• "The more perverted and unnatural the relationship, the greater the toll paid by the coalburner." - Charles Martel

    https://dailystormer.name/canada-sudanese-chap-stabbed-his-mudshark-over-100-times-cut-out-her-organs-pinned-her-heart-to-a-wall/
    "The more perverted and unnatural the relationship, the greater the toll paid by the coalburner." - Charles Martel https://dailystormer.name/canada-sudanese-chap-stabbed-his-mudshark-over-100-times-cut-out-her-organs-pinned-her-heart-to-a-wall/
    0 Comments 0 Shares
  • #Matthew4 #HowToRejectAnOffer #DoNotAcceptOffersFromTheDevil #DontMakeADealWithTheDevil #HowToRejectAWoman #HowToAvoidTemptation #HowToTurnDownTemptation #HowToWalkAwayFromAToxicRelationship #WhyItDoesntMakeSenseToMakeDealsWithTheDevil #DestructiveDeals #ToxicDeals #BadDeals #AvoidBadDeals #HowToAvoidTraps https://youtu.be/neYBNtVs7LY
    #Matthew4 #HowToRejectAnOffer #DoNotAcceptOffersFromTheDevil #DontMakeADealWithTheDevil #HowToRejectAWoman #HowToAvoidTemptation #HowToTurnDownTemptation #HowToWalkAwayFromAToxicRelationship #WhyItDoesntMakeSenseToMakeDealsWithTheDevil #DestructiveDeals #ToxicDeals #BadDeals #AvoidBadDeals #HowToAvoidTraps https://youtu.be/neYBNtVs7LY
    Matthew 4:1-12 Do Not Accept Any Offers From The Devil It Doesn't Make Sense No Deal
    1 Check out http://ChristianitatisCuria.com ! DONATE http://www.mindblowingidea.com/Donate.html 1b For Unlimited 4G LTE Internet call 1.888.306.7062 and ment...
    YouTube
    0 Comments 0 Shares
  • "These days, strategically-designed age of consent laws and the corruption of marriage ensure that teenage girls will be legally forbidden from forming long-lasting relationships with the men they’d be happy to make babies with, but since their natural sexual urges can’t be suppressed by law, these young women become sitting ducks for the corrupting and subversive media.

    It is a slut industry." - Pomidor Quixote

    https://dailystormer.name/15-year-old-slut-keeps-a-sex-diary-kisses-24-guys-in-a-week-does-blowjobs-would-do-anything-for-older-men/
    "These days, strategically-designed age of consent laws and the corruption of marriage ensure that teenage girls will be legally forbidden from forming long-lasting relationships with the men they’d be happy to make babies with, but since their natural sexual urges can’t be suppressed by law, these young women become sitting ducks for the corrupting and subversive media. It is a slut industry." - Pomidor Quixote https://dailystormer.name/15-year-old-slut-keeps-a-sex-diary-kisses-24-guys-in-a-week-does-blowjobs-would-do-anything-for-older-men/
    0 Comments 0 Shares
  • BODY LANGUAGE – BARR, ROSENSTEIN RELATIONSHIP
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/cc7dwnZiLznZ/
    BODY LANGUAGE – BARR, ROSENSTEIN RELATIONSHIP https://www.bitchute.com/video/cc7dwnZiLznZ/
    Bombard's Body Language
    Body Language – Barr, Rosenstein Relationship
    WWW.BITCHUTE.COM
    0 Comments 0 Shares
  • BODY LANGUAGE – BARR, ROSENSTEIN RELATIONSHIP
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/cc7dwnZiLznZ/
    BODY LANGUAGE – BARR, ROSENSTEIN RELATIONSHIP https://www.bitchute.com/video/cc7dwnZiLznZ/
    Bombard's Body Language
    Body Language – Barr, Rosenstein Relationship
    WWW.BITCHUTE.COM
    0 Comments 0 Shares
  • The today's relationships are as so many say, it's just a piece of paper. This is a real problem the uniting as one between man and woman has been destroyed by feminism, SJW's, and other groups who see the unity as a waste of time. It is said that young people have no interest in marriage, this is wrongly worded. It should be men are not interested, whereas women will marry almost anyone including themselves.
    https://youtu.be/MsaCgMnPIqM
    The today's relationships are as so many say, it's just a piece of paper. This is a real problem the uniting as one between man and woman has been destroyed by feminism, SJW's, and other groups who see the unity as a waste of time. It is said that young people have no interest in marriage, this is wrongly worded. It should be men are not interested, whereas women will marry almost anyone including themselves. https://youtu.be/MsaCgMnPIqM
    Be A Real Slave (PragerU Response)
    Social Media Links: SubscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/tfmonkey Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/turdflingingmonkey DLive: https://dlive.tv/TFMonke...
    YouTube
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares
  • ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION 1867

    The signing of the confederation in 1867 offered the people in Canada a chance at unity, as well as the ability to govern their own fate. Shortly after the signing the colonies joined forces to fight for independence from Britain.
    When the confederation was drawn up there was no mention of the government being able to levy taxes on the colonies. These issues spelled an end to the confederation governing document.
    Also the number of issues that were not addressed before the signing was too much, such as the independence, a value placed on slaves, restricting the ability to act in an emergency. Shortly after the signing the Article of Confederation it was removed as a governing guideline.
    With much dialogue they were able to work out the problems they were faced with, and the new relationships provided the corner stone to the Constitution.

    https://vittana.org/11-pros-and-cons-of-articles-of-confederation

    With the signing of the Constitution for the United States and the Articles of Confederation for Canada we would think we have our freedom from the British. This is not the way our rights were re-written, the change allowed Britain to over shadow our freedom to govern our country.
    In 1867 Canada was declared a sovereignty nation. The concept of sovereignty is the power for a country to govern itself and it’s subjects. The question we need to ask is if Canada has it’s own sovereignty, then why is Canada referred to as The Dominion of Canada?
    Canada was classed as a British colony until 1931, this is not what a sovereign nation is considering Canada was confederated in 1867.
    Why was the British North American Act created in 1867 if Canada was a sovereign nation?
    The BNA act is a base document for the Canadian Constitution, which is not one document but a set known as the Constitution Acts and more importantly, a set of unwritten laws and conventions. With this we can gather that the words can be changed at will.

    Since the forming in 1867, 19 other acts were passed some were amended or repealed by the Constitution Act. Until 1949 only the British Parliament could make amendments to the act, in 1982 Canada assumed full control of the Constitution Act.
    This l find hard to believe, because Canada follows the way of the British government as well as the social structure is a mirror image. There is also the ceremony of the Canadian prime minister attends with the queen of England. This does not look like a free country to make our own decisions, free of interference.
    In 1893 the British Parliament again interfered with Canada’s self governing, to repeal the Statute Law Revisions Act.
    In 1931 why did the British Parliament nullify the BNA Act and replace it with the Statute of Westminister Act.
    In 1982 Perrie Trudeau had the liberal government create the Canada Act, and take it to the queen to have her parliament pass the act as the Constitution Act. At the time of the passing of this Act Canada suppose to have been a sovereign nation for 115 years.
    Something really stinks, as well as being good liars even back then.
    To this day Canadian officials when sworn into office, swear their alliagence to Queen Elizabeth. Not to the people who elected him into power.
    We need to ask ourselves some hard questions about Canada, are we tied to the British Parliament and the queen?
    Looking at the facts l do believe that Canada is not free to do as we please. The list against a free will Canada has been crushed. The Canadian Citizenship didn’t come into existence until 1947.
    If Canada was free to grow as a country, there should not have been a law suit to force J. Little-Child MP to do his duty for his constituents, and have the courts rule in his favour.

    Below are a list of references to the BNA act as well as the Constitution act 1867.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_Act,_1867
    https://www.historymuseum.ca/cmc/exhibitions/hist/medicare/medic-1c01e.html
    https://www.mysteriesofcanada.com/canada/british-north-america-act/
    https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/constitution-act-1867
    ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION 1867 The signing of the confederation in 1867 offered the people in Canada a chance at unity, as well as the ability to govern their own fate. Shortly after the signing the colonies joined forces to fight for independence from Britain. When the confederation was drawn up there was no mention of the government being able to levy taxes on the colonies. These issues spelled an end to the confederation governing document. Also the number of issues that were not addressed before the signing was too much, such as the independence, a value placed on slaves, restricting the ability to act in an emergency. Shortly after the signing the Article of Confederation it was removed as a governing guideline. With much dialogue they were able to work out the problems they were faced with, and the new relationships provided the corner stone to the Constitution. https://vittana.org/11-pros-and-cons-of-articles-of-confederation With the signing of the Constitution for the United States and the Articles of Confederation for Canada we would think we have our freedom from the British. This is not the way our rights were re-written, the change allowed Britain to over shadow our freedom to govern our country. In 1867 Canada was declared a sovereignty nation. The concept of sovereignty is the power for a country to govern itself and it’s subjects. The question we need to ask is if Canada has it’s own sovereignty, then why is Canada referred to as The Dominion of Canada? Canada was classed as a British colony until 1931, this is not what a sovereign nation is considering Canada was confederated in 1867. Why was the British North American Act created in 1867 if Canada was a sovereign nation? The BNA act is a base document for the Canadian Constitution, which is not one document but a set known as the Constitution Acts and more importantly, a set of unwritten laws and conventions. With this we can gather that the words can be changed at will. Since the forming in 1867, 19 other acts were passed some were amended or repealed by the Constitution Act. Until 1949 only the British Parliament could make amendments to the act, in 1982 Canada assumed full control of the Constitution Act. This l find hard to believe, because Canada follows the way of the British government as well as the social structure is a mirror image. There is also the ceremony of the Canadian prime minister attends with the queen of England. This does not look like a free country to make our own decisions, free of interference. In 1893 the British Parliament again interfered with Canada’s self governing, to repeal the Statute Law Revisions Act. In 1931 why did the British Parliament nullify the BNA Act and replace it with the Statute of Westminister Act. In 1982 Perrie Trudeau had the liberal government create the Canada Act, and take it to the queen to have her parliament pass the act as the Constitution Act. At the time of the passing of this Act Canada suppose to have been a sovereign nation for 115 years. Something really stinks, as well as being good liars even back then. To this day Canadian officials when sworn into office, swear their alliagence to Queen Elizabeth. Not to the people who elected him into power. We need to ask ourselves some hard questions about Canada, are we tied to the British Parliament and the queen? Looking at the facts l do believe that Canada is not free to do as we please. The list against a free will Canada has been crushed. The Canadian Citizenship didn’t come into existence until 1947. If Canada was free to grow as a country, there should not have been a law suit to force J. Little-Child MP to do his duty for his constituents, and have the courts rule in his favour. Below are a list of references to the BNA act as well as the Constitution act 1867. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_Act,_1867 https://www.historymuseum.ca/cmc/exhibitions/hist/medicare/medic-1c01e.html https://www.mysteriesofcanada.com/canada/british-north-america-act/ https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/constitution-act-1867
    0 Comments 0 Shares
  • The problem with relationships, is everything.
    https://youtu.be/fKmkwwIFA4Y
    The problem with relationships, is everything. https://youtu.be/fKmkwwIFA4Y
    Why Men Prefer To Live Alone. Single Men 2019
    Living Alone As A single Man In 2019. Why Men Prefer To Live Alone. For some men living with their girlfriend or a partner in general is not something they'd...
    YouTube
    0 Comments 0 Shares
  • HACKED EMAILS SHOW GOP DEMANDS ON BORDER SECURITY WERE CRAFTED BY INDUSTRY LOBBYISTS
    https://theintercept.com/2019/08/01/perceptics-hack-license-plate-readers
    Lee Fang 8/1/19

    REP. CHUCK FLEISCHMANN often strikes a Trumpian tone on border security, stoking fears during television appearances and on social media about a caravan of Central American migrants, and repeating the president’s pledge to build a wall to prevent unauthorized immigration.

    In April 2018, during an appropriations committee hearing, the Tennessee Republican took a more subdued and technical approach to immigration issues when quizzing then-Customs and Border Protection chief Kevin McAleenan. Fleischmann, looking down to read from a paper in front of him, wanted to know if McAleenan was on schedule to implement an upgrade of license plate reader technology at the border, as mandated by a previous appropriations bill.

    McAleenan thanked the committee for its support and pledged continued work to upgrade LPR technology along the border.

    A few days after the exchange, a lobbyist representing Perceptics, a tech company that sold state-of-the-art LPR cameras and technology to the government, emailed her team to confirm that Fleischmann had “asked about CBP’s plan to modernize its LPRs as we asked his office to do,” along with a link to a video clip of the hearing.

    WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 25: The House Appropriations Committee's Homeland Security Subcommittee ranking member Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-TN) questions Immigration and Customs Enforcement Acting Director Matt Albence during a hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill July 25, 2019 in Washington, DC. Albence testified that the increase in the number of people illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexico border has stretched his agency's budget to the breaking point.

    The lobbyist’s email, along with several others in a cache of thousands of hacked documents from Perceptics dumped on the dark web in June, reveal that Fleischmann’s question — and the congressional demand that the agency spend millions of dollars to upgrade the cameras used to automatically read and identify license plates — had been orchestrated in part by a company that hoped to profit from the decision. Fleischmann’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

    Following the hack, the CBP suspended its contract with Perceptics. But the emails provide a rare inside view of how the border security industry plays a quiet role in shaping immigration policy — and, in this case, how private contractors maneuvered to benefit from heated debate over President Donald Trump’s border wall.

    IN 2017, TRUMP announced that he would end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program — which provides legal protections for undocumented youth, also known as “Dreamers” — and demanded that protections only be restored in exchange for funds to build a wall at the U.S.-Mexico border. The following year, GOP lawmakers attempted to hammer out a compromise that would enshrine rights for Dreamers while providing funds for Trump’s border security demands.

    Congressional Republicans split into two camps. Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., sponsored the more conservative faction’s bill, Securing America’s Future Act, which provided $38 billion in border security, including funds for the wall, and a provision to allow Dreamers to reapply for legal status every three years. Moderate Republicans, led by Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif., and Rep. Carlos Curbelo, R-Fla., presented the Border Security and Immigration Reform Act, which provided a permanent pathway to legal status for Dreamers and $25 billion in border security measures, including funds for a border wall.

    As lawmakers debated these proposals, lobbyists from Perceptics were at work finding congressional sponsors to seed both nascent border security bills with dedicated funding for border security agencies to continue buying and upgrading LPR technology.

    The emails provide a rare inside view of how the border security industry plays a quiet role in shaping immigration policy.

    In June 2018, Lucia Alonzo, chief of staff to Ferox Strategies, an outside lobbying firm to Perceptics, wrote to her client to inform them that then-House Speaker Paul Ryan had planned votes on two competing immigration bills. “We have obtained a leaked copy of the new ‘compromise’ immigration bill under development in the House,” she wrote. The compromise bill, as well as a rival conservative alternative from Goodlatte, the lobbyist noted, included provisions that Perceptics had pushed to lawmakers to boost funding for its products.

    “In summary,” Alonzo continued, “we have ensured that BOTH of the immigration bills headed for votes in the House authorize $125 million for LPR modernization, adding more weight and urgency to our request for appropriations funding LPR modernization.”

    The LPR provisions were among many provisions calling for spending on security measures well beyond the wall. Both bills also called for the funding of unmanned aerial vehicles to patrol the border, tower-based security technology, radars, detention facilities, and an array of biometric technology to identify and track undocumented migrants, including DNA testing.

    While dozens of private security firms and trade groups lobbied on the immigration proposals, there is little public information on whether the lobbyists directly authored the bills.

    Perceptics’ hacked emails, however, show a clear fingerprint. The legislative texts of both House bills include nearly identical language on LPR funding. The drafts also codify a pilot program in Laredo, Texas, to use the technology on high-volume tractor-trailer ports of entry.

    Both bills ultimately failed as conservatives rallied against the compromise legislation put forward by moderates, and Democrats and moderates killed the conservative border bill.

    But the lobbyists continued to press for further opportunities.

    In a follow-up email just before the Thanksgiving holiday last year, Alonzo sent talking points in support of the $125 million in provisions to Fleischmann’s congressional staff. “As we head toward a final FY 2019 funding package, I did want to send a quick refresher on Perceptics and our asks for your reference,” she wrote, thanking Fleischmann’s team for its support and going on to explain the need for automated tractor-trailer processing and LPR upgrades. Perceptics’ cameras along the borders, Alonzo noted, were 10 years old and required replacement.

    The provisions, Alonzo added, were broad and would not guarantee an exclusive contract for Perceptics over another LPR vendor. Still, the language provided many opportunities for the company to build its revenue. Automating cargo processing at ports of entry, like the test project at Laredo, would cost another $175 million, but would result in savings from reduced man-hours and wait times at the border, Alonzo told Fleischmann’s office.

    In the Senate, GOP leadership rallied behind similar legislation to revamp and finance an array of border security and detention facilities. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, introduced two major immigration bills: the Building America’s Trust Act, sponsored in August 2017, and the Secure and Succeed Act, introduced the following month and later endorsed by the White House. Both border security and wall-funding bills had nearly identical LPR provisions on the Laredo pilot program and the $125 million in upgrades of existing cameras.

    The legislative texts of both House bills include nearly identical language on license plate reader funding.

    The inclusion in the Cornyn bill came after over a year of dedicated, behind-the-scenes advocacy.

    In 2017, Alonzo wrote to Perceptics CEO John Dalton that officials at his company should consider giving money to Cornyn because the Texas Republican “wants to be at the forefront of immigration and border policy in the Trump era, he is very powerful in the Senate as Majority Whip, and he’s arguably the most powerful member of Texas’s congressional delegation.”

    The team of lobbyists also had a close relationship with the senator through a trusted confidant.

    Matt Johnson, a former Podesta Group lobbyist, had previously worked for Cornyn as his chief counsel. Before the Podesta Group disbanded in late 2017, the firm included Cristina Antelo, a Democratic lobbyist working with Perceptics, and provided lobbying services to Perceptics.

    “Hey fellas,” wrote Antelo, now a principal at Ferox Strategies, in an email to Perceptics executives last year, attaching an invitation to a fundraiser hosted by Johnson. “Attached is an invite for an event with Cornyn next week hosted by our buddy Matt. I think it’s a good idea to participate and not only donate to him but to do it through Matt to make sure we keep up the connection,” she wrote.

    Cornyn, Antelo added, “is in leadership, from Tx so on the border, sits on the judiciary committee and has always been helpful to us including this last year by including our language in his border security bill. Can you guys write a check for $1k and can one of you attend?”

    Federal Election Commission records show that Dalton ultimately donated to Cornyn’s leadership committee, the Alamo PAC, providing $1,000 in 2017 and $500 in 2018.

    In a statement to The Intercept, Antelo explained that her team “spent time on Capitol Hill educating members of Congress about the need to replace aging license plate reader cameras at US land borders, including the allocation of funds to be made available for an open, competitive bid procurement for their replacement.”

    “Perceptics supports the mission of homeland security and continues to have every confidence in the superior quality of their equipment,” she added.

    SINCE THE ATTACKS on September 11, 2001, the government has spent nearly $1 trillion on a variety of counter-terrorism and Homeland Security measures. The wave of cash has flowed to a range of private contractors, including those with a special focus on technology used to identify and track individuals and vehicles entering the country.

    While government austerity measures in 2011 briefly slowed down the spending spree, the immigration debates in Congress, which have often centered around border security, have revived efforts by industry to harness government spending on surveillance, detention, and other forms of security technology. The 2013 bipartisan immigration bill, for example, included money for drones, helicopters, detention centers, and an array of surveillance technology to prevent future unauthorized immigration.

    Drew Brandewie, a spokesperson for Cornyn, wrote in an email to The Intercept that “LPR technology has been deployed on the border for a long time and has been included in many immigration/border security bills and supported on a bipartisan basis,” and noted that LPRs were also included in the 2013 bipartisan immigration bill.

    It’s well known that the politics of immigration have long reflected a compromise between conservatives seeking greater enforcement on unauthorized immigration and liberals seeking legal protections for individuals without documentation. In private, however, the many private contractors that seek to profit from conservative demands on border security have a hidden hand in crafting the legislative text.
    HACKED EMAILS SHOW GOP DEMANDS ON BORDER SECURITY WERE CRAFTED BY INDUSTRY LOBBYISTS https://theintercept.com/2019/08/01/perceptics-hack-license-plate-readers Lee Fang 8/1/19 REP. CHUCK FLEISCHMANN often strikes a Trumpian tone on border security, stoking fears during television appearances and on social media about a caravan of Central American migrants, and repeating the president’s pledge to build a wall to prevent unauthorized immigration. In April 2018, during an appropriations committee hearing, the Tennessee Republican took a more subdued and technical approach to immigration issues when quizzing then-Customs and Border Protection chief Kevin McAleenan. Fleischmann, looking down to read from a paper in front of him, wanted to know if McAleenan was on schedule to implement an upgrade of license plate reader technology at the border, as mandated by a previous appropriations bill. McAleenan thanked the committee for its support and pledged continued work to upgrade LPR technology along the border. A few days after the exchange, a lobbyist representing Perceptics, a tech company that sold state-of-the-art LPR cameras and technology to the government, emailed her team to confirm that Fleischmann had “asked about CBP’s plan to modernize its LPRs as we asked his office to do,” along with a link to a video clip of the hearing. WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 25: The House Appropriations Committee's Homeland Security Subcommittee ranking member Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-TN) questions Immigration and Customs Enforcement Acting Director Matt Albence during a hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill July 25, 2019 in Washington, DC. Albence testified that the increase in the number of people illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexico border has stretched his agency's budget to the breaking point. The lobbyist’s email, along with several others in a cache of thousands of hacked documents from Perceptics dumped on the dark web in June, reveal that Fleischmann’s question — and the congressional demand that the agency spend millions of dollars to upgrade the cameras used to automatically read and identify license plates — had been orchestrated in part by a company that hoped to profit from the decision. Fleischmann’s office did not respond to a request for comment. Following the hack, the CBP suspended its contract with Perceptics. But the emails provide a rare inside view of how the border security industry plays a quiet role in shaping immigration policy — and, in this case, how private contractors maneuvered to benefit from heated debate over President Donald Trump’s border wall. IN 2017, TRUMP announced that he would end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program — which provides legal protections for undocumented youth, also known as “Dreamers” — and demanded that protections only be restored in exchange for funds to build a wall at the U.S.-Mexico border. The following year, GOP lawmakers attempted to hammer out a compromise that would enshrine rights for Dreamers while providing funds for Trump’s border security demands. Congressional Republicans split into two camps. Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., sponsored the more conservative faction’s bill, Securing America’s Future Act, which provided $38 billion in border security, including funds for the wall, and a provision to allow Dreamers to reapply for legal status every three years. Moderate Republicans, led by Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif., and Rep. Carlos Curbelo, R-Fla., presented the Border Security and Immigration Reform Act, which provided a permanent pathway to legal status for Dreamers and $25 billion in border security measures, including funds for a border wall. As lawmakers debated these proposals, lobbyists from Perceptics were at work finding congressional sponsors to seed both nascent border security bills with dedicated funding for border security agencies to continue buying and upgrading LPR technology. The emails provide a rare inside view of how the border security industry plays a quiet role in shaping immigration policy. In June 2018, Lucia Alonzo, chief of staff to Ferox Strategies, an outside lobbying firm to Perceptics, wrote to her client to inform them that then-House Speaker Paul Ryan had planned votes on two competing immigration bills. “We have obtained a leaked copy of the new ‘compromise’ immigration bill under development in the House,” she wrote. The compromise bill, as well as a rival conservative alternative from Goodlatte, the lobbyist noted, included provisions that Perceptics had pushed to lawmakers to boost funding for its products. “In summary,” Alonzo continued, “we have ensured that BOTH of the immigration bills headed for votes in the House authorize $125 million for LPR modernization, adding more weight and urgency to our request for appropriations funding LPR modernization.” The LPR provisions were among many provisions calling for spending on security measures well beyond the wall. Both bills also called for the funding of unmanned aerial vehicles to patrol the border, tower-based security technology, radars, detention facilities, and an array of biometric technology to identify and track undocumented migrants, including DNA testing. While dozens of private security firms and trade groups lobbied on the immigration proposals, there is little public information on whether the lobbyists directly authored the bills. Perceptics’ hacked emails, however, show a clear fingerprint. The legislative texts of both House bills include nearly identical language on LPR funding. The drafts also codify a pilot program in Laredo, Texas, to use the technology on high-volume tractor-trailer ports of entry. Both bills ultimately failed as conservatives rallied against the compromise legislation put forward by moderates, and Democrats and moderates killed the conservative border bill. But the lobbyists continued to press for further opportunities. In a follow-up email just before the Thanksgiving holiday last year, Alonzo sent talking points in support of the $125 million in provisions to Fleischmann’s congressional staff. “As we head toward a final FY 2019 funding package, I did want to send a quick refresher on Perceptics and our asks for your reference,” she wrote, thanking Fleischmann’s team for its support and going on to explain the need for automated tractor-trailer processing and LPR upgrades. Perceptics’ cameras along the borders, Alonzo noted, were 10 years old and required replacement. The provisions, Alonzo added, were broad and would not guarantee an exclusive contract for Perceptics over another LPR vendor. Still, the language provided many opportunities for the company to build its revenue. Automating cargo processing at ports of entry, like the test project at Laredo, would cost another $175 million, but would result in savings from reduced man-hours and wait times at the border, Alonzo told Fleischmann’s office. In the Senate, GOP leadership rallied behind similar legislation to revamp and finance an array of border security and detention facilities. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, introduced two major immigration bills: the Building America’s Trust Act, sponsored in August 2017, and the Secure and Succeed Act, introduced the following month and later endorsed by the White House. Both border security and wall-funding bills had nearly identical LPR provisions on the Laredo pilot program and the $125 million in upgrades of existing cameras. The legislative texts of both House bills include nearly identical language on license plate reader funding. The inclusion in the Cornyn bill came after over a year of dedicated, behind-the-scenes advocacy. In 2017, Alonzo wrote to Perceptics CEO John Dalton that officials at his company should consider giving money to Cornyn because the Texas Republican “wants to be at the forefront of immigration and border policy in the Trump era, he is very powerful in the Senate as Majority Whip, and he’s arguably the most powerful member of Texas’s congressional delegation.” The team of lobbyists also had a close relationship with the senator through a trusted confidant. Matt Johnson, a former Podesta Group lobbyist, had previously worked for Cornyn as his chief counsel. Before the Podesta Group disbanded in late 2017, the firm included Cristina Antelo, a Democratic lobbyist working with Perceptics, and provided lobbying services to Perceptics. “Hey fellas,” wrote Antelo, now a principal at Ferox Strategies, in an email to Perceptics executives last year, attaching an invitation to a fundraiser hosted by Johnson. “Attached is an invite for an event with Cornyn next week hosted by our buddy Matt. I think it’s a good idea to participate and not only donate to him but to do it through Matt to make sure we keep up the connection,” she wrote. Cornyn, Antelo added, “is in leadership, from Tx so on the border, sits on the judiciary committee and has always been helpful to us including this last year by including our language in his border security bill. Can you guys write a check for $1k and can one of you attend?” Federal Election Commission records show that Dalton ultimately donated to Cornyn’s leadership committee, the Alamo PAC, providing $1,000 in 2017 and $500 in 2018. In a statement to The Intercept, Antelo explained that her team “spent time on Capitol Hill educating members of Congress about the need to replace aging license plate reader cameras at US land borders, including the allocation of funds to be made available for an open, competitive bid procurement for their replacement.” “Perceptics supports the mission of homeland security and continues to have every confidence in the superior quality of their equipment,” she added. SINCE THE ATTACKS on September 11, 2001, the government has spent nearly $1 trillion on a variety of counter-terrorism and Homeland Security measures. The wave of cash has flowed to a range of private contractors, including those with a special focus on technology used to identify and track individuals and vehicles entering the country. While government austerity measures in 2011 briefly slowed down the spending spree, the immigration debates in Congress, which have often centered around border security, have revived efforts by industry to harness government spending on surveillance, detention, and other forms of security technology. The 2013 bipartisan immigration bill, for example, included money for drones, helicopters, detention centers, and an array of surveillance technology to prevent future unauthorized immigration. Drew Brandewie, a spokesperson for Cornyn, wrote in an email to The Intercept that “LPR technology has been deployed on the border for a long time and has been included in many immigration/border security bills and supported on a bipartisan basis,” and noted that LPRs were also included in the 2013 bipartisan immigration bill. It’s well known that the politics of immigration have long reflected a compromise between conservatives seeking greater enforcement on unauthorized immigration and liberals seeking legal protections for individuals without documentation. In private, however, the many private contractors that seek to profit from conservative demands on border security have a hidden hand in crafting the legislative text.
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares
  • Living Truth Daily Devotion, 2019-08-03
    OUR MORL CHARACTER
    “Then God said, ‘Let Us make mankind in Our image, in Our likeness…’” (Genesis 1:26)

    When we look at an image, we get some insight into the real thing that it portrays. When God created human beings in His image, in the beginning, the image is not a physical image but a moral image because God is not a physical being. God created human beings in such a way that we were designed to be a visible and physical expression of what God is like in His moral character. In other words, God intended for our lives, actions and reactions to reflect His moral character.

    If we were a fly on the wall in the Garden of Eden, the way the first man, Adam, treated his wife, Eve, would have showed us what God was like: kind, gentle and patient. But of course something went tragically wrong, “sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12). Our sinful nature separated us from the life of God and spills into the breakdown of our relationships and behaviour. We have jealousy and murder, which was evident in the first child of Adam and Eve, who became jealous of his brother and murdered him. The tragic consequences of that are with us right down to today. Human beings were created to portray the truth about God but when we sin, our lives tell lies about what God is like.

    Suppose somebody asked us, “What is God like?” Would we be able to say, “If you want to know what God is like, just follow me around for a week––shadow me, watch me, listen to the things I say, see how I spend my money and treat my spouse. Watch me in the privacy of my secret life. If you follow me for a week, I guarantee that by the end of this week, you will know exactly what God is like?” Probably not. Now, what does that say about us? We are sinners and, apart from Christ, our lives cannot tell others the truth about God.

    Yet, Paul tells us, “[He] made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions” (Ephesians 2:5). Hence, Paul prays, “that [our] love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, so that [we] may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ” (Philippians 1:9-11). We portray the character of God not by imitating God but by God Himself being active in us. His presence in us is the means by which His character––image––is seen through us.

    Prayer: Heavenly Father, thank You for creating me in Your image. I pray that my life may be a true portrayal of You as You actively live in me.
    Living Truth Daily Devotion, 2019-08-03 OUR MORL CHARACTER “Then God said, ‘Let Us make mankind in Our image, in Our likeness…’” (Genesis 1:26) When we look at an image, we get some insight into the real thing that it portrays. When God created human beings in His image, in the beginning, the image is not a physical image but a moral image because God is not a physical being. God created human beings in such a way that we were designed to be a visible and physical expression of what God is like in His moral character. In other words, God intended for our lives, actions and reactions to reflect His moral character. If we were a fly on the wall in the Garden of Eden, the way the first man, Adam, treated his wife, Eve, would have showed us what God was like: kind, gentle and patient. But of course something went tragically wrong, “sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12). Our sinful nature separated us from the life of God and spills into the breakdown of our relationships and behaviour. We have jealousy and murder, which was evident in the first child of Adam and Eve, who became jealous of his brother and murdered him. The tragic consequences of that are with us right down to today. Human beings were created to portray the truth about God but when we sin, our lives tell lies about what God is like. Suppose somebody asked us, “What is God like?” Would we be able to say, “If you want to know what God is like, just follow me around for a week––shadow me, watch me, listen to the things I say, see how I spend my money and treat my spouse. Watch me in the privacy of my secret life. If you follow me for a week, I guarantee that by the end of this week, you will know exactly what God is like?” Probably not. Now, what does that say about us? We are sinners and, apart from Christ, our lives cannot tell others the truth about God. Yet, Paul tells us, “[He] made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions” (Ephesians 2:5). Hence, Paul prays, “that [our] love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, so that [we] may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ” (Philippians 1:9-11). We portray the character of God not by imitating God but by God Himself being active in us. His presence in us is the means by which His character––image––is seen through us. Prayer: Heavenly Father, thank You for creating me in Your image. I pray that my life may be a true portrayal of You as You actively live in me.
    0 Comments 0 Shares

No results to show

No results to show

No results to show

No results to show

No results to show

Sponsored

Canadian Community Project INC.

Please visit our site and share!