Migrant Children Report Physical, Verbal Abuse In At Least 3 Federal Detention Centers

Migrant children as young as 11 years old have reported suffering physical and verbal abuse from staff in at least three separate child detention centers after being apprehended at the border, according to multiple lawsuits.

The allegations are in court filings that predate the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy on border crossings, which has separated more than 2,000 children from their parents. But they paint a disturbing picture of what happens to the unaccompanied child migrants who wind up in federal custody.

In affidavits submitted to the court in two federal lawsuits in 2017 and 2018, children in Office of Refugee Resettlement-contracted facilities described being sent to solitary confinement, cursed at by staff and strapped to chairs with bags over their heads after acting out. Some of the children described cutting themselves or attempting suicide.

One Honduran child, identified as D.M. in court filings, arrived at the secured Shenandoah Valley Juvenile Center in Virginia in 2014 after a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder and remained locked up there for more than a year.

The guards routinely referred to the migrant children in federal custody as “wetbacks,” D.M. said, according to an affidavit. They joked in English to American children also detained in the facility that the migrants were isolated because they had committed rapes or had HIV.

D.M. had repeated breakdowns and attempted to hurt himself several times, the affidavit said. In response, he said guards would handcuff him, strap his chest and legs to a chair and put a bag over his head with small holes in it.

“Once you’re strapped down, they have total control over you,” D.M. said. “They also put a bag over your head. It has little holes; you can see through it. But you feel suffocated with the bag on.”

“The first thing that came to my head when they put it on me was, ‘They are going to suffocate me. They are going to kill me,’” D.M. said.

The first thing that came to my head … was, ‘They are going to suffocate me. They are going to kill me.’ D.M., Honduran immigrant child

When migrant children cross the border, immigration authorities cannot legally keep them detained. The 1997 Flores settlement and subsequent rulings prohibit the detention of children for more than 20 days. Instead, children apprehended at the border are transferred to the care of the Office of Refugee Resettlement within three days so the agency can attempt to locate a sponsor.

Most migrant children are then released to a parent or other relative living within the United States.

But some of the children are instead routed into other ORR-contracted facilities. At any given time in recent years, some 200 migrant youths are locked up in long-term facilities like residential treatment centers, staff-secured facilities and secured lockups equivalent to juvenile hall, court filings indicate.

The allegations in the court filings focus on ORR’s two secured facilities ― the Shenandoah Valley center and the Yolo County Juvenile Detention Center in California ― as well as the Shiloh Residential Treatment Center in Texas, which has also faced accusations of routinely drugging children with multiple psychotropics and forced injections without consulting their parents as state law requires.

An 11-year-old girl from El Salvador said a teacher at Shiloh repeatedly called her a “dumb ass” and “stupid,” and that other staff members tried to hurt at least twice, according to an affidavit.

“One time a staff member put her two thumbs up to my throat and her hands around my neck. It hurt and I was gasping for breath. The staff member said she was just ‘playing’ but I felt scared,” she said. “I would rather go back to Honduras and live on the streets than be at Shiloh.”

An ongoing lawsuit over the 1997 Flores settlement, which partly governs how child migrants are detained, alleges that ORR’s process for locking kids up is opaque and flawed. Dozens of children wound up in secured lockups last year over Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents’ allegations that they were involved in gangs ― claims later found to lack evidence.

They’ve given no thought to the welfare of these children as they unfolded their no tolerance policy. They’re just shooting from the seat of their pants, making it up as they go along, and lying about what they’re doing half the time. Peter Schey, one of the lawyers representing children in the Flores case

Another boy detained at Shenandoah Valley also described getting repeatedly sent to the chair, oftentimes after getting into fights with guards. He acknowledged that he had behavioral problems and at times fought with staff or other detainees.

“When I was at Shenandoah, at least once a week, I had to fight ― with a guard, another kid, or anybody who wanted to fight me, because I was so angry,” the boy said in an affidavit. “They didn’t tell me anything about what was going on with my case or when I was going to leave. Not knowing anything month after month drove me crazy.”

In one instance, he said staff restrained him in a metal chair for eight hours. On a separate occasion, he remained strapped to the chair so long he urinated on himself.

Another migrant teen from Guatemala was held in multiple federal detention centers, including Shiloh and Yolo, according to court filings. Though he allegedly suffered physical abuse and witnessed forced medical injections at Shiloh, he said Yolo was even worse.

“The guards also push us, pepper spray us, and place the handcuffs excessively tight ― to the point that wrist injuries frequently occur,” he said. “The detention center makes me feel like an animal.” 

Although the cases detailed in court filings predate Trump’s now largely abandoned family separation policy, Peter Schey, one of the lawyers representing children in the Flores case, said shunting more than 2,000 new children into ORR custody will only worsen the problems children face in federal facilities.

“It is clearly not sustainable,” Schey told HuffPost. “They have no plans where to house these children, how to house these children, how to care for these children ― most importantly, how to reunite these children with their parents.”

“They’ve given no thought to the welfare of these children as they unfolded their no tolerance policy,” he continued. “They’re just shooting from the seat of their pants, making it up as they go along, and lying about what they’re doing half the time.”

The lawyers in the Flores lawsuit are asking a federal judge to halt the forced medications and create a more transparent process for kids to dispute their transfer to secured facilities. U.S. District Court Judge Dolly Gee has yet to rule in the case.

On Thursday, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam (D) ordered an investigation into abuse claims against Shenandoah Valley Juvenile Center after The Associated Press first reported on them a day earlier.

Shenandoah Valley Juvenile Center and Yolo County Juvenile Detention Center declined to comment about the lawsuits. Representatives for the Office of Refugee Resettlement and Shiloh Residential Treatment Center did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s requests for comment regarding abuse allegations.

  • This article originally appeared on HuffPost.

Source Article from https://www.yahoo.com/news/migrant-children-report-physical-verbal-215147466.html

New report finds white deaths outnumber births in most US states

nurse and old man

    

Deaths now outnumber births among white people in more than half the states in the US, according to a new report, raising questions about how long the country’s whites will remain a majority of the population.

A report published by the Applied Population Lab at the University of Wisconsin-Madison found that whites are dying faster than they are being born in 26 states, up from 17 states only two years earlier. The sudden spike in the death-to-birth ratio for whites across the country seems to challenge conservative-sounding projections made by the Census Bureau, which has estimated that whites could drop below 50 percent of the population around 2045.

The startling figures were likely exacerbated by plummeting fertility rates after the 2008 financial crisis, coupled with rising mortality rates for whites driven in part by drug overdoses, the report said.

The results of the report – which examined the period from 1999 to 2016 using data from the National Center for Health Statistics, the federal agency that tracks births and deaths – have surprised even its authors.

“It’s happening a lot faster than we thought,” noted Rogelio Saenz, a demographer at the University of Texas at San Antonio and a co-author of the report. He said he was so shocked by the report’s findings that at first he thought there had been some kind of mistake.

The findings support population estimates recently released by the Census Bureau, which showed an overall decline in the white population for the first time. The drop was small however, at just 0.02 percent, or 31,516 people.

While it appears that the United States is destined to be a more multi-ethnic nation, it’s still unclear how the transformation will affect society – especially politics.

As the New York Times observed, of the states where deaths now exceed births for whites, 13 voted for Donald Trump and 13 voted for Hillary Clinton. And, according to analysts, it’s far from certain that a multi-ethnic majority would usher in more progressive politics – or that a white minority would support the same kind of politics that it does today as the majority.

“People say demographics is destiny and there’ll be more people of color – all that is true,” said Jennifer Richeson, a social psychologist at Yale University. “But they also say the US is going to become more progressive, and we don’t know that. We should not assume that white moderates and liberals will maintain current political allegiances, nor should we expect that the so-called nonwhite group is going to work in any kind of coalition.”

Although the report’s findings were surprising, its authors noted that the United States was in better shape than many European nations facing overall population decreases. “In Europe, overall deaths exceed births in 17 countries. Compared to the United States, European fertility rates are lower, the population is considerably older, and there are fewer women of childbearing age. Thus, the immediate challenges European nations face in dealing with widespread natural decrease may provide important lessons to US policymakers as they prepare to address this issue in the future.”

White deaths outnumbered births in the United States for the first time in 2012. However, the decrease of about 12,400 whites was offset by 188,000 white immigrants. At the time, the Census Bureau had predicted that a noticeable drop in births compared with deaths for whites would begin happening with regularity in 2025.

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/388875-New-report-finds-white-deaths-outnumber-births-in-most-US-states

U.S. Releases Report Showing Elevated Health Risks from Nonstick Chemicals






U.S. Releases Report Showing Elevated Health Risks from Nonstick Chemicals


June 21st, 2018

Hair on fire lunatic fringe people who have assumed this for decades: Right again.

Via: Science Magazine:

President Donald Trump’s administration has released a politically charged toxicology report about nonstick chemicals showing they can endanger human health at significantly lower levels than the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has previously called safe.

The draft report from the Department of Health and Human Services’ Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) is a toxicological profile of four types of stain- and water-resistant chemicals.

It finds that so-called “minimum risk levels” for the toxins should be seven to 10 times lower than standards set by EPA in 2016.

The lowest level included in the ATSDR report is 12 parts per trillion in drinking water, which is greater than 80% below the current maximum safe level EPA has advised for two types of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS.

By contrast, the 2016 EPA voluntary health advisory for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) warned that exposure to the chemicals at levels above 70 parts per trillion could be dangerous.

The report’s release follows mounting congressional pressure from both sides of the aisle after news surfaced last month that a White House official in January had warned that releasing the report would be a “potential public relations nightmare” (E&E Daily, May 15).















<!–

–>











<!– AD CAN GO HERE

Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices

END: AD CAN GO HERE –>

Leave a Reply


You must be logged in to post a comment.







Source Article from http://www.cryptogon.com/?p=52997

Drudge Warns: EU ‘Link Ban’ Could Kill Drudge Report, Internet Freedom

This article first appeared at our friend Infowars.

In 2015, Internet pioneer Matt Drudge warned that the establishment would try to ban links to news stories without paid permission from the site – and now the EU’s proposed Article 11 could do just that.

During an interview on the Alex Jones Show, Drudge revealed that copyright laws which prevent websites from even linking to news stories were being drafted.

“I had a Supreme Court Justice tell me it’s over for me,” he said. “They’ve got the votes now to enforce copyright law, you’re out of there. They’re going to make it so you can’t even use headlines.”

“To have a Supreme Court Justice say to me it’s over, they’ve got the votes, which means time is limited.”

On June 20, the EU will vote on its proposed Copyright Reform, which includes Article 11, aka the link tax, that would “force anyone using snippets of journalistic online content to get a license for the publisher first — essentially outlawing current business models of most aggregators and news apps,” according to an article from TheNextWeb.com.

In other words, Article 11 outlaws fair use reporting of news articles – such as this article – and critics even warn that the vagueness of Article 11 could ban websites like the Drudge Report from even linking to news articles, just as Matt Drudge warned nearly three years ago.

BoingBoing.net goes into even further detail:

Article 11’s link tax allows news sites to decide who gets to link to them, meaning that they can exclude their critics. With election cycles dominated by hoaxes and fake news, the right of a news publisher to decide who gets to criticize it is carte blanche to lie and spin.

“That will end (it) for me – fine – I’ve had a hell of a run,” said Drudge, warning web users were being forced into the Internet “ghettos” of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.

“This is ghetto, this is corporate, they’re taking your energy and you’re getting nothing in return – nothing!”

Source Article from http://govtslaves.info/2018/06/drudge-warns-eu-link-ban-could-kill-drudge-report-internet-freedom/

IG Report Confirms Obama Lied About Hillary Email Server

Thursday’s DOJ Inspector General report covering the Obama DOJ/FBI conduct during the Hillary Clinton email investigation confirms a bombshell that had previously been hinted at through WikiLeaks disclosures:

Obama lied when he said in 2015 that he learned of Hillary Clinton’s private email server through a New York Times report.

Specifically, Obama told CBS News the following a March 7, 2015 report:

President Obama only learned of Hillary Clinton’s private email address use for official State Department business after a New York Times report, he told CBS News in an interview

CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante asked Mr. Obama when he learned about her private email system after his Saturday appearance in Selma, Alabama.

The same time everybody else learned it through news reports,’ the president told Plante. –CBS

What’s more, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok told the Inspector General that the top brass of the agency wrestled over whether or not to include Obama’s involvement in Clinton’s exoneration statement – and that former FBI Director James Comey knew Obama had lied:

“A paragraph [in Comey’s “exoneration” statement] summarizing the factors that led the FBI to assess that it was possible that hostile actors accessed Clinton’s server was added, and at one point referenced Clinton’s use of her private email for an exchange with then President Obama while in the territory of a foreign adversary,” the IG report reads. “This reference later was changed to ‘another senior government official,’ and ultimately was omitted.”

 

My recollection is that the early Comey speech drafts included references to emails that Secretary Clinton had with President Obama and I think there was some conversation about, well do we want to be that specific? -Peter Strzok

We already knew all of this though…

In October of 2016, a round of emails released by WikiLeaks featured an email from top Clinton aide Cheryl Mills reacting Obama’s statement that he didn’t know about Obama’s server – writing to John Podesta “we need to clean this up – he has emails from her – they do not say state.gov”

 

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest later claimed that Obama was simply “not aware of the details of how that email address and that server had been set up,” and that “The President, as I think many people expected, did over the course of his first several years in office exchange emails with his Secretary of State.”

The Washington Examinermeanwhile, reported in October 2016 that FBI agents “revealed in notes from their closed investigative file that Obama communicated with Clinton on her private server using a pseudonym.”

 

via:

zerohedge.com

Source Article from https://worldtruth.tv/ig-report-confirms-obama-lied-about-hillary-email-server/

From Excoriation to Exoneration: From The IG Report to the Clinton Email Investigation, the Perps Always Walk

 

First they excoriate but then they exonerate. When it comes the pattern of cover up of the Clinton FBI Email Investigation or the IG Report, the same exact strategy is employed. The crimes are clearly presented, however, no charges are ever recommended. The strategy worked with the Clinton emails and it is working with the IG Report. The crimes are public, but nobody is ever indicted.

PREPARE WITH DAVE–  4 WEEKS OF $250 STORABLE FOOD ONLY $99

FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL AND DON’T FORGET TO “LIKE” US

From the Hagmann blood sugar protocol to the Hodges joint protocol, Dr. Broer has helped hundreds of thousands of people. There is something for everybody at Healthmasters.com. Take 5% off the cost of your order with coupon code DAVE5

From the Hagmann blood sugar protocol to the Hodges joint protocol, Dr. Broer has helped hundreds of thousands of people. There is something for everybody at Healthmasters.com. 

CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT MORE-  USE THE COUPON CODE   “CSS5” TO TAKE 5% OFF 

Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DaveHodges-TheCommonSenseShow/~3/QAXfsZ-_lZU/

Excerpts from Inspector General Report

I’m speed-reading the inspector general report.  Pasted below are excerpts of instant messages between FBI agents.  Putting aside the political implications, it’s astonishing that FBI agents, or employees of any large organization, would engage in such a conversation on company time, using company computer media. If they had been my employees when I was in corporate life, I would have put them on probation or fired them.  Of course, it’s perfectly natural that government employees, out of self-interest, would favor big-government candidates versus an outsider, whether or not the outsider had oafish manners and was a buffoon.

 



10:39:49, Agent 1: “I find anyone who enjoys [this job] an absolute fucking idiot. If you dont think so, ask them one more question. Who are you voting for? I guarantee you it will be Donald Drumpf.”



10:40:13, Agent 5: “i forgot about drumpf…”



10:40:27, Agent 5: “that’s so sad and pathetic if they want to vote for him.”



10:40:43, Agent 5: “someone who can’t answer a question”



10:40:51, Agent 5: “someone who can’t be professional for even a second”



On September 9, 2016, Agent 1 and Agent 5 exchanged the following instant messages.



08:56:43, Agent 5: “i’m trying to think of a ‘would i rather’ instead of spending time with those people”



08:56:54, Agent 1: “stick your tongue in a fan??”



08:56:58, Agent 5: “i would rather have brunch with trump”



08:57:03, Agent 1: “ha”



08:57:15, Agent 1: “french toast with drumpf”



08:57:19, Agent 5: “i would rather have brunch with trump and a bunch of his supporters like the ones from ohio that are retarded”



08:57:23, Agent 5: “:)”



Agent 5 told the OIG these instant messages “referenced TV programming and commentary that Agent 1 and Agent 5 had recently viewed together.” Agent 5 continued, “The reference was not a general statement about a particular part of the country, rather it was in jest and pertained to individuals’ inability to articulate any reason why they so strongly favored one candidate over another.” 413



On Election Day on November 8, 2016, Agent 1 and Agent 5 exchanged the following instant messages.



14:21:10, Agent 1: “You think HRC is gonna win right? You think we should get nails and some boards in case she doesnt”



14:21:56, Agent 5: “she better win… otherwise i’m gonna be walking around with both of my guns.”



14:22:05, Agent 5: “and likely quitting on the spot”



14:28:43, Agent 1: “You should know;…..”



14:28:45, Agent 1: “that”



14:28:50, Agent 1: “I’m…..”



14:28:56, Agent 1: “with her.”



14:28:58, Agent 1: “ooooooooooooooooooo”



14:29:02, Agent 1: “show me the money”



14:29:03, Agent 5: “



14:29:14, Agent 5: “screw you trump”



14:19:18, Agent 5: “wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!”



14:29:32, Agent 5: “go baby, go! let’s give her Virginia”



14:30:03, Agent 1: “not to my country. You just cant get up and try to appeal to all the worst things in humans and fool my country….”



14:30:12, Agent 1: “Just 49% of us…..”



14:30:25, Agent 5: “let’s hope it’s 49% or less…”



14:30:31, Agent 5: “we’ll find out…”


Source Article from https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Opinion/242150-2018-06-19-excerpts-from-inspector-general-report.htm?EdNo=001&From=RSS

Video debunks CNN report about Islamic Jihad in Gaza

CNN released a video on the 17th of June (2018) in which they “investigated” Palestinian tunnels in Gaza. Ian Lee, spoke to members of the Palestinian resistance organization known as ‘Islamic Jihad.

This CNN report is a prime example of why most people have no understanding of the situation in Gaza. Here is a takedown of CNN’s Israeli ‘Hasbara’ (Propaganda). Watch:

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/388588-Video-debunks-CNN-report-about-Islamic-Jihad-in-Gaza

FBI’s anti-Trump bias clearly seen in DOJ inspector general’s report

FBIDOJ/TRUMP

    

I’ve long been a skeptic of the conspiratorial claims surrounding the actions of the so-called “deep state” during the 2016 campaign. While I believe that the FBI acted in political fashion to exonerate Hillary Clinton, I never believed that the FBI deliberately targeted the Trump campaign; the evidence just didn’t seem to be there.

After all, Trump could merely declassify such evidence if it existed; he could fire everyone involved. And why didn’t these “deep state” actors release damning information about Trump during the campaign, if they were so committed to stopping his campaign?

I’m rethinking that position pretty seriously after the release of the Department of Justice (DOJ) inspector general’s report.

Now, I’m not making the case that there was a broad-based, well-organized conspiracy inside the FBI to stop President Trump. But it is obvious, from the available evidence, that (1) certain high-ranking actors inside the FBI felt the necessity to stop Trump from becoming president, and were willing to act under color of authority to do so; and (2) the leading actors inside the FBI assumed that Hillary would be president, and tailored their actions based on that assumption.

These claims are well-supported in the inspector general (IG) report.

First, it’s obvious that certain officials inside the FBI hated Trump – but more importantly, saw it as their mission to stop Trump from obtaining the presidency. Peter Strzok, who led both the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email server and into allegations of Trump-Russia election collusion, texted his paramour, fellow FBI agent Lisa Page, that he would “stop” Trump from becoming president. The IG report found that this text “is not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.” That text was sent on Aug. 8.

Within days, Strzok texted Page: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office – that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

According to Strzok, this was his attempt to accelerate the Russia investigation – but that doesn’t let him off the hook. It demonstrates clearly that he wanted to use the FBI in extraordinary ways to stop Trump’s campaign.

And there’s evidence from the IG report that Strzok succeeded in altering the FBI’s decision-making process based on his hatred for Trump. The IG report points out that the FBI knew about Anthony Weiner’s laptop containing Hillary Clinton emails in late September; they sat on that information for a full month before doing anything.

Why were they so distracted? According to the IG report, Strzok and other FBI members decided to prioritize the Russia investigation above the Hillary investigation. The IG refused to discount bias in that decision: “we did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the (Clinton)-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop was free from bias.”

Then there was the assumption that Hillary Clinton would win – and ought to win. Strzok obviously believed Hillary ought to win; he discounted the investigation into her emails because of it. After completing the Clinton investigation and swiveling to the Russia investigation, he texted, “damn this feels momentous. Because this matters. The other one did, too, but that was to ensure that we didn’t F something up. This matters because this MATTERS.”

In other words, the Hillary investigation mattered only insofar as Strzok and his fellow agents could safely claim objectivity in exonerating her; the Trump-Russia investigation mattered because it would stop Trump or uncover serious wrongdoing.

FBI Director James Comey also made serious decisions regarding the Clinton email investigation predicated on his assumption that she would win. He didn’t track down the Weiner laptop lead for a month – and when he did, he decided to reveal the information to Congress because, according to the IG, he believed “that candidate Clinton was going to win the presidency and that she would be perceived to be an illegitimate president if the public first learned of the information after the election.”

Even in determining how to pursue the investigation, Comey assumed that Clinton was innocent and had to be cleared forthwith, since she would be president.

All of this stinks. It doesn’t mean that the Mueller investigation will come up with nothing, or that Trump has been exonerated. It does mean that just because Trump was paranoid didn’t mean that someone wasn’t out to get him. Top players in the FBI did allow their politics to infuse their decision-making.

The great irony, of course, is that their ardent desire for a Clinton presidency, combined with their belief in her inevitability, may have cost her the Oval Office.

Ben Shapiro (@BenShapiro), a lawyer and conservative commentator, is founder and editor in chief of The Daily Wire. The author of seven books, he hosts a daily political podcast, “The Ben Shapiro Show.”

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/388413-FBIs-anti-Trump-bias-clearly-seen-in-DOJ-inspector-generals-report