It is not.

Yep. Talking is soo... 20th Century.

 

Sub volcanic activity? Up coming BIG ONE? The whole plateau inflated upward, pushing the water away from the lake?

Anyway... Carbon taxes will bring the water back... Sure of it.

Brilliant!

The longer they do this, the worse their ROI will be. I want them to camp at her office for the next 2 years...

So you agree the gays have no business forcing her to put her name on a piece of paper recognized as already perfectly fine and legal?

Why can't they move along in their life with their love? She is irrelevant to them now anyway.

So it is not about equality, but war. Be open about it.

Hmm...

Let's say you are for open border open arms for the mass. Let's say a lot of them are running from certain deaths. Isn't more inhumane to have ZERO infrastructures for them, giving away what you already have promised to the german poor?

Winter is coming. I can see dead frozen babies on german streets as the next photo crisis everywhere...

Pray allah Global Warming Is Real Folks!!!

‘Birth Tourism’ Booming In Bay Area Despite Fed Crackdown



SAN JOSE (KPIX) — A bill that would end birthright citizenship in the U.S. is gaining steam in Washington, thanks to the Republican Presidential campaign.

It targets a controversial underground industry known as birth tourism, pregnant foreign women traveling to this country just for the purpose of delivering American citizen babies.

Business is booming here in the Bay Area, especially in the South Bay.

But publicity is not welcome.

“I don’t have a comment, I don’t have a comment,” said Jerry Zhou. He runs a popular tourist agency. The destination, not Fisherman’s Wharf, or the Golden Gate Bridge, but a regular home on a residential street in North San Jose.

We’ve learned the home is actually a birthing hotel. It caters to pregnant women, mostly from China, who come to the U.S. to grab that prize: instant U.S. citizenship for their baby.

Neighbor Robert Ramos says the women keep a low profile, rarely walking the neighborhood, going in and out only in a van with tinted windows. But he says what’s going on inside is pretty obvious.

“At one time I think there were four — four of them at the same time,” he said. “It’s pretty predictable, you can see when somebody’s giving birth. You don’t see them afterwards, and then a new family comes in.”

The house is one of at least two locations run by Jerry Zhou, who advertises on the internet under the name California Baby Care. For $3,000 to $4,000 a month everything’s included: dedicated nannies, professional chefs, transport to- and from the hospital, and a passport for the newborn.

“There’s a business apparently established apparently to do this. I think it’s fraud,” said Ramos.

Homeland security cracked down on a similar operation in Southern California earlier this year.

ICE agents raided three addresses where they found dozens of women from China, either pregnant or who had just given birth.

The crackdown is prompting debate on Capitol Hill on whether to end birthright citizenship.

A new bill would allow it only for children of citizens or legal U.S. residents.

“The organizers of these birth tourist hotels have figured out how to game the system,” said Jon Feere with the Center for Immigration Studies, a conservative research foundation.

“If you tell our visa processors that you are here to visit Disneyland when in reality you are here to give birth, that does constitute fraud,” Feere said.

But Bill Hing, an immigration law professor at the University of San Francisco disagrees.

“There is no regulation that prohibits a woman from coming to the U.S. to give birth,” said Professor Hing, after reviewing the affidavits.
Hing says the birth hotel operators may get fined for tax violations, but that’s about all.

“It’s not viable in terms of real law, but it has political viability. It appeases their constituents that are anti-immigrant,” Hing said.

Back in San Jose, Jerry Zhou didn’t want to discuss the matter and denied having anything to do with babies or pregnant women.

“This house is on your website. It’s advertised on your website as a birth hotel, that is why we are here,” KPIX reporter Betty Yu told him. Zhou’s response: “I don’t know what you are talking about. I don’t have any comment.”

Homeland Security also did not want to comment on the story, telling KPIX 5 their investigation in Southern California is still ongoing. Word on the street here is that the crackdown down south has pushed many of the operations up north.



http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2015/09/25/birth-tourism-bay-area-operators-avoid-spotlight/

-----------------------------------------------
From the comment section:

Germany in a state of SIEGE: Merkel was cheered when she opened the floodgates to migrants. Now, with gangs of men roaming the streets and young German women being told to cover up, the mood's changing

Thousands of economic migrants are posing as refugees to reach Europe
David Cameron said this week that Europe must said failed asylum claimants back to their countries
Demands for Germany's 'open doors and windows' policy to be scrapped
Women said rape and child abuse were rife in Giessen's refugee camp



On the busy shopping street in Giessen, a German university town twinned with Winchester, migrant Atif Zahoor tucks into a chicken dish with his brother and cousin at the curry restaurant Chillie To Go.

They have left good jobs back in Karachi, Pakistan, and now want to be Europeans.

In late July the three slipped into Germany with their wives and children, using illegal documents. They live together in a five-bedroom house, rented for them by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government, a 40-minute drive away from Giessen, which is home to the biggest migrants’ camp in the country.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3249667/Germany-state-SIEGE-Merkel-cheered-opened-floodgates-migrants-gangs-men-roaming-streets-young-German-women-told-cover-mood-s-changing.html

Timothy Treadwell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Treadwell


Hiker Killed and Partially Eaten by Grizzly Bear in Yellowstone National Park
http://www.people.com/article/hiker-killed-eaten-grizzly-bear-yellowstone-national-park

A feminist is not a woman. Not all the time.

Hmmm...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1190974.msg12527991#msg12527991

Last week’s announcement that Saudi Arabia — easily one of the world’s most brutally repressive regimes — was chosen to head a U.N. Human Rights Council panel provoked indignation around the world. That reaction was triggered for obvious reasons. Not only has Saudi Arabia executed more than 100 people already this year, mostly by beheading (a rate of 1 execution every two days), and not only is it serially flogging dissidents, but it is reaching new levels of tyrannical depravity as it is about to behead and then crucify the 21-year-old son of a prominent regime critic, Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who was convicted at the age of 17 of engaging in demonstrations against the government.

Most of the world may be horrified at the selection of Saudi Arabia to head a key U.N. human rights panel, but the U.S. State Department most certainly is not. Quite the contrary: its officials seem quite pleased about the news. At a State Department briefing yesterday afternoon, Deputy Spokesperson Mark Toner was questioned by the invaluable Matt Lee of AP, and this is the exchange that resulted:

QUESTION: Change topic? Saudi Arabia.

MR. TONER: Saudi Arabia.

QUESTION: Yesterday, Saudi Arabia was named to head the Human Rights Council, and today I think they announced they are about to behead a 21-year-old Shia activist named Muhammed al-Nimr. Are you aware of that?

MR. TONER: I’m not aware of the trial that you — or the verdict — death sentence.

QUESTION: Well, apparently, he was arrested when was 17 years old and kept in juvenile detention, then moved on. And now, he’s been scheduled to be executed.

MR. TONER: Right. I mean, we’ve talked about our concerns about some of the capital punishment cases in Saudi Arabia in our Human Rights Report, but I don’t have any more to add to it.

QUESTION: So you —

QUESTION: Well, how about a reaction to them heading the council?

MR. TONER: Again, I don’t have any comment, don’t have any reaction to it. I mean, frankly, it’s — we would welcome it. We’re close allies. If we —

QUESTION: Do you think that they’re an appropriate choice given — I mean, how many pages is — does Saudi Arabia get in the Human Rights Report annually?

MR. TONER: I can’t give that off the top of my head, Matt.

QUESTION: I can’t either, but let’s just say that there’s a lot to write about Saudi Arabia and human rights in that report. I’m just wondering if you — that it’s appropriate for them to have a leadership position.

MR. TONER: We have a strong dialogue, obviously a partnership with Saudi Arabia that spans, obviously, many issues. We talk about human rights concerns with them. As to this leadership role, we hope that it’s an occasion for them to look at human rights around the world but also within their own borders.

QUESTION: But you said that you welcome them in this position. Is it based on [an] improved record? I mean, can you show or point to anything where there is a sort of stark improvement in their human rights record?

MR. TONER: I mean, we have an ongoing discussion with them about all these human rights issues, like we do with every country. We make our concerns clear when we do have concerns, but that dialogue continues. But I don’t have anything to point to in terms of progress.

QUESTION: Would you welcome as a — would you welcome a decision to commute the sentence of this young man?

MR. TONER: Again, I’m not aware of the case, so it’s hard for me to comment on it other than that we believe that any kind of verdict like that should come at the end of a legal process that is just and in accordance with international legal standards.

QUESTION: Change of subject?

MR. TONER: Sure.

That’s about as clear as it gets. The U.S. government “welcomes” the appointment of Saudi Arabia to a leadership position on this Human Rights panel because it’s a “close ally.” As I documented two weeks ago courtesy of an equally candid admission from an anonymous “senior U.S. official”: “The U.S. loves human-rights-abusing regimes and always has, provided they ‘cooperate.’ … The only time the U.S. government pretends to care in the slightest about human rights abuses is when they’re carried out by ‘countries that don’t cooperate.'”

It’s difficult to know whether Mark Toner is lying when he claims ignorance about the case of al-Nimr, the regime critic about to be beheaded and crucified for dissident activism, which he engaged in as a teen. Indeed, it’s hard to know which would be worse: active lying or actual ignorance, given that much of the world has been talking about this case. The government of France formally requested that the Saudis rescind the death penalty. Is it really possible that the deputy spokesperson of the U.S. State Department is ignorant of this controversy? Either way, the reluctance of the U.S. government to utter a peep about the grotesque abuses of its “close ally” is in itself grotesque.

But it’s also profoundly revealing. The close U.S./Saudi alliance and the massive amount of weapons and intelligence lavished on the regime in Riyadh by the West is one of the great unmentionables in Western discourse. (The Guardian last week published an editorial oh-so-earnestly lamenting the war in Yemen being waged by what it called the “Saudi-led coalition,” yet never once mentioned the rather important fact that the Saudis are being armed in this heinous war by the U.S. and U.K.; it took a letter to the editor from an Oxfam official to tell The Guardian that the West is not being “complacent” about the war crimes being committed in Yemen, as The Guardian misleadingly claimed, but rather actively complicit.)

It’s not hard to understand why so many of the elite sectors of the West want everyone to avert their eyes from this deep and close relationship with the Saudis. It’s because that alliance single-handedly destroys almost every propagandistic narrative told to the Western public about that region.

As the always-expanding “War on Terror” enters its 14th year, the ostensible target — radical, violent versions of Islam — is fueled far more by the U.S.’s closest allies than any of the countries the U.S. has been fighting under the “War on Terror” banner. Beyond that, the alliance proves the complete absurdity of believing that the U.S. and U.K.’s foreign policies, let alone their various wars, have anything to do with protecting human rights or subverting tyranny and fanaticism. And it renders a complete laughingstock any attempts to depict the U.S. government as some sort of crusader for freedom and democracy or whatever other pretty goals are regularly attributed to it by its helpful press.


https://theintercept.com/2015/09/23/u-s-state-department-welcomes-news-close-ally-saudi-arabia-chosen-head-u-n-human-rights-council-panel

Only in your mind what you've quoted meant what you wrote. If he goes free to his homeland then YES the DOJ would have taken his cultural difference into account and the fact he is a rich saudi prince. I hope I am wrong and stay behind bars.
Money can get you a get out of jail free card, sometime...

Let's see how this situation evolves: justice for all and he stays behind bars. Justice for saudi princes and he gets on his private jet...

The woman, bleeding, trying to get over that wall wasn't expecting cnn or foxnews at the gate. She was running for her life. Also they can tell if her wounds were self inflicted, or defensive...

Let science keep him behind bars.. Or 0bama's DOJ let him go free...

If the DOJ lets him go back to his homeland would this be justice?