The Invasion of Buffalo

Millard Fillmore was born in a log cabin in upstate New York. Fifty years later, he took office as the thirteenth president of the United States. Around that time he sold off a piece of land. That land became the neighborhood of Lovejoy in the city of Buffalo.

Lovejoy was named after Sarah Lovejoy who had been killed defending her home during the War of 1812. British forces had assaulted American towns once again by using their Indian allies as a terror weapon. Buffalo, now a major city, was burned to the ground with only four buildings left standing.

Mrs. Lovejoy told her son Henry, a 12-year-old boy who shouldered a musket too heavy for him to bear, to flee into the woods. She stayed behind. When the savages invaded her home, she tried to defend herself.

The invaders killed her with a tomahawk and scalped her body. A neighbor described how her “long Black hair reached to the Floor clotted with Blood.” Other families fled on sleds into the snow.

When the locals returned a few days later, the only living thing in Buffalo was a cat. There were no other survivors. Only corpses.

But within a week they began to rebuild. By the time Fillmore sold his land, it was a city of 40,000. By the time Lovejoy was a neighborhood, it had surpassed 100,000. German, Polish, Jewish and Italian immigrants quickly filled Lovejoy and clung to it with the same tenacity that Sarah had.

And then another savage invasion began.

In the past decade, Erie County “resettled” nearly 10,000 refugees. Most of them have been inflicted on Buffalo and Black Rock, the same targets as that original invasion two centuries ago that claimed Sarah’s life.

Buffalo has four resettlement agencies working to bring as many Muslims as they can. Among them is the International Institute of Buffalo which was set up after WWI to bring “war brides” to America, but which now specializes in bringing Muslims here instead. Tickets to the Institute’s big event, Buffalo Without Borders, run as high as $10,000 a piece, and it is billed as “A Party Only the IIB Can Throw.”

One of these parties featured chocolates “inspired” by Iraqi Muslim migrants.

In Lovejoy though the price ranges are a little different. Like Sarah Lovejoy, the residents of this area, once Polish and Italian, are under siege.

A few months after September 11, Frank Scalisi passed away at the age of 92. For 50 years, Frank and his wife Edith had run Rosati’s Supermarket. Frank had presided over the Buffalo Retail Food Dealers and served as deputy sheriff for the Marine Division of Eric County. He coached a softball team in the sixties that became known as “The Goosport Phenomenon”.

And then Rosati’s was no more and in its place was the IGA Community Express Mart run by the Alshami clan. The Alshamis were part of the flood of Yemeni Muslim migrants who had washed up in Buffalo.

And the Muslim Yemeni population has a way of making headlines.

Six Yemenis made up the infamous Buffalo Cell, who had attended the Al Farooq training camp in Afghanistan, met with Osama bin Laden and were convicted for providing material support to Al Qaeda. The seventh member of the cell, Jaber Elbaneh, is a fugitive still wanted by the FBI, which describes him as armed and dangerous.

There is a $5 million reward on his head.

The Alshamis were not quite so ambitious. There were no suicide bombings. Rosati’s Supermarket went from a neighborhood institution to a rat’s nest. There were illegal cigarettes for sale, building code violations, glass pipes and blunts, sales of secondhand merchandise without a license, cars present without license plates and piles of trash. There were multiple complaints about drug dealing and accusations that the Yemeni shop attracted drug dealers and possibly even sold drugs.

On the corner of Ludington and Davey, where the small modest houses fly American flags, this outpost of Yemen had become a malignant sore for the community.

Councilman Rich Fontana said, “Frank Scalisi would be turning in his grave if he knew what was going on there now.”

There’s little doubt of that.

Ahmed Alshami, the grim patriarch of the clan, was arrested with crack cocaine in his car. He was accused of making drug deliveries and berated neighborhood activists by posting a picture of himself raising the middle finger and boasting, “Long stay the Arab stores.”

Then he smashed someone over the head with a bottle.

Finally he was charged with massive food stamp fraud for buying food stamp cards from customers for pennies on the dollar and then going to Walmart to stock his shelves. Not to mention a spot of burglary.

Ahmed Alshami skipped out on Buffalo City Court, announcing that he was too busy. So his bail was set at $2 million. His wife shouted, “We’ve got the million dollars!” and “F___ America.”

The family, whose patriarch had ten previous arrests, and whose presence in Buffalo has been a source of trouble, have done that already. There is talk of deporting Alshami to Yemen if he’s convicted, but considering that Yemen is currently little more than a battlefield between Shiite and Sunni Jihadists, that seems highly unlikely. Without major reforms to our immigration and criminal justice system, they are here to stay.

The Alshami antics of shouting “F___ America” made their case go viral, but they’re not the exception.

Just last year, Samir Hassan of City Market & Deli in Buffalo pleaded guilty to buying food stamps, Bandar Alsaidi and Talal Alsaidi were busted for buying food stamps at Big Boys Food Market also in Buffalo to the tune of $300,000, just as their parents before them had back in 2003 when it was known as Al’s Food Market.

This year, Alie Hassan of Buffalo’s Broadway Mart and Deli was given two years probation for buying food stamps. A few years ago, Riyadh Almadrahi of Zip’s Food and Beverage made over $140,000 by buying food stamps. The year after it was Nasser Ali Ghanem and Yousef Yafai of the Hollywood Nights Prime Shop. The crimes echo each other and they are ubiquitous.

When politicians promise us that Muslim migration will create small businesses and produce jobs, they forget to mention who will be paying for them. There are some 5,000 Yemeni Muslim settlers in Buffalo. Population numbers have increased as much as 242%. While the traditional population in the area declines, with Christian and Jewish populations falling, the Islamic population continues to grow, fed by refugee resettlement.

Cheerful news stories celebrate how “refugees” are “bringing Buffalo back.” The question raised by the Alshamis and so many of their compatriots is what is Muslim migration doing to Buffalo?

Large numbers of Muslims have been dumped in the area from Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Buffalo’s heritage and its working class roots are being traded for the Koran and the hijab.

Buffalo is listed by the State Department as a “preferred community” for resettling migrants. Sizable numbers of Syrian Muslim migrants are headed there now. It’s even been studied by European advocates for migrants. But the cost to ordinary American neighborhoods like Lovejoy has been overlooked. Media accounts trumpet the Iraqi markets opening up, they don’t look at what those markets are up to. There are celebrations of ethnic food accompanied by the decline of local American communities.

Buffalo has faced catastrophe before and recovered. But the question is how long will it take to salvage it from this latest invasion. America is being targeted, invaded and carved up town by town and city by city. Much as two centuries ago, Buffalo is being invaded. But the invaders are not a weapon being used by a foreign government against Americans. Instead this weapon is being wielded by our own government. (For more from the author of “The Invasion of Buffalo” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Federal Government Halts Work on Part of Pipeline Project

The federal government stepped into the fight over the Dakota Access oil pipeline Friday, ordering work to stop on one segment of the project in North Dakota and asking the Texas-based company building it to “voluntarily pause” action on a wider span that an American Indian tribe says holds sacred artifacts.

The government’s order came minutes after a judge rejected a request by the Standing Rock Sioux to halt construction of the $3.8 billion, four-state pipeline.

The tribe, whose cause has drawn thousands to join their protest, has challenged the Army Corps of Engineers’ decision to grant permits for the pipeline at more than 200 water crossings. Tribal leaders allege that the project violates several federal laws and will harm water supplies. The tribe also says ancient sites have been disturbed during construction. (Read more from “Federal Government Halts Work on Part of Pipeline Project” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

All Three of Murkowski’s Republican Primary Opponents Say They’re Voting Joe Miller

Joe Miller Press Release

Anchorage, AK – The Miller campaign today announced that all three of Lisa Murkowski’s primary campaign challengers have confirmed they’re voting for Libertarian Nominee Joe Miller in the November election.

“I’m humbled and honored by the support from Republicans across the state of Alaska,” Miller said. “I want to take this opportunity to thank Bob Lochner, Tom Lamb and Paul Kendall for their votes of confidence, and I look forward to working with all Alaskans for the betterment of our great state and the country we love.”

Republican runner-up Bob Lochner offered the following statement:

“I fully support Joe Miller for United State Senate. We have a Democrat and an Independent who are both liberal, and we have a Republican who is liberal. Lisa Murkowski is a walking contradiction . . . the farthest you can get from a conservative.”

Air Force veteran and Republican candidate Thomas Lamb also pledged his support for Miller, stating:

“I’m endorsing Joe because he’s an honest man, and I agree with him on 90% of the issues. With his military experience and knowledge of the Constitution, we need him in the United States Senate now. I’m honored to have a chance to vote for him.”

Paul Kendall has also affirmed that he will be voting for Miller in the November 8 election.

Citizens for Joe Miller invites all Alaskans to join us in the fight for freedom. Let’s make history!

Joe Miller is a limited government Constitutionalist who believe in believes government exists to protect our liberties, not to take them. He supports free people, free markets, federalism, the right to life, religious liberty, American sovereignty, and a strong national defense.

Hillary Caught Wearing Earpiece to Get Instructions From Handlers; Mediaite Wrong Again

Hillary Clinton was spotted wearing a nearly invisible earpiece yesterday during the NBC TV Town Hall event.

160908-earpiece

True to form, the dimwits at Mediaite are claiming this is all a conspiracy, first with urgent missives like “Fox News Now Reporting Anonymously Sourced Theory About Clinton’s ‘Earpiece’” and “Donald Trump Jr. Spreads Hillary Clinton Earpiece Conspiracy Theory on Twitter”, to name but a few.

Well, it turns out that Wikileaks actually captured an email from Huma Abedin to Hillary Clinton asking whether the elderly, infirm, and oft-injured catlady had remembered her “earpiece”.

160908-wikileaks

Josh Feldman, usually one of the few voices of sanity at the far left media-watching website, was quick to react to the Wikileaks revelation, offering up the ludicrous explanation that — not only are you imagining that earpiece in the photo, but — Hillary simply needed her “earpiece” for the United Nations General Assembly.

Pity Josh never bothered to actually look up what UN General Assemblies actually look like.

160908-un

Psst, Joshie: do an image search for united nations translation or un translation service and you’ll see what the headsets look like.

They’re not teeny earpieces that your Abuela forgets to bring to the UN. (For more from the author of “MEDIAITE WRONG AGAIN: Yes, Granny Catlady Wears an Earpiece to Get Instructions From Handlers” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Steven Crowder Sticks It to YouTube’s Political Correctness in ‘Most Offensive Video Ever’

Steven Crowder is at it again, pushing boundaries with what he declares is the “most offensive video ever.”

YouTube has been annoying content creators with their new community standards — demonetizing videos that it determines to contain “graphic content” or is otherwise “offensive.”

If you’re someone who makes money from ads on your YouTube videos, their excessive politically correct standards can really cut into your livelihood.

So in response, Crowder played fast and loose with the new rules in his latest video. Check it out:

(Don’t skip the “ad”. There is no ad. You’ll fall for the joke like I did.)

How quick until YouTube demonetizes this? This video is like when you’re in fourth grade, and you played the game of tipping your chair back. You remember that? And your teacher told you if you fell, you’d get a detention? New game, right? How close to the floor can you tip?

That’s exactly what we did here. Because what’s offensive to one is comedy to the other. Also, let’s just say whatever we want to say and let the market decide, yeah?

Hilarious.

Be sure to head over to Louder with Crowder and check out Steven’s latest podcast for his full explanation on what YouTube is doing and why it’s wrong. (For more from the author of “Steven Crowder Sticks It to YouTube’s Political Correctness in ‘Most Offensive Video Ever'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

5,300 Wells Fargo Employees Fired Over 2 Million Phony Accounts

On Thursday, federal regulators said Wells Fargo employees secretly created millions of unauthorized bank and credit card accounts — without their customers knowing it — since 2011.

The phony accounts earned the bank unwarranted fees and allowed Wells Fargo employees to boost their sales figures and make more money.

“Wells Fargo employees secretly opened unauthorized accounts to hit sales targets and receive bonuses,” Richard Cordray, director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, said in a statement.

Wells Fargo confirmed to CNNMoney that it had fired 5,300 employees over the last few years related to the shady behavior. Employees went so far as to create phony PIN numbers and fake email addresses to enroll customers in online banking services, the CFPB said. (Read more from “5,300 Wells Fargo Employees Fired Over 2 Million Phony Accounts” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Was Jesus a Social Justice Warrior?

The following is a political conversation between a Christian progressive (“Dorothy”) and a free market Christian conservative (“Jeremiah”) sparked by this year’s election.

DOROTHY: I agree with you that abortion is killing. It’s tragic and wrong, and we as Christians should be doing everything we can to discourage it. But I object when people like you think you can corral our political allegiance to your candidates over that single issue, especially when your party treats opposition to abortion as an ugly stepchild, which it trots out every four years then puts back in the corner wearing a dunce cap.

JEREMIAH: I agree that the pro-life issue is a hill worth dying on. It’s crucial to rid the GOP of pro-choice candidates and public officials. We’ve actually done a pretty good job of doing that; all but one (sub 1% George Pataki) of the GOP presidential contenders in 2016 was pro-life. But your party won’t even let pro-life Democrats speak at its convention — and hasn’t, since 1992 when the Clintons banned Robert Casey. Inside that party, pro-life Democrats barely rise to the level of “cranks.” They’re more like … exotic pets.

DOROTHY: You’re wrong to claim the “pro-life” label. Like me, you’re anti-abortion, but you’re not comprehensively “pro-life.” The rest of your party’s platform makes that obvious.

JEREMIAH: I assume you’re invoking the “Seamless Garment,” a statist ideology that was cooked up to dissipate the pro-life movement in a dozen irrelevant directions while helping the Democrats. It pretends that a million voluntary murders of innocent babies are interchangeable with, say, accidental gun deaths or side-effects of climate change. Hold on, while I email you some articles from The Stream which address that.

[He takes out his phone and sends links.]

Why is it, you think, that conservatives just happen to be right about the abortion issue, on which every prominent, successful, or even vocal liberal politician or organization just happens to be wrong? That’s a coincidence, is it?

DOROTHY: I’ll agree with you that progressives have a blind spot on abortion. They see it as a crucial piece of the feminist agenda, granting equal sexual autonomy to women as to men. We need to wake them up on how it exploits and hurts women. But that would be easier, I think, than converting the whole conservative movement on a long list of subjects where it’s out of sync with Gospel priorities.

JEREMIAH: I think you’re mistaken about “Gospel priorities,” and even on what the words “pro-life” mean. You’re against abortion thanks to some residual trace of good sense and common decency that you’ve clung to. But otherwise you’ve signed on to an ideology that rejects individual responsibility and hence human dignity, which sees us not a citizens with rights and duties but termites in a hive, whose work and wealth and daily activities must be controlled by the Collective. Abortion fits in perfectly with such a worldview, since it’s the ultimate means of dodging responsibility for one’s actions.

You have far more common ground with pro-choice secular leftists such as George Soros than you do with any historic Christian church, the Gospel itself, or any world view that is remotely compatible with orthodox Christianity. You can no more be an authentically Christian leftist than you can be a faithful Catholic Social Darwinist, or a devoutly Muslim Hindu.

DOROTHY: So you think that Donald Trump is a model Christian statesman? Why don’t you explain that to me. This should be good.

JEREMIAH: The Republicans this year chose a flawed candidate, who isn’t completely in sync with the party’s platform, or with most GOP elected officials in the country. If elected, Trump will have tangle with those people, who will moderate his views and water down his proposals. He may have tried to grab control of the party, but as we saw in the GOP primaries, he failed. Every single Trumpian challenger he supported got defeated, so even if he wins, he will be isolated within his own party. In other words, we’ll restrain him.

The Democrats, by contrast, nominated a lockstep left-wing multiculturalist who will have the full backing of their governors, senators and congressmen in promoting the radical policies she endorsed in their party’s platform. The main objections Democrats had to Hillary Clinton were to her appalling personal ethics, autocratic isolation, manifest greed, and habit of doing blatantly illegal things that endanger national security, then bald-face lying about them to the American people and Congress. So I’d say that the “character” problems of the two candidates at least cancel each other out. We’re better off comparing the parties and their platforms.

DOROTHY: Fine. Apart from abortion, the Democrats’ platform is much more closely in accord with Christian values of tolerance, inclusion, social justice, and respect for life.

JEREMIAH: The only way you could support that is by cherry-picking from the Gospels the verses that fit your ideology — ignoring context, Christian history, the examples of the saints, and the thinking of faithful Christians for almost 2,000 years. You’d have to assert that nobody understood Christianity correctly until the mid-nineteenth century, when people who were losing their faith in the church’s supernatural claims replaced them with the “social gospel.”

Whether or not Jesus really rose from the dead or is coming again, we can build an ersatz Kingdom of Heaven on earth by making the State really, really strong, and corralling people at gunpoint to follow our version of Christian ethics. That way the church remains relevant whatever becomes of its creed, because it’s close to the sources of money and levers of power. (See the mainline Protestant churches and too many American Catholic bishops.) But because you are moral superheroes, you will only use your powers for good, instead of evil. Of course you will.

DOROTHY: I challenge you to find in the Gospels any place where Jesus talks about the need to protect private property, maximize economic efficiency, guard national borders, or prepare for war. Those aren’t what he was interested in. He was speaking constantly about the poor and the marginalized — just like the Democrats.

JEREMIAH: Jesus didn’t comment on private property, economics, immigration or war. That’s why the Christian tradition has yielded many different answers on those issues. Yes, Jesus talked about our religious obligation to help the poor, enforcible on pain of hellfire. Even more than that, he talked about our duty to kneel down and worship Him as the Son of God, to avoid the same Gehenna. Both of those things are religious duties, not political programs. Neither one, if done at bayonet point to avoid going to prison, will do a thing to save your soul. So unless you want a theocratic state that will force everyone to be Christian, you can’t use Jesus’ words to advocate the redistribution of wealth by the government, either. Make other arguments, but leave Jesus out of it.

DOROTHY: Jesus was constantly telling people to give up their possessions and distribute them to the poor.

JEREMIAH: Those passages don’t mean what you think they mean. You’re confusing a call to Christian perfection — such as monks, nuns, and missionaries embrace willingly — with a crass political program to buy votes with confiscated money. Let me rewrite the Gospel to read as it would have to, if your program were truly Christian. Imagine if St. Mark had written:

And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments: ‘Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.’” And he said to him, “Teacher, all these I have observed from my youth.” And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” At that saying his countenance fell, and he went away sorrowful; for he had great possessions.

And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “Go apprehend him.” Peter and John ran after the young man and bound him with ropes, bringing him back to Jesus. Jesus bade Judas to question him about his riches and where they were kept. Once Judas had fully accounted for all of his holdings, Jesus said to his disciples, “Go to his estate, seize all that he owns, sell it, and distribute it to the poor. Blow a trumpet and announce that it is I who have done this, and command them to follow me. Then let us find more rich men and do likewise, that our numbers may be complete before we march on Jerusalem.” [Mark. 10: 17-28, Revised Socialist Version]

I could go through the whole New Testament, rewriting Christ’s words and works to fit your political program. But I don’t have to bother. Leftist pastors across America effectively do that in their sermons every Sunday. (For more from the author of “Was Jesus a Social Justice Warrior?” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hillary: Saying I’m Too Serious Is Sexist

In one of her first press conferences since last year, Hillary Clinton today accused Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Reince Priebus of sexism for tweeting that Clinton appeared “angry” in last night’s national security forum.

“I’m going to let all of you ponder that last question,” said the Democratic presidential candidate after being asked about Priebus’ comments. “I think there will be a lot of PhD theses and popular journalism writing on that subject for years to come.”

Clinton went on to criticize both the RNC and her opponent, Republican candidate Donald Trump. “I don’t take my advice and I don’t take anything seriously that comes from the RNC. We were talking about serious issues last night. I know the difference between what we have to do to fix the V.A., what we have to do to take the fight to ISIS, than just making political happy talk. And I had a very short window of time in that event last night to convey the seriousness with which I would approach the issues that concern our country.”

“Donald Trump chose to talk about his deep admiration and support for Vladimir Putin. Maybe he did it with a smile, and I guess the RNC would have liked that.”

Priebus Tweeted that Clinton was displeased when asked about her continuing email scandals by moderator Matt Lauer. Clinton’s campaign responded in kind shortly thereafter.

Clinton’s verbal response to Priebus came thanks to a question from ABC News. A reporter asked if Clinton could “react to that,” and said that Clinton has “suggested that there is a double-standard. Do you think you’re treated different in this race because you’re a woman?”

Clinton surrogates and others have used the sexism card throughout the 2016 campaign, including against Lauer last night and Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) during his primary run against Clinton. Lauer was slammed by partisans on both sides, but especially Democrats for interrupting Clinton several times in what some said was a sign of sexism. Lauer also didn’t challenge Trump when the Republican falsely said he “was totally against the war in Iraq.”

Priebus’ Tweet was tame compared to one issued by then-Democratic National Chairwoman (DNC) Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL) last year, when she accused Trump of “racism”:

Earlier this year, interim DNC Chairwoman Donna Brazile accused Trump of “soaking up … hate and … spilling it back out.”

Partisan attacks are normal in election years, especially when the White House is at stake. Republican candidates are especially targets of vitriol by their political opponents. (For more from the author of “Hillary: Saying I’m Too Serious Is Sexist” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Dangerously Daft New Study Calls Ohio Abortion Pill Restrictions Dangerous

The mainstream media is warning us in anxious tones that an “Ohio abortion pill law led to worse health outcomes.” Allow me to briefly describe the new law and show why the case against the law is at best weak, and at worst, dangerously confused.

The drugs mifepristone and misoprostol are sometimes injected into pregnant women to kill the lives inside their wombs. The procedure is called a “medical” or “medication abortion” to distinguish it from other methods of killing the unborn, usually involving sharp objects or vacuums.

In 2000, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved a version of the mifepristone + misoprostol method of killing. This version requires medium doses of both drugs to be given at an abortionist’s office on different days. To ease demands on their time, some abortionists instead prefer another, “off-label” combination of these drugs, one not approved by the FDA: a high dose of mifepristone at the office and a low dose of misoprostol self-administered at the would-be mothers’ homes.

The distinction is important because Ohio in February 2011 passed a law requiring abortionists to use only the FDA-approved method. The law was passed in dispute. Some abortionists complained that the work of killing was better using the off-label method.

Apples, Oranges and the Unborn

A group of researchers led by Ushma D. Upadhyay tried to investigate the questions, studying pre-law and post-law abortion data. They published their attempt in “Comparison of Outcomes before and after Ohio’s Law Mandating Use of the FDA-Approved Protocol for Medication Abortion: A Retrospective Cohort Study” in the journal PLOS: Medicine.

The researchers found four abortion sites willing to cooperate with their research. The immediate finding was that the fraction of medication abortions dropped dramatically at all four of the abortion sites after the law passed. The average rate was 22% of all abortions were medication before the law, which dropped to only 5% some time after. One site even discontinued medication abortions for a period of almost two years.

The researchers do not say if the medication abortions that were performed post-law were all the FDA-approved method or if any were the now illegal off-label method. This is not surprising, because admitting to use of the off-label method would be admitting violating the law. Given that the sympathies of the abortionists and the researchers was not with the law, it is possible biases creep in, both in the analyses and in way treatments themselves are administered. Confirmation bias is ever a possibility.

That sort of bias might account for why the researchers did not trouble to report what fraction of FDA-approved medication abortions were performed before the law. All? None? We never learn. And it is a crucial number to know if we are to compare pre-law with post-law adverse events, especially if it is to be asserted that the FDA-approved method causes greater harm to the would-be mothers (both methods, of course, cause ultimate harm to the lives inside their wombs).

Further muddying matters, many of the characteristics of the women given medication abortions changed pre- to post-law. For instance, pre-law only about 15% of would-be mothers had at least a Bachelor’s degree, compared to over 23% post-law. Blacks represented 21% of the pre-law sample but only 16% of the post-law sample. Importantly, only about 27% of the women had private insurance pre-law, jumping to 34% post-law. Better educated women with insurance might be more willing to be checked for adverse effects, which would boost reported rates.

Number of Gestation Days Before Killing

The oddest discrepancy was in the number of gestation days, i.e. number of days the women were pregnant before seeking an abortion. In the pre-law sample, 13.4% of women had medication abortions at 34 gestation days or fewer, contrasted with only 7.2% post-law. Also, 52.2% of women pre-law had abortions between 42 and 49 days, versus 63.6% after. These figures are notable because it has been found that the greater the gestation period before the lives inside the women are killed, the greater the likelihood of an adverse effect upon the women.

Before the law, medication abortions were legal for gestations greater than 49 days. In the new law, all medication abortions had to be performed before 50 days. So the greater number of post-law abortions in the 42-49 day period could be accounted for by women who might have rushed in before the new deadline. But this doesn’t explain why fewer women opted for earlier abortions. Whatever the reasons, the changes imply that the characteristics of the women, or the practice of abortionists, changed after the law.

And there was another questionable maneuver by the researchers. All pre-law medication abortions greater than 49 gestation days were excluded from the researchers’ analysis. Of the rate of adverse events in this important and risky group we therefore never learn. This exclusion really makes it impossible to compare health effects pre- to post-law, as do the other points made above. Nevertheless, the researchers soldiered on.

Medication Abortion: Dangerous Medicine

About those adverse events: these included “acute hemorrhage, or infection.” Nasty business, abortion.

As the authors emphasize, but fail to realize the importance of, post-law women were required under the law to go to the abortion site “a minimum of four visits instead of two,” and so there was greater opportunity post-law to report or discover adverse events (in addition to the other reasons noted above).

Now 4.9% of the pre-law women required “additional interventions,” which were things like aspiration (vacuuming up the remains inside the womb), repeated misoprostol doses, and blood transfusions. These interventions rose to 14.3% post-law. Some 12.6% of pre-law women had “at least one side effect during their medication abortion” compared to 15.6% after. Side effects included nausea, vomiting, pain and so on. These numbers comprise the authors’ main “findings.”

Yet even if it were true, as the authors suggest, that the FDA-approved method is causing the boost in rates of interventions and side effects, the number of women who suffer ill effects caused by medication abortion could still shrink. Why? Because even though the rates of ill effects increase, the number of medication abortions procured fell sharply under the law.

The calculation that could prove this is tough to do because we don’t know about the adverse rates for women with gestations greater than 49 days pre-law (a shocking omission) — nor do we know them for other abortion methods. Plus, for the many reasons given above, we do not know that the FDA-approved method is causing the boost in rates for medication abortions, even though the researchers are anxious to suggest that it is.

Perhaps most interesting is the finding (admission?) that such large percentages of women undergoing medication abortions will require “interventions” or will suffer an adverse effect. That is news worth spreading. (For more from the author of “Dangerously Daft New Study Calls Ohio Abortion Pill Restrictions Dangerous” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

SANCTUARY STATE: New Mexico State Police Refuse to Ask for Cop Killer’s Citizenship Status!

The Alamogordo, New Mexico Alamogordo Daily News reported on September 2, 2016 that 33-year-old Police Officer Clint Corvinus was fatally shot on September 3, 2016 by 38-yr-old wanted fugitive Joseph Moreno.

In the shootout, following a routine traffic stop, involving Moreno, Officer Corvinus, and a second Police Officer, Christopher Welch, Moreno was also fatally shot.

The report of the investigation of the shooting conducted by the New Mexico Department of Public Safety (NMDPS), updated on September 5, states:

“Forensic evidence at the scene, Officer Welch’s lapel camera video providing footage of the incident, and officer interviews, reveal the following information. During the course of the foot pursuit, Mr. Moreno had in his possession a bag he was carrying. As Mr. Moreno was running away from officers, he reached inside the bag and removed a .357 caliber revolver (later revealed to have had the serial number unlawfully removed).

Mr. Moreno turned toward officers and pointed his firearm at officers. Officer Welch fired at Mr. Moreno after Mr. Moreno pointed his firearm at the officers. At this time Mr. Moreno fell to the ground. While Mr. Moreno was on the ground, Mr. Moreno fired multiple shots at officers. Evidence at the scene indicates Officer Corvinus was struck with one round fired by Mr. Moreno.

Mr. Moreno then got up off the ground and briefly continued to flee on foot. Officer Welch continued to pursue Mr. Moreno and fired additional shots at Mr. Moreno near 602 South Florida Street. Mr. Moreno sustained a fatal shot to the head and fell to the ground a second time. During the time Officer Welch fired rounds at Mr. Moreno, Officer Corvinus was behind Officer Welch and never in his direct line of fire. Officer Welch was unaware Officer Corvinus had been struck by gunfire until after Mr. Moreno had been subdued.

Officer Welch secured Mr. Moreno and the firearm in Mr. Moreno’s possession. Officers later discovered inside the bag in Mr. Moreno’s possession were ten unfired hollow point bullets and a pair of handcuffs. A pistol holster was also found next to Mr. Moreno. Evidence obtained by investigators at the scene will be further analyzed by the state crime laboratory for additional examination.”

Furthermore, the NMDPS report states that:

“At the time of the incident, Mr. Moreno had three outstanding warrants for charges of possession of a controlled substance, two counts of burglary – third degree felonies, and driving with a suspended license. Mr. Moreno had an extensive criminal history and involvement with law enforcement. His criminal history includes arrests for armed robbery, aggravated burglary, multiple counts of possession of controlled substance, multiple counts of possession of firearm by felon, and contributing to the delinquency of minor.”

When queried via emails as to the citizenship status of Joseph Moreno at the time of his death, the report’s author, Sergeant Elizabeth Armijo, New Mexico State Police (NMSP), Public Information Officer stated:

“I don’t have any information regarding the citizenship of Joseph Moreno. There is no indication he is anything other than a US citizen” (September 7, 2016)

In response to a further query as to if the NMSP “assume US citizenship on the basis of his {Moreno’s} residence in Alamogordo, NM,” Sergeant Armijo responded:

“The New Mexico State Police is not assuming anything regarding the citizenship of Joseph Moreno. Our investigation is pertaining to the incident surrounding his death and that of an Alamogordo police officer. His citizenship has nothing to do with our investigation.” (September 8, 2016)

On January 31, 2011, a press release from the Office of New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez entitled “GOVERNOR SUSANA MARTINEZ RESCINDS NEW MEXICO SANCTUARY STATUS,” states that, according to Executive Order 2011-009:

“SANTA FE – Governor Susana Martinez announced today that she has signed an executive order rescinding sanctuary status for illegal immigrants who commit crimes in New Mexico while protecting victims and witnesses of criminal acts. The order signed by Governor Martinez directs law enforcement officers to inquire about the immigration status of those who are arrested for committing crimes.

‘This order takes the handcuffs off of New Mexico’s law enforcement officers in their omission to keep our communities safe,’ said Governor Martinez. ‘The criminal justice system should have the authority to determine the immigration status of all criminals,

regardless of race or ethnicity, and report illegal immigrants who commit crimes to federal authorities. Meanwhile, it is important that we safeguard the ability of victims and witnesses to report crimes to law enforcement officers without fear of repercussion.”

So is New Mexico still a de facto sanctuary state? (For more from the author of “SANCTUARY STATE: New Mexico State Police Refuse to Ask for Cop Killer’s Citizenship Status!” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.