All posts by nedhamson

Activist, writer, researcher, addicted to sharing information and facts.

Immigrant boy kicked out of Swedish football team

The sport-loving ten-year-old was dumped by Swedish club IFK Haninge via text message.

Rare Color Photographs of The Nazi Regime Isolate and Eventually Destroy the German Gypsy Population from 1938-1940

In 1939, 30,000–35,000 people known as Gypsies lived in Germany and Austria, which was incorporated into Germany in March 1938.

Gypsies are believed to have arrived in Europe from northern India in the 1400s. They were called Gypsies because Europeans thought they came from Egypt. This ethnic minority is made up of distinct groups called “tribes” or “nations.” Most of the Gypsies in German-occupied Europe belonged to the Sinti and Roma tribes. The Sinti generally predominated in Germany and western Europe, and the Roma in Austria, eastern Europe, and the Balkans. The Sinti and Roma spoke dialects of a common language called Romani, based in Sanskrit, the classical language of India.

The research of racial scientist Dr. Robert Ritter and his associates served both as instrument and justification for the Nazi regime to isolate and eventually destroy the German Gypsy population.

By studying Gypsies, Ritter, who was a psychiatrist, hoped to determine the links between heredity and criminality. With funding from the German Association for Scientific Research and access to police records, Ritter began in 1937 to systematically interview all the Gypsies residing in Germany.

To do so, he traveled to Gypsy encampments and, after the deportation and internment of Gypsies began, to the concentration camps. Ritter developed detailed genealogies—family histories to distinguish “pure” Gypsies from those of “mixed blood” and to root out assimilated Gypsies from the general German population.

German-Gypsy-1.jpg
1938. A Roma woman and child in a camp during an investigation by the Racial Hygiene Research Center at the Reich Bureau for Health.

German-Gypsy-2.jpg
1938. Eva Justin interviews a Roma woman about her family and ancestry.

German-Gypsy-3.jpg
1938. Dr. Robert Ritter conducts an interview with a Roma woman.

German-Gypsy-4.jpg
1938. Dr. Ritter takes a blood sample from a Roma woman.

German-Gypsy-11.jpg
1938. Sophie Ehrhardt of the Racial Hygiene Research Center conducts an interview with an elderly Roma woman.

See more »

′Islamic rape of Europe′: Polish magazine sparks outrage | News | DW.COM | 18.02.2016

Under a headline reading “Islamic rape of Europe,” the latest wSieci (translation: “The Network”) magazine cover portrays a distressed white, blonde-haired woman draped in the flag of the European Union as she’s assaulted by several disembodied dark-skinned men. Beyond its radical cover image, this week’s issue is devoted to articles outlining the rape and sexual assault of European women said to have been carried out by migrant men. It contains articles such as “The hell of Europe,” which addresses the attacks that occurred in the German city of Cologne on New Year’s Eve, as well as another article entitled “Does Europe want to commit suicide?” The magazine’s website also promotes the glossy as containing “a report about what the media and Brussels elite are hiding from citizens of the European Union.”

Source: ′Islamic rape of Europe′: Polish magazine sparks outrage | News | DW.COM | 18.02.2016

Pope signals contraceptives may be OK in light of Zika | CIDRAP

In response to a question about whether abortion or birth control would be considered a “lesser evil” in the face of the Brazil’s Zika virus epidemic, Pope Francis said there’s a clear moral difference between aborting a fetus and preventing a pregnancy, the Associated Press (AP) reported. He drew a parallel to the church’s approval of artificial contraception to Belgian nuns in the Congo in the 1960s, because they were being repeatedly raped, according to the AP. However, he rejected any temporary loosening on the church’s stance against abortion. “It’s a crime. It’s an absolute evil,” he told reporters.

Source: Pope signals contraceptives may be OK in light of Zika | CIDRAP

Customer Letter – Apple — back door

A Dangerous Precedent Rather than asking for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All Writs Act of 1789 to justify an expansion of its authority. The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by “brute force,” trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer. The implications of the government’s demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge. Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government. We are challenging the FBI’s demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications. While we believe the FBI’s intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.

Rather than asking for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All Writs Act of 1789 to justify an expansion of its authority. The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by “brute force,” trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer. The implications of the government’s demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge. Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government. We are challenging the FBI’s demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications. While we believe the FBI’s intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.

Source: Customer Letter – Apple

The Supreme Court Nominations | The White House

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution — known as the Appointments Clause — is unambiguous about these roles and responsibilities: “ [The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. ” The passing of Justice Antonin Scalia has left a vacancy that must be filled and President Obama has a Constitutional responsibility to nominate someone to take his place. As the President said, any politician who claims to be a strict reader of the Constitution and then claims that there are restrictions on when the President should fulfill this duty is misleading the American people.

Source: The Supreme Court Nominations | The White House