Hounded Out of Business by Obama Regulators

The company LabMD finally won its six-year battle with the FTC, but vindication came too late.



Sometimes winning is still losing. That is certainly true for companies that find themselves caught in the cross hairs of the federal government. Since 2013, my organization has defended one such company, the cancer-screening LabMD, against meritless allegations from the Federal Trade Commission. Last Friday, the FTC’s chief administrative-law judge dismissed the agency’s complaint. But it was too late. The reputational damage and expense of a six-year federal investigation forced LabMD to close last year.

While the Atlanta-based company was in business, its work required securely storing personal-health data and medical records in compliance with Health and Human Services Department regulations under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, often known as HIPAA.

So it was alarming when, in May 2008, LabMD was contacted by Tiversa, a company that describes itself as a “world leader in P2P cyberintelligence,” alleging that it had found on the Internet a LabMD insurance-agent file containing the names, dates of birth and Social Security numbers of about 9,000 patients. Oddly, Tiversa wouldn’t disclose where or how it discovered the file. But the company demanded a fee of $40,000 to mitigate the situation.

After leading its own thorough review that turned up no sign that any patient information had been exposed online, LabMD refused to pay. Little did it know that this would lead to a yearslong fight with the federal government that would bring down the company.

Tiversa had an exploitation game going. The company would “scour” the IT networks of companies for confidential information, according to whistleblower testimony in May from Richard Wallace, a former forensic analyst at Tiversa. Upon finding any such information, Mr. Wallace said, Tiversa would contact the company and demand large payments to “fix” the problem.

If a company refused, Mr. Wallace testified, Tiversa would create IP addresses to match those that law enforcement had identified in other, unrelated proceedings as belonging to identity thieves, and then pretend that the information had spread to third parties across the Internet.

Tiversa has called Mr. Wallace’s allegations “baseless” and attributed them to the complaints of a disgruntled former employee. The company is suing LabMD and Mr. Wallace for defamation.

In his May testimony, Mr. Wallace said that Tiversa’s strategy was essentially, “Hire us or face the music.” And that music, Mr. Wallace said, was the FTC. According to a January congressional investigation—the only way to know, as LabMD was denied discovery into this relationship—Tiversa began working closely with FTC staff in 2007.

As Mr. Wallace detailed in his testimony, and as was uncovered in the congressional investigation, two years later the FTC and Tiversa entered a deal wherein Tiversa would create a separate company that would pass to the agency confidential computer files it had obtained from internal computer systems from LabMD and 88 other companies. The FTC then used the files to take enforcement action under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act for alleged unfair trade practices pertaining to inadequate data security. What specifically those inadequacies were, LabMD was not told.

Using Tiversa’s information, and without ever confirming the veracity of its claims that the patient information was on the Internet—as the FTC admitted in court filings—the commission opened an investigation into LabMD in January 2010.

From the start, LabMD tried to cooperate. Yet the FTC refused to detail LabMD’s data-security deficiencies and would not disclose the nature and extent of Tiversa’s involvement. Eventually, the FTC demanded that LabMD sign an onerous consent order admitting wrongdoing and agreeing to 20 years of compliance reporting.

Unlike many other companies in similar situations, however, LabMD refused to cave and in 2012 went public with the ordeal. In what appeared to be retaliation, the FTC sued LabMD in 2013, alleging that the company engaged in “unreasonable” data-security practices that amounted to an “unfair” trade practice by not taking reasonable steps to protect patient information. FTC officials publicly attacked LabMD and imposed arduous demands on the doctors who used the company’s diagnostic services. In just one example, the FTC subpoenaed a Florida oncology lab to produce documents and appear for depositions before government lawyers—all at the doctors’ expense.

Yet after years of investigation and enforcement action, the FTC never produced a single patient or doctor who suffered or who alleged identity theft or harm because of LabMD’s data-security practices. The FTC never claimed that LabMD violated HIPAA regulations, and until 2014—four years after its investigation began—never offered any data-security standards with which LabMD failed to comply.

The administrative-law judge’s decision—which noted the lack of proof of a single victim in the case—vindicates LabMD, though Tiversa isn’t admitting anything. “We have acted appropriately and legally in every way with respect to LabMD,” the company said in a statement after last week’s ruling.

But the case illustrates the injustice of the federal system that allows agencies to cow companies into submission rather than seek a day in court. During its three years of pre-suit investigation against LabMD, the FTC demanded thousands of documents, confidential employee depositions and several meetings with management. LabMD—which at its apex employed 30 people—spent hundreds of thousands of dollars meeting demands. No federal court would ever allow such abusive tactics. But this isn’t federal court—it’s a federal agency.

Furthermore, the FTC is likely to simply disregard the 92-page decision—which weighed witness credibility and the law—and side with commission staff. That’s the still greater injustice: The FTC is not bound by administrative-law judge rulings. In fact, the agency has disregarded every adverse ruling over the past two decades, according to a February analysis by former FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright. Defendants’ only recourse is appealing in federal court, a fresh burden in legal fees.

That’s what happens when a federal agency serves as its own detective, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner. As Mr. Wright observed, the FTC’s record is “a strong sign of an unhealthy and biased institutional process.” And he puts it perhaps most powerfully: “Even bank robbery prosecutions have less predictable outcomes than administrative adjudication at the FTC.” Winning against the federal government should never require losing so much.

Mr. Epstein is the executive director of Cause of Action, a government watchdog. It represents LabMD.

High Obamacare Deductibles Make Mandated Insurance Practically Useless

by Kristina Ribali

Remember the Affordable Care Act? The law that was supposed to lower the cost of health care by providing health insurance plans to the masses that were more affordable. That’s what we were promised, but the reality is that millions have seen their formally affordable premiums skyrocket, and now they’re also stuck with deductibles that are hard to swallow.

One man from New Jersey told the New York Times just how worthless his newly mandated plan has become.

“The deductible, $3,000 a year, makes it impossible to actually go to the doctor,” said David R. Reines, 60, of Jefferson Township, N.J., a former hardware salesman with chronic knee pain. “We have insurance, but can’t afford to use it.”
Deductibles in the thousands of dollars are not uncommon. In fact, “in many states, more than half the plans offered for sale through, the federal online marketplace, have a deductible of $3,000 or more.” Once you add in several hundred dollars per month for your plan premium, a rate that may or may not be lower than it used to be and add in a $3,000 or more deductible, the average individual could be paying over $5,000 out of pocket in a year before their “affordable” insurance kicks in. This is true for employer sponsored plans as well.

Just this past September, I wrote about the Kaiser Family Foundation study showing deductibles on employer sponsored plans rose by almost 9 percent.

How many American families who need to get insurance via Obamacare have the ability to absorb more than $3,000 or $5,000 into their yearly budget? In this economy, with fairly stagnant wages, and millions of Americans leaving the labor force, it’s doubtful that’s an easy cost to absorb for low income earners or even the middle class.

Kevin Fanning of Texas told the New York Times that “Basically I was paying for insurance I could not afford to use.” Fanning said that he and his wife “had a policy with a monthly premium of about $500 and an annual deductible of about $10,000 after taking account of financial assistance. Their income is about $32,000 a year.” That’s nearly one-third of their income just to get the insurance company to cover them if they actually need to seek care.

Unsurprisingly, Fanning dropped his plan.

But it gets even worse.

“Our deductible is so high, we practically pay for all of our medical expenses out of pocket,” said Wendy Kaplan, 50, of Evanston, Ill. “So our policy is really there for emergencies only, and basic wellness appointments.”
Her family of four pays premiums of $1,200 a month for coverage with an annual deductible of $12,700.

Twelve thousand, seven hundred dollars! Is that what this Administration considers affordable?

And let’s not forget, people are required to purchase this unaffordable insurance, or face a fine from the IRS.

Clarissa Morris, 47, has been a server at the Golden Corral here for five years, earning $2.13 an hour plus tips. On a typical day, she leaves the restaurant with about $70 in tips. Her husband makes $9 an hour at Walmart but has been offered only a part-time schedule there, without benefits. Their combined paychecks barely cover their rent and daily essentials.

“It’s either buy insurance or put food in the house,” she said.
A study in 2014 found that 56 million Americans under age 65 will have trouble paying their health care bills. A whopping 10 million Americans between the ages of 19 and 64 “will be unable to pay for basic necessities like rent, food, and heat due to their medical bills.”

Furthermore, “In 2013 over 20% of American adults were struggling to pay their medical bills, and three in five bankruptcies in 2014 will be due to medical bills.”

For millions of Americans, the insurance plans they are now required to purchase under Obamacare could potentially bankrupt them – forcing them to choose insurance or food, insurance or rent, insurance or heat during a cold winter. And if they don’t choose insurance, a hefty fine awaits as well.

It’s long past time for Congress to start rolling back these senseless government mandates on health care. Real solutions that put families back in charge of their health care costs and help the uninsured are already being pioneered in the states, but first the federal government needs to get out of the way.

Update (Ed), 11/18 12:33 pm: At Kristina’s request, I edited the post slightly to remove a reference to deductibles increasing $5,000 per person, which was an error in cross-referencing some of the data.

White House ‘Lied’ About Vetting Syrian Refugees

The former chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence says President Obama has no coherent strategy to defeat ISIS, and he alleges one of Obama’s top advisers “lied to the American people” to perpetuate a misguided program allowing tens of thousands of refugees into the U.S.

Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes appeared on multiples Sunday morning news shows. When asked whether the news that one and possibly two of the Paris terrorists came to Europe as refugees would alter the Obama administration’s plan to accept tens of thousands of refugees, Rhodes said there would be no re-evaluation.

“No, Chuck,” Rhodes told “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd. “We have very extensive screening procedures for all Syrian refugees who would come to the United States. There’s a very careful vetting process that includes our intelligence community, our National Counterterrorism Center, the Department of Homeland Security. So we can make sure we’re carefully screening anybody who comes to the United States.”

Peter Hoekstra spent 18 years in Congress and spent much of his time focused on intelligence matters. He is now with the Investigative Project on Terrorism and is the author of “Architects of Disaster,” which outlines the failure of the Obama administration’s policy in Libya.

“I think (Rhodes) basically lied to the American people,” Hoekstra told WND and Radio America. “He said we’ve got a good vetting process in place where we can vet those that are coming from Syria into the United States.”

He continued, “No we do not. The records don’t exist in Syria, especially after you’ve had five years of civil war. We don’t have a relationship with the regime. It’s an ungoverned area. We don’t know who these people are. Ben, shame on you for even implying that we’ve got a good vetting system. We’re lucky if can get the names right.”

What do YOU think? Can America survive another year of Obama? Sound off in today’s WND poll

In fact, even before the terrorist attacks in Paris, Hoekstra said the idea of bringing in tens of thousands of refugees was a fool’s errand. As such, he said the announcements from a growing number of governors that they won’t accept refugees is a good sign.

“I think it’s a good decision,” he said. “I wasn’t quite sure why we were ever welcoming these folks in. We are a welcoming nation to refugees and to these kinds of individuals, but only after they’ve been vetted.”

Hoekstra said spreading all these refugees around the Western world does nothing to solve the real problem.

“This problem is not solved by accepting refugees into Europe and the United States,” he said. “This problem is solved by eliminating ISIS and bringing some stability back into the Middle East. You’ve got to wipe ISIS out.”

Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Pete Hoekstra:

The issue is taking on additional scrutiny after the European Union revealed only one-fifth of the refugees it has accepted (or about 44,000 of some 213,000 total) are actually from Syria.

But the refugee issue is just one element of the Obama administration’s approach to ISIS that baffles Hoekstra. On Monday, Obama told reporters at the G-20 Summit in Turkey that the Paris attacks would not alter the U.S. strategy toward ISIS. Hoekstra said the existing strategy is a proven disaster, as evidenced by Yemen and Libya turning into lawless wastelands and both Syria and Iraq getting increasingly unstable and deadly to Christians, Yazidis and others.

“I’m not sure what strategy this president is looking at that he believes it working,” Hoekstra said. “When you’ve got at least four countries that are no longer governed and are failed nation-states and are home for the planning and training and preparation for attacks against the West, that is not my view of success.”

Another statement from Obama in Turkey is getting even more attention. After announcing he was sticking with his existing strategy toward ISIS, Obama slammed those who want to America taking a more decisive role.

“What I’m not interested in doing is posing, or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning or whatever other slogans they come up with that has no relationship to what is actually going to work,” Obama said.

Hoekstra was stunned.

“This message is clear: When the president says, ‘I have no intention of following or implementing a strategy about America leading’ or whatever slogan they may come up with, it is clear that this president does not have a strategy in place for America leading in Northern Africa, the Middle East or, for that matter, any other place in the world,” Hoekstra said.

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

And he said America’s credibility is taking a beating as a result.

“I hate to be that critical of this president, but America is at risk,” Hoekstra said. “We are in danger, and we’re in danger of losing our influence in the world. We’ve been a voice of stability, security, democracy and human rights. We are just losing all credibility throughout significant portions of the world.”

In addition to his frustrations with the Obama administration, Hoekstra is alarmed at how unprepared the intelligence communities were for the Paris attacks.

“What I’m hearing is that there was some general awareness that there were some attacks or an attack was imminent in Europe,” Hoekstra said. “That was out there, but again no tactical insight into exactly where the attack would take place or when it would take place.”

He said the truth is, it’s really hard to find these small plots before they happen.

“It just tells you that ISIS and these radical jihadist groups in a country of 80 million people or in a country of 300-plus million people like the United States, it’s not that hard to hide and organize and prepare to carry out an attack like this,” Hoekstra said.

So what can be done to improve America’s odds of stopping future attacks?

“We need closer intelligence sharing between our agencies,” Hoekstra said. “We need to push the technology envelope as quickly as we can, and we need to improve our human intelligence.”

Intelligence experts say efforts to infiltrate ISIS have essentially “gone dark,” partly due to former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden exposing tactics for tracking terrorist suspects.

Hoekstra said this confirms what everyone should have known about Snowden from the outset.

“As I said at the time, this was not an American hero protecting American liberties,” he said. “This was an American traitor that was giving away some of America’s secrets that would make us more vulnerable to these kinds of groups and these kinds of individuals and these kinds of attacks.”


Why Should God Save America

I am a Christian. I make no apologies, and I am happy to say I am a follower of Jesus Christ. He is my Lord and Savior, and everything I am and everything I hold dear comes from Him.

This was once believed by the majority of our citizens to be a Christian nation. I know that our politically correct re-written imperial History now tells us that we were a pluralistic hodgepodge from the beginning; however the record is clear we were founded as a nation built upon Judeo-Christian beliefs.

As one source expresses it, “The founding of this country as well as the framing of the key political documents rests upon a Christian foundation. That doesn’t necessarily mean that the United States is a Christian nation, although some framers used that term. But it does mean that the foundations of this republic presuppose a Christian view of human nature and God’s providence.”

Some of the Founders of our country and the Framers of our Constitution were very direct in their statements regarding the nature of our nation.

John Adams in a letter to the officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts stated, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other”

In George Washington’s Farewell Address, which is still read aloud at the beginning of every new Congress, our first president said, “And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

What do we see today? Instead of celebrating the influence of God in our founding every child is indoctrinated from grade school through graduate school that America was founded on the principle of the separation of church and state. Yet you can scour the Constitution of the United States, and you will NOT find the phrase, “separation of church and state” or anything close to it. However, in the Constitution of the Soviet Union the doctrine of the separation of Church and State is found: “In order to ensure to citizens freedom of conscience, the church in the U.S.S.R. is separated from the State, and the school from the church. Freedom of religious worship and freedom of antireligious propaganda is recognized for all citizens” (Article 124).

While the concept of separation of church and state might be implied by the First Amendment which states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….”, it says nothing about the “separation of church and state.” And, even if you accept the principle of the separation of church and state being implied by the First Amendment, its implication is not there to protect Americans from religion, it is there to protect religious Americans from the government.

If it isn’t in the Constitution where does this wall of separation come from? The phrase originates in Thomas Jefferson’s 1802 letter to the Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut. In this letter the Danbury Baptists complained to the president that Connecticut’s law was oppressive to their religion. Among other things, Connecticut’s law allowed towns to levy taxes for the support of a religion designated by the majority of voters; since Connecticut was overwhelmingly Congregationalist, the law effectively forced Baptists throughout the state to support Congregational churches.

While Jefferson was powerless to change Connecticut’s law (the First Amendment did not yet apply to the states), Jefferson used the occasion to express his belief that no such law could be implemented on the federal level. Observed Jefferson, “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law regarding an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.”

The current anti-religious environment in our land is based upon court decisions which have given this single sentence from a private letter the force of law. It has been used by the courts to re-interpret the Constitution from its clear meaning to one that is the mirror image of what its authors intended.

Today America is ruled by a Progressive cartel made up of politicians, crony-capitalists, Academics providing the philosophical foundations, and the Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media providing cover. This minority clique relies on low information voters, government employees and those on the dole to keep them in power through elections that supposedly approximate a choice. In reality it is usually a choice between two progressives from the twin-headed party of power.

Following the dictates of secularism and enforcing the religion of secular-humanism and its sacramental hoax, man-made global warming, these wannabe totalitarians have cleansed God from our schools, government, and public life.

When God destroyed His chosen people He told them why, “Because they have forsaken Me and made this an alien place, because they have burned incense in it to other gods whom neither they, their fathers, nor the kings of Judah have known, and have filled this place with the blood of the innocents.”

Today America not only condones it promotes abortion on demand. According to Abortion No: “Many people fail to appreciate the sheer magnitude of bloodshed, suffering, and death that legalized abortion has introduced into the human experience – both in the United States and worldwide. Far more human lives have been violently ended by this scourge than by any other war or genocide in all of history.”

Freedom Outpost sums up this tragedy: “Every single day a tragedy greater than 9/11 takes place, but hardly anyone is talking about it anymore.  On September 11th, 2001 more than 3,000 Americans lost their lives when three giant steel frame skyscrapers were brought down in New York City.  That was a great evil, but so is the fact that we purposely kill more than 3,000 of our own babies every single day in this country.  The fact that society has generally accepted the practice of abortion does not lessen the evil that we have done one bit.  Today, the United States has the highest abortion rate in the entire western world, and hardly anyone makes a fuss about it anymore.  In fact, a lot of Americans laugh about it, and some even do comedy skits about it.  We are so casual about abortion these days that one university is actually recruiting teen girls to have abortions for a “scientific study” that is being conducted.  But someday we will be judged for what we have done.  We have killed more than 56 million of our own babies, and their blood is crying out for justice.”

Looking at the size and scope of this abomination, if God does not judge us he owes an apology to Sodom and Gomorrah.

However God tells us as He told Israel, “ if My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

I believe that God does not judge nations because of the sin that is in them for the same sins are in all people at all times in all places. I believe God judges nations because of the sin they condone. Look about you and ask yourself, “What sins do we not condone.”

If we will turn He will heal us. If we do not turn we will burn. And in that bonfire of our vanity we will know the answer to my question, why should God save America? If we don’t repent, turn from our evil ways, and turn to Him, He shouldn’t.

Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion. He is the Historian of the Future @ © 2015 Contact Dr. Owens Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens


Obama Will NEVER Have The Cojones to Call Out Islamic Terror -ISIS THREATENS NYC: New Video Shows Suicide Bombers Walking Times Square… CHILLING

This sick new video from ISIS threatens another terrorist attack in New York City. Is Obama going to continue cowering in the corner until it’s too late?

ISIS has threatened to bomb New York City in a newly released video, just days after vowing to attack Washington, D.C.
The slick clip features shots of yellow taxis and crowds in Times Square and Herald Square in Manhattan, with vibrant French music playing in the background – a nod to the Paris terror attacks on Friday.
It then cuts to a man wrapping a bomb around his waist before walking into the crowds and pulling the trigger.

New York police have issued a statement to say they are aware of the footage.
They added that there is no direct threat to the city but insist there is a ‘heightened state of vigilance’.
‘In addition, we are continuing to deploy additional Critical Response Command (CRC) teams throughout the City, out of an abundance of caution,’ Stephen Davis, a Deputy NYPD Commissioner, said in a statement on Wednesday.

Ben Affleck Had Hillary’s Private E-mail Address, But Ambassador Chris Stevens Did Not!

Ben Affleck sent an email to Hillary Clinton’s private email server during her tenure at the State Department, an email released on Friday by the agency revealed.

The Argo and Batman v. Superman star e-mailed Clinton on April 16, 2012 to provide an advanced copy of a report on sector security reform in the Democratic Republic of Congo on behalf of his Eastern Congo Initiative nonprofit organization.

“The report discusses the opportunity that now exists for the international community to partner with the Government of the DRC to reform the security sector and, in doing so, take concrete steps towards creating a better future for the country,” Affleck wrote. “This report describes a path towards greater security if reform of the military, police and judicial sector is supported by firm commitments from the government of the DRC and the international community.”


SOMEONE TELL OBAMA -5 Syrian Men with Stolen Passports Arrested in Honduras, 8 ISIS Terrorists Hiding Among Refugees Arrested in Turkey

by Onan Coca
This is the problem. How can we be both benevolent and vigilant? How can we be both merciful and suspicious? How can we be both compassionate to the Syrian people and be protective of our own innocent civilians?


On the heels of the horrible ISIS-led terrorist attacks in Paris and Beirut, ISIS tried to continue the chaos in an attack in Hannover, Germany. Thankfully the plot was foiled when local authorities discovered the ambulance packed full of explosives just hours before it was set to explode.

Now, just a few days later, more bad news from Honduras and Turkey.

In Honduras, authorities have arrested five Syrian men who were traveling to the United States using stolen Greek passports. The passports had been altered and the men had used them to travel to Honduras in their efforts to reach the United States.

“The suspects in Honduras were in police custody, and had flown to the country from Costa Rica, according to Reuters. They were trying to arrive in the U.S. by land, presumably by traveling through Mexico,” a police spokesman told Fox News.

Meanwhile in Turkey, 8 men have been arrested by the Turkish government under suspicion that they are ISIS terrorists who were attempting to mix in with the refugees traveling on to Europe.

Police sources said one of the suspects had a hand-drawn picture of a route from Turkey to Germany, via Greece, Serbia and Hungary.

It features exact details of how they should pick up smuggler boats and join refugees arriving on the Greek island of Kos before using trains and buses to travel across Europe before arriving in Germany where the map is rounded off with a little smiling stick man holding a flag.

Police fear the group are Islamic State militants planning to make their way to Germany posing as refugees.

ISIS2It hardly seems as if ISIS is as “contained” as President Obama believes.

Turkey and Honduras weren’t the only countries attempting to arrest jihadists on Wednesday. In France the authorities continued their investigation into last week’s terrorists attacks leading them to conduct a series of raids throughout Paris. During the raids the police killed 2 terrorists and arrested 7 others:

French investigators believe the extremists in Saint Denis were planning an attack in a shopping mall in the main business district of the French capital.

The terror suspects were also plotting to attack the Charles de Gaulle airport.

Police sources claim the dawn raid in the northern Paris suburb was carried out as the group were about to commit “imminent attacks” on Paris’ main airport and the Mall of Quatre Temps as early as Thursday.

Two people, including a female suicide bomber, died after a gunfight with French police.

One suicide bomber blew herself up as armed officers raided the apartment while another suspect was killed with a grenade.

Seven other suspects have been arrested including three men from inside the flat, a man and woman hiding in rubble, and the man who rented it out as well as his female friend.

The female suicide bomber who died made a phone call shortly before blowing herself up, suggesting there was “potential contact with accomplices”.

In a testament to hard work and good fortune, the police were able to stop this terror cell before they were able to carry out their own attacks against the people of Paris. This cell had an attack planned on both the Charles de Gaulle airport and a busy shopping mall.

French media is also reporting that the mastermind of the Paris attacks, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, was one of those killed in the raids.

Now that they’ve consolidated power in Iraq and Syria, ISIS seems to be shifting gears to a broader, international plan to wreak havoc around the world. While President Obama might believe that we’ve “contained” the evil Muslim criminals, the truth is quite a different story.

Obama’s Syrian Refugee Entrance Form Found!

Obama doesn’t have a clue what he is doing.

Check it out:

Governors don’t have any real control over the federal government’s decision to accept and place Syrian refugees — but they could frustrate the efforts of federal officials to do so, administration officials acknowledged on Tuesday.

Over the past 48 hours, more than half of the nation’s governors have called for a halt to allowing Syrian refugees into the country for now, a response to this past weekend’s terrorist attacks in Paris that left more than 120 people dead.

Those calls to halt the program have varied in key ways — some governors have tacitly or explicitly acknowledged that they lack the authority to prevent the federal government from taking action, something the federal government affirmed on Tuesday.

“This is a federal program carried out under the authority of federal law, and refugees arriving in the U.S. are protected by the Constitution and federal law,” a senior administration official told reporters on a conference call.

“While state and local governments have an important consultative role to play in the resettlement of refugees, the resettlement program is, as you’re hearing, administered by the federal government,” the official said.



Ben Nasr

I honestly don’t know what’s worse about this story: That Al-Queda henchman, Ben Nasr Mehdi almost smuggled himself into the West, or that authorities attempted to cover it up, or that we’re now stuck with relying on the Italians as our last line of defense against the destruction of civilization. Look, if you want a fantastic meal matched with an exquisite red, the Italians are your kind of people. If you want top-notch thoroughness and punctilious due diligence, maybe not so much.

Fortunately, our Italian friends put down the Chianti long enough to apprehend Mehdi amongst 200 migrants last month. Unfortunately, the only reason we seem to know anything about this is because German news channel n-tv caught Italian authorities trying to keep Mehdi’s near infiltration a secret in order to avoid “scare tactics”, whatever that means.

So, for those of you keeping score at home- we’ve got Western democracies still allowing millions of Muslim immigrants through the gates while ignoring the obvious terrorist dangers in the process. We’ve got the same Western democracies choosing to withhold key confirmation that they’re allowing terrorists a head start to destroy churches and rape women so they can avoid dealing with a perfectly appropriate fear response. And, lastly, we seem to require democracies to essentially spy on each other instead of focusing on the actual Islamic terrorist threat that is causing all of this brilliant diplomacy.

To make things worse, as Breitbart reported earlier his year, this isn’t even the first terrorist Italy had to stick its head out of the sand to deal with. Muslim IS terrorist, Abdel Majid Touil, entered the country in February before getting captured in May – an undisturbed stay of almost four months.

According to The Daily Mail, Italy slapped Touil with an expulsion order to “leave within 15 days or else” back in February. Brace yourself; I’m sure everyone will be shocked (shocked!) to learn that Touil decided to not follow it. It’s really unfair when the evil, murdering, terrorists don’t follow the laws.

So far, none of this seems to be putting a dent into the West’s Embrace Islam policy. After so many leaders in various countries are falling down on the job and endangering their citizens for fear of upsetting a terrorist religion, it kind of makes me wonder how many of these countries can really be called democracies anymore?


Conjoined-600-LAPanty Waiste and Hilly