POLICE STATE: Public schools now pharmaceutical PRISONS as 8-year-old boy strapped to gurney and forcibly injected with powerful drugs
Latest police state news within...
Debbie Kiroff told CBC Toronto that her eight-year-old son is a normal boy in many ways; he enjoys playing with Legos, cooking and swimming. However, he also has some behavioral issues and a serious learning disability. She wasn’t terribly surprised when the principal of Holland Landing Public School called her on the first day of school on September 5 to report that his behavior was “escalating.” He likes to run to release energy, she says, and he’s fond of escaping to a frog pond on the school grounds.
However, she was shocked by what happened next. Following an argument with another student over who could use a computer, the principal said he ran around and began climbing unspecified structures while holding a ruler. The principal asked her to come pick her son up, but Kiroff couldn’t leave work immediately and sent her adult daughter to pick him up instead.
By the time her daughter arrived, the boy was in the back of a police car. He was brought to Southlake Regional Health Centre, where Kiroff was forced to wait for 15 to 20 minutes before she could even go inside and see her son.
Before being allowed to enter, she says that a woman working at the hospital came to tell her that her son was out of control and that they had to restrain him and inject him with a sedative.
Kiroff said that she tried to remain calm despite seething inside and asked if they needed her consent for that. She was told that parental consent was not needed if the hospital felt there was an extreme safety concern. She asked what he was doing that prompted them to take such an extreme measure and was told that he was “kicking, screaming and yelling.” While these behaviors certainly have all the markings of a temper tantrum and are not pleasant to witness, it’s hardly an emergency situation worthy of needles and pharmaceuticals.
Her son later told her that hospital workers said they’d take his restraints off of him one at a time if he calmed down, but they ended up injecting him instead. He was kept for around an hour and a half in restraints before being released, and he stumbled back to the car. He was not allowed to go back to school until after his mother could meet with the principal on September 15. Kiroff said the incident has left her son emotionally scarred.
Could this happen to your child?
It’s hard to believe that a school or a hospital would allow such a young boy to be forcibly injected with a powerful sedative, particularly when his behavior does not seem much worse than an extreme temper tantrum. The fact that it was done without parental consent only makes the situation even more infuriating.A statement by the hospital said: “No one wants to use restraints; it is a last measure and is done only in dire situations deemed an ’emergency.’ In an ’emergency’ situation, our concern for our patient determines how long a restraint is used.”
It’s too bad their concern for the patient didn’t extend to his long-term emotional well-being. For an eight-year-old-boy, being removed from school by police, brought to the hospital, strapped to a gurney and injected with drugs is pretty much the worst possible first day imaginable and something he is unlikely to ever forget. The experience could well affect him for the rest of his life and cause him to act out even more in the future. It’s hard to imagine how any of the adults involved believed this was the best way to handle the situation, and all parents who send their children to public schools need to be aware that this could happen to their child without their consent.
Sources include:
CBC.ca
YorkRegion.com
Australia Presses for More Facial Recognition in Terror Fight
Source: New York Times
The Australian government wants to strengthen its counterterrorism efforts by making use of a fundamental part of all Australian citizens: their faces.On Thursday, at a national security meeting in Canberra, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is expected to pressure states and territories to hand over the driver’s license photos of every citizen, which would be added to the federal government’s database of passport and citizenship application photos.
The licenses would be a prized jewel: They are more prevalent than passports, and they have more regularly updated photos that can be fed into a sweeping surveillance system, to the alarm of privacy advocates.
The government contends that its Face Verification Service helps combat identity theft and terrorist plots. The push for more photos will “further advance and harmonize our response to the threat of terrorism,” Mr. Turnbull said.
Great Britain Threatens 15 Years in Prison for Repeatedly Watching ‘Terrorist Material’
by Michael Krieger, Liberty Blitzkrieg:The UK’s home secretary, Amber Rudd, is the latest bureaucrat to highlight the increased global trend of governments going completely insane. Her latest plan is to threaten the British population with up to 15 years in prison for the crime of watching “terrorist material.” Yes, you read that right.
The Guardian reports:
People who repeatedly view terrorist content online could face up to 15 years behind bars in a move designed to tighten the laws tackling radicalisation the home secretary, Amber Rudd, is to announce on Tuesday.The UK is clearly embracing pre-crime here, since it’s clear someone watching terrorist propaganda in the privacy of their own home does not harm anyone else. Thus, this is a victimless crime, and as I’ve maintained on many occasions, I do not believe such a thing exists. If there’s no victim, there’s no crime.
A new maximum penalty of 15 years’ imprisonment will also apply to terrorists who publish information about members of the armed forces, police and intelligence services for the purposes of preparing acts of terrorism.
The tightening of the law around viewing terrorist material is part of a review of the government’s counter-terrorism strategy following the increasing frequency of terrorist attacks in Britain this year.
“I want to make sure those who view despicable terrorist content online, including jihadi websites, far-right propaganda and bomb-making instructions, face the full force of the law,” said Rudd. “There is currently a gap in the law around material [that] is viewed or streamed from the internet without being permanently downloaded.
According to the Home Office the updated offence will ensure that only those found to repeatedly view online terrorist material will be guilty of the offence, to safeguard those who click on a link by mistake or who could argue that they did so out of curiosity rather than with criminal intent. A defence of “reasonable excuse” would still be available to academics, journalists or others who may have a legitimate reason to view such material.
What the UK is arguing here is that watching “terrorist material” increases the likelihood of someone committing a violent terrorist attack in the future. So you’re actually being punished for what you might potentially do in the future. This is pre-crime and it’s totally insane. Beyond that, we can pretty much guarantee that the definition of “terrorist material” will expand over time to whatever politicians don’t want the rabble exposed to.
But it gets worse still. Here’s what Rudd had to say about her government’s demented crusade against technology itself.
Rudd also caused some consternation at the fringe meeting by criticising the tech industry for their “patronising” attitude that “sneered” at politicians who did not always get it right. She claimed it was not necessary for her to understand how end-to-end encryption worked to know that it was helping criminals.
