Socialized Murder

(Tea Party 247) – The National Health Service (NHS) in the UK has announced they will be withdrawing treatment from patients who fail the golden progressive standard of tolerance and acceptance.

That’s right: they’ll be denying medical care to racists or sexists.
Patients will be subject to a “sports-style disciplinary yellow card and then final red card in which treatment would be withdrawn as soon as is safe” the North Bristol NHS Trust announced on their website.

The policy would not just cover “Threatening and offensive language” but also “Racist or sexist language, gestures or behaviour” in a disturbingly ambiguous phrasing, as well as more generally, as well as “malicious allegations.”

This is a concerning caveat, considering the NHS has, in the past, been caught up in large-scale malpractice scandals which were initially denied by hospitals and staff.

“We have staff from many different backgrounds, from all over the world, and we pride ourselves on our commitment to equality which is a fundamental value of the NHS,” commented Andrea Young, Chief Executive for North Bristol NHS Trust.

“We’re sending a strong signal that any racism or discrimination is completely unacceptable – we want staff to challenge and report it and we want everyone to know that it will have consequences.”

The trust does not, conveniently, explain exactly how broad the definition of “offensive” will on which to base withdrawal of treatment.

“We have staff from many different backgrounds, from all over the world, and we pride ourselves on our commitment to equality which is a fundamental value of the NHS,” commented Andrea Young, Chief Executive for North Bristol NHS Trust.

“We’re sending a strong signal that any racism or discrimination is completely unacceptable – we want staff to challenge and report it and we want everyone to know that it will have consequences.”
The trust does not, conveniently, explain exactly how broad the definition of “offensive” will on which to base withdrawal of treatment.

Breitbart explains:

For example, in late 2017 an NHS patient who requested a female nurse to carry out a cervical smear complained when the hospital sent a person with “an obviously male appearance… close-cropped hair, a male facial appearance and voice, large number of tattoos and facial stubble” who insisted “My gender is not male. I’m a transsexual”.

It is not clear whether the patient could have fallen foul of the Bristol policy had it been in place and the nurse had chosen to take offence — and nor is it clear how far the trust’s assurances that it will only withdraw treatment once clinically safe extend, and if patients could, for example, be denied diagnostic procedures or so-called routine

operations such as hip replacements, for which many patients have to wait eight months or more.
British state authorities have recently been showing quite a zeal for political correctness. In 2012, Foster parents caring for “not indigenous White British” children had them taken away by Labour-run Rotherham Borough Council in 2012 because they were members of the UK’s Independence Party (UKIP), then led by Nigel Farage.

Joyce Thacker, the Strategic Director of Children and Young People’s Services said that she was concerned that UKIP opposed mass immigration which made the foster parents incapable of meeting the “cultural and ethnic needs” of non-British children or the “active promotion of multiculturalism.”

Another NHS trust for the area, the University Hospitals Briston NHS Foundation Trust has displayed painful progressive political correctness, once having ordered the removal of the British flag from security staff stab vests after someone claimed that the Union Jack was “offensive.”

Source

Who lives, who dies. You may want to check the Labour Party website to see if your name is on the die list. Are we going to define "racist" as "anybody that believes a certain race is above the rest and that the rest are inferior." Are we going to define "sexism" as the belief that a particular gender is better than the other and the other is inferior". Which is an unbias definition. Or will go the PC route? "Only white males are racists and sexists". With this crowd I'm betting on the latter. What if you've had a bad day or dropped something on your toes and there is momentary pain and you say something offensive? Can you be denied medical services because you unconsciously said something on the prohibited list? What if you going to court because you were accused of a sex crime, just merely accused and you need medical attention. Will they treat you, deny you health care or worse yet murder you because you've been accused of a misogynistic sex crime and the medical staff are indoctrinated with radical feminism? They'll justify it as "one less rapist in the world" when you haven't even been tried for it and no verdict rendered. What if a member of the medical staff doesn't like you and makes a false accusation against you? What if you are a victim of a false accusation of racism and/or sexism? Is a mere accusation considered undeniable proof you are guilty?

Does this mean that a member of the protected class can taunt a white male with insults and throws harmful objects such as rocks at that white male without any repercussions but if that white male attacks back or merely defends himself from being physically attacked he will be punished for it? What if hospital staff try to extort money from the patients (give me money or I put your name on the die list) or their friends or family (give us money or you and/or the patient will die). What if your name is accidentally placed on the die list? Will you live long enough to fight it and win? What if they hate people who contest their decisions and puts you on the die list for doing it? So many questions yet no answers.

Trump won the popular vote

Ever since the presidential election, liberals have been whining about the fact that Hillary Clinton should have beaten Donald Trump because she won the popular vote. However, some massive voter fraud was just uncovered that reveals that in reality, Trump was the one who won the popular vote.

Infowars reported that a whopping 3 million votes were cast by illegal immigrants in this election. This disturbing find was uncovered by Greg Phillips of the VoteFraud.org organization, who found that without the illegals, Trump likely won the popular vote.
“We have verified more than three million votes cast by non-citizens,” tweeted Phillips after saying that his group had completed an analysis of a database of 180 million voter registrations.

“Number of non-citizen votes exceeds 3 million. Consulting legal team,” he continued.

Current statistics say that Clinton won the popular vote by 630,000 votes, even though 7 million ballots are still uncounted at this time. Since basically all of the 3 million votes from illegal aliens were for Clinton, it appears that Trump actually won the popular vote by over 2 million votes.

Many illegals used the names of dead people to cast their ballots. On the morning of the election, there were 4 million dead people on American voter rolls.

Most states require IDs to vote, but there are also many that don’t. California, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming, and Washington, D.C., all require no identification from voters.

Source

Help defeat TPP

From Demand Progress:

Breaking news: Negotiators and lobbyists meeting in secret have just reached a final agreement on the massive Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).1

The TPP is the biggest corporate trade deal in world history—slashing protections against Wall Street recklessness and for Internet freedom across a whopping 40 percent of the world's economy.

The TPP deal now goes to the U.S. Congress, where bipartisan opposition to the deal has been growing. We're launching a huge campaign to stop the TPP from passing Congress. Will you chip in $5?

Even though the deal is being reported as final, the public STILL has not be shown the text of the agreement. Members of Congress are being asked to take a position on a deal that is literally sealed behind closed doors.

What do know about the TPP has come from leaks released by organizations like WikiLeaks, and it's frankly outrageous.

The draft TPP would sneak in SOPA-like attacks on Internet freedom, overturn protections against Wall Street recklessness, and allow corporations to sue sovereign nations to overturn the decisions of democratically elected officials.2

The corporate supporters of this deal say it's about promoting "free trade," but there's actually nothing free about it. The TPP is all about rigging the rules of the game in favor of big corporations against the environment, workers, and consumers.

The reason we can stop this bill is that it's not just liberal Democrats who oppose it—conservatives and Tea Party activists hate it too. In the last few weeks, presidential candidates from Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump have condemned the TPP, and if enough of us speak out, we can stop this deal cold.

Click here to donate $5 and help stop the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Thanks for standing with us.

Sources:

1. Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Deal Is Reached, The New York Times, October 5, 2015

2. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Job Loss, Lower Wages and Higher Drug Prices, accessed October 5, 2015