Woman’s Breasts Outraged Patrons at Disneyland

A woman fires back against those who have criticized her for breastfeeding her son out in public while at Disneyland with her family.

Brittni Medina was at Disneyland in Anaheim, California, with her family when she managed to outrage other patrons in the park. While they were standing in a long line for a ride, she decided to breastfeed her infant son, as she did not wish to lose her spot in line. However, unfortunately some were incredibly upset by her actions.

As she nursed openly, Medina soon realized that some of the people around her weren’t too happy with what she was doing. The mother explained that two women in particular began criticizing her for breastfeeding in a public place, making very loud comments stating how she should’ve located to a more private place.

Instead of ignoring the comments, Medina chose to have her husband take a picture of her breastfeeding her son while the women making comments stand in the back criticizing her.

Brittni Medina Outrage Patrons At Disneyland When She Breastfed Her Son
(Photo Credit: Facebook)
Medina posted the picture on Facebook to recount the incident where she was allegedly shamed for breastfeeding her son at Disneyland. She wrote in the post, “These women were making snarky comments so I moved from my spot to catch a picture with these characters.”

Medina asserted that the purpose of the picture was “not for attention for me but attention to the fact NO WOMEN SHOULD BE SHAMED FOR FEEDING THEIR BABY UNCOVERED.” The mother described herself as “pretty comfortable feeding anywhere, anyway.”

Medina also recounted her amused reaction to the women’s remarks. “These ladies were so angry by it my husband just had to take a picture. Peep the h**ers,” she wrote. “Characters of the day. Just had to get a picture!”

The mother shared that she is not bothered by h**ers. “I actually stepped a little over to get them in the picture because they were talking loudly saying how I should go to the restroom to feed,” she told Popsugar. “I was happy my husband could capture me and my son happily feeding and I thought the looks on their faces were priceless. I mean, how could they be so mad?”

The Daily Mail reported that Medina used to cover up when breastfeeding her eldest son out in public, however that did not stop people from criticizing her either. “I covered with my first son, but honestly people will complain no matter what you do!” she said.

https://gopnewsfeed.com/photos-womans-breasts-outraged-patrons-at-disneyland-see-for-yourself/

Once upon a time, America’s greatest military strength was the creativity of its people. Our adversaries didn’t know what to expect from us on the battlefield or in the planning rooms, and it instilled the
strongest of emotions in our adversaries – fear.

But there is no fear coming from the leaders of C*******t China following its latest provocation of
sending a spy balloon over the United States. Rather, China’s claims of “help” from flying a stratospheric
“research” balloon over the heart of America sounds more like mocking derision.

Perhaps we should be thankful for their incursion as a lesson in what we must do better. For one, China
is helping to test our air defenses and specifically our ability to deal with what defense experts call an
asymmetric threat. This test provides insights as to what we can do and what we’re willing to do, both
now and in any future response to this overflight.

Those of us who’ve dedicated our lives to defending this nation deeply understand traditional air
defense and appreciate the new service dedicated to controlling the domain above the air, the Space
Force. But between these two layers is the stratosphere, specifically the upper portion where the air is
very thin. This is where the Chinese balloon was flying.

The stratosphere is a high-ground for observation and communications that, unlike the lower
atmosphere and space’s low earth orbits, allows for long endurance sensing and is not crowded.

Consider it an untapped growth area. Historically, the stratosphere is considered part of a country’s
territorial airspace which some of America’s capability developers have explored how to exploit and
dominate against any threat.

Undoubtedly, China’s real test is whether or not the American people awaken to this issue. Those who
understand the strategic importance of the stratosphere have proposed concepts for using and
defending it to the Pentagon, and debated the potential of balloons meandering over the adversary’s
airspace.

There are many tactical considerations involved: Could an adversary do anything about a unique, slow
speed stratospheric system; how might they react; is it a good exchange (using a million-dollar missile
to k**l a cheap floater); what could be lost with the payload; and what is the capability value?

But instead of taking some nickels and dimes from earlier $700+ billion defense budgets to explore the
risks and rewards of establishing stratospheric capabilities, our keenly focused institutional processes
and mega-suppliers yielded the same old stuff – traditional air defense, jets, rockets and satellites for
space, and nothing in between; the space now occupied by China.

While Washington dithered, the Chinese were either thinking the same thing or took our concept and
invested their yuan into actually building, and now using, a stratospheric balloon against us. Perhaps
we should thank the Chinese for allowing us to see how our own stratospheric concepts might work.

The real purpose of this Chinese research experiment was to reveal both our military capabilities and
our political resolve. They’ve likely concluded we lack the political will and, likely, the capability to
effectively deal with this asymmetric threat, which lingered for days over the heartland of America.
In time China and other potential adversaries, as well as our allies, will witness how we react to this spy
balloon stimulus. If we sluggishly respond by dumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the lumbering,
traditional defense suppliers we’d be lucky to see anything in years, they’ll learn one lesson. But if we
reopen the doors to America’s agile small business development community, they’ll learn another
lesson: fear of the unbounded unknown and respect.

Will this past week’s events be a wake-up call to the nation? Perhaps, maybe a small one. But will it be
enough to change the Defense Department and dislodge a calcified establishment into meeting new
threats with new ideas? We cannot say. Either way, the world is watching.

As Japanese Admiral Yamamoto is rumored to have said after the attack on Pearl Harbor, “I fear all we
have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.” The world knows how that
story ended but we’ve rested on those laurels too long.

Whether the spy balloon incursion has awakened a 21st century sleeping giant depends on the
American people. If it has, perhaps the best thing we can say is, ‘Thanks, China.’

Canada is a country led by liberals known for open-mindedness and tolerance, which has led them to allow the most permissive rules on euthanasia, or medical assistance in dying (MAID), in the world. Some U.S. states where assisted suicide is legal are now following Canada’s lead, making the practice much easier — even allowing patients suffering from eating disorders to receive prescribed lethal doses to end their lives.

Daily Mail shared that “euthanasia laws in the US are nothing like those of its neighbor to the north. But American acceptance of the practice has been growing for decades despite warnings that legalized suicide is a slippery slope toward a calamitous debasement of human life.”

MAID laws in Canada were revised in March 2021, with the government sharing that assisted suicide is a “complex and deeply personal issue” and that the government is committed “to ensuring our laws reflect Canadians’ needs, protect those who may be vulnerable, and support autonomy and freedom of choice.”

The Canadian “Superior Court found the ‘reasonable foreseeability of natural death’ eligibility criterion in the Criminal Code, as well as the ‘end-of-life’ criterion from Québec’s Act Respecting End-of-Life Care, to be unconstitutional.” With that new ruling, the MAID “law no longer requires a person’s natural death to be reasonably foreseeable as an eligibility requirement” for assisted suicide. The law states that if you are over 18 and have decision-making capacity, you can check out for a wide variety of reasons — from serious and incurable illness, disease or disability to having “enduring and intolerable physical or psychological suffering that cannot be alleviated under conditions” you find acceptable.

In the more traditional and conservative United States, federal law, in line with the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution, allows states to make their own laws regarding assisted suicide (also sometimes known as “death with dignity” or “the right to die”). Although assisted suicide is illegal in most states, it is currently legal in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Washington state, and Washington, D.C.

Some states that already allow MAID are reported to be revising their rules “by cutting wait times, [by] letting nurses join doctors in prescribing lethal drugs, and by letting out-of-staters visit to end their lives.” Oregon is America’s first “death tourism” destination, where terminally ill people from Texas and other states that have outlawed assisted suicide have begun traveling to spend their final days.

All you need to do is “spend at least 15 days in Oregon to process the paperwork, which requires sign-offs from two doctors and witnesses, before administering the fatal dose themselves,” says the Mail.

Not all those choosing to end their lives are doing so because of pain, suffering, and/or the loss of bodily autonomy. “Only about 27 percent of Oregon’s assisted deaths in 2021 involved people who said they were in too much pain, while more than half said they felt like a burden on loved ones, and 8 percent were fretting about money,” reported the Mail.

The lax end-of-life law in Colorado allowed Dr. Jennifer Gaudiani, who treats eating disorders, to prescribe lethal doses last year to “three patients with anorexia nervosa — a mental health and body image condition that often sees sufferers starve themselves.”

The Colorado Sun shared that in February 2021, Gaudiani published a paper in the Journal of Eating Disorders in which she “advocates for allowing patients who are dying from anorexia to end their lives on their own terms. She writes that, although anorexia doesn’t have delineated levels of severity like cancer, which has stages of progression and a terminal phase, it can be brutally lethal. It is widely believed to have the second-highest mortality rate of all mental illnesses, behind only substance use disorders.”

The drugs used for MAID patients have also led to concern over the ease of ending one’s life. Most people reportedly “died within 30 minutes, but others took more than 100 hours to perish. A report last year in the British Medical Bulletin found that it was not always a ‘Hollywood-style peaceful and painless death,’ citing the example of a Colorado cancer sufferer who took nine hours to die after much ‘choking and coughing.'”

“Unlike in Canada, physicians are not always present when US patients take the deadly dose. Some families have been left in an anguished limbo as a loved one takes hours, perhaps even days, to stop breathing. Where euthanasia takes place in private homes without a doctor present, it is not always clear whether the drugs — or a pillow — was the cause of death.”

There are people and groups like the Patients Rights Action Fund that don’t agree with government-approved MAID laws, as they claim “assisted suicide law perpetuates discriminatory attitudes toward people with disabilities and vulnerable constituencies, and the safeguards fail to provide meaningful protection against mistakes, coercion and abuse.”

“Instead of expanding assisted suicide laws, we should instead look to improve end of life care for the terminally ill and create better access and care for persons with disabilities,” said Matt Vallière, director of the group. “As public policy, assisted suicide laws only exacerbate the problems they try to fix.”

The United States had a reported 1,300 assisted suicide deaths in 2021, compared to more than 10,000 in Canada, whose total population compares with California. “Over three percent of all deaths there … ended their lives via euthanasia, an increase of a third on the previous year. And it’s likely to keep rising: next year, Canada is set to allow people to die exclusively for mental health reasons,” the Mail said.

It will only be a matter of time before more liberal-led states such as Oregon will catch up with Canada’s euthanasia free-for-all. Plus, the list of states approving MAID is likely to grow, as Arizona, Connecticut, Indiana, Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia are weighing whether to pass their own doctor-assisted-suicide laws this year.

Note: €1 = ~$1.067

European countries’ bill to supposedly protect households and companies from rising energy costs has risen to nearly €800 billion, researchers said on Monday, asking countries to be more intentional in their spending to combat the energy crunch.

European Union (EU) countries have presently allocated €681 billion in energy crisis spending, while Britain earmarked €103 billion and Norway €8.1 billion since September 2021, based on an analysis by think-tank Bruegel.

The total of €792 billion compares with €706 billion in Bruegel’s last evaluation in November, as countries scrambled to find alternative energy sources after Europe’s comprehensive sanctions packages cut off most Russian oil and gas deliveries to Europe in 2022.

Topping the spending chart was Germany with an expenditure of around €270 billion, a figure that surpassed all other countries. Britain, Italy, and France were the next highest, each spending less than €150 billion. Most other EU states spent a fraction of that amount.

On a per-capita basis, Luxembourg, Denmark, and Germany were the largest spenders.

Currently, the spending allocated by the countries to tackle the energy crisis has now been compared to the EU’s €750 billion C****-** recovery fund. The fund, inked in 2020, saw Brussels take on joint debt and pass it onto the bloc’s 27 member states to help counter the effects of the C***d lockdowns.

The latest update on energy expenditures comes amid debates about EU proposals to relax state aid rules even more for “green” technology projects, as Europe hopes to compete with subsidized energy coming from the United States and China.

Those plans have stoked fears in some EU capitals that encouraging more state aid would destabilize the bloc’s internal market. Germany has weathered denunciations over its gigantic energy aid package, which far exceeds what other EU nations can afford.

Bruegel reported that governments had concentrated most of the support on capping the retail price consumers pay for energy, such as value-added tax cuts on petrol or retail power price caps.

Furthermore, the think-tank said that operations had to change because states are fiscally unable to maintain such funding.

“Instead of price-suppressing measures that are de facto f****l f**l subsidies, governments should now foster more income-support policies targeted towards the lowest two quintiles of the income distribution and towards strategic sectors of the economy,” research analyst Giovanni Sgaravatti said.

Last year, a report by International Energy Agency (IEA) chief Fatih Birol and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen claimed that Europe could face a natural gas shortage of 27 billion cubic meters in 2023. That’s equivalent to almost seven percent of the region’s yearly consumption.

“We may have a problem,” Birol said, amid concerns that Russia, which sent about 60 billion cubic meters of gas to the EU over the course of 2022 even after the sanctions, could completely stop flows in 2023. Adding fuel to the fire would be how a rebooted Chinese economy would impact the natural gas market.

In the study, the IEA claimed that a supply gap of 57 billion cubic meters could surface this year.

About 30 billion of that should be covered by European actions “that are already visibly in motion,” the Paris-based group asserted. That includes major stockpiling and efforts to voluntarily reduce demand for gas by 15 percent between August 2022 and March 2023, according to a CNN report.

That being said, analysts still fear that a deficit could result. After all, the IEA stress test presumed that Russian pipeline gas flows to Europe would stop completely from the start of 2023, that China’s imports of liquified natural gas revert to 2021 levels, and that Europe’s storage facilities are only 30-percent full at the end of this winter.

The remaining shortfall could be mitigated if more attempts are made to boost energy efficiency, boost the adoption of renewables, increase use of heat pumps, and promote other changes in behavior, the IEA stated.

On a different note, while most of the mainstream media has been lambasting Russia for reducing natural gas supplies to Europe, European nations have imposed heavy sanctions on Russia’s government and economy, including its energy exports. What’ more, a report by American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh revealed that it was the United States that took out the Nord Stream Pipeline that was originally constructed to t***sport natural gas from Russia to Germany through the Baltic Sea, thus sabotaging natural gas flows to Europe.

Hersh, who won a Pulitzer Prize in 1969 for reporting on the Vietnam War My Lai Massacre, claimed that the U.S. Navy, at the behest of the Biden administration, placed explosives that caused huge holes in the main gas pipeline.

Hersh’s piece on his new Substack site, titled “How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline,” asserted the Navy divers operated under the cover of a high-profile mid-summer NATO exercise known as BALTOPS 22. The specially trained, highly sk**led deep-water divers installed C4 explosives that could be remotely detonated, which they were, three months later.

Hersh explained that the U.S. government, including Biden’s security advisors, has always opposed the Nord Stream Pipelines, worrying that they undermined Western dominance. In the months preceding the Ukraine-Russia conflict, U.S. concerns escalated. The second of the two pipelines, Nord Stream 2, appeared to be about to come online. Simultaneously, Russia was reportedly gathering troops at the Ukrainian border.

Elaborating in his essay, Hersh said, “Biden’s decision to sabotage the pipelines came after more than nine months of highly secret back and forth debate inside Washington’s national security community about how to best achieve that goal. For much of that time, the issue was not whether to do the mission, but how to get it done with no overt clue as to who was responsible.”

While the White House and the Pentagon have slammed Hersh’s report as fiction, Hersh remained unfazed. In an introductory explanation of his decision to independently post his reports on Substack, he wrote, “I’ve been told my stories were wrong, invented, outrageous for as long as I can remember — but I’ve never stopped. In 2004, after I published the first stories about the torture of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib, a Pentagon spokesman responded by calling my journalism ‘a tapestry of nonsense.’”