GOD

LOVES

YOU

&

JESUS

SAVES

POLITICAL ARCHIVE 2011

Return to Political Page

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." ~ George Washington 

"Brethren, we came to this country to practice our religious liberties, and if we don't get involved, we're going to lose them." ~ John Peter Muhlenberg, 1777

The Simple Difference between Socialism and Free Enterprise  

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.  

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A....  

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.  

The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. 

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.  

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is  great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the  reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.  

Could not be any simpler than that. (Please  pass this on) Remember, there is a test coming up. The 2012 elections.

Is Socialism’s True Father—Satan?  

The Fascist Threat

It's Not Their Fault   The Wild and Free Pigs of Okefenokee Swamp   The Tea Party Faces The fear

What if the Constitution No Longer Applied

Smart Meter Battles in Nevada

Uploaded 12/14/2011

Armed and Ready: New Mexico Residents Defy Government

Uploaded 12/10/2011

The Stop Online Piracy Act: Yet Another Stealth Maneuver to Control the Internet

Uploaded 12/10/2011

What if Freedom Were Temporary? Great Article

Judge Andrew Napolitano

Dec 08, 2011

What if our rights didn't come from God or from our humanity, but from the government? What if the government really thinks we're not unique individuals with immortal souls, but just public property? What if we were only entitled to our natural rights if it pleased the government? What if our rights could be stripped away whenever the government considers us to be its enemy?

What if this could all be accomplished with the consent of the people? What if the people's own representatives subverted the Constitution? What if the people were so afraid that they accepted the subversion? What if the government demonizes an external enemy and uses fear of that enemy to suppress our freedoms? What if people are afraid to protest?

What if the government knows this, and thus chooses enemies that are easily demonized, whether they pose real threats or not? What if threats become imminent dangers precisely because the government allowed them to happen? What if government scapegoating of an external enemy is as old as the government itself? What if the government has used scapegoating again and again to scare people into giving up their freedoms voluntarily? What if the government has relied on this to perform the same magical disappearing-freedom act time and again throughout history?

What if the government could lock you up and throw you in jail indefinitely? What if that jail was in Cuba? What if the government has written laws to let it keep you detained forever without letting you see a lawyer or a judge? What if you were just speaking out against the government and it came to silence you? What if the government could declare you its enemy and then kill you? What if your elected representatives did nothing to stop the government from doing this? What if the government claimed that your words made you a warrior, even though there never were any armed hostilities in your neighborhood and you never threatened anyone? What if the government could classify the entire country as a battlefield and, ultimately, a prison? What if the government's goal was to be rid of all who disagreed with it?

What if the real war was a war of misinformation? What if the government constructs its own reality in order to suit its own agenda? What if civil liberties don't mean anything to the government? What if the government just chooses to allow you to exercise them freely because you don't threaten it at the moment? What if the government released a report calling you a domestic terror threat, just because you disagreed with the government? What if the government coaxed crazy people into acting like terrorists, just to keep you afraid? What if the government persuaded you to believe that the greatest threat to your freedom is an impoverished and uneducated Third World population 10,000 miles away? What if the real threat to your freedom is a rich, powerful and all-seeing government? What if that government thinks it can write any law, regulate any behavior and tax any event no matter what the Constitution says?

What if the government is always the greatest threat to freedom because only the government can constitute a monopoly on the use of force? What if, in fact, at its essence, government is simply a monopoly of force? What if, in fact, at its essence, government is simply the negation of freedom? What if the government monopoly incubated, aided and abetted enemies' freedoms? What if, when the danger got more threatening, the government told you to sacrifice more of your liberties for safety? What if you fell for that?

What if those who traded liberty for safety ended up in internment camps? What if the greatest threat to freedom was not any outfit of thugs in some cave in a far-off land, but an organized force here at home? What if that organized force broke its own laws? What if that organized force did the very same things to those it hates and fears that it prosecutes people for doing to it? What if I'm right and the government's wrong? What if it's dangerous to be right when the government is wrong? What if government is essentially wrong and always dangerous?

What if these weren't just hypothetical or rhetorical questions? What if this is actually happening to us? What if the ultimate target in the government's war on terror is all who believe in personal freedom? What if that includes YOU? What do we do about it?

Uploaded 11/29/2011

Connecting the dots on the National Defense Authorization Act

Uploaded 11/29/2011

With McCain’s help the Senate will vote on stealing our rights to trial; conviction before prison

Uploaded 11/29/2011

US Senate To Vote On Bill That Will Allow The Military To Arrest Americans On American Soil And Hold Them Indefinitely

November 26, 2011By Stephen D. Foster Jr.

Since Occupy Wall Street began, American police officers have arrested thousands of people for exercising their constitutionally protected right to protest. On Monday or Tuesday, the US Senate will vote on a bill that would give the President the ability to order the military to arrest and imprison American citizens anywhere in the world for an indefinite period of time.

A provision of S. 1867, or the National Defense Authorization Act bill, written by Senators John McCain and Carl Levin, declares American soil a battlefield and allows the President and all future Chief Executives to order the military to arrest and detain American citizens, innocent or not, without charge or trial. In other words, if this bill passes and the President signs it, OWS protesters or any American could end up arrested and indefinitely locked up by the military without the guaranteed right to due process or a speedy trial.

This bill was written in secret and approved by committee without a single hearing. Senate Republicans support the bill and enough Democrats support it to give it a great chance of passing. This provision does have opponents. President Obama has threatened to veto the bill and even Ron Paul is concerned enough to bring it up during one of the GOP debates. An amendment called the Udall Amendment has been offered by Democratic Senator Mark Udall that would delete the dangerous provision.

If you are an American citizen, protect your constitutional rights. Call your senator and tell them to approve of the Udall Amendment. No American citizen should be arrested by the military and held indefinitely without charge or trial. It’s not conducive to American values and would give the military and the government more power over the American citizenry. The last time Americans had to deal with an overreaching military was during the Revolutionary era. Because of that, the Founders included the 3rd Amendment to ban the quartering of troops during times of war and peace. Once again, Americans are under threat of dealing with a military that has more power than it should have. And it could cost us most of the freedoms we tend to take for granted.

America is NOT a battlefield. America is a free country and American citizens should not ever be arrested by the military and certainly not without being charged or getting a trial. This provision would cast aside the Constitution and put the liberties of American citizens here at home and around the world at serious risk. Please call your senator or visit this link, because this is a risk Americans cannot afford to take.

Uploaded 11/29/2011

ATF and DOJ Break the Law  

Conspiracy, Wire Fraud, Operation Fast and Furious

- Jim Ross Lightfoot Sunday, November 27, 2011  

Following a widely watched hearing conducted by the US House Government Oversight Committee July 25, 2011 William G. McMahon, (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)‘s deputy director of operations in the West, William D. Newell Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the agency’s Phoenix office and David Voth, field supervisor who oversaw Operation Fast and Furious that allowed over 2,000 rifles to walk into the arms of Mexican Drug Cartels, were whisked away to the safety of ATF Headquarters fortress on New York Avenue in Washington, DC.

Many that viewed the hearing and most ATF agents in the field believe these men should have been arrested, or at the least fired, for their gross incompetence and outright violation of US Law.

Attorney General Eric Holder has fought the Congressional Committee at every turn and evidence has grown to implicate his involvement in Fast and Furious to a degree that the number of Congressmen calling for his resignation increases each day.

Is indictment of Holder, Newell, McMahon, Voth and others in ATF management just around the corner?

There is not space enough in this column to go into great detail, however here are a few facts you can check for yourself.

Let’s start with the murder of Border Patrol Agents Brian Terry and Jaime Zapata, not to mention every other cop and civilian harmed by a Fast and Furious gun. Each has been deprived of their Constitutional civil rights at the hands of ATF and DOJ Attorneys under the color of law.

42 U.S.C. § 1983 now reads in part:

Every person who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, (shorten at this point to save space)

How about the commission of wire and mail fraud? There are huge wire fraud implications resulting from EVERY email, fax, and Teletype that occurred with the intent to mislead the true actions of Fast and Furious.

All prosecutable under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 , carrying penalties that include “shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. If the violation affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.”

18 U.S.C. 371, CONSPIRACY provides in part, “outlaws conspiracy to commit any other federal crime.”

In the words of an ATF agent intimately familiar with Fast and Furious, “You can commit a conspiracy with an unindicted co-conspirator. It appears this is the one that will kill them (ATF and DOJ Attorneys) in relation to very act the cartel/straw purchasers committed, including murder. In order to avoid this, they have to admit they are acting under color of law for ANY Law Enforcement protections. The problem with that is that acting under color of law requires you are within the scope of your duties and advancing legitimate law enforcement actions.”

It is obvious to even the casual observer that Fast and Furious had no legitimate law enforcement purpose.

For the sake of the good agents within ATF, the Constitution and the future of our country, hopefully, Congressman Issa and Senator Grassley will be joined by many other Members of Congress in pushing for full disclosure and then let the evidence lead where it will.

That very well could conclude with the clanking of jail cell doors on public servants that have subjugated their duties to satisfy personal agendas rather than serve the country they took an oath to protect.

Uploaded 11/29/2011

Political Fundamentalists—A Grave Threat to World Liberty

Leftists Want to Ban Believers From Office--But Who are the Real fundamentalists?

- Kelly O'Connell Sunday, November 27, 2011  

Here is a deeply disturbing truth of our age—one American group, our most aggressive political ideology, is dangerously reactionary, exhibiting all the hallmarks of a fundamentalist movement. Is this the Conservatives? No. This group is, of course—modern liberalism. In fact, during a recent debate witnessed by this author, one party claimed that any person holding a literal belief in the Bible should be kept from public office by law. Why? Because such persons are generally assumed unfit as they are incapable of rational thought. Specifically, the left must keep a perennial eye peeled for the advent of a theocracy.

Sadly, this dismissive instinct towards forging a Conservative ghetto to “protect the country” is getting stronger. Signs of this idea are regularly given in the mainstream media. For example, the preoccupation with claiming each and every Conservative presidential candidate is simply too stupid to be considered for office. The implied evidence being they are too dumb to realize Conservatism is idiotic. Likewise, the claim that electing a strong Christian would destroy the country by Taliban-like activities—proved by the terrifying fact that the would-be-politician actually believes the Bible.

And yet, most of the distinctive elements making the West the preeminent place of learning and enlightenment for the last 500 years are directly, or indirectly tied to our historic Christian faith. Further, attempts to employ Marxism and other socialist ideologies have resulted in the greatest human rights disasters ever recorded, with hundreds of millions murdered in the name of the State. This article is composed to point out the absurd contradiction in these facts and suggest a more tolerant view of religion in our society.

I. What is Modern Liberalism

Those demanding that Conservatives be politically sidelined are modern liberals—but what is modern liberalism? This definition is essential. Scholars claim the term “liberal” was employed during the last three centuries to describe the theories espoused by advocates of liberty. Then, around the turn of last century, socialists decided this term would be helpful to spread their ideas. Writes historian of Liberty Ralph Raico.

“Classical liberalism” is the term used to designate the ideology advocating private property, an unhampered market economy, the rule of law, constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and of the press, and international peace based on free trade. Up until around 1900, this ideology was generally known simply as liberalism. The qualifying “classical” is now usually necessary because liberalism has come to be associated with wide-ranging interferences with private property and the market on behalf of egalitarian goals, ie socialism.

The most important thinker in the history of classical liberalism is probably religious enthusiast John Locke.

II. Hallmarks of Modern Liberalism, aka Socialism

So what are the traits of modern liberalism, aka socialism? In brief here is a description which hits upon the parochial and inflexible nature of its outlook. First, it makes dramatic and exclusive claims about reality which then implies those who disagree display perilous mental infirmity, suffer an utter lack of education or unforgivable moral bankruptcy. Second, given its primitive structure, it cannot accept compromise, since it claims a position of exclusive, unparalleled truth. Third, it is simplifying to a startling degree, and simplistic in its claims of the nature of reality. As such, it cannot risk engagement in debate, and therefore constantly seeks to derail any meaningful dialogue. Fourth, it has an autocratic leadership structure taking the place of an inner set of “core truths,” and so is capable of infinite permutations and contradictions. Fifth, it is overwhelmingly religious in its vision and structure, and so is held with all the fervor of pagan beliefs common thousands of years ago. Finally, as in all true fundamentalism, it seeks to either permanently silence or annihilate its critics.

To explain why modern leftism has the characteristic structure it does goes farther afield than the purpose of this article. But it does have everything to do with the fact that socialism and all progressive ideologies, including Marxism and Fascism, derive their structure and purpose from Joachim of Flora’s heretic 12th century Catholic writings (as detailed here).

III. Modern Liberals Belching Bigotry

A. Stupid is as Stupid Does

As Newt Gingrich has recently risen to the top of the GOP 2012 presidential primary heap, he received the de riguer mainstream press treatment of prominent conservatives being insulting described as not-intelligent. The following headlines illustrate the point:

Politico, website of conservative knee-capping (which single-handedly committed itself to the demise of Herman Cain) asks: Is Newt Gingrich as smart as he thinks? The author then writes,

“Nobody thinks of Gingrich as a wonky type. Nobody thinks of him as someone who has serious positions, white papers, policies on a wide array of issues coming from deep knowledge and experience,” said Roderick Hills Jr., a constitutional law professor at New York University who’s active in the conservative Federalist Society. “I don’t think of him that way, and I don’t know of any professor who thinks of him that way.”

Paul Krugman: Newt Gingrich Is ‘A Stupid Man’s Idea Of What A Smart Person Sounds Like’. NY Times columnist Krugman has established recent high-water-marks on ill-advised and frankly idiotic commentary, but may have reached his zenith here. When asked why Gingrich has gained in the polls, preternaturally childish Krugman said:

It was his time, the Republican base doesn’t want Romney and they keep looking for an alternative, and Newt—although somebody said ‘he’s a stupid man’s idea of what a smart person sounds like,’ but he is more plausible than the other guys they’ve been pushing up..

But how can ALL conservative politicians be described as dumb unless the conservative movement itself is lacking in any intellectual soundness? This question is well-examined here: Liberals Are a Thousand Times Smarter Than Conservatives—Just Ask Them!

B. Christianity—Dangerous Fundamentalism!

Further, it is assumed that anyone who believes literally in the Bible cannot think rationally, accept logic or science, or if elected—lead outside of direct application of all scripture. This is why the mainstream media cannot rest until each candidate receives vigorous personal attacks, outside of which, these politicians would come into a race against Obama unduly strong versus his weakling profile.

For example, to choose just one target, Rick Perry’s faith has come under scrutiny:

Is Rick Perry as Christian as He Thinks He Is?

Maddow (Rachel Madcow) discusses Rick Perry’s connections with a Christian conspiracy group

Rick Perry Agrees With Wife, He Has Been Brutalized for Christian Faith.

Then consider Sarah Palin, who along with Tim Tebow have received astounding anti-Christian attacks because of their faith: Tebow, Palin & the Logic of Thanksgiving

Overall, the attacks against religious politicians make no sense given the utter inability for liberals to make progress on America’s problems.

IV. Why the Traditional Western Christian Viewpoint Trumps Liberalism

A. General Impact of Christian Ideas on West

Various stories of how Christians uniquely influenced history to the benefit of mankind have been detailed, a few in this column. For example, it was a Christian who laid out the most important document in the history of British law and liberty—the Magna Carta—Archbishop Stephen Langton, as described here: Why Separating Church & State is a Fool’s Errand: Consider Magna Carta’s Origins.

And even religious tolerance itself was a Christian concept, as outlined by Puritan philosopher John Locke, who wrote A Letter Concerning Toleration which outlined his ideas on tolerating unpopular or diverse religious beliefs. And from a completely different angle, it was a Christian set of beliefs that led to the creation of modern science, as detailed here: The Christian Foundation of Modern Science.

B. Natural Rights—A Christian Theory

But it was even Christian scholarship which created the raw material that the entire modern view of government and law is based upon—Natural Rights Theory. In fact, it was William of Occam who first articulated modern Rights Theory as we might understand it. Occam was a famed Christian scholar regarded as one of the most brilliant and learned men of his day.

According to Brian Tierney, in The Idea of Natural Rights: Studies on Natural Rights, Natural Law, and Church Law 1150 1625, Occam was a colossus of Right’s Theory who wrote from an explicitly Christian viewpoint. In other words, the idea of modern rights, so essential to liberal and even radically humanistic ideals, would not have occurred without biblical scholars positing Christian rights doctrines.

Paul E. Sigmund, Professor Emeritus, Princeton University, in NATURAL LAW, CONSENT, and EQUALITY: WILLIAM of OCKHAM to RICHARD HOOKER, writes:

Ockham’s writings on natural law are significant for the ideas of both individual rights and consent to government. Defending his Franciscan order against papal criticisms of their teachings on spiritual poverty, he distinguished among the various meanings of the Latin word jus (law, right) and dominium (rule, property) to defend an individual right to property. While he was not a canon lawyer, he cited arguments from medieval Church lawyers who had already debated the status of property and attempted to explain and justify the transition from communal property before Adam’s Fall to the contemporary institution of private property. Ockham was also one of the first to derive the legitimacy of government from consent. He drew on statements from Roman and canon law about man’s original freedom and equality in order to explain the establishment of legitimate rule in both state and Church through the consent of the governed. He even used the term “the state of nature” (which became so important in the later theories of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau) to describe man’s original condition. In the case of the Church, that consent was expressed through the universal council that could limit and even depose the pope. In the temporal order, Ockham argued that the Holy Roman Emperor held his office because of the consent of the Roman people (i.e. those subject to the Holy Roman Empire) as expressed by the bishops and nobles who were the imperial electors. His arguments were based partly on the Bible and on the history of the Church and the Empire. More fundamentally, he derived the necessity of consent from natural law doctrines of original freedom and equality and from the “equal natural rights” of all mankind.

But to set aside Christian values of tolerance and rectitude would mean that only those who agreed with socialism would be allowed to silence any group that disagreed with their premises, as occurred in the USSR, etc.

V. Conclusion

Christianity is responsible for most of the West’s distinctive doctrines, a few of which are outlined above. Therefore, it would be both unwise and unjust to penalize Believers simply for their belief, by keeping them from public office. Further, since modern liberalism, aka socialism is so failed at building an economy, and seems so ill-designed for the actual construction and direction of a proper modern democracy, it seems suicide to treat our Conservative politicians like garbage. The only way forward through these staggering times is undoubtedly setting aside trendy, failed policies and embracing what made America superb in the past.

Uploaded 11/29/2011  

Pushing Back the Socialist Agenda in Education  

American parents have begun to push back the socialist agenda and the public school indoctrination that their children have been subjected to for the past 40 years  

- Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh Monday, November 28, 2011  

As the Americans’ indifference to the destruction of our country intensifies, the indoctrination and brainwashing from the left of our citizens and of their children accelerates.

I watched during Thanksgiving a National Geographic special on the pilgrims landing at Jamestown, Virginia. The strong environmentalist language shocked me.

Claiming that Europeans completely deforested the land, overfished to the point of emptying the lakes and rivers and causing a severe reduction of the teeming fish population, and of their size, was outrageous. Impressionable minds, who hear such broad, sweeping statements, are misled by design because no scientific data or evidence is offered to support these claims.

The video continued that Europeans have brought with seeds of wheat and grain weeds such as dandelion, thus causing “biological imperialism.” If wind carries seeds of plants and weeds over large swaths of land in the natural process of plant life, is it still called “biological imperialism?”

These ridiculous statements fall in line with the environmental agenda of “man as the destroyer of the planet.” The earth is in danger because man has caused global warming and only by destroying our economic system, drastically reducing human population, and returning to a primitive lifestyle would assure the survival of the globe.

I can see how frightening these made-up scenarios could be to an innocent young mind or the uninformed. Virginia is covered with beautiful lush forests. Areas where wood was harvested are restocked with seedlings for many reasons. Soil erosion prevention is one such important component of forest replacement.

Channel One News: Communism, platitudes, empty promises, lies, and slogans

As my children were growing up, Channel One News was part of their curriculum on a daily basis. Budding television stars on the left side of the political spectrum were indoctrinating students on issues dear to the heart of the left. Most parents had no idea that their children received such a one-sided view of the world but I knew. Having lived under communism, I could recognize all the platitudes, empty promises, lies, and slogans.

Perusing Channel One News recently, I found the following links: The Obama Administration, U.S., World, Politics, Science, Revolution Earth, Life, Music, Teachers, and Quizzes.

One of the videos touted National Hispanic Heritage Month, September 15-October 15, in honor of the anniversaries of independence of Chile, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Mexico. Who knew that celebrating the anniversaries of independence of South American countries was so important that we had to have a National Hispanic Heritage Month? As the video says, the face of America is changing and diversity is paramount. This is contradicting our country’s founding principles of “unity.” The leftist immigration policies emphasize “diversity.” The contributions of Hispanics to America included in the video were Sonya Sotomayor, a baseball player, and some unknown singer.

Under Teaching Tools, there were lesson plans on history, sociology, and environmentalism: The History of Thanksgiving, The History of Hate, Our Disposable Lives, Mexican Drug Cartels, and The Haves and Have-Nots. The seeds of class envy, bigotry, and hate were planted solidly in these videos. Disliking something or disagreeing with someone was presented as hate.

Under “The Obama Administration” link, Channel One headlined, “Obama pops into bookstore, backs small businesses.” Given the economic depression and the high unemployment rate in the country, this was hardly a truthful statement. Under “White House Profile, Channel One presented our president, “His life story, now familiar to many people, is unique but also quintessentially American.” This was definitely Soviet style disinformation.

Revolution Earth was highlighting the Nature Conservancy with its Leaders for Environmental Action for the Future (LEAF) internships slated for environmental careers in green transportation solutions, protecting and caring for the environment. The video stated that such fields earn 25% more than non-environmental careers and the environmental green job field is growing three times as much as other jobs. Twisting the facts was bad enough. No mention was made of all the bankruptcies of alternative energy sources or the faux “green jobs.”

Videos on biofuels, electric cars, going green, pollution cruise, green holiday shopping, oil spills, and the proverbial polar bears completed the environmental indoctrination and brainwashing.

A whole section was dedicated to Islam and the Ground Zero mosque but no mention was made of the Christian persecution in the Middle East and all the killings and torture of innocents. The only mention of Christianity was in the headline, “It’s beginning to look a lot like Xmas at the White House,” not spelling out Christmas but using the Greek X as in the inscriptions found in the catacombs in Rome when Christians had to go underground to hide their religion.

A video was dedicated to the “growing white Nazi hate groups,” exaggerating the numbers and the influence they have, and painting them as the Americans on the border fighting illegal immigration, making the disingenuous inference that those who oppose illegal immigration and want the laws of the land enforced are haters.

One of my readers named Frank had a very interesting comment about illegal immigration. “You catch a burglar in YOUR house who insists that you built YOUR house FOR HIM. He demands that you move out to make room for him and all his friends and relatives. If you refuse to do this, you are a racist, bigot, homophobe, intolerant hate-monger, and whatever else the usurper can think of to intimidate you into surrendering your birthright to him. He calls this social plunder “redistribution of wealth,” and “social justice.” I quoted Frank because this is exactly the mentality inculcated into our children’s minds by the educational establishment.

Home schooling is beginning to gain more traction with many parents who want to avoid their children’s socialist indoctrination in public schools. As Christopher Wright found out, Georgetown Law Center Professor, Robin L. West, made curious, fallacious, and uninformed arguments against home schooling.

·         “Most home schooled children have fundamentalist Protestant parents who teach their kids ‘nothing but the Bible’”

·         “Homeschooled children are at higher risk for child abuse”

·         “Other harms justify strict regulation of homeschooling including curriculum reviews and invasive home visits”

·         “It was a crime to keep children home from school until 30 years ago”

None of our Founding Fathers was the product of public schools yet they were brilliant. Students were doing quite well prior to 1979 when the Department of Education was established. Statistical data show that the level of education and student performance have decreased since 1979.

Homeschooled children represent every demographic imaginable – pagans, atheists, lower income, upper income, conservative, liberal, Ph.D.’s, GED’s. Doctoral student Jeremy E. Uecker from the University of Texas conducted a nationwide phone survey in 2008 and “found very little effect of homeschooling on any aspect of adolescents’ religious views.” “Only 17 percent of suspected abuse reports are submitted by education personnel.”(Christopher Wright)

Public school advocates, educational lefties, academics, and Marxists want “social engineering” of our children’s minds, as Dewey wrote, “social reconstruction,” well known in the circles of communism.

Textbooks are generally written by college professors to slant history in the direction of the leftist view with total disregard for historical accuracy. An effort by the Prince William County Tea Party is underway in the State of Virginia to review all textbooks for accuracy of content. There are 11 states across the country that either have completed or are doing textbook reviews.

“Our Living Constitution Then and Now,” a textbook used for grades 5-8 in American History classes, teaches our children that “Rights are special privileges the government gives you. You are also given the right to choose a religion.” The government does not give you a right; you have a God-given right. “The Bill of Rights lists the freedoms given to citizens.” Actually, the Bill of Rights lists the freedoms granted by the Constitution. “Because the government gives us rights, we have the duty to be good citizens. But what does it mean to be a good citizen? How can you be a part of giving back for the freedom you have?” The government does not give us rights and we are not required to give back restitution for our rights. The fallacies and falsehoods in this book alone are astounding.

“On July 14, 2005, Governor Pawlenty signed the 128-page Minnesota Omnibus bill into law called The American Heritage in Public Education Act. Included are two important paragraphs that encourage schools to teach America’s Founding Principles from original sources and prevent the censorship of religious reference from those sources. Teachers can now introduce their students to America’s uncensored Judeo-Christian heritage without fear.” (edwatch.org)

In a Virginia High School AP History Class, students were forbidden to use any outside help/reference/access to information or opinion for their work under the threat of disciplinary action and a failing grade. The students could not even discuss their assignments with their parents. Parent Amy Fuentes was shocked. The Westfield High School’s explanation was that the move was intended to create a level-playing field for all students because some did not have access to information. I found this hard to believe since most classrooms have computers; their libraries have computers, encyclopedias, and other reference sources. Furthermore, Fairfax County is one of the richest counties in the nation. Students were not allowed to discuss ideas, opinions, or ask questions of anybody but the teacher. This was an obvious attempt to control what students thought, allowing only the teacher’s point of view and that of the textbook writers.

Delegate Rich Anderson, R-Woodbridge, now leads the State Commission on Civics in Education. The purpose of the commission is “to educate students on the importance of citizen involvement in a representative democracy, the promotion of the study of state and local government among the commonwealth citizenry, and the enhancement of communication and collaboration among organizations in the commonwealth that conduct civics education programs.”

Adam Schaeffer, policy analyst with the Cato Center for Educational Freedom, argues in “The Public Education Tax Credit“ that “Educational freedom can most effectively be realized through nonrefundable education tax credits – for both parents’ education costs for their own children and taxpayer donations to nonprofit scholarship funds; tax credits enjoy practical, legal, and political advantages over school vouchers.”

Schaeffer says, “Vouchers are grants of government funds, while tax credits are private funds.” The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn explained the distinction.

Colorado stopped its voucher program because of a state constitutional provision that does not allow charitable, educational, industrial, or benevolent appropriations to any person, corporation, or community under the absolute control of the state. Pennsylvania has a similar provision with exception for higher education.

American parents have begun to push back the socialist agenda and the public school indoctrination that their children have been subjected to for the past 40 years. This indoctrination is bearing fruit in the anarchic societal and economic confusion of the Occupy Wall Street denizens.

The New Renaissance in Education (NRIE) promotes “a curriculum to teach America’s heritage to the next generation: liberty and limited government, America’s documents, America’s cultural heritage, free market economics, and western intellectual tradition.” This worthy educational program should spread across the nation with the help of dedicated parents, teachers, and freedom loving Americans.

Uploaded 11/29/2011

Do media Divert Attention From Obama Woes?  

BY FLOYD AND MARY BETH BROWN

    America's mainstream media is hard at work on the Obama re-election effort. Nonstop reporting on the Herman Cain allegations, the break-up of the European Union and Occupy Everything is quietly building a playing field or political environment to empower Obama's excuses.  

    Here is how it works:

    The media has taken a great field of GOP candidates and made them look like a sequel to the Hollywood blockbuster Dumb and Dumber. Each success frontrunner has been mowed down to size by outlandish and journalistically unethical reporting, combined with a nonstop series of debates that produce highlight reels of gotcha questions these so-called reporters never' ask Obama.

    Obama in contrast simply travels the world at government expense, teleprompter in hand giving well-crafted speeches written ,by others. The softball questions lofted his way are intended more to boost him than share with Americans the true story of how tough it really is living in the Obama socialist economy.  

    So we will try to ask some questions here the media should be asking Obama in person.    

    Mr. Obama: The United States Census Bureau reports that in 84 percent of our largest metropolitan areas, the percentage of ''very poor" people increased during 2010, do your policies share any blame fur this disaster?

    Mr. Obama: The number of people who fell into poverty in 2010, 2.6 million people, was the largest recorded increase since records were first kept in 1959, the number of "poor" has risen from 11.3 percent in 2000 to 15.1 percent today, do you think you could do a  better job of stewarding the economy?

    Mr. Obama: During 2010, the poverty rate for children hit 22 percent; in at least 314  American counties, a minimum of 30 percent of children live with daily food insecurity; school lunch programs are an indispensable part of the daily food intake fur more than 20 million children, Why do you think children are doing so much worse during your tenure in office than during the George W. Bush administrations?

    Mr. Obama: More than 45 million Americans live on food stamps. Since the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007, the number of people on food stamps has Jumped 74 percent; current projections say that approximately 50 percent of all American children will live on food stamps at some point before he or she reaches 18. How do you intend to empower people to get off these government programs before we have a debt crisis like Europe?

    Mr. Obama: One in six Americans now depends on some kind of federal anti-poverty program; food pantries and soup kitchens are serving 46 percent more Americans than they were in 2006; there may be as many as 500,000 American children who are homeless in our country today. How do you explain the continuing collapse in America's economy as more of your legislative agenda has been made into law?

    Mr. Obama: When you see that your prescription for what ails the economy is failing when will you change direction?  

    Instead of forcing Obama to give Americans answers, we have a media that focuses on destroying any Republican that has the potential to really challenge him. They report heavily on stories that empower Obama's biggest excuses. Excuses such as: this disaster was caused by George W. Bush don't blame me, Europe's problems have become our problems, this is global, don't blame me. And the classic, if only the wealthy paid their fair share we wouldn't have these problems, don't blame me.

    The common message shared by Obama and his minions in the media is clear. Obama doesn't own this economic apocalypse. Collectively they shout, it is someone else's fault. In the meantime the economic collapse is morphing into a cataclysmic, systemic failure.

    In the end we almost expect Obama to smile' as he chants in unison with the Occupy crowd, "our failure is America's fault."

    The Browns are bestselling authors and speakers. Together they write a national weekly column distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate. Floyd is also president of the Western Center for Journalism. Copyright 2011, Floyd and Mary Beth Brown. 

Uploaded 11/22/2011

The U. S. Constitution and Sharia Law  

Throughout the history of this world there really have only been two kinds of law. We have given these systems of law very descriptive and easy names to remember. They are Rulers' Law and People's Law. Every legal system can fit             under one of these two broad banners. Under Ruler's Law, the king or dictator makes the law. Under People's Law, the people make or accept the law by which they live. It is interesting that some of the most dominant kinds of legal systems have come about when it is claimed to emanate from God. Under Ruler's Law, if the ruler can make the people believe he has a divine right to rule, he can persuade the people to do about anything and the use of force becomes acceptable to many people if done in the name of God. Under People's Law, as was the case in Ancient Israel, when the people accepted Jehovah as their King and accepted His laws as their laws, it had a powerful persuasiveness to right actions. The major difference was that there was no use of force. Not even God would force a leader or laws on a people they did not willingly accept, because He respects the agency of man. Religion has been a powerful force  throughout history in either types of law.  

In following the example of Ancient Israel, America's Founders set forth laws based on the laws of nature and of nature's God. It has catapulted the United States to an unmatched position as the most prosperous and freest nation on earth.  

Now we are faced with the same kind of threat that has been seen in the past-a system of compulsory laws which has the use of force at its very core and which claims to emanate from God. It is called Sharia Law.  

In 2010, an exhaustive study was published by a group of top security policy experts concerned with the preeminent totalitarian threat of our time: the legal-political-military doctrine known within Islam as Shariah. The study was designed to provide a "second opinion" on the official assessments of this threat as put forth by the United State government, which assessments included co-existence, accommodation, and even submission. By permission, much of the following is taken from this study.  

What is Sharia?  

The Arabic word "shariah," according to one modern English-language student textbook on Islam, "literally means a straight path (Quran 45:18) or an endless supply of water. It is the term used to describe the rules of the lifestyle ordained by Allah. In more practical terms, shariah includes all the do's and don'ts of Islam." In other words, shariah is held by mainstream Islamic authorities - not to be confused with "radical," "extremist" or "political" elements said to operate at the fringes of Islam - to be the perfect expression of divine will and justice and thus is the supreme law that must comprehensively govern all aspects of Muslims' lives, irrespective of when or where they live. Shariah is characterized as a "complete way of life" (social, cultural, military, religious, and political), governed from cradle to grave by Islamic law.  

While there are a few additional sources for sharia, the most notable and authoritative is the Quran. In Islamic parlance, the Quran is considered to be the uncreated word of Allah. According to Muslim belief, it has existed since the beginning of time and was revealed by the Archangel Gabriel in the 7th Century to the Prophet Mohammed in the Arabic language of his homeland. It is interesting to note that the verses in the Quran are not compiled in chronological order of revelations but are organized from longest to shortest. This presents confusion in trying to read the Quran. Also, there is really no central authority to clarify or interpret the versus, so many are left to their own understanding of the writings.  

While many, many millions of Muslims around the world do not practice their faith in a manner consistent with shariah, those who do practice shariah have grounds for arguing that their version of Islam is the authoritative one because of the Islamic doctrine of abrogation-which holds that the later verses supersedes or abrogates the earlier ones. As a result, the later verses become much more violent and forceful in relation to non-Muslims. For example: Fight and slay the unbelievers wherever ye find them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war. But if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them; for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (Q 9:5)  

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, even if they are of the people of the Book [meaning Christians and Jews], until they pay the jizya [taxes on non-Muslims] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Q 9:29)  

Shariah is Anti-Constitutional  

Whether pursued through the violent form of jihad (holy war) or stealthier practices that shariah Islamists often refer to as "dawa" (the "call to Islam"), shariah rejects fundamental premises of American society and values: the bedrock proposition that the governed have aright to make law for themselves; the democratic republic governed by the Constitution; freedom of conscience; individual liberty freedom of expression (including the liberty to analyze and criticize shariah); economic liberty (including private property); equal treatment under the law (including that of men and women, and of Muslims and non-Muslims); freedom from cruel and unusual punishments; an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism (i.e., one that is based on a common sense meaning of the term and does not rationalize barbarity as legitimate "resistance"); and an abiding commitment to deflate and resolve political controversies by the ordinary mechanisms of our democratic republic, not wanton violence. The subversion campaign known as "civilization jihad" must not be confused with, or tolerated as, a constitutionally protected form of religious practice. Its ambitions transcend what American law recognizes as the sacrosanct realm of private conscience and belief. It seeks to supplant our Constitution with its own totalitarian framework.  

America's Founders and Islam  

America's earliest presidents best understood these founding principles. They were not only deeply involved with their formal adoption, but they were professionally competent in explaining them. When confronted with an Islamic threat, they took the effort to consult primary sources and to conduct competent analysis of that threat.  

In 1786, Thomas Jefferson, ambassador to France, and John Adams, ambassador to England, met with the emissary of the Islamic potentates of Tripoli to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, regarding the demands for tribute being made at the time by the so-called Barbary Pirates.  

Afterwards, Jefferson and Adams sent a four-page report to the Congress describing this meeting. The relevant portion of their report reads: "We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the Grounds of their pretentions to make war upon Nations who had done them no Injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation.  

"The Ambassador answered us that  it was founded on the Laws of their prophet, that it was written in their Qur'an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise."  

John Adams' son and our sixth president, John Quincy Adams, whose formative years coincided with the founding of the republic, offers further insights into the early presidents' views on this subject. Like many Americans, he took an oath to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. And, when faced with an Islamic enemy, he understood his obligation to be educated on the factual aspects of the principles, doctrines, objectives, jurisprudence and theology of shariah that comprised his enemy's threat doctrine.  

John Quincy Adams' 136-page series of essays on Islam displayed a clear understanding of the threat facing America then - and now, especially from the permanent Islamic institutions of jihad and dhimmitude. Regarding these two topics, Adams states:  "...[Mohammed] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind.... The precept of the Quran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that [Mohammed] is the prophet of God.  

"The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute. As the essential principle of [Mohammed's] faith is the subjugation of others by the sword;  it is only by force, that his false doctrines can be dispelled, and his power annihilated.  

"The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.  

"This appeal to the natural hatred of the Mussulmen towards the infidels is in just accordance with the precepts of the Quran. The document [the Quran] does not attempt to disguise it, nor even pretend that the enmity of those whom it styles the infidels, is any other than the necessary consequence of the hatred borne by the Mussulmen to them - the paragraph itself, is a forcible example of the contrasted character of the two religions.  

"The fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion is the extirpation of hatred from the human  heart. It forbids the exercise of it, even towards enemies. There is no denomination of Christians, which denies or misunderstands this doctrine. All understand it alike - all acknowledge its obligations; and however imperfectly, in the purposes of Divine Providence, its efficacy has been shown in the practice of Christians, it has not been wholly inoperative upon them. Its effect has been upon the manners of nations. It has mitigated the horrors of war - it has softened the features of slavery - it has humanized the intercourse of social life. The unqualified acknowledgement of a duty does not, indeed, suffice to insure its performance. Hatred is yet a passion, but too powerful upon the  hearts of Christians. Yet they cannot indulge it, except by the sacrifice of their principles, and the conscious violation of their duties. No state paper from a Christian hand, could, without trampling the precepts of its Lord and Master, have commenced by an open proclamation of hatred to any portion of the human race. The Ottoman lays it down as the foundation of his discourse."  

In conclusion, it is clear from the writings of several of our earliest presidents, as well as the texts of the nation's founding documents, that American principles are not at odds with - and imperiled by - some "radical" or "extreme" version of Islam. Rather, it is the mainstream doctrine of shariah that constitutes the threat to the U.S. Constitution and the freedoms it enshrines. That incompatibility has several practical implications: For one thing, the shariah legal code cannot be insinuated into America - even through stealthy means or democratic processes - without violating the Constitution's Article VI Supremacy Clause, which requires that the Constitution "shall be the supreme Law of the land."  

Even more reprehensible is the willingness of some among America's elites, and it would appear even a subset of its elected leaders, to accede to these groups'  increasingly insistent contention that shariah is compatible with the U.S. Constitution. In fact, based on shariah's tenets, its core attributes - especially its intolerance of other faiths and disfavored populations and its bid for supremacy over all other legal or political systems, there can be no confusion on this score: As the Framers fully understood, shariah is an enemy of the United States Constitution. The two are incompatible.

Uploaded 11/20/2011

UN plan referenced by Newt Gingrich is a real threat to private property and US sovereignty

What is Agenda 21?  

“Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on Earth…it calls for specific changes in the activities of all people… Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced… ” - Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993).

Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich stated during a recent campaign event that the United Nations was seeking to create an “extraconstitutional control” over the US with programs like Agenda 21. Gingrich’s remarks are featured in a YouTube video. But what is Agenda 21 and why has it taken nearly 20 years before this subject got national recognition?

Agenda 21 seeks to control populations through zoning and seizure of private property, strip national sovereignty, reduce the world population, even control our consumption of meat and air conditioning ... all in the name of the environment. And who can be against the environment, right?

Many Americans cringe at the mention of “global government” or “conspiracy.” And often, conspiracy theories have little basis in fact. But we must recognize that it is a basic element of human nature to seek wealth and power, and that people throughout human history have conspired together to do so. Not all conspiracies are real, but they do exist. And Agenda 21 is a perfect example on a global scale.

From the report produced by the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements, which was the predecessor to Agenda 21: “Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice…. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable….”

Our Constitution explicitly protects our private property rights. No wonder President Clinton signed it into law without consent from Congress. In fact, those who drafted the plan considered it to be so toxic that they warned proponents not to use the term Agenda 21.

“Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy- fixated groups and individuals in our society,” said J. Gary Lawrence, adviser to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development. “This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking [Agenda 21]. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.”

Rather than defend against the disinformation campaign used to prop up Agenda 21, we must read the document and instead demand why the UN thinks it has any business subjugating the world under its authority when their record is full of epic corruption and humiliating failures.

Uploaded 11/20/2011

The Secret Perversion of Tim & Sarah's Hateful Critics

Tebow, Palin & the Logic of Thanksgiving  

Shall we unveil the 700-pound Tasmanian devil in the room? The chief reason the average crank hates Tim Tebow & Sarah Palin is because both are open and unapologetic Christians. Although typical anti-American bigots are loathe to admit this fact, it is transparently true. Further, it is the essential values and characteristics of authentic Christianity which most of these non-believers find highly objectionable. This same anti-religious bigotry now threatens to atomize America’s once nearly impregnable foundations.

Currently, atheism is more esteemed than American Idol contestants. Meanwhile, atheists pour out disdain against Christians like so many Mothers Against Drunk Drivers. For example, consider the juvenile ramblings of Richard Dawkins, whose works create a toxic minefield of assorted fallacies, while raging blindly against God. This article examines the loss of a Christian worldview in America, as hinted at by the fury poured out against Sarah Palin and Tim Tebow for merely openly espousing their beliefs. The article goes onto suggest America may still restore our glory days if we turn away from failed and godless political ideals, and once again honor Him—as we did originally, so many years ago—on the first Thanksgiving day.

I. Tackling Tim-bow Out of Bounds

One cannot help but notice that Denver Bronco quarterback Tim Tebow gathers more weekly critics than would a blind knife-throwing exhibit at a hemophiliac convention. So why does Tim generate such hostile reactions regardless of his current habit of fostering last-minute comeback wins? Well, to listen to his critics, one would be forced to conclude that Tebow cannot be allowed to compete anymore in the NFL simply because his fundamental skill set is so bad. This theory suggests his throws are so predictably bad that he is actually robbing merit from the entire league, and so must be banned for the good of the dignity of professional sport.

The alternative theory, which is admittedly gaining steam with each victory, is that Tebow’s worth can only be gauged by his win-loss record, which tends to grow each week. In other words, Tebow’s beauty is better summed up by his win-loss record, than any dry recapitulation of his mechanical flaws.

But neither of these positions really sums up the heated debate over Tim, does it? Instead, some astute observers understand that the fight over Tebow is a proxy war over the right to live an openly Christian lifestyle in an age of sanctimonious secularism. According to his most vociferous critics, Tebow’s joyful demeanor, pious public pronouncements and knee-dropping prayers—aka “Tebowing”—and humble persona are weighed in the balance and found wanting…MENE, MENE, TEKEL, PARSIN.

In other words, Tim’s very open Christian witness is considered an odious assault against popular decorum and so must be driven from public life after a proper shaming. Only, Tebow has yet to get this message. But when pondering the need for Tim to quietly exit the NFL for the good of its image, consider these observations:

Inside the NFL’’ analyst and former Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver Cris Collinsworth concluded that much of the hatred against Tebow was based on his religious beliefs. Responding to a question from fellow host James ‘JB’ Brown, Collinsworth showed his disgust for Tebow’s treatment: ‘‘It’s unbelievable, though, JB, that one of the best kids - just pure kids that’s ever come into the NFL - is hated because of his faith, because of his mission work, because of the fact that he wears it on his sleeve, because of the fact that he lives his life that he talks about…And it’s kind of a sad commentary, that, you know, if someone is out carousing every night, the Joe Namath thing, or whatever, they’re American heroes, and Tim Tebow, who’s working in missions in Asia somewhere, is a guy that we’re going to vilify.’‘

Tebow has indeed been vilified for his Christian faith and beliefs. Commentators have taken aim at him because of his religion and pro-life stance. One sportswriter compared Tebow’s confidence that he will start in the NFL to blasphemy. ‘Daily Show’ comedian John Oliver declared: ‘‘I dislike Robert Mugabe. I hate Tim Tebow.’’ The vitriol directed against Tebow is how religion and people of faith are often treated in the media, which often seeks to remove any mention of religion from public life entirely, including in sports.

Oliver also stated that if he had two bullets, between Tim Tebow and Osama Bin Laden, he’d shoot Tebow first.

Other astute sports analysts have come to a similar conclusion:

No, Tim Tebow is a target of irrational hatred, not because he’s an iffy quarterback at the NFL level, or a creep personally, or an obnoxious, in-your-face, self-righteous proselytizer. He draws hatred because he is an unabashed Christian, whose calmness and decency in the face of his Christophobic detractors drives them crazy. Tim Tebow, in other words, is a prime example of why Christophobia—a neologism first coined by a world-class comparative constitutional law scholar, J.H.H. Weiler, himself an Orthodox Jew—is a serious cultural problem in these United States.

It is simply unimaginable that any prominent Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or Sikh quarterback, should such a fantasy of anthropology exist, would be subjected to the vileness that is publicly dumped on Tim Tebow. Tolerance, that supreme virtue of the culture of radical relativism, does not extend to evangelical Christians, it seems. And if it does not extend to evangelicals who unapologetically proclaim their faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior and who live their commitment to the dignity of human life from conception and natural death, it will not extend to Catholics who make that same profession of faith and that same moral commitment. Whatever we think of Tim Tebow’s theology of salvation, Tim Tebow and serious Catholics are both fated to be targets of the Christophobes.

Another public figure can well identify with Tebow’s excoriation by the mainstream media for their public affirmation of private faith—Sarah Palin.

II. The Indignity of Being Sarah

Has any public figure ever been pilloried more savagely for less reason than Governor Sarah Palin? A person of both strong faith and winsome disposition, Palin attracted more savages responses than would a barbecue pit located at the entrance of Mecca. But why? Her ocean of critics will give a thousand “good reasons” why she is just one loathsome step removed from the anti-Christ. Yet, is it not inevitable her very public faith and possible proximity to the Oval Office—caused this remarkable tsunami of condemnation? Listen to actor Matt Damon’s 2008 description of Palin:

“I think there’s a really good chance Sarah Palin could become president, and I think that’s a really scary thing… I think the pick was made for political purposes… Do the actuary tables and there’s a one out of three chance, if not more, that McCain doesn’t survive his first term and it’ll be President Palin… It’s like a really bad Disney movie. The hockey mom, you know, ‘oh, I’m just a hockey mom’... and she’s facing down President Putin… It’s totally absurd… it’s a really terrifying possibility… I need to know if she really thinks that dinosaurs were here 4,000 years ago. I want to know that, I really do. Because she’s gonna have the nuclear codes.

Clearly, Damon’s problem with Palin is her faith. And using this as a litmus, one must conclude that Damon and his many entertainment fellow-travelers believe that simply holding straightforward Christian beliefs invalidates a person from higher office in the US. But Damon is merely the mouthpiece of millions of “progressive” persons whose own convictions beggar belief, and yet are on a relentless crusade to drive the Christian faith out of the public arena.

III. A Generally Dismissive View of Christians

The fact is that a wholesale resistance against Christianity has been growing in America for the last half century, if not for longer. But what has driven the rise in atheism and demand for hermetic separation between church and state? Many factors have given rise to this sentiment, but probably none are more important than the debasement of the US education system into a pale joke of its former self.

Certainly the default atheistic worldview espoused by the majority of US educators must have a logical effect, right? In the description of a world built by random explosions and sheer chance, accidentally throwing out the default raw materials of life, which then assembled itself, we find a vacuum of meaning. And teaching children that even the most obvious society-affirming moral conclusions are beyond the ambit of public education, one simply gives a rubber stamp to the most contradictory and selfish of impulses.

In the aftermath of the Cold War collapse of world communism, how is it possible that the lessons we learned are that socialism is both morally defensible and inherently successful? No wonder major global leaders are in free-fall and collapse when such inane conclusions are jammed down the throats of kids never given the option of education in logic, common sense, or coherent argumentation!

IV. Thanksgiving’s American Moral

As Americans ready themselves to celebrate our peerless forebears, and ponder what kind of “luck” could result in formation of the greatest country ever assembled, we really ought to stand back and reflect—What is the source of the original code book that the USA stand out from so many thousands of other nations which have risen to fall over the centuries?

Thanksgiving seems like the last American holiday to not suffer a perverse re-defining of its original meaning to suck out all life, and replace with materialism. So what is the essence of our national creed, revealed by Thanksgiving?

Former professor of History, Newt Gingrich reminds us of this holiday’s true meaning:

America’s First Thanksgiving: A Wholly Holy Celebration

As we all enjoy turkey and the trimmings this Thanksgiving, you may be interested to know that the first Thanksgiving celebration in America was a completely religious observance that didn’t include a feast.

It occurred in 1619—more than a year before the Pilgrims arrived from Massachusetts. A group of 38 English settlers arrived in Virginia and set aside a day to give thanks to God for their safe passage. The three-day festival of food and friendship that was the origin of Thanksgiving as we know it today didn’t occur until 1621.

Not Just a Private Celebration, a Public Thanks to God.

V. Ten Characteristics of Christians That Used to Define America

A. America’s Ship Off Course

Most US residents agree that America has strayed badly off course these last few years. So—Is it more Obama’s or George W’s fault? Actually, every sincere American can take our own share of blame for falling short, or choosing leaders who cultivate compromise, instead of pointing fingers.

B. Ten Essential Christian Doctrines Americans Must Hold

But instead of chasing red herrings—let’s examine a list of ten integral characteristics that are true both of good Christians and classic American ideals, expressed in these beliefs:

There is a God, revealed in the Bible; this Deity on earth is Jesus.

Life has a purpose; we are here to use our gifts to achieve this.

Honesty is crucial; lying is diabolical.

No free lunches; everyone must work for what they have.

Rule of Law; same standards for all.

Sex is for marriage.

Don’t buy what you can’t afford.

Capitalism is simply freedom applied to economics.

Government must be moral.

All forms of Marxism are godless, and therefore evil.

Imagine how quickly America would return to greatness, peace, prosperity and health if we would once again take biblical ideals seriously—like Tebow & Palin do—and apply them across the board in our lives? ‘Nuff said.

Gaffney: Rise of Sharia Law Will Bring War to the Middle East

Monday, 24 Oct 2011 06:56 PM

By Martin Gould and Kathleen Walter  

War is on its way in the Middle East as Muslim countries are determined to force a showdown over the future of Israel, Ronald Reagan’s assistant defense secretary Frank Gaffney warned in an exclusive Newsmax.TV interview.

“I’m afraid there’s a war coming, a very serious, perhaps cataclysmic regional war,” he said. “It will be presumably over, at least in part, the future existence of the state of Israel. It may involve all of its neighbors, as they have in the past, attacking Israel to try, as they say, to drive the Jews into the sea.

“It may involve the use of nuclear weapons,” Gaffney predicted. “But whatever form it takes and whenever it occurs, it is unlikely to be contained to that region, and we must do everything we can to prevent freedom’s enemies from thinking they have an opportunity to engage in that kind of warfare.”

That means standing “absolutely, unmistakably” as one with Israel and doing everything to prevent Iran getting its hands on nuclear weapons.

Gaffney, who now heads up the nonprofit Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C., was speaking on the day that the “moderate” Islamist party Ennahda claimed victory at the ballot box in Tunisia and the day after Libya’s new rulers declared that country will be run on Islamic principles and under Sharia law.

Watch the video.

The Obama Administration must stop embracing the Muslim Brotherhood to protect U.S. national security, says Frank Gaffney. In a Newsmax.TV video interview, the Center for Security Policy founder says a cataclysmic regional war over Israels future is inevitable in the Middle East.

Gaffney does not believe Ennahda is really a moderating force. “I don’t believe there is such a thing as a moderate Islamist party,” he said. “The challenge with Islamists is that they seek to impose what they call Sharia on everybody, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.

“They may, as a matter of tactical expediency, choose to do so in incremental ways, often nonviolently, at least initially.

“The problem is that, because ultimately they must — according to Sharia, according to what they believe is God’s will — make everyone feel subdued in order to achieve their God-mandated direction, they will not remain moderate. They will not be satisfied with anything less than the ultimate supremacy of Sharia and they certainly will not resist the use of violence when it becomes expedient to get their way.”

Gaffney, who writes a regular column for Newsmax, foresees a rising tide of Islamist governments growing throughout Middle East and North Africa and spreading even further.

“We’re witnessing not just the violent kind of jihad that these Islamists believe God compels them to engage in, but also, where they must for tactical reasons, a more stealthy kind, or civilizational jihad as the Muslim Brotherhood calls it. We’re witnessing that playing out, not only in places in the Middle East but also in Europe, in Australia, in Canada and here in the United States as well,” he said.

The spread of Sharia, which Gaffney said often is referred to as “Communism with a god,” is “the most urgent and grievous challenge we face as a free people.

“Those who follow this program of Sharia believe that God is directing them to engage in jihad or whatever form of warfare is necessary to accomplish their goals . . . .Through stealth, they have successfully penetrated important parts of the free world including our own government and civil society institutions.”

The Obama administration has to stop “embracing” the Muslim Brotherhood, Gaffney said.

“This is legitimating our enemies,” he said. “It is facilitating their influence operations and their penetration and it greatly increases the prospect that they will be successful at what the Muslim Brotherhood’s own documents indicate is their desire, which is to destroy western civilization from within.”

Gaffney noted that Ennahda had won what appears to be a clean election in Tunisia, but that doesn’t mean there ever will be another vote there.

“The problem is not simply democracy. People are pointing to Tunisia as a perfect example of democracy at work. Democracy is fine if all you want is one-man-one-vote one-time. That is precisely what the Muslim Brotherhood and its like-minded Islamist friends want.”

The Obama administration must apply pressure to ensure that democracy has a future there and elsewhere in the region, Gaffney said.

“The president and his administration are not even pursuing that,” he said. “What we are likely to wind up with, not just in Tunisia, not just in Libya, not just in Egypt, but probably in due course in Syria — as we have in Lebanon, as we have in Gaza and probably will have down the road in Yemen, Bahrain, maybe Saudi Arabia — is the takeover, the unmistakable takeover, perhaps through the ballot box, of people who will not seek or allow others freedom, who will impose Sharia and who will use whatever resources they amass as a result, not only to suppress their own people, but to endanger us.”

Uploaded 10/30/2011

Big Government Over All  

The United States Constitution was written in a manner specifically designed to limit the size and scope of the federal government. All government power, prior to the writing of the Constitution, was held by the States. The new country needed a central government to protect the union of sovereign states, yet the new federal government needed to be limited so that it would not become a tyranny that sought to destroy the autonomy of the individual states. From the very beginning there were those that disagreed with the concept of a limited central government, and worked to usurp the Constitution so that the federal government may have full authority over everything.  

That battle not only still rages today, but the liberal democrats, and establishment republicans, have positioned themselves to give the federal government all authority, not only over the States, but over the private sector, and even the individual decisions of the citizens.

The Obama administration has become one of continuous executive orders, and a growing hostility against the other branches of government whenever those branches don’t “play ball.”

During his State of the Union Speech in 2010, Obama went after the Supreme Court, publicly criticizing them for their Citizens United ruling, which recognized the free speech of corporate entities during the campaign season, and opens the opportunity for candidates to increase campaign contributions from the business sector.

Justice Alito caught Obama in a lie during that speech, and mouthed the words “not true,” which then set up a larger media firestorm.

Obama’s decision to rebuke the Supreme Court Justices in such a way drags the high court into politics, when they have sworn to be apolitical (as if they truly follow that. . .), and also sent the message that Obama does not want The Court to rule in a manner consistent with the law, but in a manner consistent with how he wants them to rule - in other words, “rule in accordance to my statist opinions, or be rebuked for daring to differ.”

Barack Obama has decided that the Congress does not need to be involved in any processes either, commenting after his “Jobs Bill” was rejected by the Senate that he would pass the pieces administratively through the regulatory agencies, instead. He has decided to first test the waters with each piece of the bill by submitting the pieces to Congress, but they are rejecting each piece individually, which is setting up the opportunity for him to implement those provisions through the regulatory agencies.

Obama’s response for the Congress to dare reject his political will? Obama has determined that Congress is stupid, and unable to comprehend the complexities of his legislation. His Vice President, good ol’ Joe Biden, went on to say that rejection of the Jobs Bill will result in more rapes and murders across the country - an absurd statement that even the media found themselves appalled by.

When one looks through the proposals themselves, you realize how sinister they truly are, slowly giving the federal government more and more authorities that they have no constitutional right to, while also setting up the election by giving the president a list of legislative rejections he can blame on his opposition, and in turn giving him the opportunity to twist language for his benefit. The republicans have rejected, according to The Left, clean water, clean air, public safety, access to education, access to health care, and so on and so forth.

In the first piece of his Jobs Bill that was pushed on Congress, the provision demanded a years worth of federal funding to police, fire and teachers. Clearly, a local function, this funding would be a greater step in the direction of the federal government dictating to local governments what they can and can’t do with their own local law enforcement and fire services. The proposal was only for a year, which means the money would stop flowing to the localities soon after the election, and then when the cities and states were unable to maintain the level of funding the federal government provided, they would be faced with either laying off those personnel hired as a result of that funding, or asking the federal government for more money.

More money from the federal government equals more control by the federal government.

When it came to his great student loan giveaway, Obama again announced that Congress could not be trusted, so he had to just implement the plan himself. And he did - with an executive order (an unconstitutional use of that power, might I add - only Congress is given the authority to legislate in any manner - Article I, Section 1).

As a big government statist, Obama truly believes that the federal government creates jobs, creates innovation, and creates great minds. Therefore, the education system needs more money so that it can program more kids to follow the liberal madness.

Obama says he’s helping to ease the burden of student loan debt, when in reality it does nothing of the sort. It is just a move to make him “look like” he is doing so.

Nobody ever challenges the public universities on why they have increased the cost of education (you know, like they challenge corporations?) - they won’t challenge an ally in that way.

This is nothing new. In May of 1973, Dr. Medford Evans wrote: “. . . government schools make it a matter of policy to spend as much money as possible, and impart as little knowledge as possible since spending demonstrates power while keeping the scholars ignorant monopolizes power in the hands of the government insiders.”

Now Obama is taking aim on meddling in the mortgage industry. . . to get it to do the same kind of stuff that got us in this mess in the first place. And he is doing it without Congress.

Michelle Obama wants government to tell you what you can and can’t eat (Hey, Michelle, I have an idea: How about you mind your own damn business what I eat), the federal government wants to tell you how to raise your kids, give you free diapers if you allow the government access to your child before Kindergarten, Harry Reid says government jobs should take a priority over private sector jobs (in a bid to eventually federalize all jobs, I am sure), and Jesse Jackson is suggesting that the federal government should hire all of the unemployed at $40,000.

It won’t be long before the federal government controls everything, the dollar collapses and everyone is dependent upon the government. And then they will come for our guns - If we fail to stop this.

They don’t care how much money it takes, just as long as the federal government controls everything. And if the federal government controls everything, they can dictate to you all of your choices. That is a loss of liberty.

And as for them dictating everything? Don’t forget, dictate is the root word of dictator. 

Uploaded 10/29/2011

Obama says he’ll be taking ‘executive actions’ without Congress on ‘regular basis’ to ‘heal the economy’  

President Barack Obama told an audience in Nevada on Monday that he will be regularly announcing “executive actions” his administration will take to “heal the economy” without the “dysfunctional” Congress.

“I’m here to say to all of you and to say to the people of Nevada and the people of Las Vegas, we can’t wait for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to do its job. Where they won’t act, I will,” Obama said.

“I’ve told my administration to keep looking every single day for actions we can take without Congress, steps that can save consumers money, make government more efficient and responsive, and help heal the economy. And we’re going to be announcing these executive actions on a regular basis,” the president said.

Obama then explained the home mortgage refinancing plan that his administration announced on Monday.

“The barrier will be lifted that prohibits responsible homeowners from refinancing if their home values have fallen so low that what they owe on their mortgage is 25 percent higher than the current value of their home,” he said. “And this is critically important for a place like Las Vegas, where home values have fallen by more than 50 percent over the past five years.”

“If you’ve got a $250,000 mortgage at six percent interest rates, but the value of your home has fallen below $200,000, right now you can’t refinance,” Obama explained. “You’re ineligible. But that’s going to change. If you meet certain requirements, you will have the chance to refinance at lower rates, which could save you hundreds of dollars a month, and thousands of dollars a year on mortgage payments.”

Virginia Democratic Rep. Jim Moran told TheDC last Thursday that he would like to see the Obama administration refinance every home mortgage to three and a half to four percent without congressional approval. (RELATED: Obama admin. to offer home re-fi plan regardless ‘of how deeply underwater they are’)

“The banks aren’t doing it, but the federal government can borrow money at three-and-a-half percent today,” Moran said. “It would reset the economy, and I think it’s the one thing that would most quickly get this economy back on its feet.”

Moran’s recommendation foreshadowed the president’s statements on Monday.

“Where we don’t have to wait for Congress, we’re just going to go ahead and act on our own, and we’re going to keep on putting pressure on Congress to do the right thing for families all across the country,” Obama said.

“And I am confident that the American people want to see action,” he said. “We know what to do. Question is whether we’re going to have the political will to do it.”

Is Occupy Wall Street a Cause with a Culture?  

Does Occupy Wall Street (OWS) consist of individuals and groups representing divergent interests or is it shaping into a movement with a common goal and purpose?

Is the movement sustainable without a leader or will it frost over with the first winter wind?

Looking for insight on the structure and the future of OWS, I turned to influential activists and political figures.

What I found is opinions that the movement is cohesive, powerful and does not require leadership to move forward.

Activist Shel Horowitz, who has attended both OWS and Occupy Northampton in Massachusetts, finds the movement compares to many that have come before, particularly, in its organization, the Clamshell Alliance of the mid- to late-70s in Seabrook, N.H. The Clamshell Alliance was formed to protest against the building of nuclear reactors in Seabrook; Horowitz was arrested during a protest in 1977.

Like the Clamshell Alliance, "Occupy will produce a culture of leaderless, consensus decision-making," Horowitz said. "It will galvanize people to realize their own interests are not being served by those in power, and that government and the corporate world have colluded to develop an oppressive and unequal situation."

Paul Krassner, whose escapades were famously chronicled as one of the Merry Pranksters in Tom Wolfe's "Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test," finds a connection between OWS and the Youth International Party (Yippies), which Krassner founded with four others as part of the counter-cultural movement in the sixties.

The Yippies, much like the Clamshell Alliance, was a leaderless organization, reinforcing this point by putting up a pig for their 1968 presidential nomination bid.

The Yippies would perform stunts, such as throwing wads of cash from the balcony of the Stock Market onto the floor, to get media attention for their cause, whereas protesters for OWS are garnering their media power simply from the incredibly turnout of protesters.

"We had to use messy mimeograph machines to make flyers that had to be stuffed into envelopes and mailed, whereas the Internet enables Occupiers to reach countless people immediately," Krassner wrote to me in an email. "What gives me a feeling of continuity is that both the Yippies and the Occupiers experienced an enthusiastic sense of community. Although I've been wavering between hope and despair, the Occupiers have inspired the needle on my compass to point at hope again."

When I asked about the consistency of OWS to political consultant Roger Stone, the libertarian seemed impressed by the movement.

"I was watching a parade of Occupy Wall Street down 6^th Avenue," Stone said. "They are not a group of left-wing hippies, they are middle-class, angry people."

In the opinion of Stone, there is a lot of overlap between OWS and the Tea Party Movement, both of whom Stone believes are misrepresented by being attached to one of the two major parties.

"Both (The OWS and Tea Party) are against big business, against big labor, against Wall Street and suspicious of big government," Stone said. "These could be the seeds of a third-party reform movement where the people eventually get rid of both the Republicans and the Democrats."

It seems that through wind or winter, rain or shine, OWS might be here to stay, possibly without a leader, using power in positioning and numbers to hold the bargaining chips

Uploaded 10/14/2011

The Roots Of Obama’s Rage Against Capitalism

October 13, 2011 by Frank York Comments (13)

President Obama apparently wants us to be more like North Korea -- with its lights out. South Korea, of course, is thriving under a free-market system.

Last year, Dinesh D’Souza published an amazing book titled: The Roots Of Obama’s Rage.

In it, he outlined reasons why Obama is so determined to undermine capitalism, energy independence and to benefit Third World nations.

D’Souza believes that Obama’s rage against capitalism and what he perceives as modern-day colonialism is based on the ideology of his father. Barack Sr. was a Kenyan bureaucrat, drunkard, socialist, and anti-colonialist who ultimately died in a car wreck. Barack Sr. was still married to a Kenyan woman when he hooked up with Barack’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham when they were taking a Russian-language class together. He later dumped Stanley for another woman and then returned to Kenya.

Barack Jr. barely knew his real father, but apparently developed an obsession with the evils of capitalism and the need to redistribute income based on Marxist thinking. Of course, he also had help from his mother who was a committed Marxist. While in Hawaii, living with his grandparents, young Barack was also mentored by Frank Marshall Davis, a black Communist who apparently inspired him to become a community activist. He later had help in developing his anti-capitalist ideology from Pastor Jeremiah Wright, a Marxist black liberationist who preaches against the free enterprise system and the basic goodness of America.

D’Souza believes that Obama’s anti-colonialist worldview is what has driven him to work to destroy our economy with such unrelenting fervor. America isn’t a colonialist nation, but our economic power is viewed as being as evil as the old colonialism abroad. In Obama’s mind, we are neo-colonialists because our economic power extends into other nations.

According to D’Souza, “My argument in this book is that it is the anti-colonial ideology of his African father that Barack Obama took to heart. From a very young age and throughout his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father’s position that the free market is a code word for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. He began to detest corporations as institutional mechanisms for economic control and exploitation.”

Obama’s actions against our economy can be explained by his anti-colonialist Marxist view of the world. He will do everything he can to undermine free enterprise, while seizing money from the “rich” to give to the poor – both here and around the globe. He will do everything he can to diminish the U.S., while enriching other nations – especially those nations that view America with disgust. Likewise, he will do whatever he can to disrespect nations that have traditionally been our ally.

Barack Obama is easy to understand, once you know what is driving him to destroy the greatest nation in the world. His actions aren’t the result of incompetence, but of clear intention.

In relation to our energy crisis, Obama’s strategy is simple: He will do whatever he can to make sure we have less energy in the future and that other nations will get our tax dollars so they can exploit their own natural resources.

His ultimate goal is to have our nation looking like North Korea at night. You’ve seen the night shot of North Korea and South Korea by satellite. There is a stark contrast between a Communist system and a free-market based system in South Korea. This is our future if Obama gets his way. Let’s work to make sure he doesn’t.

Uploaded 10/7/2011

Obama’s premeditated murder of America

John Boehner: “We’re legislating. He’s campaigning. It’s very disappointing.”

 Why is no one stepping forward to halt the murder of America?

As surely as the Bolsheviks murdered the Romanov family at Ekateringburg on July 17, 1918, Barack Obama and his handlers are murdering America.

Why is no elected official stepping forward to halt the murder of America; the assassination of 300 million lifestyles, not even counting the untold millions of freedom lovers who depend on the USA worldwide?

It is now crystal clear that Obama is pushing America into the certainty of a socialist state.

Pretending it isn’t happening is not doing anything to stop the greatest nation ever paid for in blood and sacrifice from disappearing forever from a predator weary world.

It is patently clear that Obama is as much “your agent of change” as Raila Odinga, the despot he actively campaigned for one year before he ran for his own presidential election in 2008.

This Nobody in any kind of worthwhile stature is deliberately trying to scrub America’s noble history from the books; is erasing in big swipes off the chalkboard, American exceptionalism that for centuries made life better for so many in other corners of the world.

Even dreamers know that a Ronald Reagan only come along once in a lifetime, but where are the statesmen of the day decrying loudly against the deliberate decline of America?

Did striving to save America from the political front die off in 2007 with Congressman Henry Hyde? Sen. Hyde, who served in the Navy during WW 11, where he served in combat in the Philippines, was the congressman known for his leadership role in managing the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton.

Did the dream of a better day die with the passionate pleas of Martin Luther King?

The American Space Race that kindled the imaginations of youngsters everywhere ended with the grounding of the Space Shuttle. The Space Shuttle didn’t die a natural death but was willfully killed off by Obama in July, 2011. The Constitution is in tatters; American patriots are shunned by a regime-complicit mainstream media and are held back from the fight to save their country by a president whose minions, many of them appointed and not elected, get to smear them as “terrorists”.

Even as this is being written, Obama’s barbarians at the gate, being fed on site three square meals a day, while out in the streets calling for anarchy at the expanding Wall Street protests.

Obama can choose from any one of his running dog alphabet networks to grab headlines, as he did again only today demanding the passage of a “jobs bill” which is, in reality, just another tax bill.

The screams are already renting the air with House Speaker John Boehner concluding “We’re legislating. He’s campaigning. It’s very disappointing.”

What Obama is doing to America transcends disappointment, Mr. Boehner. It’s premeditated murder.

And most tragic of all, the life is being squeezed from America with no elected voice—not even one—calling out loudly to save her.

Uploaded 10/7/2011

Do “We the People” have the right of Revolution?

 By Coach Collins, on October 7th, 2011

By Doug Book, staff writer

Do the citizens of the United States have an absolute right to, by force of arms if necessary, overthrow a government which has, with malicious deliberation, become destructive of those ideals of liberty granted by God and guaranteed by instruments such as the Constitution of the Unites States?

Clearly the Founders believed in the existence of such a right. There could be no more axiomatic example than the American Revolution itself!

And though these men warned against pursuing such a course for “light and transient causes”, rightly observing that “…mankind are more disposed to suffer…than right themselves by abolishing forms to which they are accustomed,” the Declaration of Independence states without reservation that if any government should become “destructive” of its proper role, it is the right of the citizens to “…alter or abolish it and institute new government…”

The left is quick to maintain that anyone suggesting the American people have a right to reclaim country or liberty, even from those who have deliberately and with malevolent purpose represented a mortal threat to both, is little more than a wanton terrorist, his words being responsible for every act of violence from Oklahoma City to Tucson.

But if this is the case, we modern day “domestic terrorists” are in the best of company. For in the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson set down a number of abuses which King George had heaped upon the American colonies, among them:

“He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.”

“He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.”

“He has excited domestic insurrections against us…”

Was Jefferson a terrorist for relating these truths about the mistreatment of American colonists by the King of England and for exhorting the people to do something about it?

Though times change, the villainy of tyrants does not. Look at the striking similarities over the centuries between the actions of George the III and those of Barack the First.

Obama too has “refused his Assent to Laws”, working to have the Arizona immigration law overturned and forbidding the Executive branch to enforce current federal immigration statutes.

He has “erected a multitude of New Offices”, creating czars whose control over the American public is indisputable, yet over whom the people have no authority or recourse. So many in, fact that his own Vice President obviously couldn’t name them all.

And Obama has also “excited domestic insurrections“ against the American public, ordering his minions to shut down radio programs critical of his policies and telling supporters to argue with his detractors and “get in their face.”

And what can be said of a President who suggests his followers “bring a gun“ to confront Republicans and their political backers.

Do the American people have the right to overthrow a tyrant? Damned right we have! And rather than members of the Continental Congress directing the fight, today it will be the people leading their legislators and probably warning them to stay out of the way or be run over.

Most of us will live to see it. Many will take part. And you can bet that we will win.

Uploaded 10/6/2011

How the United States is Implementing Agenda 21:  

In Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42 USC 5165, authority to create natural hazard mitigation plans exists.

In the past, federal legislation has provided funding for disaster relief, recovery, and some hazard mitigation planning. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) is the latest legislation to improve this planning process and was put into motion on October 10, 2000, when the President signed the Act (Public Law 106-390). The new legislation emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur. The Act establishes a pre-disaster hazard mitigation program and new requirements for the national post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP).

Under the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has produced several volumes of text that facilitates, and simplifies the process of promoting and implementing Sustainable Development through Hazard Mitigation Planning.

Each state has its Emergency Management Agency that receives its directives from FEMA. Most, if not all, states have established regional councils (soviets—regionalism) that exist as an extra-constitutional, quasi-public, quasi-governmental layer of governance. Above county government and seemingly below state government, these regional councils are the pipelines through which the international community, and the federal government exercise their will over local governments. Programmes of action and grants-in-aid flow through these regional non-profits. They may be likened to drug pushers or pimps in the global “casino”, the “city of crime.” We the people, and the governments instituted among men, have become hooked on OPM that is, “Other People’s Money.”

We have forsaken our founder’s advice, “A people willing to sacrifice their Liberty for security deserve neither security nor Liberty.” Socialism demands that it be so.

Even a schoolboy knows that man, even a group of sincerely dedicated wealthy men, is powerless against the mighty energy of creation. “[T]o reduce through concerted international action, especially in developing countries, the loss of life, property damage and social and economic disruption caused by natural disasters such as earthquakes, windstorms, tsunamis, floods, landslides, volcanic eruptions, wildfires, grasshopper and locust infestations, drought and desertification and other calamities of natural origin”, is at best a humanitarian and altruistic pipe dream. This is the stuff of the snake oil salesman, the shrill bark of the carney, the studied deception of change agents and propagandists.

The Department of Homeland Security, like Civil Defense before it, has as its primary objective: the continuation of government. Ensuring the continuity of government, and the preservation and protection of records and critical facilities, therefore, is at the apex of the mitigation plan. Immediately below the preservation of government is the preservation of business and banking interests.

Stripped of its bluster, obfuscatory demographics and pseudo-science, the hazard mitigation plan may be reduced to one element: Floodplain Ordinance. People have been either causing floods for irrigation and other purposes, or rebuilding after floods have occurred, from the beginning of recorded time. FEMA understands and can respond to flooding.

FEMA is prepared to use the property owner’s fear of loss due to flooding, as the vehicle to relocate development out of the 100-year floodplains, which defined is any land area that has a one percent or greater chance on any day to be inundated, and other hazardous or sensitive environments. The concept is known as “floodplain buyout”, but could also be labeled “Fear Motivation.”

FEMA publications state, “citizens are ultimately responsible for their own safety and for protecting their assets from damage by preparing for potential disasters that could occur within their community.”

FEMA says that, “a sustainable community is a disaster-resistant community.” This is where Sustainable Development, Smart Growth, flood plain buyouts, relocation of human settlement development, and the International Code Council come to the fore. Before Agenda 21, we knew much of this as Urban Renewal, but whatsoever cannot be bought out, demolished, relocated or retrofitted will soon have to be built to resist whatever the Almighty can cast upon it.

How Local Governments Implement Agenda 21:

Former FEMA director James Lee Witt has partnered with the International Code Council as CEO and serves as Chairman of the International Code Foundation. What are these International Codes and how will their implementation affect each and every American?

The International Code Council, established in 1994, is based in the United States and is a nonprofit organization dedicated to developing a single set of national model construction codes. The ICC is ahead of the curve as we move further into the Free Trade Area of the Americas. With more than 250 well-qualified super social scientists at 16 offices throughout the United States and Latin America, the International Code Council and their International Building Codes, may just be another rapidly expanding globalist monopoly.

The International Codes published by the International Code Council (ICC), include:

·         International Building Code®

·         ICC Electrical Code®—Administrative Provisions

·         International Energy Conservation Code®

·         International Existing Building Code®

·         International Fire Code®

·         International Fuel Gas Code®

·         International Mechanical Code®

·         ICC Performance Code®

·         International Plumbing Code®

·         International Private Sewage Disposal Code®

·         International Residential Code®

·         International Wildland-Urban Interface Code®, and

·         International Zoning Code®

These comprehensive ICC codes are created following the model code development process and are performance and prescriptive code requirements. The codes are subject to and capable of revision. A new edition is promulgated every three years. Model codes encourage international consistency in application.

The 1998 edition of the International Property Maintenance Code, begun in 1996, supercedes earlier property maintenance codes; for brevity, we will consider only the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC), which governs the maintenance of existing buildings.

Ostensibly, the International Property Maintenance Code seeks to protect public health, safety and welfare without unnecessarily increasing construction costs, restricting the use of new materials, products or methods of construction, and without giving preferential treatment to particular types or classes of materials, products, or methods of construction.

Neither the ICC, nor any of those participating in the development of their codes accept any liability (accountability) resulting from compliance or non-compliance because “ICC does not have the power or authority to police or enforce compliance” with the contents of the code. “Only the governmental body that enacts the code into law has such authority.”

As with all ICC code products, the International Property Maintenance Code is available by adoption by jurisdictions internationally in accordance with proceedings establishing the jurisdictions laws. Sample adoption ordinances written with fill-in-the-blank simplicity are included in the code booklet.

The adoption Ordinance reveals the broad range of the code which embraces existing structures and premises; regulates and governs the conditions and maintenance of all property, buildings and structures; provides standards for supplied utilities and facilities and other physical things and conditions that are essential to ensure that structures are safe, sanitary and fit for occupation and use; for the condemnation of buildings and structures unfit for human occupancy and use; for the demolition of such existing structures; and provides for the issuance of permits and collection of fees therefore; together with, the regulations, provisions, penalties, conditions and terms of such 2006 International Property Maintenance Code.

The ordinance is in full force and effect from and after the date of its final passage and adoption. States, counties, municipalities and other forms of governance may adopt any or all of the ICC products in like manner, and many have already done so.

We will now examine several individual sections within the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code:

SECTION 101 GENERAL

In Section 101.2 Scope, the code shall “apply to all residential and nonresidential structures and all existing premises and constitute minimum requirements and standards for premises, structures, equipment and facilities for light, ventilation, space, heating, sanitation, protection from the elements, life safety, safety from fire and other hazards, and for safe and sanitary maintenance; the responsibility of owners, operators and occupants; the occupancy of existing structures and premises, and for administration, enforcement and penalties.”

Section 101.3 Intent, states that “existing structures and premises that do not comply with these provisions shall be altered or repaired to provide a minimum level of health and safety as required within.”

SECTION 102 APPLICABILITY

The universe of command and control expands in Section 102.1 General, where “the code shall apply to all matters affecting or relating to structures and premises,” as set forth in Section 101. 102.1 continues by stating that where “different sections of the code specify different requirements, the most restrictive shall apply.”

Section 102.2 Maintenance declares that the owner or the owner’s designated agent shall be responsible for the maintenance of buildings, structures and premises.

“None are so hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."

One might add that anyone who actually believes that he owns real property is under a strong delusion, as our further study of the IPMC will demonstrate.

Section 102.8 Requirements not covered by code, states, “Requirements necessary for the strength, stability or proper operation of an existing fixture, structure or equipment, or for the public safety, health and general welfare, not specifically covered by this code shall be determined by the code official.”

SECTION 103 DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY MAINTENANCE INSPECTION

Government thrives upon bureaucracy. Section 103.1 General creates upon adoption “the department of property maintenance inspection” and the appointed “executive official in charge thereof shall be known as the code official.” “The code official shall not be removed from office except for cause” (103.2), and “shall have the authority to appoint a deputy code official, other related technical officers, inspectors and other employees.”

Section 103.4 Liability provides immunity from personal liability for all charged with the enforcement of the code. The jurisdiction (adopting body) shall defend the enforcers against all claims.

SECTION 104 DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE CODE OFFICIAL

Section 104.1 General “The code official shall enforce the provisions of this code.” The code is made law; the code official is the law enforcement officer. As with Conservation Department “Agents,” and Forest Service “Rangers,” who were initially unarmed and believed to be friendly—but are now armed, generally feared, or considered likely to be hostile—may one expect that code enforcement “deputies” shall one day holster a sidearm.

Recall that in many cities the Department of Public Safety is its police, and often, fire departments. Section 104.2 Rule-making authority, grants the code official “authority as necessary in the interest of public health, safety and general welfare,” this is police, or executive power. 104.2 continues: “to adopt and promulgate rules and procedures,” this is legislative power. And 104.2 continues: “to interpret and implement the provisions of this code; to secure the intent thereof,” this is judicial power.

Sections 104.3–104.7. The code official shall make all of the required inspections, or shall accept inspections made by approved agencies or individuals, and keep written reports. The code official is authorized to enter structures or premises at reasonable times to inspect subject to constitutional restrictions on unreasonable searches and seizures, if any yet exist. The code official shall carry proper identification (badge and a gun?). And the code official shall issue all necessary notices or orders to ensure compliance with the code (ticket book?).

With the powers granted him, the opportunity and likelihood of arbitrary and capricious enforcement of the code is without question. The potential for graft, corruption, bribery, and abuse of power inherent within a system without adequately defined oversight, checks and balances, or limitations is reason alone to reject the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code at first glance.

·         The code official may order the owner of any premises upon which is located any structure that is so old, dilapidated or has become so out of repair as to be dangerous, unsafe, insanitary or otherwise unfit for human habitation or occupancy, and such that it is unreasonable to repair the structure, to demolish and remove such structure (110.1).

·         All exterior property and premises shall be maintained in a clean, safe and sanitary condition (302.1).

·         All premises and exterior property shall be maintained free from weeds or plant growth in excess of (jurisdiction inserts height in inches). All noxious weeds shall be prohibited (302.4).

·         No inoperative or unlicensed motor vehicle shall be parked, kept or stored on any premises, and no vehicle shall at any time be in a state of major disassembly, disrepair, or in the process of being stripped or dismantled. Painting of vehicles is prohibited unless conducted in an approved spray booth (302.8).

·         Peeling, flaking and chipped paint shall be eliminated and surfaces repainted.

·         Roof drains, gutters and downspouts shall be maintained in good repair and free from obstructions (304.7).

·         All glazing materials (window glass) shall be maintained free from cracks and holes (304.13.1).

·         All exterior property and premises, and the interior of every structure, shall be free from any accumulation of rubbish or garbage.

Rubbish. Combustible and noncombustible waste materials, excepting garbage; the term shall include the residue from the burning of wood, coal, coke and other combustible materials, paper, rags, cartons, boxes, wood, excelsior, rubber, leather, tree branches, yard trimmings, tin cans, metals, mineral matter, glass, crockery and dust, and other similar materials.

Garbage. The animal or vegetable waste resulting from the handling, preparation, cooking and consumption of food.

-Definitions Chapter 2—Section 202

The above citations from the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code should be adequate to alert people and governments to the intentioned assault on private property ownership that is the heart of ICC’s Frankenstein creation. We must recall that the International Property Maintenance Code is but “A Member of the International Code Family.”

The intention of this code package may be to so regulate, restrict, condition and invade individual self-determination, that the abolition of private property will be soon realized. Americans will retain all the expense, toil and responsibility of private property ownership without their customary and traditional right to and benefit from individual initiative that our forefathers enjoyed.

The surest pathway available to governments implementing the United Nations Agenda 21: Sustainable Development programme for action in their communities is via the Multi-Jurisdictional All-Hazard Mitigation Plan. And the surest way for We the People to prevent the destruction of our unalienable right to Life, Liberty and Property is to become Vocal Local and say No! to Mitigation Planning, No! to Comprehensive Planning and Zoning, and again, No! to the International Code Council and their comprehensive model codes!

As globalism transitions from global to local (localism) we the people must be ever vigilant, well informed, and prepared to meet the globalists at the grassroots level, then become Vocal Local!  

 Uploaded 10/6/2011

Does The American Jobs Act Destroy State Sovereignty?  

The American Jobs Act has already faced a flurry of criticism for a variety of reasons, including the cost and the likelihood that it will do little to create jobs. The most recent cause for criticism, however, follows the revelation that the bill could potentially destroy state sovereignty.

Section 376 of the bill reads:

SEC. 376. FEDERAL AND STATE IMMUNITY.

Abrogation of State Immunity — A State shall not be immune under the 11th Amendment to the Constitution from a suit brought in a Federal court of competent jurisdiction for a violation of this Act.

In other words, under the authority of the jobs bill, states are not immune from federal prosecution if they are in violation of the act. The Blaze explains, “In the event this bill passes, it will override a state’s sovereign authority as defined and protected under the 11th Amendment.” It reads:

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

The bill also includes a provision that provides for the loss of state sovereignty:

(A) WAIVER- A State’s receipt or use of Federal financial assistance for any program or activity of a State shall constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity, under the 11th Amendment to the Constitution or otherwise, to a suit brought by an employee or applicant for employment of that program or activity under this Act for a remedy authorized under Section 375(c) of this Act. [Emphasis added.]

That portion of the bill virtually indicates that any state which receives federal assistance under the bill automatically loses its sovereign unity.

Meredith Jessup of The Blaze explains:

[If] a state is allocated a certain amount of funds for a road project, the initial funding for the project is a debt incurred by the state to be reimbursed by the federal government. This is so the feds can enforce guarantees of debt. It also prevents states from hiring contractors and then refusing to pay. Without the waiver of the 11th, the contractor would have no legal standing to sue the state for non-payment since the federal government is the ultimate source of funds (see the 14th Amendment).

You can find similar language in other bills [such as] The Americans with Disabilities Act.

In general, this type of waiver serves to stop states from contracting workers and then refusing to pay them. However, the language is certainly in place for a state to surrender certain rights.

The bill continues:

(2) EFFECTIVE DATE — With respect to a particular program or activity, paragraph (1) applies to conduct occurring on or after the day, after the date of enactment of this Act, on which a State first receives or uses Federal financial assistance for that program or activity.

c) Remedies Against State Officials — An official of a State may be sued in the official capacity of the official by any employee or applicant for employment who has complied with the applicable procedures of this Act, for relief that is authorized under this Act.

(d) Remedies Against the United States and the States — Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, in an action or administrative proceeding against the United States or a State for a violation of this Act, remedies (including remedies at law and in equity) are available for the violation to the same extent as such remedies would be available against a non-governmental entity.

The Blaze observes, “It would seem that The American Jobs Act was drafted in order to achieve statist goals rather create jobs. The authority of individual states is all but thrown to the side.”

Likewise, political analyst Dick Morris wrote of the bill:

It is soft tyranny that requires us to sit by passively while our ethic of cultural assimilation is replaced by a permanent enshrining of diversity. It bids we let our rights to our own property, that we have worked for and acquired, be sublimated to government power disguised as human rights. It asks that we elevate the demand for equality over that for economic initiative and the incentives which propel them.

Whether the bill will actually diminish the individuality of the states remains to be seen, but what is certain is that The American Jobs Act may continue to be scrutinized, particularly when analysts ponder the effectiveness of the bill.

Uploaded 10/6/2011

The Truly American Policies we ought to adopt

By Coach Collins, on September 29th, 2011

By Ron Reale, staff writer

CONCERNING THE FOUNDING DOCUMENTS

“WE THE PEOPLE,” in our founding documents means “CITIZENS of the United States.” American CITIZENS decided all, like-minded American citizens are equal. No foreign subject is equal to an AMERICAN CITIZEN, nor deserving of, nor entitled too, under any circumstances, the benefits or protections of our FOUNDING DOCUMENTS, unless and until they renounce their allegiance to all other countries, jurisdictions and belief systems, and become American CITIZENS. At that point, they are EQUAL CITIZENS, and afforded all the protections of the founding documents.

The mere presence on American soil does not an American Citizen make, nor does presence in the United States automatically transfer any rights or privileges of American CITIZENSHIP onto anyone.

CONCERNING FOREIGN POLICY

American foreign policy should be easy. One run-on sentence should cover it all:

The United States will do no business with, nor trade with, nor accept any immigrants from, nor give foreign aid or support of any type to, any country, or group, that does not accept any other peaceful country, or peaceful peoples, right to exist, or calls for the destruction of any peaceful country, or peaceful people, or has in it’s “constitution” or “founding documents” such declarations, or whose leaders make public declarations to that effect; nor any country that gives aid to, or supports in any way, any country, or group, fitting that description.

Period: no exceptions.

A real American leader would insist on nothing less, and the free countries and peoples of the world would rally around the United States under such a leader, and build mutual defense alliances against those that disagree.

CONCERNING A GENERAL “STRONG WEAPONS MAKES GOOD NEIGHBOR” POLICY

In consultation with a trusted adviser, and combined with my long-held belief in personal responsibility concerning self-defense, I have determined the only sensible weapons policy this country should support is:

We lead the world in weapons advancement. We always will. Therefore we will no longer allow any of our advanced weaponry to leave our control nor let anyone know what comprises our abilities, both defensive and offensive. We will not be the world’s armory. We will, however, make ourselves the best defended, most destructive force on the planet.

All our military weapons and advancements will be available only to our own American military.

Once we decide on the best, most defensive or most deadly weapon we need, we will gratefully compensate the creator, to guarantee it will never be produced by anyone but citizens of the United States. Every weapon produced will be carefully tracked. No weapons will be available for duplication. All weapons will have a disabling system of some sort, embedded or built into it. The United States will be in control of, responsible for, and answerable for, any of its weapons.

END PART ONE (To Be Continued…)

  Uploaded 10/6/2011

BEWARE–the President’s private army…is US!

By Coach Collins, on October 2nd, 2011

By Doug Book, staff writer

If anyone believed the autocratic arrogance responsible for the infamous MIAC Report was on the wane, rest assured that a believer in absolute authority like Barack Obama will never give up his totalitarian dreams of dominating the American public. He’ll just resort to a change of tack.

For those who don’t remember the Regime’s initial assault on our Constitutional liberties, it was neatly housed in a report entitled “The Modern Militia Movement.”

Crafted in 2009 by the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC), it presumed to provide the American public with warning signs to help identify the traits and proclivities of the potential domestic terrorist.

Written by one of 58 national “fusion centers” developed under the Department of Homeland Security during the Bush Administration, the MIAC report profiled as potential terrorists: anyone who supported 3rd party candidates, like Ron Paul or Bob Barr; anti-abortion advocates; members of the Constitution Party or Campaign for Liberty; Libertarians and those displaying signs of militia involvement, such as ownership of a Gadsden (Don’t Tread On Me) flag!

Of course, members of the NRA, gun owners and 2nd Amendment supporters clearly merited watching!

But given the national outcry over that ham-handed effort, the White House decided it would be advisable to tone down the overtly fascist rhetoric.

So last month, thanks to Obama’s continuing concern for the well-being of his flock, the American people were given a new manual for spying on our neighbor: “Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States.”

This joint effort of the White House, the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department offers a first hand view into the insidious nature of Barack Obama.

For couched in the most innocuous of language, this offering provides the means by which the federal government will identify the enemies of the people, define the danger and train the rest of us to keep watch on the suspicious guy next door.

As one analyst puts it, “using the Counter Extremism program as a catalyst, the White House and the [Department of Homeland Security] plan to link together and centralize organizations…in tandem with community contacts around a national witch hunt for anyone the government happens to deem undesirable.” (3)

And naturally those “undesirables” include anyone critical of Barack Obama, his administration, or its overt agenda of instituting a Marxist utopia in the otherwise deeply flawed United States.

Anyone, it seems, except Muslims may be viewed as “suspicious.” For as Obama put it in his 2011 State of the Union speech, “as extremists try to inspire acts of violence within our borders, we are responding with the strength of our communities, with the respect for the rule of law and with the conviction that Muslim Americans are part of our American family.”

In Obama’s view, no longer interested in radicalizing Islamic jihadists, al Qaeda has now become a terror organization of former computer geeks, lonely unemployed losers and those in search of the power only explosive underwear can provide.

So the time has come to join the President’s army of spies, snitches, stoolies and paranoid people watchers. After all, those who resist run the risk of being among the watched!  

 Uploaded 10/6/2011

Friday’s White House Fast and Furious e-mail dump means pressure increasing on Obama

By Coach Collins, on October 3rd, 2011

By Doug Book, staff writer

With a Friday evening release of emails, the Obama White House was finally forced to admit its early knowledge of and possible involvement in the Operation Fast and Furious “Gunwalking” scandal, even if not by NAME!

During the summer of 2010, Bill Newell, Special Agent in Charge of the ATF Arizona field office exchanged numerous emails and telephone calls with Kevin O’Reilly, White House staffer and Director of North American Affairs of the National Security Council.

We now know the subject of these contacts to have been Operation Fast and Furious, the infamous Administration “Gunwalking” debacle.

While a White House National Security Director, O’Reilly not only held his meetings in the White House with such notables as the President and Vice President, Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano and members of the Joint Chiefs, he asked for and received “regular updates” on ATF border operations directly from Bill Newell.

O’Reilly then shared this information with Dan Restrepo, Special Assistant to the President, National Security Council and Greg Gatjanis, Director of Terrorist Finance and Counternarcotics, National Security Council.

For months, Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have maintained–Holder under questioning by the Grassley/Issa congressional committees–that they neither had knowledge of, nor approved the Fast and Furious scheme.

In support of these claims, the White House had “provided” LA Times reporter Richard Serrano with a SELECT FEW of Newell’s emails in which neither Fast and Furious nor Gunwalking are mentioned. As Obama’s operatives undoubtedly expected, Serrano obligingly concluded that the White House had no idea that “…a botched sting operation had allowed hundreds of guns to flow to drug cartels.”

Yet under questioning by the Grassley/Issa committees on July 26th of this year, Newell admitted that he did indeed discuss the Gunwalking operation with Kevin O’Reilly, “…as early as September 2010.”

And now, with the release of more than the very few emails leaked to Serrano, more information exists linking not only the White House but key Obama NSA advisors and staffers to the man who managed Operation Fast and Furious from its inception: Bill Newell.

After all, is it likely that neither O’Reilly, Restrepo or Gatjanis mentioned a major ATF border operation to the President?

The White House still maintains it had never heard the words “Fast and Furious”, that “Gunwalking” was never discussed either in conversation or by email and that no one in the White House knew anything of firearms being “lost” rather than interdicted by the ATF.

Nevertheless, according to Friday’s Politico, “the chief council to President Barack Obama…indicated that the White House was withholding an unspecified number of INTERNAL EMAILS (my caps) exchanged among three National Security Staff aides.”

Could these aides be Restrepo, O’Reilly and Gatjanis? Could the withheld emails include the Fast and Furious label or at least details of the walking of guns across the Mexican border?

The Watergate cover-up inflicted a death-of-a-thousand-cuts on Richard Nixon. Yet even with a “supportive” national media, the Obama Regime is gradually drowning in its own attempts at subterfuge.

“These internal NSS emails are not included in the enclosed documents because the [Executive Office of the President] has significant confidentiality interests in its internal communication…”, writes Obama’s Chief Council Kathryn Ruemmler.

Finally something coming from the White House which we can all believe!

Uploaded 9/21/2011

>>>>>>>>>>  We The Stupid   <<<<<<<<<<

[Emphasis Added]

August 2, 2011;  Ann Barnhardt; www.americanthinker.com  

I stand here in abject stupefaction.  The so-called "right" or "Tea Party" in this republic is being so thoroughly rolled and defeated that I am struggling to come up with an adequate violent submission metaphor that does not involve prison rape . . . and they honesty think that they're "winning."  Really?  You call this winning?

·      Obama gets over $2 Trillion to spend before the 2012 election

·      There are no real spending cuts

·      There is a massive tax increase effective January 1, 2013

Obama is going to be handed something in excess of $2 Trillion -- and he has made it perfectly clear that he will spend every penny of it before the November 2012 election.  That's why he kept saying, " . . . so we don't have to do this again", meaning raise the debt ceiling again.  The debt ceiling would only need to be raised if all of the money had been spent.  Therefore, he has stated very clearly that he will spend every penny of any debt ceiling increase.  He is going to burn through $2 Trillion-plus in the next sixteen months.  This was the Obama regime's plan from day one.  Geithner appeared before Congress in early May and told them this in no uncertain terms.  This outcome has been a known quantity all along.  

There are no spending cuts in this plan.  It is all accounting fraud.  Saying that you are not going to spend money in Afghanistan ten years from now is not spending cuts.  Even if you accept the $1 Trillion in cuts over ten years propaganda, that is only $100 Billion per year, which is essentially meaningless relative to the size of the problem.  Furthermore, even a miniscule uptick in interest rates, which given the massive debasement of our currency is now a mathematical certainty, will completely consume that $100 Billion per year.  It's all a joke.   

Back to the $2 Trillion that Obama is being handed.  I honestly think that most people in this country have no understanding of simple counting numbers.  Do you not understand how much a trillion is?  Where do you think this money is going to come from -- who has two trillion dollars to loan us?  China?  Nope.  Not even close.  China's entire GDP is only $6 Trillion.  Do you honestly think that China is going to loan us one third of their total annual economic production?  China was a huge creditor to us back when $100 Billion was considered a staggeringly large amount of money - which was four years ago.  Now $100 Billion is literally a rounding error.  Do you realize that there are only a handful of nations of this planet that even have a GDP in excess of $2 Trillion?  If these countries loaned us every penny of their GDP, it wouldn't even be $2 Trillion:

Canada ($1.57 T)
India ($1.54 T)
Russia ($1.46 T)  

Are you starting to understand the scope of what we are talking about now?  Obama is going to embezzle considerably more than the entire economic output of Canada, India or Russia to his cronies before the 2012 election -- and that is just counting this round of spending.  This doesn't include the other $5 Trillion he has already burned through since 2009.  

China is not going to lend us this money because they simply don't have anything close to that much money to lend.  This $2 Trillion is going to come from the Federal Reserve.  Where is the Federal Reserve going to get $2 Trillion?  They are going to print it out of thin air.  We are in the midst of the largest currency debasement ever seen in human history.  There is only one result that can come of currency debasement:  hyperinflation and total economic and societal collapse.  

Have you also forgotten the so-called "Bush tax cuts"?  Yeah.  Those rates are going to expire on January 1, 2013.  Obama will presumably still be occupying the Oval Office at that time assuming that he is not forcibly removed or that the Republic is still intact at that time.  Taxes will increase significantly at that point, and the Congressional Budget Office has scored everything put before them given the fact of the massive tax increases on 1/1/2013.  Do you understand that?  When these Republicans and even these so-called "Tea Party Freshmen" tell you that there are no tax hikes in their "plan," they are consciously, willfully, knowingly lying to you through their teeth.  

Finally, I do not understand how it can possibly be that conservative writers are still addressing Obama as if he is actually trying to help the economy, but his well-intentioned policies are failing.   

Obama is the enemy.  Obama is a Marxist-Communist usurper and puppet front for a cabal of Marxist-Communists who are actively trying to destroy the United States of America.  Everything they have done, are doing, and will do has the single goal of collapsing and destroying the U.S. economy, military, constitutional government and culture.  What part of "Marxist Revolution" do you not understand?   

The Obama regime is not a failure.  The Obama regime is not incompetent.  The Obama regime has achieved more in two and a half years than anyone could have possibly foreseen.  It has debased the currency by 50% of the GDP and guaranteed that our economy will collapse.  It has looted the Treasury for more than the size of a top-ten economy and embezzled that wealth into the hands of their fellow Marxists in preparation for the final collapse of the United States.  It has ground the economy of the United States to a screeching halt.  It has destabilized the entire Muslim world and ensured that there will be a nuclear war centered around Israel within the decade.   

The Obama regime has no interest whatsoever in "stimulus" or "getting folks back to work."  How can you not understand this?  How can we possibly win this war if we refuse to come to terms with the fact that we are in fact fighting a war.  

God save the United States of America, because the people are far too stupid to do it themselves.  

 Ann Barnhardt is a livestock and grain commodity broker and marketing consultant, American patriot, traditional Catholic, and unwitting counter-revolutionary blogger.  She can be reached through her business at www.barnhardt.biz.

Uploaded 9/21/2011

Obama Tears Up the Constitution  

This column by ACRU Senior Fellow Robert Knight was published September 19, 2011 in The Washington Times.

The Constitution of the United States, whose adoption we celebrate every Sept. 17, clearly lists the powers of each branch of the national government. Let's take a look at what Barack Obama, like any president, is empowered to do and see if it squares with his actions. In Article II, Section 1, he is sworn to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Section 2 names the president as commander in chief of the armed forces, grants him the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate and to appoint ambassadors, federal judges, Cabinet officials and other federal officers. Section 3 says the president "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed."

In his two years and nine months in office, President Obama has compiled a spectacular record of noncompliance with the Constitution. Here are just some of the ways his administration has failed to execute the laws while using raw, unauthorized power:

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA): On Feb. 23, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced that under Mr. Obama's direction, the Justice Department would no longer defend DOMA, which is under attack in several federal courts. DOMA, which was passed by overwhelming majorities in Congress and signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, defines marriage for all federal purposes as the union of a man and a woman and allows states under the full-faith-and-credit clause not to be forced to recognize unions from other states that do not comport with their state marriage laws. Forty-five states have moved to strengthen their marriage laws, with 30 enacting constitutional amendments. Mr. Obama, who has played coy with the marriage issue while aggressively promoting the homosexual agenda, is violating his oath of office to appease the gay lobby.

The 15th Amendment: Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department has effectively become a race-based enforcement unit. After New Black Panther Party members were caught on tape intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place in 2008, the Justice Department declined to defend the convictions and thus sent the message that baton-wielding thuggishness on Election Day is no big deal. Former Justice Department attorney J. Christian Adams, who laid out the case before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, described the administration's dismissal of charges as "lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law."

Illegal Immigration: The Obama administration has ignored the illegal actions of "sanctuary cities" and sued the state of Arizona in July 2010 for enforcing federal law. Then, last month, the administration announced a new policy that, in effect, ends enforcement of illegal immigration, providing the illegal alien meets the requirements of the Dream Act, a bill Congress failed to pass. So, Mr. Obama is ignoring current federal law while creating rules based on a law that never passed.

"Cap and trade": In 2010, the Senate rejected a sweeping environmental bill that would have created a massive federal carbon regulation system. Despite this, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would treat carbon dioxide (the air we breathe out) as a pollutant and begin cracking down on America's businesses and power plants. The EPA has become a law unto itself. The Obama administration also has ignored a federal judge's ruling that it acted illegally in prohibiting new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

Obscenity laws: The Obama administration, like the George W. Bush administration before it, has ignored federal laws against selling obscene materials, prosecuting only a handful of cases. Even though the law is clear and courts routinely hand down convictions, U.S. attorneys don't bother to enforce the law anymore, given the direction from the top. The result is that the Internet is awash in illegal obscenity and even mainstream hotels peddle obscene materials via pay TV.

The Fifth Amendment: The Constitution guarantees that no one is deprived of his or her property without "due process of law" or "just compensation." The National Labor Relations Board's absurd order to the Boeing Co. not to open a newly built $750-million Dreamliner facility in right-to-work South Carolina, because unions in Boeing's home state of Washington object, violates that guarantee. Even liberal New York Times columnist Joseph Nocera commented, "Seriously, when has a government agency ever tried to dictate where a company makes its products? I can't ever remember it happening."

The First Amendment: The NLRB struck again this year, declaring two Catholic universities - St. Xavier University in Chicago and Manhattan College in New York - not sufficiently "religious." If the holdings stand, the schools may see the NLRB assert jurisdiction and rope the faculty and employees into a union election.

While ignoring laws that he is obligated to enforce, Mr. Obama has added other duties that would leave America's Founders scratching their heads. As columnist Don Feder notes, "Right out of the gate, there was his salaam to the Saudi king and his declaration in the course of a 2009 speech at Cairo University that 'I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.' That's in the Presidential-Responsibility-To-Fight-Negative-Stereotypes-Of-Islam section of the Constitution."

More frightening is Mr. Obama's heavy-handed seizure of the nation's health care system and Obamacare's unconstitutional mandate for everyone to purchase health insurance. Nowhere, not even in the much-abused commerce clause, does the Constitution give the government the right to force citizens to engage in commerce. If Obamacare is upheld, government bureaucrats can pretty much order us to do anything they want.

This list, which could be longer, should include Mr. Obama's failure as commander in chief to lead our armed forces with honor. Can you imagine George Washington's or Gen. George S. Patton's response to the Obama administration's doctoring of results of a troop survey, leaking misleading "findings" to the press, ignoring strong opposition by combat troops and ramming through a policy of homosexualizing the armed forces? This violates 235 years of tradition in the world's finest military.

Paraphrasing Ted Koppel's comment about the Ten Commandments, the Constitution is not a set of suggestions. The Constitution's enumerated powers and limitations ensure maximum liberty in a free republic. When the chief enforcer shows such profound contempt for the Constitution, he needs to be reminded that no one is above the law. Not even The One.

Uploaded 9/17/2011

Obama’s ineligibility: Prepare to defend America – Political insurgency

We have an illegal President, who is a felon, yet nothing is done

 It is no longer a question if Obama will fall, but when. The question remaining, however, is which members of the political establishment will fall with him.

Republicans and Democrats are now beginning to scramble to identify scapegoats or formulating excuses, not only for Obama’s abysmal policy failures, but for allowing a usurper and criminal to occupy the White House.

The mainstream media are now starting ever so slowly to criticize Obama, not because they have suddenly discovered that there is an empty suit sitting in the Oval Office, but because they are desperately trying to regain some semblance of journalistic credibility after nearly four years of fawning and sycophantic coverage as Obama’s public relations firm.

Neither the political establishment nor the mainstream media are worth saving.

Obama was never eligible for the Presidency because he is not a natural born citizen (nor are Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal).

Nancy Pelosi, many senior Democrats and Hawaiian government officials have always known that Obama could not verify his eligibility.

The Certificate of Live Birth presented by Obama via national television on April 27, 2011 is a documented forgery. Kapiolani Hospital in Hawaii has never provided official verification that he was born there. The only logical conclusion one can draw from this lack of evidence is that Obama was not born in the United States.

The Social Security Administration has verified that Obama is using a Social Security Number not issued to him and that number appears on his federal income tax return and on his forged Selective Service registration.

We have an illegal President, who is a felon, yet nothing is done.

The conspiracy of silence has been orchestrated by the Obama Administration and the Democrat Party, but extends to the Republicans, federal law enforcement agencies, the courts and the mainstream media.

Ongoing effort to hide government-wide complicity in the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people

The Congress continues to display willful ignorance and maintains an official policy of providing misinformation in response to any citizens’ questions about Obama’s eligibility and crimes.

There is an ongoing coordinated effort to hide government-wide complicity in the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people.

All those co-conspirators have dishonoured themselves and have violated their oaths of office to support and defend the Constitution. None are worthy of the privilege of representing the American people as government officials.

I believe that all traditional sources for the redress of our grievances, that is, our elected representatives, our courts and our law enforcement agencies have all been compromised.

We are experiencing, in real-time, the destruction of the Constitution and a dictatorship by a permanent political establishment, owned by powerful and wealthy special interests and facilitated by a compliant press.

Political insurgency adapted from the principles of combat insurgencies

In such a situation, a political insurgency adapted from the principles of combat insurgencies, may be the only remaining option.

It requires continuous and ever increasing pressure on elected officials to the point where their fear of the American people is greater than their devotion to special interests.

Pressure is generated by larger numbers of angry citizens increasing the decibel level in support of three objectives: gaining the support of the population, disrupting the control of the political establishment and the mainstream media over the population and direct action against the political establishment.

Obama remains the weakest link and the main target. Bring him down and the entire corrupt permanent political establishment will begin to unravel.

Overload and overwhelm the system

Large numbers of patriotic citizens must relentlessly and repeatably deliver the message directly and with force to all members of Congress.

Attend town halls, rallies and campaign events, where you are able to confront them face-to-face or in Q&A sessions. Ask them why they are not investigating Obama’s illegal Presidency and his numerous felony frauds. (Link)

Use Twitter and Face Book. Post questions such as, why are you and Congress silent on Obama’s forged birth certificate? Why aren’t you investigating the proven fact that Obama is using a stolen Social Security number?

Visit your local Congressional office, bombard them with emails, phone calls or faxes questioning their complicity in the cover-up.

Warn them that collective action against them will increase if they fail to act.

Oath Accountability Civil Action for Constitutional Integrity

Sign the “Oath Accountability Civil Action for Constitutional Integrity”, a formal legal action to require all members of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches, first and foremost, to abide by their oaths “to support and defend” our Constitution, under penalty of law.

Overload and overwhelm the system.

The American people must send an unambiguous message to the political establishment that the status quo, their usurpation of power and undermining the Constitution will no longer be tolerated.

Put the fear of God into them.

Uploaded 9/15/2011

Obama is the most successful enemy penetration of the US Government in American history

Obama’s ineligibility: Muslim-leftist radical in the White House

Barack Hussein Obama is the most successful enemy penetration of the US Government in American history.

During his lifetime, he was nurtured, mentored and supported by radical leftist and fundamentalist Islamic elements both of which hate the United States and seek its demise by whatever means necessary.

Obama’s immediate family were close to the Communist Party or sympathetic to its aims. His mother Stanley Ann Dunham has been described by former classmates as a “fellow traveler.” His grandfather Stanley Armour Dunham arranged Obama’s mentorship by Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis, originally from Chicago and the former editor of the Chicago Communist paper, the Star.

In a 1965 paper “Problems Facing Our Socialism” published in the East Africa Journal, his Muslim father, Barack Obama Sr., from whom Obama obtained his “Dreams”, attacked the economic proposals of pro-Western ‘third way” Kenyan leader Tom Mboya, siding with the communist-allied leader Oginga Odinga, father of current Kenyan prime minister Raila Odinga, who has claimed to be Obama’s cousin. The radical socialist proposals recommended by Obama, Sr. closely resemble those eventually implemented by Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe.

Obama once campaigned for the pro-Sharia, Marxist Raila Odinga, who graduated from East Germany’s Magdeburg University in 1970 on a scholarship provided by the East German government. He was a member of Parliament representing an area in western Kenya, which was the birthplace of Obama’s father. Odinga and Obama were nearly inseparable throughout his six-day stay. The two traveled together throughout Kenya and Obama spoke on behalf of Odinga at numerous rallies. (Washington Times)

Prior to the Dec. 27, 2007 Kenyan presidential election, Odinga had the backing of Kenya’s Muslim community. In exchange for their support, Odinga promised the recognition of “Islam as the only true religion,” that Islamic leaders would have an “oversight role to monitor activities of ALL other religions [emphasis in original],” installation of Shariah courts in every jurisdiction, a ban on Christian preaching, replacement of the police commissioner who “allowed himself to be used by heathens and Zionists,” adoption of a women’s dress code, and bans on alcohol and pork. (Washington Times)

Within hours after the final election results were announced on December 30, 2007, an election which Odinga lost by more than 230,000 votes, violence led by Odinga supporters began. It eventually led to more than 1,500 Kenyans deaths. Many were slain by machete-armed attackers. More than 500,000 were displaced by the religious strife. Villages lay in ruin. Many of the atrocities were perpetrated by Muslims against Christians. (Washington Times)

It was Obama’s friendship with Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour and his sponsorship of Obama as a prospective Harvard law student, however, that probably helped merge Obama’s Islamic, leftist and black nationalist anti-American views.

It is likely that Obama became closely associated with al-Mansour as early as age 25. Formerly known as Donald Warden, al-Mansour, an American, was a mentor of Black Panther founders Huey Newton and Bobby Seale in the early 1960s. He changed his name after studying Islam and learning Arabic. He is well known within the black community as a lawyer, an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an author, an international deal-maker, an educator, and an outspoken enemy of Israel. His writings and books are packed with anti-American rhetoric reminiscent of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s disgraced former pastor. Al-Mansour has close ties to Saudi Arabia and is a personal advisor to Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the world’s 19th wealthiest person. (Newsmax)

Percy Sutton, the former borough president of Manhattan and lawyer for Malcolm X, was asked by his former business partner al-Mansour to write letters of recommendation to Harvard Law School in support of Obama’s application

Sutton said:

“I was introduced to (Obama) by a friend who was raising money for him. The friend’s name is Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, from Texas. He is the principal adviser to one of the world’s richest men. He told me about Obama.”

It has never been clear, who paid for Obama’s Harvard education, but it is possible, if not likely, that the money came from Saudi Arabia.

The question remains; who is Barack Obama and what does he represent?

American politicians and senior government officials know that Obama is an illegal President, has a stolen Social Security Number and has forged his birth documents and Selective Service registration.

We still do not know who Obama is because he presented a forged birth certificate and the political establishment were derelict in their duty not vetting him and now they are complicit in a government-wide cover-up to hide both Obama’s and their own guilt.

Obama is, however, more than just a usurper and criminal. He represents the nexus of fundamentalist Islam and radical leftist ideology. He now controls the most powerful office in the world and believes that America, as the embodiment of evil in the world, must be destroyed.

One only needs to observe Barack and Michelle Obama’s behavior during the recent 9/11 ceremony to know that he is a representative of anti-American interests.

The Democrats are hopelessly corrupt and the Republican Presidential candidates deserve no respect as long as they remain silent while the country experiences, in real-time, the destruction of the Constitution and the greatest crisis since the Civil War.

The American political establishment has obviously not learned from history and we may be doomed to repeat a similar civil conflict.

Uploaded 9/15/2011  

"The Price of Liberty Is Eternal Vigilance"--Thomas Jefferson

September 11th, Jihad & the Doctrine of Perpetual War  

Lest we forget, during our mourning for the ten year anniversary of the 9/11 holocaust and its victims, we still battle violent Muslim Jihadists. In fact, there is not only a Muslim holy war being waged upon the battlefields of Afghanistan, but also in the murkier shadows where terrorists eviscerate their unsuspecting victims.

But what is Jihad? The doctrine of Jihad has been both debated publicly and also ignored in the years after the 9/11 attacks. Yet it has a set meaning and use since Muhammad’s days, despite much propagandizing and obfuscations by its apologists. Further, any group opposed by violent Islam shall be permanently attacked since Islamic radicals demand submission or death. Jihad, the Western idea of the Just War, and September Eleventh are the topic of this brief essay, lest we forget the cause of the terrorist butchery.

I. September 11th, 2001

It is a matter of the most solemn remembrance that we recall what happened on September 11th, 2001 in New York City, NY, Washington, DC, and Pennsylvania. As one source describes it:

The September 11 attacks were a series of four coordinated suicide attacks upon the United States in New York City and the Washington, D.C. area on September 11, 2001. On that morning, 19 terrorists from the Islamist militant group al-Qaeda hijacked four passenger jets. The hijackers intentionally crashed two planes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City; both towers collapsed within two hours. Hijackers crashed a third plane into the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia. A fourth jet, United Airlines Flight 93, crashed into a field near Shanksville, PA, before it could reach its intended target in Washington, D.C., after the passengers attempted to take control. Nearly 3,000 died in the attacks.

II. Two World Views: Western & Islamic

A. Muslim World View: Fundamentalism with no Reformation or Enlightenment

To understand the doctrine of Jihad, we must first realize how differently the Muslim world view is from that of the West. Briefly, in the aftermath of the fall of the Roman Empire, the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment, the West developed a “liberal” manner of dealing with politics, government, and religion. The root word and idea were “liberty,” or that freedom should be allowed people in what they believed and how they acted, as long as they did not disturb others. This became the classical liberal doctrine of tolerance in the midst of free expression of belief.

The result was the “Social Contract” which delivered peace as a side benefit of allowing matters of conviction to remain private choices. This resulted, ultimately, in the founding of America upon the classic expressions of political liberalism—the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, along with the Bill of Rights. The results have revolutionized the world.

On the alternative, Islam has never experienced a Reformation, and is therefore still highly impacted by the values of 7th century Arabia. Whereas the West developed the nation-state theory of sovereign lands, doctrinaire Muslim writers never countenanced such an idea. Instead they taught the Quranic view of society and religion, where church and state are one, no democracy is possible, and the land is ruled by a strong man.

B. Essential Elements of Islamic Convictions

First, the law stands at the heart of Islam, not the religion, according to Joseph Schacht. He wrote,

The sacred law of Islam, the Shari’a, occupies a central place in Muslim society, and its history runs parallel with the history of Islamic civilization. It has often been said that Islamic law represents the core and kernel of Islam itself and, certainly, religious law is incomparably more important in the religion of Islam than theology.

Second, there is no doctrine of practical separation of mosque and state, even if some Muslim states have practiced such. Third, there are two possible spheres of reality—the lands of the believers versus that of the unbelievers. Fourth, only believers hold unmitigated rights of any kind, but only when they hold tight to the one true faith.

C. House of God v. House of War

The practical outcome of these Muslim beliefs is to turn the world into two opposing, and perpetually antagonistic spheres—House of Allah versus the House of War. This fact then explains why true Islam and those who refuse to accept the teachings of Muhammad must always remain at odds. As Bernard Lewis describes this Muslim idea in The Multiple Identities of the Middle East:

The world is divided into the House of Islam and the House of War, the Dar al-Islam and the Dar al-harb. The Dar al-Islam is all those lands in which a Muslim government rules and the Holy Law of Islam prevails. Non-Muslims may live there on Muslim sufferance. The outside world, which has not yet been subjugated, is called the “House of War,” and strictly speaking a perpetual state of jihad, of holy war, is imposed by the law. The law also provided that the jihad might be interrupted by truces as and when appropriate. In fact, the periods of peace and war were not vastly different from those which existed between the Christian states of Europe for most of European history.

The law thus divides unbelievers theologically into those who have a book and profess what Islam recognizes as a divine religion and those who do not; politically into dhimmis, those who have accepted the supremacy of the Muslim state and the primacy of the Muslims, and harbis, the denizens of the Dar al-harb, the House of War, who remain outside the Islamic frontier, and with whom therefore there is in principle, a canonically obligatory perpetual state of war until the whole world is either converted or subjugated.

III. Jihad

A. Moral Struggle v. Holy Warfare

It has been stated many times that the term “Jihad” in Islam is more properly defined as “holy struggle” than “holy war.” Reuven Firestone, in Jihad, The Origin of Holy War in Islam, points out that the word “Jihad” has no direct connection to war. Yet, it would be better to state that Jihad is a holy struggle most often expressed in terms of violent attack against Islam’s enemies. Firestone states,

When the word is used without qualifiers, like “of the heart,” or “of the word,” it is universally understood as war on behalf of Islam (equivalent of Jihad “of the sword”—jihad al-sayf), and the merits of engaging in such Jihad are described plentifully in the most respected religious works.

Firestone describes how the doctrine of Jihad developed, especially as holy war was allowed by Allah to evolve because of the obdurate attitude of the unbelievers. Eventually this developed into a doctrine of total war in the name of God.

B. Jihad as Bloodshed

And yet, Jihad remains a duty of all Believers, both individual and the group, as explained by Rudolph Peters in Jihad, In Classical And Modern Islam. For example, there is an immediate duty to kill all pagans, aka polytheists, according to Peters, who writes,

The only reasons an unbeliever should be put to death…is their unbelief. This motive then goes for all unbelievers…Enemies must not be tortured nor their bodies mutilated. The Muslims agree they may be slain by weapons. Controversy exists, however, concerning whether it is allowed to burn them by fire.

As to whether once could wage total war, and thereby also destroy the homes and property of unbelievers, Peters reports that while the Prophet’s right-hand man Abu Baker did not allow this, Muhammad did himself.

C. Seven Aspects of Legal Jihad

Peters lists Seven aspects of the legal doctrine of Jihad: 1. Legal Obligation: Muslim communities are everywhere held responsible to wage violent Jihad, even if all members cannot bear a sword; 2. The Enemy: All pagans—ie polytheists (everyone not Muslim, or dhimmi, being Jew or Christian). Christians and Jews can also be targeted under many circumstances; 3. Damage Allowed: Any confiscation or destruction of property, and the enslavement, jailing or death of enemies—except women and children; 4. Prerequisites of Warfare: The enemy must hear first the call to Islam before being attacked; 5. Maximum Number of Foes One Must Not Retreat From: Double the size of the forces of the Muslims; 6. Truce: A truce may be entered for advantage or from fear of extinction; 7. Aims of Warfare: To force dhimmis to either convert or pay the war truce tax “Jizya,” and either convert or kill the rest.

D. 164 Jihad Verses

There are said to be 164 suras in the Quran extolling Jihad. Here are just two:

[2.190] ...fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you…[2.191] And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.

IV. Western v. Muslim Just War Theory

A. Western Just War: 6 Elements

In the history of the West, appearing very early, was the notion of the Just War, first articulated by Augustine, but well-outlined by Aquinas and Grotius. According to the standard theory, a Just War must have six elements to be defensible:

The war must be for a just cause.

The war must be lawfully declared by a lawful authority.

The intention behind the war must be good.

All other ways of resolving the problem should have been tried first.

There must be a reasonable chance of success.

The means used must be in proportion to the end that the war seeks to achieve.

B. Islamic Just War

Peters explains that in the classic Muslim war theory, any battle with unbelievers was considered justified. Writes Peters,

The classical doctrine of jihad considered all wars against unbelievers as legal wars, sanctioned by the Shari’ah. In Fact, the Shari’ah required that the head of state organize once a year a military raid into enemy territory.

V. Doctrine of Perpetual War & the Cult of the Assassins

A: Submission

Perhaps the most unnerving aspect of the West’s unwanted war with Islamic terrorism is its permanent tenor. On the one hand, America and other nations have long vexed Islamic societies because of our freedoms and irreverence. On the other, the mere existence of a large group of highly successful unbelievers guaranteed at some point violent Islamists would try to take us down. Radical Muslims have launched surreptitious attacks against foes for a thousand years. This will not end till either they, or we, prevail.

Let us not forget that Islam means “submission” to the will of Allah. This denotes the group as a political entity, which all history proves. To become a Muslim merely means verbal assent to Allah and Muhammad. Therefore, conversions by sword is not merely possible, but clearly the most efficient way to bring the world to Allah. And, for example, while Muslims might sign a treaty—up to 10 years long—there is no shame in breaking such, whenever it benefits Islam. In fact, this is highly recommended.

B: Assassin Cult

Consider the murderous cult of the Assassins, an offshoot of Islamic Ismailis. The Assassins would take young boys, groom them into fanatics, then allow them to infiltrate a hated foreign enemy’s camp. There they would assiduously work to gain trust, often over decades, until they got close enough to a king or leader to drive a dagger into his heart when least suspected. Says one writer:

Marco Polo brought the remarkable tale of Hasan-i Sabbah and his cult of Assassins to the West. He visited their former stronghold, the fortress of Alamut (“Eagle’s Nest”), near Tehran, in 1273 C.E., 150 years after the death of Hasan.

Beginning just before the First Crusade, the Assassins held the Muslim world in the grip of fear. From his mountain keeps, Master Hasan directed campaigns of holy terror against rivals. Rulers could be struck down at any moment not just by a hidden assailant, but by a beggar or holy man on the street, even a trusted member of their own households. When captured, the attackers were contemptuous of death, resisting severe torture without betraying their comrades, sometimes even naming innocent people as their supporters, causing their deaths as well.

Hasan’s organization was clearly a prototype for modern Islamic terrorist groups. In some ways, it is eerily like Osama bin Laden’s. As one historian put it,

Hasan’s contribution to the art of assassination was that by careful selection, training, and inspiration he developed the practice into a sacred ritual and the prime weapon of a small state waging war against a great power. Thus, Alamut became the greatest training center of fanatical politico-religious assassins the world has known.

In other words, this group prizes martyrdom and murder so highly, one must assume that their entire purpose is to fight for their religion—even in the face of impossible odds. So, of course, they will not give up their war against the West. That is not in their nature or beliefs.

Conclusion

“The Price of Liberty Is Eternal Vigilance,” claimed Thomas Jefferson. And once we have accepted the obvious—that Islam is destined to a perpetual war against us infidels—our lives become easier. Because we are then on notice who our enemies are, and what their methods shall be. Instead of feeling sorry for ourselves, let’s instead recall that war appears the fate of mankind.

In the not too distant past, one of our greatest presidents commented upon the meaning of war and its heroes. Recall the immortal words of President Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, while we likewise remembering the victims and heroes of 9/11:

Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead who struggled here have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.

What radical Islam attempts is nothing less than the assassination of world freedom. America’s liberties are what really drive militant Muslims to want to destroy us. Their chief aim is obliterating freedom, and they shall not rest until achieving this. And unless America stands up to these religious bullies, world liberty will always be very much be at risk.

Uploaded 8/27/2011  

Obama’s ineligibility: Prepare to defend America – The real issue for 2012  

Shall this nation, under God, have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth?  

The core issue of the 2012 election is the one about which no politician and no journalist speaks.

No other issue, however, is more important.

Shall this nation, under God, have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth?

The present United States Government is riddled with corruption, complicity and complacency. As such, America will not survive.

Sarah Palin, during her speech at the Tea Party of America’s “Restoring America” event in Indianola, Iowa on September 3, 2011, described it well:

“It’s the collusion of big government and big business and big finance to the detriment of all the rest – to the little guys.”

The United States is now ruled by an oligarchy, where power effectively rests, not with the American people, but with a relatively small elite, who enhance their personal wealth by looting the country and maintain their control by adjusting the levers of government and regulating the press.

The oligarchy owns the politicians and the mainstream media, a political-media complex, which assists them in maintaining the status quo.

Barack Hussein Obama is a Constitutionally illegal President, who has forged his birth documents and his Selective Service registration. He has committed identity theft by using a Social Security Number not issued to him.

Questions about Obama ineligibility and his crimes are being intentionally suppressed by the political establishment and the media because the truth would so outrage the American people that the oligarchy and its servants in the political-media complex would be destroyed.

At least part of the oligarchy is displeased with Obama because he is affecting their profits and he is risking the exposure of the oligarchy’s plundering of the country and the economic enslavement of the American people.

In order to maintain the status quo, the oligarchy and its operational arm, the political-media complex, must facilitate a smooth transition to a new President and Obama’s crimes must be swept under the rug.

This week, a Republican Presidential candidate was privately asked why Obama’s crimes have not been investigated. The only answer was “I don’t know”, expressed in a tone of agitated resignation, a combination of frustration and acquiescence.

That individual wants to be President. It was a sad display of fear and submission. Unfortunately, in that respect, they are all the same.

If any candidate is to remain a “player”, nothing can be said about Obama’s ineligibility and crimes. The political establishment and the media would crush that candidate in a microsecond.

The same treatment would be administered to any conservative politician or pundit. They would be blackballed and unemployable.

All we hear from our politicians and the media is silence. They are cowards. They have chosen complicity and economic self-preservation over duty to their country. They have chosen to oppose the American people.

As Palin correctly noted in her Tea Party speech:

“Real reform never sits well with the entrenched special interests, and that’s why the true voices of reform are so quickly demonized.”

Abraham Lincoln said:

“I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.

Democrat and Republican parties have violated the Constitution, subverted the rule of law, lied to and betrayed the American people

The Democrat and the Republican parties have violated the Constitution, subverted the rule of law and lied to and betrayed the American people.

It is now up to us to bring the country back on the right course.

The American people are faced with many serious problems, which can only be solved by first shattering the status quo, exposing the truth about Obama and eliminating the endemic corruption in our government.

It must be done before the 2012 election and Obama remains the weakest link in the conspiracy. He needs to be removed from office and brought to justice.

Palin also stated:

“We are the heirs of those who froze with Washington at Valley Forge and who held the line at Gettysburg, who freed the slaves to close a shameful chapter, and who carved a nation out of the wilderness. We are the sons and daughters of those who stormed the beaches of Normandy and raised the flag at Iwo Jima and made America the strongest, the most prosperous, the greatest nation on earth forever in mankind’s history – the greatest, most exceptional nation.”

We owe it to those American heroes and to our posterity to fight the evil now permeating our government and society. We must not fail. Our country’s survival is in the balance.

Uploaded 8/27/2011

Regulating us into Economic Destruction  

- Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh  

In accordance with the law, the Executive Branch must document annually the number of new regulatory actions it plans for the coming year. The Administration’s current regulatory agenda has 4,257 new regulatory actions. At least 219 will have an economic impact of $100 million or more. That is an increase of nearly 15 percent over last year when it had 191. Americans have heard the Administration stating that some of these new economically significant regulations will have an economic impact of tens of billions of dollars.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) sent a letter today, August 26, 2011, to President Obama, asking the White House to provide Congress before it returns this fall, with a list of all regulatory actions that would have an economic impact of $1 billion or more. Boehner sent a similar request for information last August 16, 2010 when he was the House Republican leader. The requested data was never provided.

Dudley says in Politico, “Some activity is required by new legislative mandates – particularly [Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform/Consumer Protection Act and Obamacare]. Others, including EPA’s regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, are based on new judicial interpretation of statutes passed 20 or more years ago – and do not necessarily reflect the priorities of any recent Congress. But some are discretionary actions, like EPA’s pending decision to tighten ozone standards. That is likely to slow economic growth in thousands of counties across the nation and impose costs of $20 billion to $90 billion per year, according to the agency’s own estimates.”

Regulations are enacted every day by fiat by this administration and its various governmental agencies with or without congressional approval at such at dizzying speed that Americans no longer have the capacity to keep up with the sheer volume and correctly assess the negative impact that they have short-term or long-term on the U.S. economy, our sovereignty, private property, and our freedom.

United Nations Agenda 21 driven initiatives are being forced on all communities across the country

Global warming, climate change, carbon credits, environmental sustainability, smart growth, smart grid, smart meters, sustainable communities, all United Nations Agenda 21 driven initiatives are being forced on all communities across the country at the local, state, and government level. There are no agencies left that have not yet adopted some sustainable plans.

Flying in the face of our Constitution that protects private property, United Nations Agenda 21 believes in government control of our economy, environment, and social equity because “individual rights must take a back seat to the collective.”

George Washington said, “Private property and freedom are inseparable.” John Adams proclaimed, “Property must be secured, or liberty cannot exist.” How much clearer can we state our collective desires to be free? We do not wish to be slaves to the United Nations; we are an independent constitutional republic.

The UN General Assembly President, Joseph Deiss, does not understand our wishes to remain independent because he stated on August 10, 2011, speaking in Chile, that the UN must be reformed in order to “claim its rightful role in achieving more effective global governance in the 21st century.” Mr. Deiss underlined “the UN’s essential role as the unique umbrella for the whole system of global governance due to its universality, unique legitimacy and its value-based nature.” As a free American citizen, I am opposed to UN’s values of abolishing private property and installation of collectivization under global government control.

Yet on September 22, 2010, the President signed a Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development, the first of its kind by a U.S. administration. This is a policy focused on “sustainable development outcomes,” the hallmark of United Nation’s Agenda 21.

The directive is to “use U.S. leadership in the multilateral development banks, U.N. agencies, other international organizations, other donors, foundations, nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and other stakeholders to deploy the full range of our development tools and policies at our disposal.” We are to “place greater emphasis on building sustainable capacity in the public sectors of our partners and at their national and community levels to provide basic services over the long-term. How about providing services to our bankrupted economy?

United Nations schemes to steal our property and destroy our economy

Because Congress does not agree to all of these United Nations schemes to steal our property and destroy our economy, they are being passed by fiat, executive orders, proclamations, directives, and generous grants given to local communities who are suffering under our depressed, mismanaged economy.

The latest example of collaborative effort to “invest” (read “force”) in sustainable communities was announced on August 17, 2011 between HUD and EPA and involved $5.65 million grant “competitively awarded to eight organizations.” Each grantee was uniquely qualified to “build the capacity of sustainable communities in six outcome areas.”

·         The Institute for Sustainable Communities from Montpelier, VT will “create a National Sustainability Learning Network”

·         The University of Louisville Research Foundation, Inc. from Louisville, KY will “address the need for incorporating water infrastructure planning and investments with other planning efforts”

·         The Coalition of Utah’s Future/Project 2000 from Salt Lake City, UT will “work to build skills in Scenario Planning techniques and tools”

·         Reconnecting America in Washington, D.C. will “develop effective implementation strategies for economic development and local and regional plans”

·         PolicyLink in Oakland, Ca and Place Matters, Inc. in Denver, CO will “work with communities to advance social equity in planning, participation, and decision making”

The NADO Research Foundation in Washington, D.C. and the Minnesota Housing Partnership in St. Paul, MN will “target their efforts in strengthening sustainability practices for tribes, small towns, and rural places.”

Having seen such plans in action under communism, when they confiscated our land, property, money in the name of collectivization, and being a thorough researcher of UN’s Agenda 21, I can recognize its nefarious goals and plans. I wish other Americans could see that these Orwellian, euphemistically named programs and grants are nothing but economic shakedowns, aimed at destroying our freedom and turning us into a “fundamentally changed” America.

Uploaded 8/27/2011

Where is the GOP response to Obama’s illegal alien amnesty?

On Thursday, the Obama administration announced that they will now only deport illegal aliens who have been convicted of crimes in this country, more than likely, that means only those convicted of felonies. Perhaps, even more devastating, the administration will also reportedly distribute work permits to those illegal aliens allowed to stay even as U.S. unemployment remains very high.

·                     While the anger among conservative activists and law abiding Americans is palpable, the silence coming from the national Republican Party on this potentially disastrous move has been deafening.

·                     While it is true that Congress is currently on vacation, what Obama has done is grant a blanket amnesty to millions of illegal aliens currently inside the U.S., as well as issue an invitation to untold numbers of people around the world to just ‘get here and you can stay!’

·                     Given the country’s current economic state, adding millions of new job seekers to the already anemic job market could easily result in an actual unemployment rate of 30 percent.

·                     Advertisement

·                     Additionally, even if a judge orders an illegal alien to be deported, the administration can simply overturn the decision. Of course, due to overwhelming resistance from the American people, all forms of amnesty have failed time and time again to make it through Congress.

Obama has now essentially declared himself to be more powerful than the courts as well Congress.

So, where are the Republicans?

Not one current GOP presidential candidate has called for Obama’s impeachment over this matter, nor even held a press conference.

Should we be surprised?

In January 2011, it was announced that Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) will head the House Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement. The California Congressman was chosen for the top job, even though Rep. Steve King (R-IA) was the ranking member of the subcommittee when Democrats controlled the House.

Rep. King has consistently been the loudest voice in the U.S. Congress, calling for strict border enforcement and at times, seemingly the only one on Capitol Hill who is concerned about the public safety crisis caused by illegal immigration.

In 2006, King released the results of a study which found that 12 Americans are murdered daily by illegal aliens, and 13 are killed by drunk illegal alien drivers every day.

That same study also determined that eight American children become victims of sexual abuse by illegal aliens every day, translating into 2,920 child victims annually.

King once said: “Members of Congress that vote for a guest-worker plan ... will be supporting an amnesty plan and they should be branded with the scarlet letter 'A' and pay for that amnesty in the ballot box in November [elections].”

In the past, King has introduced legislation which would deny birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens.

It seems that it is that same, out-spoken nature, and no-nonsense attitude that sunk him with the Republican elitists.

We must not forget that only a few years ago, it was the Republicans who were championing amnesty for illegal aliens. President Bush wanted it, and Sen. John McCain wrote the bill…Of course, Republicans were in control of both houses of Congress at that time.

In the lead-up to the 2010 midterm elections, we heard tough talk on immigration from the Republicans, but that was when they were farther out-of-power than that party had been in nearly a generation.

The chairmanship rightfully belonged to King, but just as in the past, the GOP has placed more importance on pandering to Hispanic voters than on the rule of law—it would appear they may be going down that same destructive path again.

During a recent conversation with my good friend and fellow Examiner, Rick Oltman, we both concluded that Congressional Republicans are more than likely, very relieved by Obama’s actions because now the issue is effectively over and they do not have to risk alienating Hispanic voters by calling for strict enforcement.

If the Republican Party returns to the ways of Bush and McCain and goes back on their word to Americans eager to see our immigration laws enforced, those same Americans will find what they are looking for in a third party and leave the GOP behind forever.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

Threat: EMP (ElectroMagnetic Pulse)

ElectroMagnetic Pulse, or EMP, is a grave threat to every single American today. In fact, it is such a great threat, that instead of the ABCs of WMD (Atomic, Biological, and Chemical weapons), it should really be ABC...EMP.

Not even a few a three-stage Teller–Ulam design hydrogen (thermonuclear) warheads with a yield in the 10-25 Megaton range (equivalent to 10-30 MILLION TONS (20-60 BILLION POUNDS) of TNT detonating at the same time in the same place), detonated above our three largest cities, killing millions, would come close to the destruction of three strategically-placed, small nuclear warheads detonated at a certain number of kilometers above the ground.

Yes, immediate deaths from the thermonuclear warheads would be much higher. However, over a period of weeks, and then months, deaths could easily reach a hundred million Americans or more, depending upon amount and distribution of relief aid (assuming any, much less enough, comes, within the first two years), and let's face it, I would only expect certain nations to provide any relief at all: The United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada, if they aren't knocked out, too (EMP attacks would most likely take out the vast majority of Canada's electronics/electric infrastructure, as well).

It is quite possible that HALF of our population COULD die within the first year or two, with time increasing the body count quite a among the elderly and the young. Both age groups would fall prey to the realities of a world without electricity, and diseases which were conquered once upon a time would resume their ghastly work among the youth who haven't received all of, or any of, the vaccinations they would have had if they had been born a few years prior...and the elderly, with their weakened immune systems, due to undernourishment, and a lack of antibiotics and/or other medications...

This is because our entire civilization is dependent upon many things which require electricity and microchips, and those things which have pushed our life expectancy so dramatically high compared to Revolutionary War times, that once they're removed, everybody saved by technology will succumb to the realities of a post-electrified America. Electricity, and all it enables, gone in an instant, with no warning, and no relief in sight. Our paradigm wouldn't have simply shifted; it would have been burned out of existence.

For a full overview of what could happen in the event of an EMP attack, the book which both Glenn Beck and I recommend: One Second After . It goes into quite a bit of detail, in a suspenseful novel format, which is easy for most Americans to enjoy (those who can read; I realize that The 9.12 Project Network is wholly comprised of people who read, the vast majority at a rather advanced level, but our government indoctrination centers...er...public schools have failed far too many Americans in the critical, foundational area of reading).

Refrigeration, gone. No food, medical supplies, or anything else that requires refrigeration. No frozen food. No ice. No vaccines. No lights when the sun goes down. No ventilation in our well-insulated, but sealed-off homes. No alarm systems. No air conditioning or central heating (since fuel oil & propane deliveries cease immediately, and pumps which feed natural gas pipes also cease with an EMP attack). Circuit boards which are essential to modern vehicles, cars, trucks, AND motorcycles, IIRC, all fried instantly (as well as the spares, since an EMP wave fries everything it contacts, not just those things connected to the electric grid). Pretty much everything which is electrical, rather than purely mechanical, could potentially be knocked out, depending upon the strength of the EMP.

Truck transportation would cease, as would all manufacturing. Stores would no longer receive shipments, so once they're cleared out, they would remain empty. Once doctor's offices and hospitals ran out of supplies, they would no longer have access to sterile bandages, until they learned to make them. No shipments of clothing, shoes, food, drinks, fuel, or anything else from far-away locations; what you have stockpiled is all you'll get, unless you have enough gold to quickly acquire new supplies prior to the realization of how worthless gold becomes when you're starving to death.

Steam cars would work, as would cars built in the fifties, and the occasional EMP-hardened military vehicles would work, as well as those in deep underground parking lots at the moment of nuclear warhead airburst-induced EMP...some of them, anyway, but over 99.9 percent of vehicles in America would instantly die for good, making our roads and highways a junkyard of epic proportions, and mass transportation vehicles would, except for steam-powered trains (and perhaps some old diesel models), roll to a stop, trapping their occupants until they broke out of them, and walked to their destinations. The lack of wild horses, since the government slaughters millions of them each decade, would become very conspicuous indeed.

Every airplane without manual, mechanical controls with direct mechanical links would likely fall from the sky, with a much higher death toll if the attack happened during the day, when thousands of airplanes were airborne, rather than the hundreds in flight at night. Those crashing in populated areas could significantly boost the body count.

Virtually all communications would be knocked out...only hardened military gear and vacuum tube-based radio communication gear would continue to function. That's the really, really old stuff. Every cell phone in the country, instantly gone. Same with all transistor radios.

Difficult birth requiring surgery or C-Section? Time to pray, and prepare to grieve your loss. Need insulin to keep your child, your mom or dad, or a sibling or friend alive? Pray and prepare to grieve. Have a loved one with a cut that is infected? Pray, and if it doesn't soon heal, prepare to grieve. Accidents and sicknesses we don't give a second thought to, which are mere inconveniences in our current civilization, are suddenly lethal threats.

Just imagine, every surgery is a potential death sentence, as is any wound not fixed with a band-aid and your supply of an antibiotic ointment (such as Neosporin--hope you have enough of a supply of this stuff to last your family at least a year). No more blood pressure medication, no more anti-rejection drugs, no more cancer treatment. Once the supply of scalpels, bandages, etc. run out, no more modern surgery, painful or otherwise. Once the anesthetics on hand run out, no more anesthetics to make surgery bearable.

No more food delivered in trucks at your local store. In fact, all deliveries by truck will cease. Only what is in the fields owned by a neighbor or corporation nearby...and what is on your shelves. No more water coming out of your faucet once the water pressure drops (and that happens quickly once the pumps stop, unless your water pressure is due to gravity). Even if your water comes from a tank, once it runs out, say goodbye to water you don't carry yourself from a source nearby (if one exists within walking distance). No more showers, and when you run out of soap, shampoo, toilet paper, etc. no more modern toiletries and hygiene. No more flushing toilets, once the water pressure is gone, and let's not even go into what could happen with sewers.

Imagine no more air filtration, no more fire suppression, the fire hydrants all become monuments to a more civilized age. Imagine no Internet, no talk radio, no television.

Here's the first video clip that helps illustrate the threat of EMP, from 33 Minutes (full trailer at the bottom of this discussion article):

EMP - Segment from "33 Minutes"  

Get the picture? We're talking being instantly forced to go back to the early 1800's, but without the infrastructure they had, since our modern infrastructure would lie useless, and we wouldn't have a working pre-industrial infrastructure. And the more densely populated the area, the more of an urban jungle, complete with predators willing to kill you for your food, it becomes. Hope you have plenty of ammunition and a large food, water, and fuel supply. And toiletries. And an outhouse. And the ability to leave safely once you run out, or too many desperate people willing to do anything to get to your reserves decide it's time for you to share, like it or not.

The wisdom of food AND WATER storage, energy independence (including at your own home, as in solar panels, wind energy, solar water heaters, etc.), and general preparedness is now much more apparent and personal, and our need to be prepared is far more urgent than even a month ago. We should all look into getting food storage. In fact, anybody who doesn't have a guaranteed supply of food to last them a year or more is at risk. And if one has nothing saved up, food-wise, gold-wise, or other-wise, but can see what is coming, nothing will bring peace of mind like the ability to eat, no matter what.

When I received my first order of food storage, I felt like Glenn talks about feeling when he's advertising for them on the radio: the burden which began to lift off of my shoulders is surprisingly heavy. In my case (as I'm sure it is in many of yours), with a family of five to support, the burden to provide, whatever comes, weighs heavily in a time such as the times in which we live. If you can't afford Gold (and even if you can), if you don't yet have food security, it's a good idea to get food you don't have to worry about rotating, because it will still be good in one year or twenty; regardless of how this turns out, at some point the wisdom of preparedness will be as obvious as the nose on one's face.

Honestly, if things get bad enough, many believe that food will be worth its weight in gold. A starving man will definitely part with whatever he has to in order to survive, and even more so if he has a starving wife and starving children.

And while some will certainly balk at the cost of providing food for several months, when you think about how long it will last, when you consider what your TRUE food costs each month are, I'm talking the total of all fast food, dining out, prepared/frozen food, and freshly-prepared meals you or your spouse cooks up in your kitchen, you might be surprised at the total you're already spending, and how relatively inexpensive options like FoodInsurance.com actually are. It sure beats eating handfuls of wheat, oats, or corn...if you can find any! And do NOT forget to stock up on MULTIPLE GUNS and lots of ammunition...and WATER!

Here's a video which helps illustrate the threat:  

National Geographic Video

Please also remember to prepare go-packs (AKA bug out bags...a backpack with everything you'd need to survive on foot, in case you must leave your home on short notice). And try to store clothing, shoes, fuel, water, toothpaste, soap, etc. in addition to food - if this happens soon, you won't want to have to divide your resources among other essentials like soap, shampoo, Q-tips, toothbrushes/heads, toilet paper, etc. Don't forget copies of the Constitution & Declaration and other essential publications. See our Preparedness Group for more.

If you need something to read which might be very motivating, don't forget to take a look at our network page for Glenn Beck's new Thriller, THE OVERTON WINDOW.

Please INVITE your friends, relatives, neighbors, co-workers, church congregation members, customers/clients, and other peers to join us today! Time is growing short for action.

Here's the trailer to an excellent movie which focuses on our need for a fully-deployed, fully-funded National Missile Defense system, which Obama has been cutting back on, even while Iran goes nuclear, and is testing a newly-developed 3-stage rocked, getting closer to having outright ICBM capabilities:

33 Minutes Trailer :: LONG PROMO (inHD)  

Uploaded 8/25/2011

Obama Creates Office Of Diversity, Inclusion

 The economy remains in shambles yet President Obama keeps wasting taxpayer dollars expanding an already bloated U.S. government, this month launching a new office to help build a “diverse and inclusive workforce” at all federal agencies.

The new Office of Diversity and Inclusion will ensure that the entire U.S. government develops comprehensive strategies to drive and integrate diversity and inclusion practices. It will assist the different agencies in building a workforce that “respects individual and organizational cultures” by examining policy options, data trends and employee survey findings.

The goal is to eliminate demographic group imbalances in targeted occupations and improve workforce diversity. To attain this, special initiatives have been created targeting specific groups, including Hispanics, African Americans, American Indians, women and gays and lesbians. The idea is to create a workforce that truly reflects America’s diversity, according to the Obama Administration.

In fact, the Obama executive order creating the new agency assures that it will promote the federal workplace as a model of equal opportunity, diversity and inclusion. It will also establish a coordinated government-wide initiative to promote the cause. The investment is worth it because a commitment to equal opportunity, diversity and inclusion is critical for the federal government as an employer, according to the commander-in-chief.

The president’s new plan will force agencies to identify and remove barriers to equal employment opportunities that may exist in the federal government’s recruitment, hiring, promotion, retention, professional development and training policies and practices.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

The Buck Stops Where?

"Fast and Furious"

Congressional hearings on BATFE's "Fast and Furious" operation reveal failures of leadership -- and of Judgment.  

"Fast and Furious." Until a few months ago, those words may have been best known as the title of a series of action movies featuring fast cars and the sort of reckless action Hollywood loves to promote.  

Now, thanks to ongoing media and Congressional investigations, those words represent another kind of recklessness-the reckless disregard for public safety shown in a misguided and foolish law enforcement operation on the southwest border, accompanied by a lack of sound judgment and a clear failure of

leadership at the U.S. Department of Justice.  

The operation known as "Fast and Furious" is, of course, the Obama administrations program in which Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agents allowed the sale of thousands of firearms to suspected illegal purchasers. Even worse, the bureau literally sat back and watched those firearms walk out the door. Many of those guns, moving unhindered by the BATFE, have now turned up at crime scenes, both in Mexico and in the United States.  

Much of what we've learned recently is thanks to U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and U.S. Rep. Darrell lssa, R-Calif. For months now, Rep. lssa, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Sen. Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, have pressed for full disclosure of the facts. During that time, the Justice Department has fought to hide what really happened, using every excuse it could come up with to deny the truth to the American people.  

But in the end, the truth is coming out, and many of the most damning truths appeared in a joint staff report on the scandal, released by the two-lawmakers in advance of hearings held by Chairman Issa's committee.  

Some of the most important findings include:  

• ATFE knowingly allowed 1,800 or more firearms to be sold illegally to known or suspected straw purchasers. Just one of those purchasers accounted for more than 700 illegal guns.  

• BATFE supervisors specifically ordered agents working the program not to arrest illegal gun buyers or to interdict thousands of guns that were allowed to "walk" into criminal hands.  

• Senior BATFE officials in Washington were regularly briefed on the operation and approved of the tactics employed.  

• BATFE agents who opposed the operation and who raised objections were told to "get with the program" ahd threatened with job retaliation if they continued their opposition.  

Key to these findings was testimony provided by a number of whistle-blowing BATFE field agents.  

Special Agent John Dodson, in his prepared testimony, made the key point most plainly: "Simply put, during this operation known as Fast and Furious, we, ATF, failed to fulfill one of our most fundamental obligations, to care take the public trust, in part, to keep guns out of the hands of criminals."  

Dodson, along with Special Agents Olindo James Casa and Peter Forcelli, among others, put their careers at risk to object to the operation's tactics. In each case, not only were their objections dismissed by BATFE superiors, but it was made clear their j6M' could be on the line' he did not et on board with  the program.  

Agent Casa testified that BATFE officials sent an e-mail rebuking those who opposed the plan. "Based on my 18 years of experience with ATF," testified Casa, "I did not think the e-mail was an empty threat and took it very serious. It has become common practice for ATF supervisors to retaliate against employees that do not blindly toe the company line, no matter what the consequences:'  

Agent Casa went on to describe the operation as "recklessly" planned and implemented with the purpose of allowing firearms to be illegally trafficked. He reported that agents were ordered not to take action against illegal gun buyers or to seize the firearms. Instead, surveillance was regularly broken off without further action-a drastic departure from BATFE's usual practice.  

Giving the lie to anti-gun claims that U.S. gun stores are part of the criminal gun trafficking network, the field agents also opposed the operation because of the negative impact it was having on lawful firearms dealers, who are a crucial law enforcement allies in identifying illegal traffickers.  

Though the firearm industry has long worked with BATFE to educate dealers about how to spot and block suspicious transactions, the agents testified that they were ordered to instruct cooperating gun dealers to complete sales to suspicious persons, including known straw purchasers.  

As Agent Forcelli put it: "The gun dealers were our friends. They helped us make a lot of these cases .... But the problem is then, by getting them mixed up in this thing and ... encouraging them to sell guns when they decided to stop did not help our reputation with the gun industry:'  

In total, the witness statements and the findings of the staff report paint a shocking picture of an operation that intentionally allowed thousands of guns to end up in the hands of some of the most violent criminals in North America. It also showed that senior officials of the BATFE, and not just regional or local supervisors, approved of the operation and received regular reports on its progress. (Acting BATFE director Kenneth Melson even wanted to know how he could log in from his office to watch online video feeds from the bureau's surveillance cameras in gun stores.)  

What remains to be answered, however, is who really approved this operation. And the Justice Department does not appear willing to provide that answer.  

Since the story of this reckless operation became known, the Department of Justice has refused to fully respond to congressional inquiries. Both Rep. Issa and Sen. Grassley have repeatedly had their requests for information denied. And 'even now, when the full seriousness of the scandal is becoming known, the department continues to stonewall.  

Chairman Issa pointed out that even the information that has been provided is heavily redacted, with most of the key information blacked out.  

One exchange between Rep. Issa and Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich at the hearings clearly shows the ongoing refusal of the DOJ to cooperate:  

Chairman Issa: "Who authorized this program that got people killed? Who here in Washington authorized it?"  

Weich: "We don't know."  

"We don't know" is simply not an acceptable answer, but Weich is not the first to use it.  

Attorney General Eric Holder gave the same answer when asked the same question a few weeks before. After so many months of scandal and scrutiny, it seems hard to believe the Attorney General still can't-or won't-answer this simple question.  

As NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told Fox News' Lou Dobbs in June, "The administration needs to stop the cover-up:' adding, "Either they were doing this to prop up a political agenda of sending thousands of guns across the border and blaming it on American gun laws ... or they were completely incompetent."  

Either way, those who approved this operation, and all those who should have known about it and failed to stop it, are responsible for the operation's horrendous outcome. And that certainly includes Attorney General Holder.  

At the core of this scandal is the effort to politicize BATFE's law enforcement activities and to take advantage of yet another crisis to achieve a political agenda: the passage of new gun control laws.  

The explosion of violence in Mexico as the various drug cartels fight with each other and with the Mexican government is a serious problem. But rather than focusing on ways to fight the cartels, antigun politicians in the U.S. have focused their efforts on American gun laws and the rights protected by the Second Amendment. And anti-gun groups and media outlets have tried to deflect attention from the scandal by blaming gun owners for blocking anti-gun laws.  

All of these people are using the violence in Mexico as an excuse to promote the gun restrictions that they supported long before today's drug war-restrictions such as the re-imposition of the semi-auto ban and a ban on private sales of firearms between law-abiding Americans. Both measures would threaten the right to arms, but neither would affect the cartels one bit.  

The real solutions to the violence in Mexico will not be found in new restrictions on law-abiding Americans' Second Amendment rights. Rampant drug abuse by Americans, widespread corruption in Mexico and a serious lack of effective border security have created an environment where drug cartels have billions of dollars to finance their wars.  

Yet while none of those problems can lived easily, one thing is clear: American law enforcement agencies must never be allowed to make the situation worse. Reckless operations like "Fast' and Furious" must never be allowed to happen again. That will take not only a leadership change at the Justice Department and BATFE, but legislative reform. And that means it will be time once again for NRA members to roll up their sleeves and get to work.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

America is Under Attack  

Eco-fascists on the environmental left have been shown to be nihilistic revolutionaries whose only aim is the destruction of capitalism and America  

If I recall correctly – which I do – the federal oath of office binds employees thusly: “I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…” I would like to take a look at that word “domestic” as it applies to what has and is occurring in America.

As most of you are aware, the fascist and Marxist left has, over the years, infiltrated and virtually taken over middle and upper management of our government agencies. Land and environmental management agencies, especially, have been infested with radicals and extremists, the way the Democrat-run inner cities are infested with rats, cockroaches, and criminals. They are everywhere, in the daylight, and in the dark nooks and crannies.
As early as 1946, the left began a strategy to use people’s concern for the environment to impose government control over land use (http://sovereignty.net/). They tricked people into accepting laws that on the surface appeared designed to protect some aspect of the environment, but always, with vague or ambiguous language, or clauses hidden deep within the legalese and gobbledygook, gave government the power to regulate and control our property, our businesses, and our lives. Today, we see this manifest in the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the totally misnamed Environmental Protection Agency.

The EPA, wielding these laws like battle axes aimed at our heads, has been unleashed by the Obama-Soetoro administration with orders to attack our last source of affordable power. That the Marxist fraud who would be King is doing this should surprise no one. On November 2, 2008, he told the nation that he intended to bankrupt the coal industry and the coal-fired producers of electricity.

The insane reporting requirements for “greenhouse gas emissions” that will cost consumers tens of millions of dollars, are just the beginning. What the neo-fascist and Marxist Democrats were stopped by the American people from doing with cap-and-trade, they are now trying to do using administrative rules and executive orders. Remember when he told us we couldn’t keep using air conditioning and heat?

By the time Obama-Soetoro and his environmental Storm Troopers are finished, if they are not stopped, Americans will be living like Obama-Soetoro’s brother, George, in mud huts with no electricity or running water.

What concerns me just as much as the neo-fascist/Marxist onslaught is the near total lack of response from the supposed opposition. Where are the outraged calls for Congress to take back its usurped authority? Where are the demands to abolish the unconstitutional, rogue EPA? Where are the voices insisting that genuine, unequivocal scientific proof be required for each and every claim of harm to the environment? Where are the patriots in government standing up to what are, without the slightest shadow of a doubt, domestic enemies of America? Our misleaders are ominously silent.

Over and over, the eco-fascists on the environmental left have been shown to be nihilistic revolutionaries whose only aim is the destruction of capitalism and America. This, they clearly have in common with the Fool-in-the-White House. The Ministry of Propaganda, aka, the “mainstream” media, is complicit in this, eagerly publishing or parroting on TV, without question or criticism, every press release of every half-baked greenie group, as if they were messages sent directly from God.

And now, in spite of the fact that America is the cleanest place in the world, in spite of the fact that global warming has been proved to be a leftist political scam, in spite of the fact that there is no real, hard science underlying any of the so-called “environmental threats,” the zealous radicals in the administration and the radical zealots at the EPA are moving to destroy our ability to produce the electricity we need to survive as anything other than a Third World Nation.

Moronic Marxist minions of the Democrat Party: Traitors, totalitarian fascists and Marxists, out to enrich themselves and their cronies while they destroy our country

We, the People, need to stop worrying about being so polite, so tactful. The moronic Marxist minions of the Democrat Party have no problem telling us to go to Hell, calling us racist terrorists, killers of crippled children and old people, and threatening us with bodily harm. We need to stop using euphemisms. These people are traitors, totalitarian fascists and Marxists, out to enrich themselves and their cronies while they destroy our country. They need to be stopped, cold, removed from office by whatever means are necessary, and jailed where appropriate.

We are under attack. From within. Let’s fight back.  

 Two Videos:  

OBAMA TELLS SAN FRANCISCO HE WILL BANKRUPT THE COAL INDUSTRY  < 2 minutes  

Obama Says He Will Control Your Thermostat , 35 seconds

Uploaded 8/25/2011

The Buck Stops Where?

"Fast and Furious" 

Congressional hearings on BATFE's "Fast and Furious" operation reveal failures of leadership -- and of Judgment.  

"Fast and Furious." Until a few months ago, those words may have been best known as the title of a series of action movies featuring fast cars and the sort of reckless action Hollywood loves to promote.  

Now, thanks to ongoing media and Congressional investigations, those words represent another kind of recklessness-the reckless disregard for public safety shown in a misguided and foolish law enforcement operation on the southwest border, accompanied by a lack of sound judgment and a clear failure of

leadership at the U.S. Department of Justice.  

The operation known as "Fast and Furious" is, of course, the Obama administrations program in which Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agents allowed the sale of thousands of firearms to suspected illegal purchasers. Even worse, the bureau literally sat back and watched those firearms walk out the door. Many of those guns, moving unhindered by the BATFE, have now turned up at crime scenes, both in Mexico and in the United States.  

Much of what we've learned recently is thanks to U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and U.S. Rep. Darrell lssa, R-Calif. For months now, Rep. lssa, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Sen. Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, have pressed for full disclosure of the facts. During that time, the Justice Department has fought to hide what really happened, using every excuse it could come up with to deny the truth to the American people.  

But in the end, the truth is coming out, and many of the most damning truths appeared in a joint staff report on the scandal, released by the two-lawmakers in advance of hearings held by Chairman Issa's committee.  

Some of the most important findings include:  

• ATFE knowingly allowed 1,800 or more firearms to be sold illegally to known or suspected straw purchasers. Just one of those purchasers accounted for more than 700 illegal guns.  

• BATFE supervisors specifically ordered agents working the program not to arrest illegal gun buyers or to interdict thousands of guns that were allowed to "walk" into criminal hands.  

• Senior BATFE officials in Washington were regularly briefed on the operation and approved of the tactics employed.  

• BATFE agents who opposed the operation and who raised objections were told to "get with the program" ahd threatened with job retaliation if they continued their opposition.  

Key to these findings was testimony provided by a number of whistle-blowing BATFE field agents.  

Special Agent John Dodson, in his prepared testimony, made the key point most plainly: "Simply put, during this operation known as Fast and Furious, we, ATF, failed to fulfill one of our most fundamental obligations, to care take the public trust, in part, to keep guns out of the hands of criminals."  

Dodson, along with Special Agents Olindo James Casa and Peter Forcelli, among others, put their careers at risk to object to the operation's tactics. In each case, not only were their objections dismissed by BATFE superiors, but it was made clear their j6M' could be on the line' he did not et on board with  the program.  

Agent Casa testified that BATFE officials sent an e-mail rebuking those who opposed the plan. "Based on my 18 years of experience with ATF," testified Casa, "I did not think the e-mail was an empty threat and took it very serious. It has become common practice for ATF supervisors to retaliate against employees that do not blindly toe the company line, no matter what the consequences:'  

Agent Casa went on to describe the operation as "recklessly" planned and implemented with the purpose of allowing firearms to be illegally trafficked. He reported that agents were ordered not to take action against illegal gun buyers or to seize the firearms. Instead, surveillance was regularly broken off without further action-a drastic departure from BATFE's usual practice.  

Giving the lie to anti-gun claims that U.S. gun stores are part of the criminal gun trafficking network, the field agents also opposed the operation because of the negative impact it was having on lawful firearms dealers, who are a crucial law enforcement allies in identifying illegal traffickers.  

Though the firearm industry has long worked with BATFE to educate dealers about how to spot and block suspicious transactions, the agents testified that they were ordered to instruct cooperating gun dealers to complete sales to suspicious persons, including known straw purchasers.  

As Agent Forcelli put it: "The gun dealers were our friends. They helped us make a lot of these cases .... But the problem is then, by getting them mixed up in this thing and ... encouraging them to sell guns when they decided to stop did not help our reputation with the gun industry:'  

In total, the witness statements and the findings of the staff report paint a shocking picture of an operation that intentionally allowed thousands of guns to end up in the hands of some of the most violent criminals in North America. It also showed that senior officials of the BATFE, and not just regional or local supervisors, approved of the operation and received regular reports on its progress. (Acting BATFE director Kenneth Melson even wanted to know how he could log in from his office to watch online video feeds from the bureau's surveillance cameras in gun stores.)  

What remains to be answered, however, is who really approved this operation. And the Justice Department does not appear willing to provide that answer.  

Since the story of this reckless operation became known, the Department of Justice has refused to fully respond to congressional inquiries. Both Rep. Issa and Sen. Grassley have repeatedly had their requests for information denied. And 'even now, when the full seriousness of the scandal is becoming known, the department continues to stonewall.  

Chairman Issa pointed out that even the information that has been provided is heavily redacted, with most of the key information blacked out.  

One exchange between Rep. Issa and Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich at the hearings clearly shows the ongoing refusal of the DOJ to cooperate:  

Chairman Issa: "Who authorized this program that got people killed? Who here in Washington authorized it?"  

Weich: "We don't know."  

"We don't know" is simply not an acceptable answer, but Weich is not the first to use it.  

Attorney General Eric Holder gave the same answer when asked the same question a few weeks before. After so many months of scandal and scrutiny, it seems hard to believe the Attorney General still can't-or won't-answer this simple question.  

As NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told Fox News' Lou Dobbs in June, "The administration needs to stop the cover-up:' adding, "Either they were doing this to prop up a political agenda of sending thousands of guns across the border and blaming it on American gun laws ... or they were completely incompetent."  

Either way, those who approved this operation, and all those who should have known about it and failed to stop it, are responsible for the operation's horrendous outcome. And that certainly includes Attorney General Holder.  

At the core of this scandal is the effort to politicize BATFE's law enforcement activities and to take advantage of yet another crisis to achieve a political agenda: the passage of new gun control laws.  

The explosion of violence in Mexico as the various drug cartels fight with each other and with the Mexican government is a serious problem. But rather than focusing on ways to fight the cartels, antigun politicians in the U.S. have focused their efforts on American gun laws and the rights protected by the Second Amendment. And anti-gun groups and media outlets have tried to deflect attention from the scandal by blaming gun owners for blocking anti-gun laws.  

All of these people are using the violence in Mexico as an excuse to promote the gun restrictions that they supported long before today's drug war-restrictions such as the re-imposition of the semi-auto ban and a ban on private sales of firearms between law-abiding Americans. Both measures would threaten the right to arms, but neither would affect the cartels one bit.  

The real solutions to the violence in Mexico will not be found in new restrictions on law-abiding Americans' Second Amendment rights. Rampant drug abuse by Americans, widespread corruption in Mexico and a serious lack of effective border security have created an environment where drug cartels have billions of dollars to finance their wars.  

Yet while none of those problems can lived easily, one thing is clear: American law enforcement agencies must never be allowed to make the situation worse. Reckless operations like "Fast' and Furious" must never be allowed to happen again. That will take not only a leadership change at the Justice Department and BATFE, but legislative reform. And that means it will be time once again for NRA members to roll up their sleeves and get to work.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

E-VERIFY IS A THREAT TO LIBERTY

by Tom DeWeese
August 20, 2011
NewsWithViews.com

Rebuttal by Tom DeWeese

I don’t know Peter Gadiel, and he apparently knows absolutely nothing about me. But that hasn’t stopped him from attacking me in a recent article (Influential Conservative is Dangerously Wrong on E-Verify). His article makes some outrageous statements about me, even to presume he can tell you what motives are in my head when I take a position.

Recently, I released an article entitled E-Verify and the Emerging Surveillance State.” (Note: article is reproduced below) My opposition to E-Verify is that it is a major tool in the creation of a surveillance society; will give the government the power to decide who works and who doesn’t in America; will be a great burden on both worker and business; and will do absolutely nothing to protect us from illegal immigration or terrorism. In short, E-Verify represents another false promise of security and a greater threat to our freedom.

In an article attacking my position, Mr. Gadiel contends that E-Verify has absolutely nothing to do with the creation of an international ID system. Moreover, he claims I offer no solutions to the illegal alien situation and implies that I am (at least secretly) in favor of the illegal invasion that is devastating our nation.

He opens his article against me by claiming that my opposition to E-Verify is “supposedly a libertarian perspective,” and indicates that is a bad thing. Though I never once used the term libertarian, I understand his reference to the libertarian position, in which some advocate open borders. He mistakenly places my opposition to government surveillance in the same category as open-border libertarians. As I said earlier, he obviously knows nothing about my position on this issue, though my record is very clear. I have written in a series of article over the past decade (available to all on www.americanpolicy.org). All that is necessary to curb illegal immigration is for the federal government to enforce immigration laws already on the books. Secure the border; enforce visas; end free health care, free education and welfare to illegals; allow local jurisdictions to arrest illegals; and stop the merry-go-round game of deporting illegals only to have them return a few weeks later. Above all, when one commits a violent crime, prosecute and put them behind American bars.

It has been widely proven that when a jurisdiction decides to crack down on illegals they leave. Prince William County, Virginia is a perfect example of this, and so is the state of Arizona. Admittedly the Arizona law includes E-Verify, but it is not the reason the invasion of illegals has drastically dropped off in Arizona.

Rather than take these obvious and workable steps, forcing the federal government to do its proper job to enforce its laws, certain parts of the conservative movement, including Peter Gadiel, have opted instead to change the American judicial system from “innocent until proven guilty,” to “guilty until proven innocent.” Worse, the E-Verify system now forces those who started their own business to be the front lines in the battle against illegal immigration and terrorism, instead of government. We already made them the chief tax collector. Enough is enough.

Concerning E-Verify’s active role in the creation of an international surveillance system, Mr. Gadiel simply says it’s not true. And he says E-Verify does not create a new data base for use in surveillance. Perhaps he should learn more about the international surveillance network that is being created with the cooperation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). What most Americans don’t know is that the blue print for Real ID did not originate in the United States, but in the backrooms of a United Nations organization called the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). That organization is tasked with the goal of creating a one-size fits all international identification system using massive data banks that contain individual biometric information on nearly everyone in the world.

It is interesting to note that the DHS ordered specific changes to the E-Verify system to include biometric information and the use of enhanced photographs that measure and analyze the unique identifiable characteristics of a person’s face into a numeric code, usable and in compliance with these international databases. That identifying facial number code is read by a computer and can track your face by cameras worldwide. In addition, DHS has expanded the number of data bases used by E-Verify to check on employees. Obviously DHS understands that E-Verify is to be used in that international system.

#I have studied this surveillance system and the intention to create an international ID system for more than two decades. I have heard every lie and smooth talker assuring Americans there is no international surveillance system. There is and it is growing daily. E-Verify is a central tool for its implementation. With each addition to the ability of government to watch our every move, freedom dies from another cut.

I understand that Mr. Gadiel lost a son in the 911 attacks and that is his motivation to take action to secure the borders. I am sorry for his tragic loss, but I will not sit back and allow his desire for revenge to destroy our nation’s freedom.

FROM THE  LINK IN THE PREVIOUS ARTICLE

E-VERIFY AND THE EMERGING SURVEILLANCE STATE

by Tom DeWeese
July 18, 2011
NewsWithViews.com

Subjecting all Americans to an International databank

The rush is on to force into law mandatory use of the E-Verify system that will mandate that all businesses use this hand-me-down from the Social Security Administration in order to hire anyone. Republican Representative Lamar Smith has introduced HR 2164 and House action is expected at any time. Say proponents, E-Verify is necessary to stop illegals from getting jobs. Many freedom-loving Conservatives are supporting the idea in a desperate attempt to control illegal immigration. Is this the right way to protect America?

To answer that, it’s necessary to ask another question. If government won’t do its job, is that a reason for Americans to surrender their liberty? Do you think that is a funny question? Well, it is actually what a number of Conservative activist groups are now advocating in the name of stopping illegal immigration through enforcement of E-Verify.

The fact is, the U.S. government is not doing its job to secure the border and stop the flood of illegal aliens from rushing across it. Even though Congress has passed legislation demanding that a fence be built, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has dragged its feet, deliberately holding up the project. Moreover, DHS is fighting efforts in local communities to allow police to arrest illegals.

There is little effort to tighten visa security, or allow law enforcement to track down and deport those who stay here past their allotted time. Those illegals caught committing crimes are still allowed to leave, only to easily and surreptitiously return at their will. The border is a sieve. There is no border control – period.

Rather than work to strengthen the borders and take steps to stop illegals from getting here in the first place, many now seek “internal enforcement” instead of the “rule of law.” In other words, take action while leaving the barn door open.

The answer, say some very powerful anti-immigration forces, is to put the burden of control on American businesses. Jobs, they say, are the draw to illegals, so business should be the first line of defense. The answer, we are told, is simply to get tough with business and stop the ability of illegals to get a job. Such a plan, while appealing to desperate Americans, can have dire consequences if a nation desires to remain free.

Chief among the schemes to “get tough” with business is the universal enforcement of something called the E-Verify System. It is the brainchild of the Department of Homeland Security and is an electronic employment verification (EEV) program. Essentially, E-Verify uses the Social Security databases to check potential employee Social Security Numbers to determine if the job candidate is a US citizen. Employers are to simply enter in the applicants Social Security Number to verify they are an American citizen (of legal status) and therefore eligible for employment.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 made it illegal for employers to “knowingly” employ unauthorized workers, and E-Verify (then known as “Basic Pilot”) grew out of the requirement for work-eligibility verification. Since its inception the program has been voluntary for all businesses. However, if Smith’s bill passes, voluntary will change to mandatory.

In 2007, after the dramatic defeat of the illegal immigration amnesty bills, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced several changes to the E-Verify System. The agency now requires more than 200,000 federal contractors to use E-Verify, an increase of more than 1,076 percent over the 17,000 employers registered in 2007 (with only about half actually using) E-Verify. The system now requires an “enhanced photograph capability” that will allow employers to check photographs in E-Verify databases. DHS is expanding the number of databases E-Verify checks to include visa and passport databases; and the agency now wants direct access to state Department of Motor Vehicle databases. DHS will require employers to fire employees if they are unable to resolve “no match” discrepancies within 90 days. If the employers do not terminate the workers’ employment, the business will fines of $11,000 or more. DHS also will raise fines against employers by 25 percent and increasingly use criminal action against employers, as opposed to administrative action.

With those changes, E-Verify is now being sold as the atom bomb in the war on illegal immigration. Described as “the most effective tool to protect vulnerable American workers from unscrupulous businesses that hire illegal foreign workers to displace American workers or depress wages.” Sounds great – of course all of this confidence in the E-Verify System’s ability to stop illegal immigration is celebrated BEFORE most businesses have even been required to use it.

The fact is, there are major problems with the E-Verify System. It is a hugely flawed system and will have a severe effect on both naturalized U.S. citizens, as well as those who are native born.

Millions of employees could mistakenly fall into legal limbo

Independent analysis of existing government databases have found unacceptably high error rates. Currently those voluntarily using E-Verify have experienced near double-digit error rates. Forcing more than 7 million employers to verify the legal status of more than 160 million current employees, as well as the millions of future hires, means that potentially, as many as 17 million citizens and legal US residents will be mistakenly found “ineligible” to work.

The fact is, the Social Security Administration (SSA) never purges a Social Security number once it’s assigned. The Numident database (which E-Verify uses) currently contains 435 million records; more than 100 million more than the nation’s total population, legal or otherwise. In December 2006, the SSA Inspector General reported approximately 18 million of these records are not accurate. Yet, DHS wants E-Verify made mandatory for the entire American work force.

“As a matter of simple math,” says Jim Harper at the CATO Institute, “that means that if E-Verify were to go national, on the first day 1 in 25 legal hires would be bounced out of the system and asked to go down to the Social Security office and straighten out the problem.”

Imagine the problems faced by honest, law abiding Americans who are thrown out of the system. In most cases, these are not well-to-do executives who can simply take the afternoon off to fix the problem. They are lower level workers who depend on every dime they earn to pay the rent and feed the kids. Simply taking a day off to go down to the local Social Security office isn’t an easy thing.

From the moment they are found to be a “tentative non-confirmed” they have eight days to contest the claim and to prove they are legal. A day off work is required because the Social Security office is only open from 8:30am to 5:00pm. If the employee fails to make it to the office in the 8 days, the employer is required by threat of fine and criminal charges to fire the employee.

Moreover, as the E-Verify system is forced on all employers and the large numbers of employees (as reported above) are thrown from the system, there will be a massive run on the Social Security office. The SS Administration is simply not equipped to handle such a massive influx of cases. The infrastructure to handle it is not in place.

As anyone who tried to get a passport a few years ago after the government makes significant, mandatory changes in a system, knows how badly managed typical-government inefficiency made for massive lines. New rules concerning passports forced Americans to flood passport offices, but the offices weren’t prepared to receive and process the massive number of applicants. The E-Verify System would force much larger numbers into unprepared Social Security offices.

Now, under E-Verify, employees that do make it to the SS office may be forced to return day after day. Jobs and income will be lost as the Employment Eligibility Verification (EEV) process does not permit employers to hold the jobs or delay start dates. The clock starts to tick the second the tentative non-confirmed notice is issued and runs out in exactly 8 days.

If it’s all been a mistake, the burden of proof is on the employee to prove who they are and that they are legal citizens or residents eligible to continue working. These law-abiding American citizens enter the Social Security Office as criminal suspects with the potential of being deported. Contrary to American law, they are guilty until proven innocent. Incredibly, there is no appeals process in place to challenge the findings of E-Verify.

More Fraud – Not Less

The E-Verify System is promoted as the only foolproof way to stop illegals from obtaining jobs. Advocates say the program has enough safeguards to protect citizens. Not so fast. Once the system is in place there are huge gaps that allow massive fraud.

To work efficiently, an E-Verify System allows employers access to a centralized record of all legal residents and citizens. Given the government’s mixed record on data security, this could become a one-stop-shop for identity theft.

First, illegals and those employers wishing to hire them can simply work under the table, paying cash, hiding the transaction from any official source. Illegals don’t regularly file income taxes, so the hire isn’t hard to hide.

On a larger scale, it must be understood that illegal immigration is big business and it has the money and the means to create false documents and to provide “legal” identification, complete with matching names and Social Security numbers.

Today, many illegals simply make up names and Social Security numbers, hoping not to get caught. Of course, the E-Verify system would catch them. However, in response, an illegal only has to obtain the name and SS number of a legal citizen. While that legal person may already be working a job, it will not create an alert if the information is used by someone else.

Such information can be available through a wide variety of situations, including stolen lists and select employees with access to databases like the Social Security lists. Organized crime can certainly have well placed cohorts. The process would create a massive criminal market for Americans citizens’ personal information. The only way to stop it is for the federal government to create a new database that records every new hire and monitor all employees in the nation. The real losers in this game are the people who now have had their identity stolen in the process. They may be the ones accused of identity theft as they suddenly discover someone else is using their name and SS number.

Of course, the federal government has proven it has no ability to safeguard the records in its current databases. And the more databases established, the more opportunity for theft. Not long ago there was a major scandal as federal employees were caught “sneaking a peek” at the passports of a large number of celebrities and even presidential candidates including Barack Obama, John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

In August of 2007, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) lost a laptop computer which contained the records of 33,000 people who had signed up for its pre-screening program, designed to give travelers quicker access through airport security. The unencrypted information in the database included names, addresses, driver’s license numbers, passport numbers, Social Security numbers, Alien registration numbers, and current credit card numbers. (Remember this?)

The laptop was in the possession of employees of a private company contracting with TSA for the project. TSA signup documents for the project promised that the records would be maintained at its headquarters in Arlington, VA and “other authorized TSA or DHA secure facilities, as necessary, and at a digital safe site managed by a government contractor.” In reality, the laptop was stashed in a locked office at the San Francisco Airport. There are a lot of laptops containing personal information of Americans being taking home by government employees these days. Why?

Mission Creep

The greatest threat from the establishment of a system such as E-Verify is the creation of perhaps unintended results. As Cato’s Jim Harper surmises, “The things to make a system like this impervious to forgery and fraud would convert it from an identity system into a cradle-to-grave biometric tracking system.”

“Mission Creep” is the commonly used description for a program designed for a specific purpose, but is later used for much more. A prime example of mission creep is the Social Security System itself. It was designed specifically as a means for people to deposit money into a government program to supplement their retirement years. Today, there are those who want to take its databank of users and transform it into an identity system to prove American citizenship. The excuse - “well, it’s already there!” That’s mission creep.

As reported in the beginning, the Department of Homeland Security intends to increase the E-Verify system to include biometric photographs and extended databases. On numerous occasions DHS spokesmen have expressed the desire to create a national identification card that would include near complete information on its bearer. This would include job, medical, tax, and school records. It would also include biometric and facial recognition, with RFID microchips that could monitor the whereabouts of every American.

E-Verify is the beginning of the creation of such a system. Is it worth it for Americans to endure an existence in a well-controlled matrix of surveillance simply to catch some illegal workers? Communities across the nation are proving that illegals will stop coming here – in fact actually leave – if they are made to feel unwelcome. Arizona’s much derided immigration law has proven that a get tough policy results in illegals avoiding the area. Manassas, Virginia is another locality that had a huge illegal immigration problem, only to see a huge decrease in such activity when it passed tough new laws to arrest and deport them.

And the most dangerous aspect of E-Verify is that it sets the stage for a national workforce management system which gives the government ultimate power to decide who works and who doesn’t. Will Obama appoint a “Jobs Czar” to comply with the new E-Verify law? It is designed to ultimately subject all Americans to an intrusive global surveillance system as the information in DHS databanks is being transferred to international systems through such DHS partners as American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

The federal government has been given the mandate by the people to close the borders and keep them out. It doesn’t require cradle-to-grave biometric tracking of every legal American to accomplish that task. Facts show that such “internal enforcement” would not reduce the illegality, it would promote it. Border security combined with real efforts by the government to keep illegals out of the country will do much more to stop the flood than by chaining American citizens to massive, all-knowing surveillance data banks.

#Those who profess a love of freedom must learn quickly that granting government massive new powers to control employment is not freedom, but tyranny beyond any ever experienced in the United States. HR 2164 and E-Verify in any form must be stopped.

Special thanks to extensive reports on the E-Verify issue by Jim Harper at CATO (Electronic Employment Eligibility Verification, Franz Kafka’s Solution to Illegal Immigration), and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), (E-Verify System: DHS Changes Name, But Problems Remain for US Workers).

Uploaded 8/25/2011

GETTING OFF THE GLOBALIST CHESSBOARD: AN INTRODUCTION

Sunday, 17 April 2011 16:18 Stewart Rhodes and Brandon Smith

By Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers
and Brandon Smith of the Alternative Market Project

To put it simply, America is nearing a checkmate scenario. Like the final torrid maneuvers of a rigged chess match, we have been pressed, manipulated, and attacked into the last remaining corner of the “grand global chessboard” left to us; centralized control of all social and economic power into the hands of an unworthy elite. If we continue playing the game by their rules, we will lose. There is no doubt. There have been many solutions presented to us in the past to combat this development, but nearly all of them function within the constraints of Federal politics. Working within the system has earned us no quarter, and frankly, no results. Our only recourse (and, frankly, the best recourse all along) is to STOP relying on the rules of their game, and to walk away from the chess board completely.

Globalization is essentially just another word for centralization, and the key to centralizing any system is to remove all options until the masses are completely and utterly dependent upon a single dominant paradigm. Globalists have deceived many Americans into believing that centralization is a “natural” process - that their game is indeed the only one in town. The widespread acceptance of the fiat monetary system is a perfect example of the average person’s unfortunate lack of economic flexibility. Only recently, in the face of dollar devaluation and complete financial collapse have many finally begun to question the legitimacy of a single brittle and corrupt economic structure. American politics are no different.

The elites have conned us into thinking that the only possible “solution” to where we are is federal elections, which only vote in new puppets for the puppet masters to manipulate in an illusory shell game. We have been tricked into thinking we are free because we come together from time to time to select our rulers.

But of course, this country was not founded as a democracy, but as a Constitutional Republic, and in such a Republic as ours, liberty is not just about “kicking the bums out” every few years only to vote a new set of bums into Congress, as the globalists would have us think. Federal elections are just one small part of it. The Founders intended us to be active, sovereign citizens, in strong communities and strong, sovereign states, and that is about far, far more than merely voting.

But because the globalists – with the aid of complicit domestic counterparts - have been able to capture our education system, our media, our political system, and our legal system, they have succeeded in dumbing us down and duping us into thinking that all other mechanisms for constraining power have been removed from the table. In fact, we have been convinced that all of the other fundamental institutions of our republic– aside from voting - are illegitimate, or even criminal.

The Founders gave us a dual sovereignty republic. That means states are as much sovereign within their sphere as the national government is within its sphere, with a national government of limited, enumerated, and divided powers. As our Tenth Amendment makes clear, “[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In Federalist 45, James Madison (widely considered the ‘father of the Constitution”) promised the American people that:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

Clearly the design of the Founders’ has been turned on its head. With the aid of complicit judges – which Thomas Jefferson called a “corps of sappers and miners” – who willfully misinterpret the Commerce Clause to grant Congress the power to regulate literally anything, we now have a ruling class who will admit of no restraints on national power with a national government of nearly unlimited de facto powers, grown like a metastasizing cancer far beyond the bounds of anything foreseen by even the most skeptical of Anti-Federalists from the Founding era. All actual, physical and structural powers of any real meaning – legislative, military, legal, law enforcement, and economic – are consolidated in the hands of the federal government. On top of this, they have grafted a hydra-like overlay of international law and international unelected agencies and untouchable international “officials” that are also being imposed up us by means of treaties, executive partnerships (such as the supposedly now defunct Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, now being revitalized by the Obama Administration) and other constitutionally dubious mechanisms.

While we are distracted with elections, they are planning the destruction of the dollar, the collapse of our economy, the final destruction of our sovereignty, and the total absorption of our entire system into the vapid body of an unaccountable global government.

This is why we must stop playing by their “rules,” must get off of their artificial chess board, and instead play by the rules of our Constitution. This means taking power into our own hands as individuals, communities, counties, and states.

To do this, Neithercorp Press, the Alternative Market Project, and Oath Keepers are working together to focus on concrete solutions that can be applied by the average American in their day-to-day lives, in both the private and public spheres. In the limited time we have left, we urge Americans to focus on the following four key strategies (arranged in order of priority of needs):

1. Food and fuel independence and security – and other essential infrastructure (general preparedness) - as individuals, within local veterans organization chapters, neighborhood mutual aid societies, churches, co-ops, farmers markets, and at the town, county and state levels). In the aftermath of an economic collapse, food is the hardest necessity to improvise, and food scarcity is a serious achiles heel, exploited by oppressive regimes throughout history. To get started on food storage and independence, follow the advice on providentliving.org (you don’t need to be LDS to learn from their experience in food storage and preparedness, or to use their canneries). Likewise, we will need fuel, emergency medical, and resilient communication that can function in a grid-down crisis, devoid of internet communication (or with the internet shut down intentionally by means of a kill-switch).

2. Physical security and Independence - again as individuals, neighborhoods, towns, counties and states, to include forming neighborhood watches, mutual aid associations, a volunteer sheriff’s posse (staffed by volunteers under direct command of the sheriff), and county militias established by county ordinances but staffed by self-supplied and self-funded volunteers (as is done in volunteer fire departments all over this nation), and ultimately, a true state militia capable of “repelling invasions” (using the research and model bills of Dr. Edwin Vieira). Americans have plenty of guns, but not enough organization. See operationsleepinggiant.org for details.

3. Economic security and independence - as individuals and communities, including barter networks, use of silver and gold as real money, the development of valuable trade skills, and sound money bills at the county and state levels (as Utah just passed into law). The localization of community commerce is the only sure way to counter globalization. The more independent and insulated cities and states are from the corrupt and dysfunctional mainstream economy, the more safe and secure they will find themselves when that economy implodes. We must have an alternative to the fiat money system in place to preempt such an event. See alt-market.com for details.

4. State sovereignty and nullification of unconstitutional federal laws and actions. Veterans must support only sheriffs, state legislators and governors who have the guts and integrity to keep their oaths. To vote for an oath breaker, is to become an oath breaker. We must defend the powers reserved to the states and to the people by supporting state sovereignty resolutions and nullification of unconstitutional laws. See tenthamendmentcenter.com. And eventually we must kick the bums out, as GOOOH recommends. See goooh.com.

We will soon be publishing an upcoming series of articles that will provide in-depth details on each of the above four key pillars of action. While we should not turn our backs on the tactics of educating the public, supporting constitutional legislation, voting for honest and principled representatives, or nullifying unconstitutional laws (we should certainly make full use of the soap box, the ballot box, and the jury box) it is now time to dedicate ourselves to much more. The very future of our country, our liberties, and the prosperity of the next generation depends upon this.

Getting Off The Globalist Chess Board: Safe Haven Relocation  

Special Note: This is the second part in our ‘Getting Off The Globalist Chessboard’ series. Go here to read Part I. Also go to Operation Sleeping Giant for more information,  and, be sure to check out our recently launched Safe Haven State Project (page still under construction).

As we noted in part one of this series:

“To put it simply, America is nearing a checkmate scenario. Like the final torrid maneuvers of a rigged chess match, we have been pressed, manipulated, and attacked into the last remaining corner of the “grand global chessboard” left to us; centralized control of all social and economic power into the hands of an unworthy elite. If we continue playing the game by their rules, we will lose. There is no doubt. There have been many solutions presented to us in the past to combat this development, but nearly all of them function within the constraints of Federal politics. Working within the system has earned us no quarter, and frankly, no results. Our only recourse (and, frankly, the best recourse all along) is to STOP relying on the rules of their game, and to walk away from the chess board completely...”

Ideally, it would be grand if enough Americans across this nation would decouple from the fraudulent fiat system so that they and their communities could be sufficiently strong, independent, and resilient enough to weather the coming storm and walk out the other side free. Whatever our individual circumstances, wherever we are, we should work toward that goal; decentralized and sovereign – starting with ourselves, then working outward to galvanize and steel our families, our close friends and distant relatives, our neighborhoods, towns, counties, and then, of course, our states.

Through this effort, we greatly improve our own chances, and equally important, the chances of our communities and our country. It is not only for us to save ourselves, but also to restore our Republic, from the ground up.

We also need to face the reality that an economic collapse is very likely to come before such a renaissance of preparedness will see the light of day. We must accept that in many parts of modern day America, we will not be able to wake up enough people in time to prevent a U.S. version of what we now see in the riots of England, as well as what we saw here in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, but on a national scale – unprepared people who are desperate and scared, or those who are willing to take advantage of the situation to loot, rob, rape, assault, and even kill their fellow citizens.

Some might say that in times like these, uncertainty reigns supreme. However, for those of us in the Liberty Movement, who have spent years carefully tracking the negative progressions of our economy, our government, and our culture, the future is disturbingly clear. We’ve all noticed the turning of the tide, in financial sectors, in political attitudes, in social interaction, in law and law enforcement; our country is, indeed, eroding before our very eyes. It is degrading into something unrecognizable; something monstrous. The pace has quickened, especially in 2011, and those who have chosen to “wait out” the storm in the hopes of a comprehensive top down solution are becoming more and more disappointed and disenchanted.

This is not to say that astounding strides have not been made. The Liberty Movement has an incredibly strong and decisive presence on the internet and in our society today, something that we could not boast three years ago. Efforts to educate the public on globalism, central banking, and economic collapse have brought substantial results that are visible now even in the so called mainstream. However, root problems of centralization and fiscal instability remain. These problems will never be undone unless we are first honest with ourselves.

The painful reality is that right now the general populace is urbanized, collectivized, and addicted to the speed and ease of technological amenities to the point that many cannot live without them. This simply will not do.

It is historically evident that in every modern economic collapse, city dependent cultures are far less resilient than farming cultures. During the hyperinflationary crisis of 1920s Wiemar Germany, Austria, and Hungary, those tied to city life, indeed, went hungry, while those in the country had food. In fact, with extreme currency devaluation, farmers no longer had any incentive to trade food for worthless fiat money, and thus stopped supplying large population centers altogether. Though just as “poor” as any city dweller, farmers were able to live on their own produce and labor, and began bartering with their rural neighbors. People trapped in the dregs of metropolitan dependency did not have that option, and desperately hocked grand pianos and the family silver for mere sacks of potatoes. This has happened over and over again, with Argentina being the most recent example of a sophisticated modern nation suffering hunger in its cities during hyperinflation.

America is truly on a similar path, and the outcome will undoubtedly be the same…

While awareness is growing, a primary focus or framework for activism is still elusive. The movement seems to be pulling itself in too many directions at once in search of answers, and without a foundation for proactive measures. Many participants and activists feel isolated from one another, or even surrounded by less prepared swaths of the American public. Organization is limited primarily to interactions on the web, and face to face cooperation is rare. If a full spectrum economic collapse were to occur today, or even a moderate breakdown, we would NOT be ready for the panic that would follow. This is the bottom line which we must acknowledge if we are to finally move forward.

Political and legal recourse has so far failed to produce tangible results, and is unlikely to do so before a serious crisis unfolds. So the question is; what solutions are left to us?

At Alt-Market and Oath Keepers, we believe that the best solutions are those which can be implemented by each individual American without reliance on legislators, bureaucracy, or political solutions alone. While we do encourage people to take back their towns, counties, and state governments, kicking out the corrupt oath breakers and replacing them with solid liberty advocates, we must also work outside the political sphere, taking personal responsibility to strengthen ourselves and our communities by private action and free association.

The Founders never intended that we simply sit around and wait for “officials” to save us. We must work both in the public and in the private arenas. We certainly don’t have time to wait for lawmakers to find their sanity or their honor, and so, in many respects we must walk away from the rigged game entirely, and take matters into our own hands. This means first and foremost decoupling from the broken mainstream financial system, and building networks for Alternative Markets as well as for mutual defense in the event of disaster.

First steps towards this end include relocating away from areas with a high potential for danger. Of course, in any region, prepping with food storage, survival gear, and a personal garden is essential. Ideally, your neighbors should also be aware, prepared, and already involved in food production and barter. You should strive to build such robust community wherever you are (even if in the city), but country settings definitely offer greater opportunity. Rule #1: Go where the food is! Regardless of the state you live in, get out of the city and into a rural area.

Next, a community’s proximity to urban environments must be considered. Many rural retreats are still vulnerable to being flooded by unprepared city dwellers in search of food at the onset of collapse. James Wesley, Rawles, of Survival Blog, refers to this as the “Golden Hoard”, and advocates living at least one tank of gas distance from major metropolitan areas.

Just as there are better places to live in each state, there are also better states to live in; what we call “Safe Havens.” Rural states with low population, abundant water, plentiful game, natural resources, fertile farmland, and defensible terrain, along with a relatively self reliant population, can rightly be considered safe haven states. These states will fare better than others in adapting and overcoming in the face of any crisis.

Many fantastic efforts have been launched over the past decade which follow this concept. One is the Free State Project, which eventually selected New Hampshire, and another is the Wyoming Free State Project, which was started by Free State Project participants who opted out of East Coast relocation. There was also the Montana Alliance for Liberty, started by folks who likewise declined to consider New Hampshire. I (Stewart Rhodes) was also in the Free State Project but likewise opted out of the East Coast states and moved to Montana in 2005. And now Alt-Market’s Brandon Smith is moving to Montana. In the past year Pastor Chuck Baldwin, the 2008 Constitution Party presidential candidate, along with his son Timothy Baldwin and their families, have moved to Montana, with the same goals in mind. In response to Pastor Baldwin’s effective championing of Montana, many others have followed him by moving there. Most recently, influential survivalist author James Wesley, Rawles has promoted the concept of the Northern Rocky Mountain U.S. (Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, eastern Oregon, and eastern Washington) as being the “American Redoubt” – a refuge in time of coming trouble, and likewise has renewed interest in relocation to that region.

All of the above projects provide a solid framework for those seeking refuge amongst like-minded people. Our goal is to learn from, provide support for, and build onto these existing projects until full fledged large scale liberty minded communities become a reality. While some people might feel perfectly comfortable in their current location, or have an existing community to work with, many other Americans out there do not.

The Safe Haven State Project (alt-market.com/safehaven) is designed around helping those people to relocate to counties or cities within states that have elements of protection and survival not readily available in other places. Here are some of the finer points of this project:

1) Safe Havens will be organized and promoted through the networking capabilities of Alt-Market.com. Coordinators will be made available who already live in safe haven areas that will help you with information on the region, housing availability, job availability, etc.

2) Initially, the project will focus only on a few areas of a few states. For now, our efforts will be centered on Western Montana (where we both reside). As more people in states suited to the project volunteer to help with coordination, greater numbers of safe haven areas will become available. And, of course, if anyone is interested in Wyoming, we will send them to the good folks at the Wyoming Free State Project.

3) The core purpose of Safe Havens will not be to build voting blocks, or to effect change through legislation, though those methods will be taken under consideration. Instead, Safe Havens are almost entirely about community building. This means that our area of networking will be tight (within a few counties, instead of spread out across the entire state). People relocating should be within easy driving distance of each other, so that barter networks can be constructed and mutual defense is made practical. Eventually, a few counties could turn into a dozen, and a dozen could turn into a full state, depending on the circumstances.

4) Safe Havens are meant to consist of a large number of people, with a diverse membership, living in relative proximity. Safe Havens are NOT compounds, communes, or any other such nonsense that requires too many people in too small an area with too many rules. A Safe Haven will not be dictated or micromanaged through pyramid structures, military hierarchy, or “community tribunals”. It is a designated area of free cooperation, not a creepy village of collectivists ruled by herd mentality. White robes and funny tasting Kool-Aid will not be made available…

5) Barter markets will become a foremost concern. A community entirely dependent on the mainstream financial system cannot be realistically considered a safe haven. Therefore, active organization of barter and trade will be ongoing. This trade will include goods and services, anchored by silver and gold (and perhaps copper) as a common currency. A weekly or bi-weekly marketplace will eventually be arranged (think “market bazaar” or farmers market).

6) Meet-ups will be a common occurrence in order to maintain market stability as well as to create opportunities for building relationships. The method of these meet-ups will likely vary.

7) Volunteer coordinators will help relocators to the best of their ability, however, the Safe Haven Project is not an employer or a nanny, and cannot provide guaranteed employment or housing. We are here to make your move smoother, and to introduce you to the area as well as other participants, but there will be no hand-holding.

8) Sincere commitment is essential. Our limited number of coordinators restricts our ability to help people who are not serious about relocating. Now is not the time for wishy-washiness…

9) There are certainly many arguments (usually erroneous) against the idea of community building. Most of these have been covered and refuted in great detail in the following article:

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/175-the-strategic-advantages-of-community-building

The combined establishment of Safe Haven States, along with alternative markets and barter networking capability, could be a powerful step forward for the Liberty Movement that would attract many free minded Americans and inspire coherent working communities based on Constitutional principles and the support of individualism, not to mention non-coercive, truly free cooperation. This would provide not only the foundation for mutual defense, but also insulated, localized economies, shielded from financial chaos. The positives are many. The negatives are few. And, most people are tired of waiting around for someone else to solve their problems for them. Safe Haven Projects give activists an environment in which they can take legitimate steps towards determining their own destinies, as well as an opportunity to meet many others who are pursuing the same end, building a better country from the ground up, with their own two hands. 

Uploaded 8/25/2011

Gold’s Rise Signifies America’s Fall  

by Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson  

The price of gold has gone on a tear this summer, from slightly under $1,500 per ounce to well over $1,800 per ounce, and it looks like it wants to go higher. What gives?

Well, if you bought gold last spring, you’re looking pretty smart. And if you bought gold a decade ago at $300 per ounce, you’re looking like a whiz. Imagine buying a stock 10 years ago, having it appreciate fairly steadily over the decade, and then watching its price increase in less than two months by more than your original purchase price. For a commodity to increase at such a rate is truly extraordinary, even portentous.

For an investor, gold is an insurance policy, a way to preserve some purchasing power regardless of Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. or a country’s banking system.

For a society, the rising price of gold is not a good thing. When investors flock to gold, it means they are not investing in wealth-creating enterprises. Money (which is what gold is once again becoming) is the oil that enables a country’s economic engine to run smoothly. Gold can’t make our country wealthier any more than engine oil by itself will get you from point A to point B, so while owning some gold may be individually prudent, it won’t make our country more prosperous.

Gold is a barometer that warns of financial and political storms. When its price goes up, as much as it has this summer, it is telling us that our country is in deep, deep trouble. “Gold’s meteoric rise” is just another way of saying “the dollar’s sickening plunge.” Because the dollar is our normal frame of reference, we think more in terms of the price of gold rising than the value of our currency falling. Gold provides a mirror image to the dollar, and the golden mirror is telling us that the Federal Reserve Note is critically ill.

Actually, the dollar has been sick for a long time. Forty years ago this month, President Richard Nixon “closed the gold window”—that is, the United States defaulted—yes, “defaulted.” Nixon broke our country’s solemn promise to redeem our foreign trading partners’ paper dollars for gold. There had been another default in 1933, when President Roosevelt “closed the gold window” domestically by refusing to let Americans exchange paper dollars for gold. (Americans were free to own gold again without restrictions in 1975.) Indeed, FDR even made it illegal for Americans to own gold, just as the Soviet communists forbad Russians to have dollars. But August 15, 1971, was the day that the dollar’s last link to gold was severed.

Nixon’s decision to default began the slow death process that is the inevitable fate of fiat currencies. It also means that we have been engaged in a partial default on our debts for the last 40 years, for we have been repaying our debts with Federal Reserve Notes that have less purchasing power than what we borrowed.

The dollar has now begun its death throes. (Don’t panic, the process could take years.) The perception of increased likelihood of U.S. default by monetary debasement, triggered by the pathetically ineffectual debt-ceiling agreement earlier this month, has shaken the confidence of millions, if not billions, of people in Federal Reserve Notes. People just don’t believe that our government will get spending under control. They have doubts about the paper Federal Reserve Note and, by extension, the “faith and credit” of the government whose creditworthiness undergirds the Federal Reserve Note for better or for worse.

Some may argue that gold is irrelevant and that the dollar really hasn’t taken a hit because its exchange value against a basket of foreign currencies has remained fairly steady this summer. This is hardly reassuring.

The currencies from smaller-GDP countries don’t compete with the dollar. What is your average American or European going to do with South Korean won or Mexican pesos? The only two currencies that compete with U.S. dollars are the euro and the Japanese yen.

Europe is a mess, suffering multiple sovereign-debt crises. The E.U. is on life-support and the euro could implode, yet the dollar can’t rise against it. This is a sign of incredible dollar weakness, not strength. The yen has been the strongest of the three, which is astounding, since Japan has a debt-to-GDP ratio more than twice as high as ours and has been devastated by March’s massive natural/nuclear disaster. If Japan, with its massive economic problems, is deemed the strongest major currency in the world, then the world’s fiat currencies are a joke, and it is no wonder that the price of gold is setting new record highs.

Buckle up, folks. Things are getting very interesting, and it isn’t going to be fun.

Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson is an adjunct faculty member, economist, and fellow for economic and social policy with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

How Obama Spent His Summer Vacation- Day Two: Grant Illegal Immigration Waivers

Prepare for the rhetoric to heat up in the debate over border security, the Constitution and the use of executive power to selectively prosecute individuals who the administration deems undesirable.

If you’re a coal company or a community bank, you’re screwed. If you’re a community organizer here illegally from Kenya or Juarez?

Hurrah for you.

“Reacting to intense pressure from the Latino community and aware that President Obama will need their votes in 2012,” writes Albor Ruiz in the NY Daily News, “the White House announced with great fanfare last Thursday a plan to stop the deportation of some undocumented immigrants.”

With the announcement Obama spent his second day on vacation casting around for the Hispanic support that he ignored for the first three years of his reign.

In a development that’s drawing well-deserved outrage from conservatives and lukewarm plaudits from progressive activists, the administration announced a new policy of selectively enforcing illegal immigration laws.

In short they’ve granted illegal immigration waivers to their friends, just as I predicted in my May 12^th column Crass and Cynical on Illegal Immigration.

“Today’s policy announcement clearly demonstrates the Obama administration’s defiance of both the constitutional separation of powers and the will of the American public in its relentless effort to gain amnesty for illegal aliens,” said Federation for American Immigration Reform President Dan Stein according to Boston.com

In trouble with everyone else because of the deficit, the debt, the economy, inflation, unions and the general plague of locusts that he’s brought down on the country, Obama’s trying to shore up support with progressives who have been on the verge of abandoning him recently.

Indeed one of his wise-guys from Chicago, Rep Luis Gutierrez has been critical of Obama in the past months, hinting that perhaps Hispanic progressives will look at not turning out for the president precisely because Obama’s done nothing on illegal immigration. Gutierrez recently noted that on illegal immigration “[Obama] has the power to make things better right now without the Congress having to pass any new laws.”

Obama took the hint.

So Obama’s now going to do for illegal immigrants what he did for gays, unions, Chicago and all of his other cronies: He’s going to ignore enforcing the laws he doesn’t like. He’s granted a blanket waiver for every illegal immigrant, like he did for his favorites under healthcare “reform,” the Defense of Marriage Act, the new, improved union-run NLRB, the EPA and the rest of the red and screw tape crowd he’s using to hold the gun on us.

This is exactly what people are talking about when they talk about the climate of regulatory uncertainty hurting the confidence of the country.

As citizens we don’t even know that if a law gets passed to make something either legal or illegal that it will have any effect whatever. All we are left with is a parody of John Kerry’s famous “I was for the war before I was against the war”- we all obey the laws, while we break them.

That’s even presuming the numbnuts at the White House or that nut house we call Congress are proposing bills that honestly attempt to solve problems like the debt crisis, illegal immigration, bank reform, healthcare costs.

Which of course they aren’t.

The easiest way to create a tyranny in the United States is to create laws that are so vague that the government can decide to selectively enforce them. By doing so you create a permanent underclass of citizens who is wholly dependent on the government as to whether they are treated as criminals or voters.

And the effects go beyond government. Selective enforcement becomes attractive to anyone who would like to stifle dissent.

Conservatives have a long-standing complaint that Facebook regularly buries or otherwise deletes posts that don’t jive with the progressive agenda. On Sunday ZDNet reported that Facebook removed a posting from the account of Arizona governor Jan Brewer that was critical of Obama’s new “backdoor” amnesty policy.

“Facebook said it was sorry for deleting the post; the company issued a statement saying that ‘the post was removed in error. We apologize for the inconvenience,’” writes Emil Protalinski on ZDNet. “The social network said it mistakenly removed the post, but did not provide further details, such as whether the removal resulted from complaints by other Facebook users.”

Of course they didn’t.

With the kind of regulatory heft the president has, and is willing to use, you wouldn’t want to be on his bad side either. 

Uploaded 8/25/2011

Iran says U.S. 'will be taught the mother of all lessons'

Editorial warns of pending cyber attack on electrical grid

August 07, 2011;  By Reza Kahlili © 2011 WND  

Iran is planning to retaliate against the United States for the sabotage against its nuclear program, according to an editorial in the Kayhan newspaper, the mouthpiece of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.  

The U.S. has all of its infrastructure connected to the Internet, the editorial says, and as a result, "it is constantly worried about an unknown player, who they will never be able to identify ... sitting in some corner of the world who would launch an attack on a sector of (the Americans') foundations. They will be taught the mother of all lessons."  

Specifically, Iran is looking into launching a cyber attack against U.S. electrical grid systems.  

Iranian officials are furious over the July 23 assassination of nuclear scientist Dariush Rezai-Nejad, who was working on electric detonators for the Iranian nuclear program, which can be used on missiles or nuclear bombs. He was the third Iranian nuclear scientist assassinated since 2009.

The frustration over acts of sabotage started with the computer virus Stuxnet in which 1,000 of Iran's centrifuges at the Natanzs nuclear facility were destroyed and had to be replaced. The virus also attacked the Bushehr nuclear power plant, which has resulted in repeated delays in it joining the country's power grid.  

The July 29 Kayhan editorial threatening America with retaliation said that during the last month, the United States has published two strategy documents regarding cyberspace, both of which emphasize the ever-evolving nature of Internet communications.  

The first document, signed by President Obama, lays out the country's strategy on cyberspace, states that the Internet epitomizes great opportunity and says it is not viewed as a threat to the United States, the editorial says. It adds that "it can be suggested that the U.S. can play a leadership role in cyberspace in that the U.S. would create and maintain that position for the long term."  

But then the editorial takes direct aim at Washington: "The second document is brimming with the over-confidence and hyper-intellectual posturing of the first. These documents, which the Pentagon published two weeks ago, use straight-forward war vernacular and (the Pentagon) has openly announced that from here on in, cyberspace will be considered a war zone.  

"The laughable part of this document is when the neurotic American generals threaten hackers sitting behind their computers who attack America (that they) should be careful that a cruise missile does not fly in through their heating pipes to destroy their turf."  

The United States is no longer the unequivocal leader of the Internet, the editorial says. "Diverse and interesting players have now come on the scene and have … managed to inflict some costly and unprecedented damages on the American Internet infrastructure. … Due to the convenient global nature of the 'players,' their network operates outside time and space. They can be anywhere from right under Mr. Obama's ear in Washington, D.C., to the depths of the African desert."  

The editorial accuses the Americans, with the help of Israelis and Germans, of creating the Stuxnet virus to attack the Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities.  

"Americans are under the (mistaken) impression that they are the only ones who can strike violent blows against their most ardent opponents and not sustain any real damage," the editorial warns.  

#Earlier this year Iranian officials announced that Iran's cyber war campaign would be activated under the Passive Defense Organization of Iran, which openly recruited hackers who would support the goals and ideals of the radicals ruling Iran. Also as reported earlier, in a recent meeting among Iran's Revolutionary Guard commanders and Iranian scientists, America's vulnerabilities for a cyber attack were discussed. They concluded that the U.S. power grids represent the best opportunity for such attacks, as more U.S. utilities are moving their control systems to the Internet and using smart-grid technology.  

According to reports from the U.S. Department of Energy, America's power grid remains vulnerable to cyber attack, a result of slow implementation of computer security standards. A successful cyber attack on the North American power grid systems could disrupt the economy and possibly create a national trauma.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

Marxists' Apartment A Microcosm Of Why Marxism Doesn't Work  

AMHERST, MA—The filthy, disorganized apartment shared by three members of the Amherst College Marxist Society is a microcosm of why the social and economic utopia described in the writings of Karl Marx will never come to fruition, sources reported Monday.

"The history of society is the inexorable history of class struggle," said sixth-year undergraduate Kirk Dorff, 23, resting his feet on a coffee table cluttered with unpaid bills, crusted cereal bowls, and bongwater-stained socialist pamphlets. "The stage is set for the final struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, the true productive class. We're well aware of that here at 514 W. Elm Street, unlike other apartments on this supposedly intellectual campus."

Upon moving in together at the beginning of the fall 2001 semester, Dorff, Josh Foyle, and Tom Eaves sat down and devised an egalitarian system for harmonious living. Each individual roommate would be assigned a task, which he would be required to carry out on a predetermined day of the week. A bulletin board in the kitchen was chosen as the spot for household announcements, and to track reimbursements for common goods like toothpaste and toilet paper.

"We were creating an exciting new model for living," said Dorff, stubbing his cigarette into an ashtray that had not been emptied in six days. "It was like we were dismantling the apparatus of the state right within our own living space."

Despite the roommates' optimism, the system began to break down soon after its establishment. To settle disputes, the roommates held weekly meetings of the "Committee of Three."

"I brought up that I thought it was total bullshit that I'm, like, the only one who ever cooks around here, yet I have to do the dishes, too," said Foyle, unaware of just how much the apartment underscores the infeasibility of scientific socialism as outlined in Das Kapital. "So we decided that if I cook, someone else has to do the dishes. We were going to rotate bathroom-cleaning duty, but then Kirk kept skipping his week, so we had to give him the duty of taking out the garbage instead. But now he has a class on Tuesday nights, so we switched that with the mopping."

After weeks of complaining that he was the only one who knew how to clean "halfway decent," Foyle began scaling back his efforts, mirroring the sort of production problems experienced in the USSR and other Soviet bloc nations.

At an Oct. 7 meeting of the Committee of Three, more duties and a point system were added. Two months later, however, the duty chart is all but forgotten and the shopping list is several pages long.

The roommates have also tried to implement a food-sharing system, with similarly poor results. The dream of equal distribution of shared goods quickly gave way to pilferage, misallocation, and hoarding.

"I bought the peanut butter the first four times, and this Organic Farms shit isn't cheap," Eaves said. "So ever since, I've been keeping it in my dresser drawer. If Kirk wants to make himself a sandwich, he can run to the corner store and buy some Jif."

Another failed experiment involves the cigarettes bought collectively. Disagreements constantly arose over who smoked more than his fair share of the group's supply of American Spirit Blues, and the roommates now hide individually purchased packs from each other—especially late at night when shortages are frequent.

The situation is familiar to Donald Browning, author of Das Kouch: A History Of College Marxism, 1970-1998.

"When workers willfully become less productive, the economy of the household suffers," Browning said. "But in a society where a range of ability naturally exists, someone is bound to object to picking up the slack for others and end up getting all pissy, like Josh does."

According to Browning, the group's lack of productivity pervades their lives, with roommates encouraging each other to skip class or work to sit on the couch smoking pot and talking politics.

"A spirit of free-market competition in the house would likely result in better incomes or better grades," Browning said. "Then, instead of being hated and ostracized by the world at large as socialist countries usually are, they could maintain effective diplomacy with their landlord, their parents, and Kirk's boss who cut back his hours at Shaman Drum Books."

The lack of funds and the resulting scarcity breeds not only discontent but also corruption. Although collectivism only works when all parties contribute to the fullest extent, Foyle hid the existence of a $245 paycheck from roommates so he would not have to pay his back rent, in essence refusing to participate in the forced voluntary taxation that is key to socialism. Even worse, Dorff, who is entrusted with bill collection and payment, recently pocketed $30, a theft he claimed was "for the heating bill" but was put toward buying drinks later that night.

"As is human nature, power tends to corrupt even the noblest of men," Browning said. "The more power the collective has over the lives of the individuals, as is the case in this household, the more he who is in charge of distribution has to gain by being unscrupulous. These Marxists will soon realize they overestimated how much control they would like 514 W. Elm as an entity to have."

Uploaded 8/25/2011

Obama’s ineligibility: Prepare to defend America – And defend ourselves  

“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty.”

Thomas Jefferson was not speaking hypothetically. Only time and events will tell us whether or not defense against domestic enemies will be an unwanted necessity.What many Americans may not yet realize is how far down the road to despotism the United States has already traveled.

Aided and abetted by a corrupt political establishment and a far left mainstream media, the Constitution was flagrantly violated by placing an ineligible individual, Barack Hussein Obama, in the White House.

Those same traitorous individuals continue to deceive the American people and protect Obama through a deliberate disinformation campaign and ignoring mounting evidence that Obama has committed numerous felonies both before and after illegally occupying the office of President.

There is now more evidence supporting the conclusion that Obama was not born in Hawaii than that he has; forged birth documents and no hospital record.

His Social Security Number was not issued to him and he never properly registered with the Selective Service system because the image of his registration card is also an obvious forgery.

Yet not one member of Congress dares to speak up, let alone call for an investigation.

The American people have become little more than slaves, whose labor and wealth generation support lavish lifestyles of a political elite, who disregard our petitions for the redress of grievances, who produce nothing of value and whose profligacy has created a crushing national debt.

The political elite are facilitating a dismantling of the Constitution, an erosion of the rule of law and the destruction of our country.

They are permitting Obama to circumvent the legislative process and rule by decree.

The Obama administration announced that it would implement the DREAM Act by launching a case-by-case review of illegal immigrants slated for deportation.
(Foxnews.com)

A spokeswoman with the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) described the new policy as “blanket amnesty.”

“Having failed in the legislative process, the Obama administration has simply decided to usurp Congress’s constitutional authority and implement an amnesty program for millions of illegal aliens,” FAIR President Dan Stein said. “This step by the White House amounts to a complete abrogation of the president’s duty to enforce the laws of the land and a huge breach of the public trust. ... In essence, the administration has declared that U.S. immigration is now virtually unlimited to anyone willing to try to enter—and only those who commit violent felonies after arrival are subject to enforcement.”

It is part of Obama’s 2012 campaign strategy to mobilize illegal immigrant “voters” as one part of a racially- and ethnically-based coalition supplemented by union thugs and anti-American radicals.

He intends to make the 2012 election a street fight complete with flash mob violence and widespread voter intimidation.

Obama knows that he is no longer restrained by the Constitution and the rule of law because the political establishment and the mainstream media are either complicit or cowardly.

Our government no longer represents us; in fact, it has declared war on us. We are now on our own. We must begin to band together and join forces with the few remaining patriotic leaders to defend ourselves and try to restore Constitutional government and the rule of law.

At the request of tea party leaders in Arizona, famed Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has promised to investigate the validity of Barack Obama’s purported long-form birth certificate in a determination of the president’s eligibility for the county’s 2012 election ballot. (#HYPERLINK "http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=335261"wnd.com)

The petition calls for the sheriff to investigate the possibility that a crime has been committed against the Arizona secretary of state, who must decide whether to put Obama’s name on the ballot.

Arpaio told the tea party leaders the complaint is within his jurisdiction, and he will be forced to investigate. He said he expects political pressure, but he pointed out that as the chief law enforcement officer of Maricopa County, he’s taken an oath to respond to citizens who approach him about enforcing the law.

It is time to raise the stakes.

Obama and his supporters want to put the fear of tyranny into the American people.

We need to put the fear of God into them

Uploaded 8/25/2011

Social Security Disability on Verge of Insolvency

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Laid-off workers and aging baby boomers are flooding Social Security's disability program with benefit claims, pushing the financially strapped system toward the brink of insolvency.

Applications are up nearly 50 percent over a decade ago as people with disabilities lose their jobs and can't find new ones in an economy that has shed nearly 7 million jobs.

The stampede for benefits is adding to a growing backlog of applicants - many wait two years or more before their cases are resolved - and worsening the financial problems of a program that's been running in the red for years.

New congressional estimates say the trust fund that supports Social Security disability will run out of money by 2017, leaving the program unable to pay full benefits, unless Congress acts. About two decades later, Social Security's much larger retirement fund is projected to run dry, too, leaving it unable to pay full benefits as well.

Much of the focus in Washington has been on fixing Social Security's retirement system. Proposals range from raising the retirement age to means-testing benefits for wealthy retirees. But the disability system is in much worse shape and its problems defy easy solutions.

The trustees who oversee Social Security are urging Congress to shore up the disability system by reallocating money from the retirement program, just as lawmakers did in 1994. If Congress does not act, the disability program will collect only enough payroll taxes to pay about 85 percent of benefits after the trust fund is exhausted in 2017.

Even if Congress does act, the combined retirement and disability trust funds are projected to run out of money in 2036, the trustees say. The new congressional report estimates the combined fund would run out of money in 2038. At that point, the combined programs would collect enough in payroll taxes to pay about three-fourths of benefits.

Claims for disability benefits typically increase in a bad economy because many disabled people get laid off and can't find a new job. This year, about 3.3 million people are expected to apply for federal disability benefits. That's 700,000 more than in 2008 and 1 million more than a decade ago.

"It's primarily economic desperation," Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue said in an interview. "People on the margins who get bad news in terms of a layoff and have no other place to go and they take a shot at disability,"

The disability program is also being hit by an aging population - disability rates rise as people get older - as well as a system that encourages people to apply for more generous disability benefits rather than waiting until they qualify for retirement.

Retirees can get full Social Security benefits at age 66, a threshold gradually rising to 67. Early retirees can get reduced benefits at 62. However, if you qualify for disability, you can get full benefits, based on your work history, even before 62.

Also, people who qualify for Social Security disability automatically get Medicare after two years, even if they are younger than 65, the age when other retirees qualify for the government-run health insurance program.

Congress tried to rein in the disability program in the late 1970s by making it tougher to qualify. The number of people receiving benefits declined for a few years, even during a recession in the early 1980s. Congress, however, reversed course and loosened the criteria, and the rolls were growing again by 1984.

The disability program "got into trouble first because of liberalization of eligibility standards in the 1980s," said Charles Blahous, one of the public trustees who oversee Social Security. "Then it got another shove into bigger trouble during the recent recession."

Today, about 13.6 million people receive disability benefits through Social Security or Supplemental Security Income. Social Security is for people with substantial work histories, and monthly disability payments average $927. Supplemental Security Income does not require a work history but it has strict limits on income and assets. Monthly SSI payments average $500.

As policymakers work to improve the disability system, they are faced with two major issues: Legitimate applicants often have to wait years to get benefits while many others get payments they don't deserve.

Last year, Social Security detected $1.4 billion in overpayments to disability beneficiaries, mostly to people who got jobs and no longer qualified, according to a recent report by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.

Congress is targeting overpayments.

The deficit reduction package enacted this month would allow Congress to boost Social Security's budget by about $4 billion over the next decade to invest in programs that identify people who no longer qualify for disability benefits. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that increased enforcement would save nearly $12 billion over the next decade.

At the same time, the application process can be a nightmare for legitimate applicants. About two-thirds of initial applications are rejected. Most of these people drop their claims, but for those willing go through an appeals process that can take two years or more, chances are good they eventually will get benefits.

Astrue has pledged to reduce processing times for applicants' appeals, and he has had some success, even as the number of claims skyrockets. The number of people waiting for decisions has increased, but their wait times are going down.

"It's ludicrous to say that the backlog problem is getting worse," Astrue said. "The backlog problem has gotten dramatically better."

Patricia L. Foster said she was working as a nurse in a hospital in Columbia, S.C., in 2005 when she was attacked by a patient who was suffering from a mental illness. Foster, 64, said she injured her neck so bad she had a plate inserted. She said she also suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder.

Foster was turned down twice for Social Security disability benefits before finally getting them in 2009, after hiring an Illinois-based company, Allsup, to represent her. She said she was awarded retroactive benefits, though the process was demeaning.

"I have to tell you, when you're told you cannot return to nursing because of your disability, you don't know how long I cried about that," Foster said. "And then Social Security says, `Oh no, you don't qualify.' You don't know what that does to you emotionally. You have no idea."

Uploaded 8/25/2011

The Radical Education Elite and Agenda 21

By Nathan Tabor, on July 19th, 2011  

Far too many conservatives are failing to pay attention to the rise of global socialism at the hands of the United Nations through its Agenda 21. Agenda 21 embraces virtually every aspect of human life; it is being implemented aggressively in the United States.

"The overarching goal of Agenda 21 is to establish international norms of personal behavior that are dictated by a group of the world's so-called 'enlightened elite' who believe they know best how people ought to live therefore they should be allowed to tell the how they should live."

Americans and the American news media are all but ignoring the shenanigans by those who worship at the altar of the United Nations. The big story these days is the conflict between the U.S. Congress and President Barack Obama over the proposed debt ceiling increase, cuts in spending and the Democrat Party's favorite activity: Raising taxes on the rich (anyone making more than $200,000 per year).

Far too many conservatives are failing to pay attention to the rise of global socialism at the hands of the United Nations through its Agenda 21. It is easy to overlook world governance schemes when Americans are inundated with information regarding local and national events.

Also, the problem with the media coverage of this United Nations labyrinth known as Agenda 21 is that it was created in 1992 and implemented in incremental actions by the U.N. and its supporters in the U.S., E.U., and other countries whose populations are eager to benefit from the work of others especially those enjoying success in the United States.

But make no mistake, even though Congress never approved the implementation of Agenda 21 programs in education, economics, the environment and other areas. Presidents as far back as George H.W. Bush have signed Executive Orders allowing implementation of Agenda 21's programs. In fact, the U.N. has ignored the federal government and through its Agenda 21 International Council of Local Environmental Initiative and made deals with local governments numbering upwards of 600 cities, towns and villages.

Compounding this is the fact that Agenda 21 is a dull topic, and it becomes understandable how it has been able to fly mostly under the radar since 1992, slowly working its way into our cities and counties. To understand how serious the left is about United Nations rule, look at some of the proponents of Agenda 21: billionaire George Soros has provided millions of dollars to ICLEI. Former Obama czar Van Jones' Green for All and the Tides Foundations' Apollo Alliance are also reportedly ICLEI contributors.

The truth is, Agenda 21 promotes European socialism that by its nature will infringe upon our freedoms and liberties. Most of its vague, lofty sounding phrases cause the average person's eyes to glaze over, making it easier to sneak into our communities.

Besides its radical environmental agenda, the U.N. wishes to change consumption patterns, including ownership of property and automobile ownership, and successfully promote social justice.

Part of this lofty goal -- possibly the most important part -- is the inclusion of indoctrination programs in U.S. government schools. Berit Kjos, author of Brave New Schools, warns that Agenda 21 will indoctrinate the very young to accept the outcome of its programs.

The Government Schools Indoctrination

In the United States, the Agenda 21 National Coordinating Body is the President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD).

The U.S. Constitution requires that consensus on public policy be hammered out in public by elected officials, not by 28 appointed individuals, carefully selected because of their known support of the principles expressed in Agenda 21. This UN description of the PCSD is found in a section of the report entitled "Integrated Decision-making," also known as the "consensus" process.

All federal agencies have now adopted this "consensus" process to by-pass Congress and other elected bodies, to build consensus on Agenda 21 activities at the local, state, and national levels. The UN report describes America's progress in each of the activity areas in glowing terms.

Whether intentionally or unintentionally, the progressives laid the foundation for Agenda 21 in the 1960s when it became unlawful to pray in government schools. In place of prayer, schools began sex education classes with the rationale that such a curriculum would prevent unwanted pregnancies. Of course, the program was a failure and the progressives simply changed the objective of sex education programs to preventing sexually transmitted diseases.

Now sex education includes children being exposed to gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender sex. In addition, U.S. schools -- while prohibiting even a hint of Christianity in classrooms -- have actually directed children to play-act the part of Muslims, complete with Islamic texts, Muslim costumes and holiday festivities.

Sustainable Development in School Curriculum" is one of the 32 specific objectives of Agenda 21. This objective has been achieved in 63% of the participating nations, and in process in another 17%.

Education is a key ingredient in the transformation to a sustainable society. The UN Commission on Sustainable Development reports that in America, "the national strategy on education is prepared by the Department of Education and includes such programs as Goals 2000 and School to Work.

The National Environmental Education Advisory Council to the Department of Education consists of eleven individuals appointed by the EPA Administrator and includes representatives of women's groups, Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), and local authorities (visioning councils). The U.S. State Department reported to the UN that: "At the primary school level, school curricula have already been reviewed and revised, and at the secondary school level, the revision of school curricula is being undertaken currently to address environment and development as a cross cutting issue."

The State Department also told the UN: "The U.S. has been involved in several awareness raising programs and activities aimed at the population at large (Earth Day, industry supported campaigns, Ad Council, Program KAB, Arbor Day, GLOBE Program, Discovery Channel, National Geographic program, CNN, ZooQ, As it Happens, and water clean-up programs."

Agenda 21 embraces virtually every aspect of human life; it is being implemented aggressively in the United States. Congress has never examined the totality of the Agenda. Instead, Congress is fed only bits and pieces in the context of "protecting the environment." The ultimate objective of Agenda 21 is to establish "international norms" of personal behavior that are dictated by a handful of the world's enlightened elite who believe they know best how people ought to live therefore they should be allowed to tell people how they should live.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

Where Is The Black Outrage, or, If Michael “DOG KILLER” Vick Is Right, Today I Became A Proud Racist!

 By Coach Collins, on August 25th,2011

By Ron Reale, staff writer

So Michael “DOG KILLER” Vick has come out and blamed his “urban culture” for his propensity to enjoy his bare-handed torture, strangulation, electrocution, drowning, picking dogs up over his head and slamming them into the ground until dead, and laughing as he threw his tiny house pets into pits to be torn apart alive by killer dogs.

Where is the outrage at this slander from the black community?

Every time I have pointed out the disgusting behavior of Michael “DOG KILLER” Vick, I invariably get called a racist for attacking a black man gambling and running dog fighting rings. No one ever mentions the deviant sociopathic behavior or the dead dogs. No one mentions I have also attacked every person that helped him hide this behavior, and enabled him to escape the true reward he had coming.

I have called out every disgusting member of the team he now plays for, lamenting the fact that between them collectively, they couldn’t come up with a pair of balls for their cowardice in not standing up to management and refusing to allow this thug on their field, where children can look up to him. I have berated the NFL, Nike, and Subway, none of whom will ever get a penny of my money again, nor that of any clear thinking American with any values, morals or ethics.

But I am a racist for telling the truth about this low-life vermin.

Now, Mr. low-life vermin himself, the disgracefully evil Michael “DOG KILLER” Vick, actually wants people to feel sorry for the fact that he wants a dog, because what he did was not his fault, but the fault of the “urban,” (black), community, that his actions were just an extension of his neighborhood, and perfectly normal to all living there.

If I had said that “urban,” (black), society condoned such savage behavior, and reveled in the torture of animals, and it was normal in “urban,” (black), communities for children to be taught to use their hands to strangle, drown, electrocute, pick animals up over my head and beat them into the ground until dead and throw their house pets into pits to be ripped apart by killer dogs, and that that deviant behavior was part of the normal “urban,” (black), lifestyle, I would certainly be called a racist, and deservedly so, as no such thing is true.

Michael “DOG KILLER” Vick has made just that allegation.

Where is the outrage from the good people being slandered in such an unfair and totally unjustified manner? Where is the Reverend Al to stand up for his people against such lies? Where is Reverend Jackson going to appear to rail against such accusations?

It is one thing to talk about dog fighting, which has been a part of southern culture, regardless of race; a horrible endeavor, worthy of scorn and prosecution.

It is, however, quite another thing to hide behind lies smear your family and friends to cover your own atrocious behavior, and blame innocent, sane people for your depravity.

I look forward to the denunciation of this accusation from black leaders, and in the absence of said denunciations, I can only assume the “urban,” (black), communities accept that responsibility, and Michael “DOG KILLER” Vick is not lying.

If his accusations stand unanswered, I must proudly proclaim myself to be a racist.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

Who Needs Robin Hood?  

“It’s time to level the playing field.” “The rich need to pay their fair share.” “We have to end tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.” These are some of the stock phrases used by President Obama and his administration to fire up their troops to picket private homes, gin up mobs to protest success and to channel America towards the future they envision.

Like a one trick pony or an extremely inept coach the Progressives’ playbook has only one option. It’s a Hail Mary pass they run over and over: class warfare. From Marx to Chavez the collectivists have always played the same card from each according to the ability to each according to their need.

Over a century of propaganda and indoctrination has conditioned most Americans to accept one of the most insidious aspects of class warfare as a natural and respectable feature of our government: progressive taxation. At its core progressive taxation is the quintessential action of the Trojan horse the Progressives have constructed to transform America from a representative republic with a capitalist economy into a centrally planned socialist democratic republic.

The shock troops for this movement which has captured the leadership of both major parties is made up of the Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media, unions, crony capitalists, and a conglomeration of front groups and organizations, many of which receive vast amounts of government money. These interest groups constantly agitate for Progressive policies and carry the water for Progressive politicians. They also contribute time, money and resources for the election campaigns of the very Progressive politicians who vote to give them government grants in a circular money laundering scheme which if not illegal is certainly immoral.

Who are these Progressives in America today? They’re the most vocal proponents of the manmade global warming hoax. They serve as willing acolytes for their Nobel Prize winning high priest. After failing to pass their much desired cap-n-trade they are regulating it into existence through the Environmental Protection Agency.

They are also the same ones who after leading the charge against integration, standing in the school house door and attacking peaceful demonstrators with everything from fire hoses to clubs they support every media starved Civil Rights professional who will rant and rave on cue to keep America’s deepest wound festering.

They use Political Correctness to monitor and manage the discussion. Political Correctness is the Progressives’ version of New Speak and the coin of their realm. Many of these verbal add-ons are merely variations and expressions on the over-riding theme of take from the evil rich to help the deserving poor, with a good dose of “We’ve got to do it for the children” thrown in for good measure. Political Correctness is strangling free speech and pushing many into a cone of silence wherein they no longer have the liberty to express their opinions without retaliation on the job or in school.

People who wish to take from the rich and give to the poor never create wealth themselves. They always want to take from one and give to another so they can drain off a living in between exulting in the power to decide who deserves the blessings of their charity. And they always seem to get more than anyone else.

The massive frauds and waste of the Federal government shows where this is headed. As they swallow more of the economy their ineptitude seems to grow in direct proportion to the size of the swag. Take for instance the stimulus slush-fund of 2009. Billed as a way to create jobs this bill spent $278,000 for every job created. In terms of the national debt President Obama is spreading the wealth around at an astounding rate of 3.94 billion dollars per day in deficit spending alone. He has gone beyond taxing the rich and is now taxing the unborn.

Looking back at the battle cry of “Tax the rich” which symbolizes the inequity which is the Progressive tax system some often confuse this with the story of Robin Hood. They say he stole from the rich to give to the poor. They point to Robin and say that is all they want to do, take some of the excess wealth held by the rich and distribute it to the unfortunate.

Unfortunately for them such a translation of the Robin Hood myth turns the story on its head. After returning from a war of choice initiated by an absentee king in the Middle East Robin learned his estate had been taxed away. Finding this level of abuse intolerable he became an outlaw stealing the ill-gotten loot government agents were extorting from the people in the form of taxes and then returned the money to those who had actually earned it.

Wait a minute. Maybe we do need Robin Hood today!

Uploaded 8/25/2011

USDA gay-sensitivity training seeks larger audience

 Standing together on April 16, 2010, after handcuffing themselves to the White House fence to protest for gay rights are (from left) Petty Officer Autumn Sandeen, Lt. Dan Choi, Cpl. Evelyn Thomas, Capt. Jim Pietrangelo II, Cadet Mara Boyd and Petty Officer Larry Whitt. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

By Rowan Scarborough-

The Washington Times Friday, June 17, 2011

U.S. Department of Agriculture activists want to impose their intense brand of homosexual sensitivity training governmentwide, including a discussion that compares “heterosexism” - believing marriage can be between only one man and one woman - to racism.

If accepted by the Obama administration, that move could mean more sessions for military service members already undergoing gay-sensitivity indoctrination. Critics fear additional gay-oriented training would add an unnecessary burden for combat troops and encourage some to leave.

USDA officials have asked the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which oversees all federal employee policies, to impose its gay-awareness programs on all federal departments, according to an internal newsletter. The training includes a discussion of “heterosexism” and compares it to racism. It says people who view marriage as being between only one man and one woman are guilty of “heterosexism.”

The push for the training is coming from Agriculture Secretary Thomas J. Vilsack, former governor of Iowa. The Democrat has launched a departmentwide “cultural transformation” that includes a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) Special Emphasis Program.

The USDA’s senior training coordinator, Bill Scaggs, has developed a sensitivity program far more extensive than the Pentagon’s training for the anticipated lifting of the ban on open ho[JUMP]mosexuals in the ranks. His training program, which OPM calls “groundbreaking [and a] model for other agencies,” delves more into gay issues and terminology. It also justifies pro-homosexual political positions.

Elaine Donnelly, who heads the Center for Military Readiness and opposes the repeal of the military’s ban on acknowledged gays, said it would be a mistake for the administration of President Obama to impose the USDA sensitivity training program on the Pentagon.

“There are disturbing implications for national defense in the USDA’s development of a ‘groundbreaking’ training program that is to become a model for other federal agencies,” she told The Washington Times.

She predicted that, once the ban is lifted, “training programs similar to the USDA’s LGBT Special Emphasis Program will become a growth industry within the Department of Defense.”

“This would drive out thousands of experienced troops, starting with chaplains and people of faith who do not support LGBT ideology and activism,” she said.

Eileen Lainez, a Pentagon spokeswoman, said: “Sensitivity training has not been a tenet of previous and ongoing repeal training, nor will it enter into sustainment plans.

“The key messages for sustainment will be the same as with the training servicemembers have previously received, with emphasis on leadership, professionalism, discipline and respect.”

The Pentagon has been preparing 2.2 million active and reserve troops to deal with homosexuals serving openly in the military since Congress last year repealed the so-called “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that required gay troops to keep their sexuality private.

The Agriculture Department described its program in an internal newsletter, My USDA: A Progress Report for Employees on USDA’s Cultural Transformation.

“Due in large part to Bill’s tireless efforts, USDA is recognized as a leader among Federal departments and agencies. Mr. Scaggs has recently started working with OPM and the Federal Executive Institute, sharing the sexual-orientation and gender-identity diversity training he developed at USDA,” the newsletter said.

“OPM has called our LGBT work ‘groundbreaking’ and expressed an interest in using it as a model for other federal agencies.”

The newsletter adds: “Future collaborations with OPM are planned, with the ultimate goal of having LGBT Special Emphasis Programs across the federal government.”

Veronica Villalobos, OPM’s director of diversity and inclusion, told The Times: “OPM strongly encourages all agencies to conduct diversity and inclusion training.

“USDA is one of the many agencies we are currently working closely with, and while OPM continues to encourage this type of training, the effort has not gone governmentwide.”

Mr. Scaggs‘ briefing for USDA employees is titled “Including Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Diversity.”

Slides used for briefing presentations reveal topics such as “courageous conversations” and “What can I do to promote workplace diversity?”

One slide on gender identity states: “Individuals are conscious of [sexual identity] between the ages of 18 months and 3 years. Most people develop a gender identity that matches their biological sex. For some, gender identity is different from biological sex (transsexuals).”

On attempts to change someone from gay to straight, the briefing says: “Usually doesn’t work and may even be harmful. Can produce feelings of depression, hopelessness, shame and anxiety. Some people become suicidal.”

It refers to the term “down low,” noting: “Men who discreetly have sex with other men while in sexual relationships with women are said to be on the ‘down low’ (or ‘DL’ for short).”

The briefing defines “heterosexism” as an “’ism’ like sexism or racism, where one is considered better than others.” It gives as examples the ban on gays serving openly in the military and laws that define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

Agriculture Department spokesman Justin DeJong said gay diversity training is part of an overall program to correct past systemic discrimination at USDA.

“USDA makes this training available as part of our commitment to ensuring that all constituents and employees are treated fairly and equally,” he said. “USDA has had a policy against discriminating against people based on their sexual orientation since 1993, and this was further formalized when President Clinton signed an executive order regarding sexual orientation employment nondiscrimination in 1998.”

Mr. Obama has courted the gay vote and campaigned on repealing the military’s gay ban. In office, he has decided not to defend in court the Defense of Marriage Act, which Mr. Clinton signed and which defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

USDA Training Equating ‘Heterosexism’ to Racism Could Soon be Gov’t Norm

The Washington Times reports that U.S. Department of Agriculture officials are moving to push their gay-sensitivity training program — which equates believing marriage to only be between one man and one woman with sexism or racism — into the training of all federal employees, according to an internal newsletter.

If accepted by President Obama’s Office of Personnel Management (OPM), sensitivity training with rhetoric condemning those who believe in “Heterosexism” will be the norm for all federal agency training programs including those in the Department of Defense and Pentagon.

The USDA program defines “heterosexism” as an “‘ism’ like sexism or racisim, where one is considered better than others.”

Supporters have called the USDA training “groundbreaking” while critics feel “heterosexists” serving our country at home and abroad should not have their government compare them to sexists or racists.

“This would drive out thousands of experienced troops, starting with chaplains and people of faith who do not support LGBT ideology and activism,” Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness told the Times.

OPM, which oversees all federal employee policies, has applauded Agriculture Secretary and former Iowa Governor Thomas J. Vilsack (D) for launching his Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) Special Emphasis Program at the USDA.

“OPM has called our LGBT work ‘groundbreaking’ and expressed an interest in using it as a model for other federal agencies,” read the internal newsletter titled My USDA: A Progress Report for Employees on USDA’s Cultural Transformation.

OPM Director of Diversity and Inclusion Veronica Villalobos said “USDA is one of the many agencies we are currently working closely with, and while OPM continues to encourage this type of training, the effort has not gone governmentwide.”

Yet.

Uploaded 8/25/2011

GLSEN Receives Federal Grant to Launch 'Safe Space' Initiative to Support Health and Well-being of LGBT Youth

GLSEN Press Release;  Contact Daryl Presgraves;  646-388-6577;  dpresgraves@glsen.org;  Jun 17, 2011  

Award Will Help Program Reach 14,500 School Personnel and 4 Million Students  

The Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN) announced today an annually renewable grant from the Department of Adolescent and School Health (DASH) at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to increase the percentage of schools that identify and maintain "safe spaces" for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) youth. During the five-year project, GLSEN will partner with 20 targeted school districts across the country, including the 16 DASH-funded districts, to implement a comprehensive evidence-based program to help keep LBGT students safe and healthy.

The CDC's grant will allow GLSEN to partner with each district to establish sustainable safe space infrastructure by creating internal Implementation Teams, delivering multi-day Train the Trainer (TOT) programs based on GLSEN's Safe Space Kit, providing guidance, information and resources to assist in effecting policy enhancements, and increasing collaboration and knowledge sharing among stakeholders within and across states and school districts.  

"It is abundantly clear that LGBT youths' experience of bias and violence at school contributes to significant threats to their health, academic success and psychological well-being," said Eliza Byard, GLSEN Executive Director. "The CDC is taking a critical step to ensure safe and healthy schools for LGBT youth and a stronger foundation for their future by supporting the creation of truly safe spaces where they can receive support from administrators, teachers or other school staff. Such spaces are vital to these students' health, success in school and life prospects."  

Among the many aspects of this program is a facilitated district self-study of local- and state-level anti-harassment and LGBT health promotion policies and the development of a network of educational and community-based organizations equipped and trained to support the health and well-being of LGBT students. By the close of the five-year plan, which was funded at the maximum $285,000 annually, GLSEN programs will have reached 14,500 school personnel and 4 million students.  

A comprehensive program monitoring and evaluation process will develop project logic modeling, collect data on program output, training process and outcome evaluation, and assess impact on youth risk behavior and experience of school climate, culminating in two reports of findings at the conclusion of the grant.  

The grant is the latest example of federal government partnership with GLSEN to improve school climate and culture. GLSEN's work with the federal government dates back to a meeting with President Clinton in the late 1990s, and continued under President Bush as GLSEN contributed to the development and launch of the "Stop Bullying Now" campaign at the Department of Health and Human Services in 2004. GLSEN has worked closely with a number of other agencies, including the Department of Justice and the Department of Education, whose Office of Civil Rights is a partner in its Claim Your Rights campaign.

"We are proud to contribute to federal efforts to support safe, healthy and respectful learning environments for all students," Byard said. "This grant is an exciting new element of GLSEN's long-standing partnership with federal agencies in the common project of improving U.S. schools."

About GLSEN

GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, is the leading national education organization focused on ensuring safe schools for all students. Established in 1990, GLSEN envisions a world in which every child learns to respect and accept all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression. GLSEN seeks to develop school climates where difference is valued for the positive contribution it makes to creating a more vibrant and diverse community. For information on GLSEN's research, educational resources, public policy advocacy, student organizing programs and educator training initiatives, visit www.glsen.org.

From 8/25/11 Alert

The Silence that Shatters America

- Judi McLeod  

Why do we take it as gospel that Barack Hussein Obama gets to fundamentally transform America just because he makes the bold claim that’s what he’s going to do?

Why do decent, rational, American-loving people let Obama get away with saying he will “fundamentally transform America”?

The first time he arrogantly uttered these words, the response should have been: “It should go without saying that no one, not even a president or a king will ever be allowed to fundamentally transform America.”

As far as is known, not one single public official ever stepped up to ask: “Who are you, Mr. Obama, to fundamentally transform America?”

Sadly, ditto, thus far, nor did any presidential candidate in the 2012 race ever ask.

Why do we accept as fact that it is within the power of Obama to fundamentally transform the country the rest of the world has long looked to for inspiration?

Why do so many elected politicians on the other side of the House and Senate, so many candidates for presidential election seem to accept as fact that Obama’s will shall be done?

“Thy Kingdom come”; “Thy Will be done” are immortal words prayed universally down through the centuries; words taught to us by our Saviour. It is God’s Will, and only God’s Will that shall be done.

Do Obama and his masters truly believe he is the Messiah?

No words by any politician were ever etched in stone. Much like their deeds, the words of politicians are forgotten in the passing of time.

In order to stop D.C.’s Marxist Commander in Chief in his tracks, he must be forced back to reality and told “No One is going to fundamentally transform America.” It’s eons apart from “Dreams From My Father”.

How did the promise to fundamentally transform America ever go unchallenged in Obama’s long narrative?

It must be treason to want to fundamentally transform America against the wishes of the majority.

The West, which counts on the freedom of the United States of America, needs this burning question answered: Who is Obama to come along, trash the Constitution, ridicule America from foreign shores, and put into hateful, spiteful words his insane vision for the fundamental transformation of America?
Some call Obama a Marxist on a take-down America mission. Talking heads define him as stupid, incompetent, even as a man child. Yet aside from two books, many claims of which were never proven, all personal details of Obama’s life before his Second Coming to the Oval Office are locked away from public view.

For all we know Obama’s may have been the lowest IQ of any among students attending his school in Indonesia and the U.S.A. For all we know, Obama may have been banned from practicing law because of criminal activity. For all we know he even may have spent time behind bars for crimes committed.

Did circumstances force him into the ‘profession’ of community organizer in Chicago, or did he choose this job paid from the public purse for himself?

Who really knows?

Why would someone with absolutely nothing significant to prove his intelligence; absolutely nothing to recommend him, in terms of work place experience be able to promise in the most menacing of ways to transform a country that got on exceedingly well without him for 234 years?

As the days unwind to Election 2012, with all contenders claiming their bragging rights on national television; with decent American citizens working to save their country demonized as domestic terrorists, there’s an elephant squatting in everyone’s living room, and the elephant continues to trumpet at us only from a Tele-Prompter.

From the very first time he voiced it, Obama’s braggart promises to fundamentally transform America should have been forced back within the realm of reality and truth.

Only those poor souls, suffering delusions of grandeur, do not know at heart that saying something is so doesn’t make it so.

Think voodoo when you think of the fundamental transformation of America. Even in modern times some people believe in voodoo. But the walking dead who look like Nancy Pelosi do not exist outside the human imagination. Voodoo works by making its victims believe in its evil power. If a victim of voodoo does not believe the pins in the doll can cripple or maim, they remain in good health.

Who really believes it is possible for one man to accomplish the fundamental transformation of America? Barack Hussein Obama.

There is no magic in the stridently anti-American couple who currently occupy the White House. They are just two people who led the sort of charmed lives that got them ahead not through their own efforts or hard work, but via contacts in high places of Chicago land power. They are two people living the high life off of the avails of the people who voted one of them into office, and whose almost 3-year long uninterrupted power tripping has likely left them mentally deranged by now.

Sitting around smoke-filled campus coffee shops talking about the Revolution works when you’re green and only 20. When you’re talking the same way at age 50, it’s time for a sanity check.

The best way to fight Obama is to make reality count. The power of his office notwithstanding, Barack Hussein Obama cannot fundamentally transform America. Not only did anyone that matters ever ask him to, he has not the right.

From 8/24/11 Alert

Ominous Parallels  

This column by ACRU Policy Board Member and Professor of Economics Dr. Walter E. Williams was published August 17, 2011 on Townhall.com.

People are beginning to compare Barack Obama's administration to the failed administration of Jimmy Carter, but a better comparison is to the Roosevelt administration of the 1930s and '40s. Let's look at it with the help of a publication from the Mackinac Center for Public Policy and the Foundation for Economic Education titled "Great Myths of the Great Depression," by Dr. Lawrence Reed.

During the first year of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, he called for increasing federal spending to $10 billion while revenues were only $3 billion. Between 1933 and 1936, government expenditures rose by more than 83 percent. Federal debt skyrocketed by 73 percent. Roosevelt signed off on legislation that raised the top income tax rate to 79 percent and then later to 90 percent. Hillsdale College economics historian and professor Burt Folsom, author of New Deal or Raw Deal?, notes that in 1941, Roosevelt even proposed a 99.5 percent marginal tax rate on all incomes more than $100,000. When a top adviser questioned the idea, Roosevelt replied, "Why not?"

Roosevelt had other ideas for the economy, including the National Recovery Act. Dr. Reed says:

"The economic impact of the NRA was immediate and powerful. In the five months leading up to the act's passage, signs of recovery were evident: factory employment and payrolls had increased by 23 and 35 percent, respectively. Then came the NRA, shortening hours of work, raising wages arbitrarily and imposing other new costs on enterprise. In the six months after the law took effect, industrial production dropped 25 percent."

Blacks were especially hard hit by the NRA. Black spokesmen and the black press often referred to the NRA as the "Negro Run Around," "Negroes Rarely Allowed," "Negroes Ruined Again," "Negroes Robbed Again," "No Roosevelt Again" and the "Negro Removal Act." Fortunately, the courts ruled the NRA unconstitutional. As a result, unemployment fell to 14 percent in 1936 and lower by 1937.

Roosevelt had more plans for the economy, namely the National Labor Relations Act, better known as the "Wagner Act." This was a payoff to labor unions, and with these new powers, labor unions went on a militant organizing frenzy that included threats, boycotts, strikes, seizures of plants, widespread violence and other acts that pushed productivity down sharply and unemployment up dramatically. In 1938, Roosevelt's New Deal produced the nation's first depression within a depression. The stock market crashed again, losing nearly 50 percent of its value between August 1937 and March 1938, and unemployment climbed back to 20 percent. Columnist Walter Lippmann wrote in March 1938 that "with almost no important exception every measure (Roosevelt) has been interested in for the past five months has been to reduce or discourage the production of wealth."

Roosevelt's agenda was not without its international admirers. The chief Nazi newspaper, Volkischer Beobachter, repeatedly praised "Roosevelt's adoption of National Socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies" and "the development toward an authoritarian state" based on the "demand that collective good be put before individual self-interest." Roosevelt himself called Benito Mussolini "admirable" and professed that he was "deeply impressed by what he (had) accomplished."

FDR's very own treasury secretary, Henry Morgenthau, saw the folly of the New Deal, writing: "We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. ... We have never made good on our promises. ... I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started ... and an enormous debt to boot!" The bottom line is that Roosevelt's New Deal policies turned what would have been a three- or four-year sharp downturn into a 16-year affair.

The 1930s depression was caused by and aggravated by acts of government, and so was the current financial mess that we're in. Do we want to repeat history by listening to those who created the calamity? That's like calling on an arsonist to help put out a fire.

From 8/23/11 Alert

The Bus, The Beast and the Dark Lord of Mordor  

“One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its black gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume.” —Boromir at the Council of Elrond  

As the Obama taxpayer-funded campaign through the Midwest unfolds, we in the Shire are, or should be, focused on the shiny new bus our Dark Lord is traveling on. According to Secret Service spokesman, Ed Donovan, there are two buses at a cost of $1.1 million each. They were purchased from the Hemphill Brothers Coach based in Tennessee. The good news is the manufacture of the buses created jobs—in Canada. Correct, my Hobbit friends, while on a supposed jobs tour, the Dark Lord is traveling on a luxury bus built by Prevost, a Quebec based company. It’s the company’s top of the line VIP model normally used by Rock Bands. Would we expect any less for our own self-proclaimed rock star?

According to Hemphill’s website, “this coach is appointed with the finest materials and the latest in high tech electronics and was built for a top entertainer to travel efficiently without losing the luxuries of home”.

This bus was rolled out while Obama and the EPA were touting new CAFE standards for trucks and buses for we “little people” to reduce our carbon footprint. Make no mistake these new standards are intended to put long haul truckers out of business to further justify “investments” in rail. Obama’s entourage consisted of the bus as well as numerous SUV’s and law enforcement vehicles. There was even an ambulance joining the parade. Where is the outrage of the environuts over the Dark Lord’s carbon footprint?

While gathering information on the new bus, I was reminded of the “Beast”, the Obama Cadillac Limo. You remember the “Beast”, the fresh, more modern, more expensive version of the Cadillac DTS that was used by President Bush. It weighs between seven and eight tons and is propelled by a diesel engine. It has military grade armor believed to be eight inches thick and weigh as much as a cabin door on a Boeing 747 according to Motor Authority. The cabin is thought to feature an air recirculation system to protect the Dark Lord from chemical attacks. It’s loaded with the latest communication technology as well as a ten disc CD changer. While the new CAFE standards recently unveiled by the Uruk-Hai of the EPA call for new fuel efficiency standards of 54 miles per gallon, the “Beast” gets an estimated eight miles per gallon.

In other words, while the Dark Lord and his Uruk-Hai mandate we Hobbits travel in plug-in “looney-tune” cars, his highness travels in an eight ton armored tank.

Just as Mordor was the protected realm of Sauron against his enemies, so has the White House become Obama’s fortress whereby his Uruk-Hai, Orcs and Trolls protect him and launch their attacks on we Hobbits. The Orc were known for not fighting fair and using whatever strategy, or no strategy, to win; just as Obama’s rogue agencies, czars, union thugs and Democrat members of Congress are using against us today.

Among the most powerful captains of Mordor were the Nazgui, the deadly shadow wraiths, that could spread terror in their foes. I equate them with the liberal main stream media and their repeated talking point attacks on the Tea Party Hobbits. While these ridiculous attacks have not had the desired affect of striking terror in the hearts of the patriotic Hobbits, it seems to be working quite well on our GOP members of Congress. Time and again they have shown themselves to be spineless and easily intimidated. It’s time we Hobbits exert pressure on them and make it clear they either need to stand with us or step down and enable us to elect true defenders of the Shire and its Constitution.

Rather than cowering in fear, we must become more vocal and more energized against them. Just as the fictional Mordor eventually fell, it is up to we Hobbits to end the reign of the new Dark Lord and his minions of Mordor. Only then will the evil die and the “poisonous fume” begin to dissipate.

From 8/22/11 Alert

The New and Improved American Dream as Envisioned by UN Agenda 21  

When liberals are not destroying private property or setting fire to private businesses to protest the very capitalism that afforded them the freedom, time, and money to be idle and live off the hard work of others, they come up with ideas to “fundamentally change” and redefine the American dream. After all, they are the ultimate experts at everything: what we should eat, how and where we should live, how we learn, what we read, what we drive, what we watch, where we pray, if we are allowed to pray, what kind of medicines we can take, and what doctors we can see.  

They think other cultures are superior to our culture, and they have been taught that we are evil. We have to change to shape ourselves into the vision that only liberals can conjure up in conjunction with various nefarious United Nations third world organizations and countries.  

They invent, write, and produce cartoons like “The Story of Stuff,” widely distributed and viewed in classrooms across the country with the goal to bamboozle children into believing that capitalism is evil and our way of life is destroying the planet at this very moment if we do not do something about it. Children are impressionable, trusting, naïve, gullible, and listen to misguided authority; they do not know how to verify false statements.  

“The Story of Stuff” plants the idea of socialism and communism as being the only way to live and save our planet from our laser-guided, capitalist destruction. We consume too much, they say. We have to return to a simpler life, to the pre-car, pre-technology era, to a time of equality that only exists in their deluded minds. In progressive views communism is wonderful; it only failed repeatedly throughout history because the right person was not in charge. This is the definition of insanity; repeat the same mistake, hoping to obtain a different result.  

The Center for a New American Dream (more of what matters) is promoting the redefinition of the American Dream. They must have had a revelation one day that they were worthless pawns in the huge universe that needed rearranging on the chess board of life. Hippies and restless female souls with a trust fund decided, “One of the root causes of our environmental problems is hyper-consumption. We simply buy too much of what we don’t really need.” We need a simpler living, the center’s definition of simpler living.  

“In 2008, Teresa Carey left her job, sold many of her belongings, and moved aboard a 27-foot sailboat to pursue her dream of simpler living.” How many Americans could actually afford a 27-foot sailboat much less consider such a lifestyle of simple living? It is simple all right, simply incredible and egotistical in its lack of work ethic.  

She learned so much from her two-year journey, she is now inspiring a large audience of “simple livers, adventure-seekers, and dreamers.” There you have it, Nancy Pelosi’s advice in action, you can take time to find yourself while the federal government nanny state or a trust fund provides your sustenance to dream and find yourself. Teresa is now trying her hand at documentary filmmaker. Is this not entrepreneurship and thus capitalism?  

The environmental and progressive Center for a New American Dream founded in 1997 promotes “a more socially and ecologically balanced society.” “We seek to change social norms around consumption and consumerism” and replace it with community action and collaborative communities. Collaborative communities, right out of UN Agenda 21, create local initiatives, ecological sustainability, livability, and engage (read force) local governments to embrace sustainability.  

“We seek to cultivate a new American dream—one that emphasizes community, ecological sustainability, and a celebration of non-material values.” It sounds so kumbaya. What non-profit firms are financing their non-material lifestyle, salaries, and agenda? The staff is composed of community organizers, activists, and environmentalists.  

The list of those who endorse the center reads like a Who’s Who among progressives: Robert Reich, former U.S. Secretary of Labor, Danny Glover, Bill Bradley, former U.S. Senator, Meryl Streep, actress, Ed Begley Jr., actor, Rep. Nydia Velasquez (D-NY), Julian Bond, Chairman, NAACP National Board of Directors, to name a few.  

Robert Reich says, “The Center is forging the way toward a more equitable and sustainable future.” Meryl Streep suggests that we should change our consumer behavior in order to restore balance to the planet. I promise to do it right after she changes her lavish Hollywood lifestyle.  

Velasquez, in the usual Democrat politician fashion, urges consumers to protect the environment and promote social justice, typical United Nations Agenda 21 goals.  

United Nations believes that wealth and consumption were built on the backs of the poor and must thus be re-distributed from the rich to those who decided to work less, study less, and play the game of victiomology. Are Americans awake? UN Agenda 21 is like a metastasized cancer that is sucking your freedom and life away.  

Ed Begley Jr. talks about the “orgy of consumerism” but I have not heard or seen him donate his wealth made in Hollywood. When he does give away his last penny, the rest of us, evil capitalists, will do the same.  

The Center for a New American Dream is an organization that pushes at the local and national level the UN’s Agenda 21. It is headquartered in Charlottesville, Virginia, and offers summer internships to our naïve youth who will become tomorrow’s UN’s Agenda 21 slaves.

From 8/21/11 Alert

Obama's Tour of Denial and Blame  

It’s being billed as a listening tour—a three-state journey across the Midwest where President Barack Obama will hear directly from Americans about the economy and talk about his ideas for job growth. Instead, though, it has the characteristics of a political campaign swing, and the rhetoric the President has brought along for the ride is marked by a desperate effort to blame someone other than himself for America’s economic woes.

The President’s tour began yesterday in Cannon Falls, Minnesota, where in one breath he pointed his finger at Washington’s broken politics and in the next he blamed “a string of bad luck … a bunch of things taking place over the last six months that were not within our control.”

You had an Arab Spring in the Middle East that promises more democracy and more human rights for people, but it also drove up gas prices — tough for the economy, a lot of uncertainty. And then you have the situation in Europe, where they’re dealing with all sorts of debt challenges, and that washes up on our shores. And you had a tsunami in Japan, and that broke supply chains and created difficulties for the economy all across the globe.

As much as the President would like to bill his three-state tour as an exhibition in listening or leadership, it’s more of an exercise in cognitive dissonance—of blaming everything but his own policies for the reality of America’s dire economic straits, rather than taking responsibility for his presidency.

That reality has manifested itself in a big way. In every state, a vast majority of Americans see the economy as getting worse, according to a new Gallup poll. The only exception is in Washington, D.C., where taxpayer spending has feathered the nest of the federal government, creating a cushion from the harsh existence of 9.1 percent unemployment, an average duration of unemployment hitting a record high of 40 weeks, and a tepid pace of economic growth that could leave joblessness at permanently high levels. Contrast Obama’s results with the promise of his presidency, as articulated in his inaugural address:

The state of our economy calls for action, bold and swift. And we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.

Lest America forget, President Obama had two years of a Democrat-controlled Congress to effect that bold and swift action. And boy, did he take action. He and his liberal allies in the House and Senate gave America a $780 billion stimulus that the President promised would save or create 3.5 million jobs by the end of 2010. (He came up 7.3 million jobs shy.) And then there was the 2,700-page behemoth known as Obamacare, the 9,000-Earmark Omnibus Bill, $3.22 trillion in new debt, a $26.1 billion government union bailout in the summer of 2010, the $3 billion Cash for Clunkers program, and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform bill.

Somehow, though, all that action was not enough. So in January, the President used his State of the Union Address to convey to America that he was singularly focused on job creation. And here America sits, seven months later, watching President Obama tour the Midwest delivering that same message, this time calling for piecemeal job creation policies including more stimulus and infrastructure spending, a renewal of the payroll tax cut that was initially passed in December last year, tax credits for companies who hire veterans, a trade deal that he fails to send to Congress yet blames them for not passing, and tax increases on job creators. Though the President calls his ideas new and bold, he’s only delivering more of the same tired thinking that has left America in an economic rut.

On top of the spending and debt, the President has promulgated stifling regulation while calling for job-killing tax increases. Meanwhile, his Administration is going out of its way to work against job creation—the National Labor Relations Board has taken action against the Boeing Company for creating jobs in right-to-work South Carolina while also pushing for pro-union policies that harm employers and workers.

Fortunately, the President’s way is not the only way. Rather than going back to the Keynesian well and relying on the hand of government, the President and Congress should restrain government and allow entrepreneurs to thrive. That doesn’t require a listening tour and placing blame. That requires being a leader and recognizing that the policies of the past two and a half years have not worked—that it’s time for a new way, and a new speech.

From 8/20/11 Alert

Obama’s ineligibility: Prepare to defend America – Total leadership failure

- Lawrence Sellin  

Just how many felonies does Barack Hussein Obama need to commit before anyone in the US Government speaks out? Millions of Americans are asking that question.

We now learn that the Cook County Assessor’s Office confirms that Obama has likely committed real estate and tax fraud in a deal with Tony Rezko in Chicago.  

Add to that Presidential eligibility fraud, birth certificate fraud, Social Security Number fraud and Selective Service registration fraud.

When will Congress launch an investigation into the criminal and usurper in the Oval Office? When will senior members of the military or the federal law enforcement agencies stand by their oaths to support and defend the Constitution?
The answer is “never.” There has been a colossal failure of leadership. We have a government littered with careerists, sycophants, cowards, liars and the greedy. As they see it, ordinary Americans only exist to serve their interests.  

Senior members of the US Government are part of a criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice and hide the truth about Obama from the American people. The mainstream media are actively colluding with these corrupt officials through a campaign of disinformation and psychological operations to denigrate and discredit anyone who demands the truth about Obama.  

There is an ever-increasing list of examples demonstrating the growth of oppression of ordinary citizens and American elective totalitarianism.

One such example is Tim Adams, who was the Senior Elections Clerk for the city and county of Honolulu during the 2008 presidential election.

His crime was speaking the truth, a truth which threatened Obama’s election, the radical agenda of the far-left wing of the Democratic Party and the exposure of criminal acts by high government officials.

Tim has now documented his experiences in a Master’s thesis published by Western Kentucky University.

The orchestrated political, media, and law enforcement attack on Tim Adams began when, on June 6, 2010, he told a Liberty News Radio audience:

“Barack Obama was not born in Hawaii.”

As he tells it:

“It had been nine days since my appearance on The Political Cesspool radio show with James Edwards, and it had been a single week since the first YouTube video had appeared carrying my story online. Two days after the initial flood of Internet postings, I had already been contacted by over fifty alternative and mainstream media outlets. We were receiving emails and phone calls at the rate of several hundred per day. Three days following, I was being contacted by my university administration, and had been charged with being a Nazi, a White Supremacist, and a host of other claims, some so fantastic you wonder where they came up with the ideas. Five days into that first week my email and computer accounts had been the target of data phishing and my home computer had been hacked. By the end of that first week: my university admission, finances, apartment, phone, and Internet usage had been investigated. A nationally televised news anchor had run an active smear job on me that was viewed both by television audiences and by Internet users in the millions, and I was under active police surveillance and had received numerous, violent threats.”

In every sense of the term, we have a rogue government which is no longer constrained by the rule of law and has declared war on the American people.

The faux-leaders in Congress will continue to posture, position themselves, cut secret deals, nod and wink at each other. It is political incest, incompetence and gross negligence.

If the cover-up continues and Obama is permitted to run in 2012, his forces will unleash the most racial, polarizing and potentially violent campaign in US history. Expect to see organized flash mobs used as a method of political intimidation.

We are now perched on the edge of an abyss. The survival of our republic is at stake. We must join together and stand against those who will destroy our country.

The Obama criminal conspiracy must be exposed and taken down now.

There will be no second chance.  [Emphasis added.]

From 8/19/11 Alert

Wall Street targeted for Britain-style riots

'Day of rage' aims to 'bring down the stock market'  

In the wake of Britain's riots, a group of American radicals are planning a "Day of Rage" targeting Wall Street and U.S. capitalism.

The upcoming protests, replete with a planned tent city in downtown Manhattan, is closely tied to the founders of ACORN and leaders of major U.S. unions, including the Service Employees International Union, or SEIU.

There are indications the protesters are training to incite violence, resist arrest and disrupt the legal system.

The protest aims to take root nationwide.

Activists are advertising on social network sites such as Facebook and Twitter for a "Day of Rage" on Sept. 17 to begin with the "occupation" of Wall Street and continue with protests across the nation.

Planners have their own website – USDayofRage.org (* see my note below) – which tells protesters to "bring your own tent."

The website is not specific about the purpose of the "Day of Rage" other than calling for "integrity" to be "restored to our elections."

The site accuses corporations of using "money to act as the voices of millions, while individual citizens, the legitimate voters, are silenced and demoralized by the farce."

Advertisements claim the protests at Wall Street and nationwide will be "non-violent."

However, the official website provides resources, including videos and detailed written instructions, for protesters to engage in "civil disobedience."

The resources provided include instructions on how to resist police arrest and disrupt court hearings.

Similar instructions are provided on the website of an affiliated organization, which calls itself "Occupy Wall Street" and is also involved in planning the Sept. 17 protests.

The use of the term "Day of Rage" recalls the "Days of Rage" organized in the 1960s by the Weather Underground domestic terrorist organization co-founded by Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, close associates for years of President Obama.

Numerous radicals, many with direct ties to Obama, are linked to planned protests and other activism scheduled for the coming months.

In March, ACORN founder Wade Rathke announced what he called "days of rage in ten cities around JP Morgan Chase." Rathke was president of an SEIU local in New Orleans.

The planned Sept. 17 protest seems to be the culmination of Rathke's efforts.

Those efforts are being organized by Stephen Lerner, an SEIU board member who reportedly visited the Obama White House at least four times.

Lerner is considered one of the most capable organizers of the radical left. He recently organized the SEIU's so-called Justice for Janitors campaign.

As part of his planned protests, Lerner called for "a week of civil disobedience, direct action all over the city."

His stated aim is to "destabilize the folks that are in power and start to rebuild a movement."

In an interview about the planned protests, Lerner outlined his goals: "How do we bring down the stock market? How do we bring down their bonuses? How do we interfere with their ability to, to be rich?"

Forecast for American cities: Confrontation, intimidation?

There are other indications a coalition of radicals and unions are planning chaos using the current economic crisis.

Earlier this month, WND reported that a slew of extremist organizations, some tied to Obama, are preparing protests to coincide with major NATO and G-8 summits in Chicago next May.

Foreshadowing possible violent confrontations, some of the same radical trainers behind the infamous 1999 Seattle riots against the World Trade Organization have been mobilizing new protest efforts geared toward world summits as well as the current economic crisis.

Some of the activists are tied to Obama.

The NATO and G-8 summits are not the only focus of radical groups.

WND reported Heather Booth, director of a Saul Alinsky-style community organizing group, the MidwestAcademy, was among the main speakers at the "2011 State Battles Summit" in June at the Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill Hotel in Washington, D.C.

Booth's husband, Paul, also was a speaker at the union summit. Paul Booth co-founded Midwest Academy in the 1970s.

The four-day summit was organized by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, or AFSCME, with participation from the AFL-CIO, the nation's largest union.

An official schedule for the event, obtained by WND, declared: "Our union is under unprecedented attack in every state. Extremist politicians want to weaken us as we head into 2012. Their tactics include budget cuts, layoffs, privatization and the denial of our very collective bargaining rights."

Continued the flyer: "New challenges require new energy and new thinking. We encourage union activists to attend this conference and bring their creative ideas on how to overcome the challenges ahead."

Heather Booth participated in a panel entitled, "Our Message, Alliances and Best Practices."

Paul Booth delivered the opening remarks for the union conference.

Another speaker at the union event was John Podesta, who co-chaired President Obama's transition team.

Podesta is president of the Center for American Progress, which is heavily influential in advising the White House. The center is funded by philanthropist George Soros.

Mideast revolutions coming to U.S.?

Citizen Action of Wisconsin, an arm of Booth's Midwest Academy, is part of the Moving Wisconsin Forward movement, one of the main organizers of the major Wisconsin protests in February, as WND first reported.

The protests were in opposition to Gov. Scott Walker's proposal for most state workers to pay 12 percent of their health care premiums and 5.8 percent of their salary toward their own pensions.

WND reported at the time speakers at the rallies likened the Wisconsin protests to the ongoing revolutions in the Middle East and North Africa while calling for similar uprisings in the U.S.

'Redistribution of wealth and power'

Obama himself once funded Midwest Academy. He has been closely tied to Heather Booth.

Booth has stated building a ''progressive majority'' would help for ''a fair distribution of wealth and power and opportunity."

Her husband Paul is a founder and the former national secretary of Students for a Democratic Society, the radical 1960s anti-war movement from which Ayers' Weather Underground splintered.

In 1999, the Booths' Midwest Academy received $75,000 from the Woods Fund with Obama on its board alongside Ayers, In 2002, with Obama still serving on the Woods Fund, Midwest received another $23,500 for its Young Organizers Development Program.

Midwest describes itself as "one of the nation's oldest and best-known schools for community organizations, citizen organizations and individuals committed to progressive social change."

It later morphed into a national organizing institute for an emerging network of organizations known as Citizen Action.

Discover the Networks describes Midwest as "teach[ing] tactics of direct action, confrontation and intimidation."

WND first reported the executive director of an activist organization that taught Alinsky's tactics of direct action, confrontation and intimidation was part of the team that developed volunteers for President Obama's 2008 campaign.

Jackie Kendall, executive director of the Midwest Academy, was on the team that developed and delivered the first Camp Obama training for volunteers aiding Obama's campaign through the 2008 Iowa Caucuses.

Camp Obama was a two-to-four day intensive course run in conjunction with Obama's campaign aimed at training volunteers to become activists to help Obama win the presidential election.

Also, in 1998, Obama participated on a panel discussion praising Alinsky alongside Heather Booth, herself a dedicated disciple of Alinsky.

The panel discussion following the opening performance in Chicago of the play "The Love Song of Saul Alinsky," a work described by the Chicago Sun-Times as "bringing to life one of America's greatest community organizers."

Obama participated in the discussion alongside other Alinskyites, including political analyst Aaron Freeman, Don Turner of the Chicago Federation of Labor and Northwestern University history professor Charles Paine.

"Alinsky had so much fire burning within," stated local actor Gary Houston, who portrayed Alinsky in the play. "There was a lot of complexity to him. Yet he was a really cool character."

With research by Brenda J. Elliott

(* My note: go to this link: http://www.usdayofrage.org/about.html  and scroll to the bottom of the page and note the two statements:  

1.      "One citizen. One dollar. One vote."

2.      "Help us reclaim democracy on the US Day of Rage." [Emphasis added.]  

A lady asked Dr. Franklin,  "Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy?" — "A republic," replied the Doctor, "if you can keep it." Anonymous, from Farrand's Records of the Federal Convention of 1787  

“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” ~ Thomas Jefferson [Emphasis added.]  

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" Benjamin Franklin

From 8/18/11 Alert

Agenda 21 In One Easy Lesson  

Awareness of Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development is racing across the nation as citizens in community after community are learning what their city planners are actually up to.  [Emphasis added.] As awareness grows, I am receiving more and more calls for tools to help activists fight back. Many complain that elected officials just won’t read detailed reports or watch long videos. “Can you give us something that is quick, and easy to read that we can hand out,” I’m asked.

So here it is. A one page, quick description of Agenda 21 that fits on one page. I’ve also included for the back side of your hand out a list of quotes for the perpetrators of Agenda 21 that should back up my brief descriptions.

A word of caution, use this as a starter kit, but do not allow it to be your only knowledge of this very complex subject. To kill it you have to know the facts. Research, know your details; discover the NGO players in your community; identify who is victimized by the policies and recruit them to your fight; and then kill Agenda 21. That’s how it must be done.  [Emphasis added.] The information below is only your first step. Happy hunting.  

What is Sustainable Development?

According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.  

Social Equity (Social injustice)

Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social injustice. All part of Agenda 21 policy.  

Economic Prosperity

Public Private Partnerships (PPP). Special dealings between government and certain, chosen corporations which get tax breaks, grants and the government’s power of
Eminent Domain to implement sustainable policy. Government-sanctioned monopolies.  

Local Sustainable Development policies

Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, Green jobs, Green Building Codes, “Going Green,” Alternative Energy, Local Visioning, facilitators, regional planning, historic preservation, conservation easements, development rights, sustainable farming, comprehensive planning, growth management, consensus.  

Who is behind it?

ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability (formally, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). Communities pay ICLEI dues to provide “local” community plans, software, training, etc. Addition groups include American Planning Council, The Renaissance Planning Group, International City/ County Management Group, aided by US Mayors Conference, National Governors Association, National League of Cities, National Association of County Administrators and many more private organizations and official government agencies. Foundation and government grants drive the process.  

Where did it originate?  

The term Sustainable Development was first introduced to the world in the pages a 1987 report (Our Common Future) produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environmental and Development, authored by Gro Harlem Brundtland, VP of the World Socialist Party. The term was first offered as official UN policy in 1992, in a document called UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21, issued at the UN’s Earth Summit, today referred to simply as Agenda 21.  

What gives Agenda 21 Ruling Authority?  

More than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21 as official policy during a signing ceremony at the Earth Summit. US president George H.W. Bush signed the document for the US. In signing, each nation pledge to adopt the goals of Agenda 21. In 1995, President Bill Clinton, in compliance with Agenda 21, signed Executive Order #12858 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development in order to “harmonize” US environmental policy with UN directives as outlined in Agenda 21. The EO directed all agencies of the Federal Government to work with state and local community governments in a joint effort “reinvent” government using the guidelines outlined in Agenda 21. As a result, with the assistance of groups like ICLEI, Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county and state in the nation.   

Revealing Quotes From the Planners  

“Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by EVERY person on Earth…it calls for specific changes in the activities of ALL people… Effective execution of Agenda 21 will REQUIRE a profound reorientation of ALL humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced… ”  Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993). Emphases – DR

Urgent to implement – but we don’t know what it is!

“The realities of life on our planet dictate that continued economic development as we know it cannot be sustained…Sustainable development, therefore is a program of action for local and global economic reform – a program that has yet to be fully defined.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.

“No one fully understands how or even, if, sustainable development can be achieved; however, there is growing consensus that it must be accomplished at the local level if it is ever to be achieved on a global basis.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.

Agenda 21 and Private Property

“Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” From the report from the 1976 UN’s Habitat I Conference.

“Private land use decisions are often driven by strong economic incentives that result in several ecological and aesthetic consequences…The key to overcoming it is through public policy…” Report from the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, page 112.

“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.” Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Earth Summit, 1992.

Reinvention of Government

“We need a new collaborative decision process that leads to better decisions, more rapid change, and more sensible use of human, natural and financial resources in achieving our goals.” Report from the President’s Council on Sustainable Development

“Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman, ICLEI. The Wildlands Project

“We must make this place an insecure and inhospitable place for Capitalists and their projects – we must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres or presently settled land.” Dave Foreman, Earth First.

What is not sustainable?

Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paves and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment.” UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report.

Hide Agenda 21’s UN roots from the people

“Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy- fixated groups and individuals in our society… This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking LA21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.” J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development.

From 8/17/11 Alert

UN’s Agenda 21 forcing society back to the Ghetto

- Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh  

I came across an article from Baton Rouge, LA, with a sugary title like an elementary singsong, “Grow Forth and Prosper.” Then I zoomed in on the subtitle, “Smart Growth proponents say building up may save Baton Rouge – but only if we do it the right way.” I am not sure which way Kendra R. Chamberlain understands it, but it is obviously the UN Agenda 21 way.

Such articles supporting Smart Growth, Smart Meters, and Sustainable Development have started to appear across the country with regularity in support of UN Agenda 21’s goals of destroying our economy, control and reduce our population, control our land use, redistribution of wealth, under the guise of protecting our environment. Slowly but surely, they have made great strides across the U.S. with very little opposition or understanding from the population. None of the articles mentions UN Agenda 21 at all.

Take Smart Meters for example, they have been installed in Maryland with the help of power company bribes ranging from $40-100, being sold as good for the environment. Now people are suffering six hours every day when their electricity is remotely cut off at consumption peaks.

How many people will have to die of heat stroke? How will electronics fare, especially computers? What would happen to food in the fridge? How will the A/C units cope with power surges? How will homes deal with the humidity that will build up in basements since de-humidifiers will be idle? How will sump pumps route water away from home foundations? There will be a lot of mold growing.

Dominion Power is going to install Smart Meters in Virginia and is telling customers who want to opt out that it is not optional. Really? Who decided that a homeowner could not opt out of a particular device? Since these Smart Meters stream data from homes 24/7 to a remote location, telling somebody everything about your life cycle in that house, when has home surveillance without a warrant become legal in this country?

UN Agenda 21 has decided that America has too much urban sprawl; we have to cut back, de-grow, and return to the pre-car era of the early 20th century. Kendra enthusiastically says that urban sprawl makes us “suffer economically and in terms of peace of mind.” Who knew that giving up our cars, suburban homes, and moving into high-rise tenements pre-determined and built by supporters of UN Agenda 21, will make us happy and pain free?

In Kendra’s liberal view, suburbia has caused a bankrupt bus system, ghost neighborhoods, crumbling infrastructure within the city, “while development in the surrounding suburbs is flourishing.” Kendra, could it be the high crime rate, high school dropout rate, drug use and dealing, lack of societal responsibility for one’s children, lack of work ethic, creation of perennial welfare generations?

The Center for Planning and Excellence, a UN Agenda 21 approved organization, will hold its annual Smart Growth Summit, “a conference of some of the most brilliant and bold minds – both local and national – in urban land use and development in Baton Rouge.” I have news for Kendra, the local and national minds that are making policy for Baton Rouge in conjunction with UN Agenda 21 are in violation of the Constitution.

Smart growth is indeed the “anti-American” dream. The ideals of a white picket fence and two-car garage have not lost appeal, Kendra, to most Americans, perhaps to UN Agenda 21 lap dogs.

The city is aligning with the tenets of Smart Growth, moving people from suburbs, their homes, and their cars, into high-rise ghetto tenements within five minute’s walk or bike from work, shops, school. Buses and trains become the main mode of longer distance transportation because UN Agenda 21 says that agricultural land must be reclaimed for unspoiled nature and roads will be abandoned and no longer repaired. Nobody objects to walking except that you will be trapped like a rat in a five-minute walk maze, which will be your world every day. No spur of the moment trips, no hopping in your car for a 25-mile ride to a friend’s house.

The Dulles Corridor in D.C., when completed, will cost $17-25 toll in one direction, a way to encourage locals out of their cars and into trains. The out-of-country developers do not really care as long as their investment pays off.

Traditional washing machines are disappearing. If you purchase one in the future, the water level will be preset and so will the type of detergent that you can use, all in compliance with UN Agenda 21 goals. Cap and trade is alive and well within UN Agenda 21. Kendra repeats the pre-scripted sales pitch of UN Agenda 21 NGOs (non-governmental organizations), “public-private partnerships are the key to establishing successful smart growth projects.” She has no idea what it entails, it just sound good, warm and fuzzy.

Kendra, we live in a thriving country, with thriving communities and, until recently, a thriving economy that bureaucrats and politicians in Washington have destroyed, we do not need to re-engineer the UN Agenda 21’s “sustainable thriving community.” There is no such thing – most developing countries that have concocted this monstrosity live in substandard conditions because corrupt politicians have filled their coffers with wealth stolen from the UN coffers.

Now they want more from the United States because we are wealthy in their view and we created our wealth not through hard work, entrepreneurship, risk-taking, excellent work ethic, and productivity. In their opinion, we did it at the expense of poor people. Kendra, wake up, you are being duped along with millions of other unsuspecting Americans. You are being useful idiots to UN Agenda 21.

All these grants given to communities and local governments come with strings attached, read the fine print, the main string is the loss of your freedom, land use, cars, and homes. Taking funds away from fixing and building roads in order to buy more buses and build high-rise tenements is not the way most Americans want to live.

This type of tenement development is new to Louisiana and everywhere else, Kendra, that is why they have to lie to people in order to build “consensus.” Incidentally, building consensus is the tactic used by UN Agenda 21 to pass its illegal goals across communities in the U.S. under the pretense that it was the community’s idea, they voted on it, and they passed it, when in reality, the opposite is true. The idea came from higher ups in the UN Agenda 21. “The United Nations has got you fooled. No matter how smart you think you are, it’s got you hoodwinked.” (Michael Benson)

“The smart growth philosophy is rooted in urban designs that dominated the first half of the 20th century, before the automobile became a household commodity.” Why would anyone want to go back to those times, Kendra? Do you have a sick wish to destroy one hundred years of progress?

UN Agenda 21 Smart Growth has five tenets:

Existing Infrastructure (rehabilitate areas already established in the city) Maybe Americans like living on their farms, why force them into ghettoes?

Low Auto Dependence (no driving within a community, offering trolley, buses, walkways, bike paths, rails) What if I don’t want to give up my car? What if I cannot bike, walk, take bus, or train?

High Density (anti-sprawl, plucking us from the suburbs and placing us forcefully into tenements with specific boundaries)

Mixed-Use, Mixed-Income (multi-income community with multi-problems, disease born by overcrowding and close proximity, schools, supermarkets, retails, pharmacies, and work within the confines of the boundaries of the community; if it sounds Orwellian, it is).

Whole Community (all this crowding and proximity is supposed to create a wonderful kumbaya sense of togetherness and community) Yes, I remember the sense of community we had in our communist tenements, noise, dirt, disease, everybody spying on everybody else for a little extra food handouts from the ruling elite, beatings, and disappearances.

After the secret deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, a Mrs. Powell of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” Franklin responded with no hesitation, “A republic, if you can keep it.” It looks like we are not going to keep our republic, we are headed in uncharted territory for us, a mixture of fascism and communist totalitarianism. The sad and frustrating thing is that Americans are acquiescing either because they are uninformed, have not studied history, are not paying attention, or are refusing to believe the evidence before their eyes.

From 8/16/11 Alert

U.S. Downgraded by Credit Markets.  When Will The Economy Come Back?  

by Chuck Harder

[Emphasis mine]  

            My first talk show was back in the early 70’s.  At that time almost everything was MADE IN THE USA.  Factories that employed 20 people actually created over a hundred jobs down the line.  Suppliers, cargo, materials, local food and drink establishments, builders and local merchants all were part of “The Miracle of Main Street.”  Money circulated 7 to 10 times locally and a good standard of living was ready for anyone willing to start on the factory floor.  Today those stores in towns are empty and have plywood over the windows. Yet, at the edge of town sits Wal-Mart sucking up the money and sends it to Arkansas and then China daily.  It’s the big vacuum cleaner for global policies that has ended the “American Dream.”

            Ever since 1985 I have warned America that the economy would go into the tank.  Why?  First there was “Equity Stripping.”   Junk bond kings would buy a successful US company, fire the US workers and move the plant offshore and the savings on labor paid off the bonds.  Example:  Mr. Coffee.

            Soon other factories moved offshore for this simple reason:  If your competitor moved to Asia or Mexico you also had to move to keep you in the price lines and allow for massive advertising campaigns.  You could pay sports stars millions as your product cost to the retailer was still better than the old price.  But it gets worse.  Two US Federal agencies funded with your tax dollars are there to move jobs offshore.  Go and study OPIC and AID.  Overseas Private Investment Corporation is a US Government agency that helped thousands of factories to leave the USA. Go to their site and get out your puke bag.  Your tax dollars fund the agencies to move jobs offshore.  Then there is AID or the Agency for International Development that functions along the same lines as OPIC.  As banks that make loans cannot own a piece of a US factory the rules are gone when you move a plant offshore and bankers can get a piece.  Years ago Charles Kernigan who heads a sewing union pretended to own a plant he wanted to move to 37 cent per hour labor in Honduras and with a hidden camera got video of the reps from the US Agencies telling how he could get loans and save money and how they would help him do so.

            The guiding hand behind all the de-industrialization of the USA is David Rockefeller who along with George H. Bush, Sr. and other associates had a global dream where the US would do the technology and other countries would produce the goods.  This policy would also let banks get back bad loans made around the world. When you moved a factory from the USA it was to cut costs.  Thus in the third-world such as Mexico, South America and Asia the workers cannot afford to buy what they make.  There are no parking lots at the plant for workers as they are gathered up in old buses and returned home after a long shift the same way.  Often the workers must wear different colored shirts that designate what part of the plant they belong in.  This prevents unions from recruiting as the colored clothes lets “security” know when the serfs are up to something.  Reports of labor activists being either blacklisted or shot has been reported in media outlets around the world. 

            Back in the USA our workers cannot compete with “penny wages” that even THE WALL STREET JOURNAL has admitted.  Often soldiers who were called up from the military reserves go overseas on duty and often when they return their job is gone.  I must congratulate CNBC for their series on “American Greed” that has produced hour long documentaries of what’s happening as our economy is exported.  Just when the policy-makers try to give us hope we learn that companies like Wal-Mart employ workers at low wages and let them work no more than 30 hours on the clock.  This keeps benefits down and workers resort to food stamps and financial aid from the states or federal government.  Thus we promoted  moving the factories offshore but we are also subsidizing Wal-Mart as their workers get government benefits to make up for low paychecks.  Thus when the vapid blonde ladies who read the news on TV furrow their brows and are mystified as to what happened to the economy they need to read this.  The downward spiral of our economy has been slowed down with strategies of the Federal Reserve that is not Federal but a private bank owned by twelve companies.

            I howled with laughter over the last twenty years as I saw one trick after another to prop up a “ghost” economy.  One of the areas is constant wars someplace.  When Clinton said we would be in Bosnia for a year you must understand that we’re still there and in other hot spots.  This keeps cash flowing and often a high school graduate goes into the service for a job or has to flip hamburgers and cut lawns.  The massive damage of hurricanes like Andrew and Katrina and others kept the economy going as we had to constantly rebuild.  Now we learn that cheap drywall bought from China emits deadly fumes and thousands of homes have it and it has to be replaced. Copper water pipe from Mexico degrades and causes water to turn blue.

            Alan Greenspan did every trick in the book to keep us afloat as our dollar has devalued.  I watched as he promoted what Wall Street calls MEW or “Mortgage Equity Withdrawal.”  The Fed promoted families to borrow against their home equity with a second mortgage and spend the money. (AKA Reverse Mortgage)

Loan programs with negative amortization meant that you could buy a home with a low monthly payment but the mortgage amount would rise to a point where the house was “loaned out.”  When all that crashed we watched as the Fed told banks to issue giant mortgages to anyone who had a pulse.  No credit check for jumbo loans on a house that soon goes into foreclosure. News reports tell of 22 million houses that are empty and all of the tricks have run out of time.  Now, the USA has to face reality.  Reality is “things as they really are and not what you wish them to be.”

            A recent New York Times article revealed that the mass population of New Orleans and other damaged areas cannot qualify for mortgages to rebuild.  A figure of over 80 percent being turned down was noted.  Many in the deep South inherited their small home from earlier generations and they worked for low pay.  Now, they can’t rebuild.

            In an earlier article I pointed out that only three things create wealth. Manufacturing, mining and agriculture.  With the never ending regulations of OSHA and other federal agencies it’s almost impossible to start and run a business in the USA.  Sure, GM had a good year but how many billions of your dollars has bailed out falling giant companies?

            Did you know that most apple juice comes from China as new regulations make it virtually impossible to own an apple orchard?  Thus they have been cut up into lots for new homes.  Years ago a book titled THE DEATH OF COMMON SENSE told of how the government regulations kill possible regrowth.  Worse, Obama has added over 200 new regulations.  Then the distortions like the Ethanol issue.  Ethanol is made from horse corn that is grown to feed animals and after the process over 90 percent is left and the mash dried for feed.  We do not use sweet corn for Ethanol.

            Recently the fact that FEMA is buying hundreds of millions of MRE’s or “meals ready to eat” shows that they are preparing for something.  Then the FCC bought uncountable millions of new HD TV converter boxes from China and not the USA.  Our military buys supplies offshore from boots to ammo. Thus it will take more than rebuilding from disasters to bring the jobs and factories back.  Until that happens we are stuck in a downward spiral that gets worse by the day.  Just look at the price of an ounce of gold and it all gets real clear.  We’re in trouble.

From 8/15/11 Alert

We The Stupid  

August 2, 2011;  Ann Barnhardt;  

I stand here in abject stupefaction.  The so-called "right" or "Tea Party" in this republic is being so thoroughly rolled and defeated that I am struggling to come up with an adequate violent submission metaphor that does not involve prison rape . . . and they honesty think that they're "winning."  Really?  You call this winning?

·      Obama gets over $2 Trillion to spend before the 2012 election

·      There are no real spending cuts

·      There is a massive tax increase effective January 1, 2013

Obama is going to be handed something in excess of $2 Trillion -- and he has made it perfectly clear that he will spend every penny of it before the November 2012 election.  That's why he kept saying, " . . . so we don't have to do this again", meaning raise the debt ceiling again.  The debt ceiling would only need to be raised if all of the money had been spent.  Therefore, he has stated very clearly that he will spend every penny of any debt ceiling increase.  He is going to burn through $2 Trillion-plus in the next sixteen months.  This was the Obama regime's plan from day one.  Geithner appeared before Congress in early May and told them this in no uncertain terms.  This outcome has been a known quantity all along.  

There are no spending cuts in this plan.  It is all accounting fraud.  Saying that you are not going to spend money in Afghanistan ten years from now is not spending cuts.  Even if you accept the $1 Trillion in cuts over ten years propaganda, that is only $100 Billion per year, which is essentially meaningless relative to the size of the problem.  Furthermore, even a miniscule uptick in interest rates, which given the massive debasement of our currency is now a mathematical certainty, will completely consume that $100 Billion per year.  It's all a joke.   

Back to the $2 Trillion that Obama is being handed.  I honestly think that most people in this country have no understanding of simple counting numbers.  Do you not understand how much a trillion is?  Where do you think this money is going to come from -- who has two trillion dollars to loan us?  China?  Nope.  Not even close.  China's entire GDP is only $6 Trillion.  Do you honestly think that China is going to loan us one third of their total annual economic production?  China was a huge creditor to us back when $100 Billion was considered a staggeringly large amount of money - which was four years ago.  Now $100 Billion is literally a rounding error.  Do you realize that there are only a handful of nations of this planet that even have a GDP in excess of $2 Trillion?  If these countries loaned us every penny of their GDP, it wouldn't even be $2 Trillion:

Canada ($1.57 T)
India ($1.54 T)
Russia ($1.46 T)  

Are you starting to understand the scope of what we are talking about now?  Obama is going to embezzle considerably more than the entire economic output of Canada, India or Russia to his cronies before the 2012 election -- and that is just counting this round of spending.  This doesn't include the other $5 Trillion he has already burned through since 2009.  

China is not going to lend us this money because they simply don't have anything close to that much money to lend.  This $2 Trillion is going to come from the Federal Reserve.  Where is the Federal Reserve going to get $2 Trillion?  They are going to print it out of thin air.  We are in the midst of the largest currency debasement ever seen in human history.  There is only one result that can come of currency debasement:  hyperinflation and total economic and societal collapse.  

Have you also forgotten the so-called "Bush tax cuts"?  Yeah.  Those rates are going to expire on January 1, 2013.  Obama will presumably still be occupying the Oval Office at that time assuming that he is not forcibly removed or that the Republic is still intact at that time.  Taxes will increase significantly at that point, and the Congressional Budget Office has scored everything put before them given the fact of the massive tax increases on 1/1/2013.  Do you understand that?  When these Republicans and even these so-called "Tea Party Freshmen" tell you that there are no tax hikes in their "plan," they are consciously, willfully, knowingly lying to you through their teeth.  

Finally, I do not understand how it can possibly be that conservative writers are still addressing Obama as if he is actually trying to help the economy, but his well-intentioned policies are failing.   

Obama is the enemy.  Obama is a Marxist-Communist usurper and puppet front for a cabal of Marxist-Communists who are actively trying to destroy the United States of America.  Everything they have done, are doing, and will do has the single goal of collapsing and destroying the U.S. economy, military, constitutional government and culture.  What part of "Marxist Revolution" do you not understand?   

The Obama regime is not a failure.  The Obama regime is not incompetent.  The Obama regime has achieved more in two and a half years than anyone could have possibly foreseen.  It has debased the currency by 50% of the GDP and guaranteed that our economy will collapse.  It has looted the Treasury for more than the size of a top-ten economy and embezzled that wealth into the hands of their fellow Marxists in preparation for the final collapse of the United States.  It has ground the economy of the United States to a screeching halt.  It has destabilized the entire Muslim world and ensured that there will be a nuclear war centered around Israel within the decade.   

The Obama regime has no interest whatsoever in "stimulus" or "getting folks back to work."  How can you not understand this?  How can we possibly win this war if we refuse to come to terms with the fact that we are in fact fighting a war. [Emphasis added.]  

God save the United States of America, because the people are far too stupid to do it themselves.

The Fundamental Transformation of America  

Alexander's Essay – August 4, 2011 
The Next American Revolution
What is the Authority for Rebellion?
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

(PUBLISHER'S WARNING: The following essay may cause heartburn and knee-jerk reactions, especially in those who are predisposed to "give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety." But as Benjamin Franklin concluded, they "deserve neither liberty nor safety." For such feeble souls, Samuel Adams advised, "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!" For those who are not cast among that faint-hearted lot, please read on.)
I receive hundreds of messages every day from Patriots across the nation. For the last three years, one thematic question has emerged with ever-increasing frequency. To paraphrase that question: "What is the authority to rebel against the central government?"
That question is most often asked by those who have taken their oath of allegiance to our Constitution, particularly active duty, reserve and veteran military personnel. Typical is this note from a disabled combat Patriot this week: "Please clarify for me when my solemn oath to 'support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign AND [his emphasis] domestic,' kicks in."
Such questions were once considered too radical and discordant for consideration in civil discourse. However, as Rule of Law enshrined in our Constitution has been all but completely usurped by the rule of men through the Left's so-called living constitution, the frequency and tenor of questions about the future of Essential Liberty for our once-great Republic is propelling them into mainstream debate.
The unfortunate ascension of Barack Hussein Obama and his socialist cadres had a silver lining: It revitalized the spirit of American Patriotism in dozens of millions of our countrymen. The imminent threat to Liberty posed by Democratic Socialism is the catalyst driving this great awakening and it is spreading.
To the question of the authority to rebel against government, we turn to the Constitution's guiding document, our Declaration of Independence. It clearly affirms the "unalienable rights" upon which our Constitution was instituted, and those rights supersede the authority of the Constitution itself as they are the inherent rights of man.
This authorizing language reads as follows: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..."
So, is it time for another American Revolution?
The answer to that question depends upon the answer to a more fundamental question: Is it too late to restore authority of our Constitution? Moreover, will the current dire circumstances result in a sunset or sunrise on Liberty?
In my enthusiastic analysis, the degraded state of the union presents a great opportunity for restoration of Rule of Law, and this sunrise on Liberty is already in progress under the broad heading of the Tea Party movement. Further, having been in close proximity to revolutions on foreign soil, I am intimately aware that restoration (or revolution without shots fired) is a far more desirable path than the violent one -- not that the latter must ever be excluded as an option.
But behind every sunrise is a sunset. As Ronald Reagan warned thirty years ago, when the "Reagan Revolution" temporarily restored our nation's course toward Liberty, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States when men were free."
Make no mistake; there are formidable obstacles to the restoration of Liberty. The most daunting of these impediments is complacency, the result of either a false sense of comfort, institutionalized ignorance or both. Nonetheless, I still believe that the ballot box is a viable alternative to the bullet box at this juncture. Every effort to work within what remains of our Constitution's framework to restore its Rule of Law, as outlined in The Patriot Declaration must be exhausted.
If the 2012 election cycle does not provide sufficient momentum toward the goal of restored Liberty, there are substantial measures of civil disobedience that can ratchet up the pressure -- measures which will find support among true conservatives in both the House and Senate.
Post your comment on civil disobedience
Either way, we face a long, uphill battle. It has taken many years to degrade Rule of Law, and it will take many years to fully restore it.
As for timing, Obama has already dropped a debt bomb on our economy, the goal of which is to "fundamentally transform the United States of America." The greatest systemic risk to Liberty that this act of economic violence poses is the destruction of free enterprise by way of taxation, regulation and insurmountable debt. U.S. debt has now surpassed 100 percent of our annual gross domestic product (economic output).
It should, of course, be the highest aspiration of every Patriot to restore our Constitution's Rule of Law, a fundamental principle of which is the separation of economy and state. But is there still time, and are we sufficiently resolute?
Leading the forces arrayed against us are the statist extremists, the "useful idiots" on the Left who now vilify as "terrorists" those seeking to restore Rule of Law.
In a closed-door Democratic Caucus meeting this week hosted by Veep Joe Biden, Demo Rep. Mike Doyle said of the recent budget negotiations, "We have negotiated with terrorists. This small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money." Biden, to his everlasting shame, concurred: "They have acted like terrorists."
Biden, Doyle, and the Kool-Aid-drinking legions of the Left are formidable. But history shows that Barack Obama's model for prosperity, is a blueprint for economic collapse, a model that is antithetical to prosperity and ultimately at odds with Liberty.
Patriots, we have an obligation to secure Liberty for our posterity, and in the words of John Adams, "Our obligations to our country never cease but with our lives."
Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter to James Madison dated January 30, 1787: "I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. ... An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."
Today, Tea Party "terrorists" should expect no such accommodation, as "honest republican governors" are few and far between.
That same year, Jefferson famously wrote more pointedly to John Adams's son-in-law, William Smith, "What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must from time to time be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if the rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
Short of the bullet box, it is my fervent prayer that on 6 November 2012, an unprecedented army of American Patriots will use the ballot box to further alter the course of our nation toward Liberty and Rule of Law.
Do we have the momentum? Tell me what you think
That notwithstanding, American Patriots remain well aware of both the authority for rebellion and more importantly the obligation to overcome tyranny, as enumerated in the Declaration of Independence. There may come a time to fight, and our Founders wisely extended to us the means for rebellion. We also fully understand the cost outlined in its closing: "For the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor."
We do.
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, The Patriot Post

7 Responsibilities You Have As An American

John Hawkins  

1) It's your responsibility to pay your own way. Nobody owes you a living and that includes other taxpayers. You have a responsibility to pay your own bills and not be a leech. That means, over the course of your lifetime, paying as much in taxes as you take out in services and direct payments from the government. If, by some horrible set of circumstances you feel compelled to go on the dole, you should at least be ashamed to take hand-outs from your fellow citizens.

2) It's your responsibility to take care of your children. If you have kids, you have a duty to take care of them. That means paying money to feed, clothe, and house them. It means being a part of their life and doing your best to raise them, teach them right from wrong, and help them have a better life than you've had. This seems to be so simple that it's practically instinctive to most people, but apparently, a lot of people don't get it.

3) It's your responsibility to look out for future generations of Americans. Whether you think of America as "the land of opportunity, "a shining city on a hill," "the land of the free and the home of the brave," or the "last, best hope of mankind," we all have a duty to preserve what's great about this nation so that future generations of Americans can experience it just as we have. How careless, how irresponsible, how unforgivable it would be if our children and our children's children have to grow up in an America that is no longer extraordinary.

4) You have a responsibility to be an informed voter. In recent years there has been a big push to get all Americans to vote. That's sort of like giving everyone a gun and encouraging them to immediately squeeze off a few rounds. If they don't know anything about what they're doing, they're as likely to hurt themselves or someone else as they are to do good. The same goes for voting. Not everyone has to be a political junky, but it would be nice if people took the time to become well-informed about the ins-and-outs of the basic political issues we have to deal with in this country instead of voting on who has the best attack ads. Being an informed voter is a responsibility. Being an uninformed voter is flipping a coin – heads, America wins and tails, it loses.

5) You have a responsibility to support and defend the Constitution. The Constitution is the "set of rules" that we go by as a people and most of the "rights" are guaranteed by the Constitution. Yet, the Constitution is under daily attack in this country by activists and politicians who feel the ends justify the means along with judges who claim to believe in a "living Constitution," which is functionally no different than not having a Constitution at all. You may not win every fight to adhere to the Constitution, but it's a battle worth fighting because no document does more to safeguard the rights of all Americans.

6) You have a responsibility to put America first. The UN, other nations, and "the world" don't really care very much whether you live or die. Not that Americans in Boston are going to shed tears if an American in LA passes on either, but we at least have a certain small, but meaningful level of kinship with each other by virtue of being Americans.

9/11 was a good example of that. Most other nations around the world said a few kind words for us and seemed to have a few days to a few weeks’ worth of goodwill towards us over it. But nearly 10 years later, it was other Americans who got revenge for the fallen by putting a bullet in Bin Laden's forehead. You should always look out for your own country because it's the biggest group of people on the planet who might actually care whether you live or die.

7) You have a responsibility to be a good person. As Samuel Adams noted way back in 1779,

A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.

Honesty, honor, godliness, industry, respect for the law, morality, and truthfulness are the wheels on which our entire republic rides. If the American people are no damn good, then no matter how well the Constitution is written, how well we're governed, or how much good fortune comes our way, we are doomed as a nation.

SOME OF YOU WILL APPRECIATE THIS AND SOME OF YOU WILL NOT.

I DO NOT APOLOGIZE FOR POSTING THIS BECAUSE ALL OF IT IS TRUE.

If any other of our presidents had doubled the National Debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

If any other of our presidents had then proposed to Double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?

If any other of our presidents had criticized a State Law that he admitted he never even read, would you think that he is just an ignorant hot Head?

If any other of our presidents joined the country of Mexico and sued a State in the United States to force that State to continue to allow Illegal Immigration, would you question his patriotism and wonder who's side he was on?

If any other of our presidents had pronounced the Marine Corps as if it were the Marine Corpse, would you think him an Idiot?

If any other of our presidents had put 87,000 workers out of work by arbitrarily placing a moratorium on offshore oil drilling on companies that have one of the best safety records of any industry because one foreign company had an accident, would you have agreed?

If any other of our presidents had used a forged document as the basis of the moratorium that would render 87000 American workers unemployed, would you support him?

If any other of our presidents had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

If any other of our presidents had spent hundreds of thousands of Dollars to take his First Lady to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

If any other of our presidents had reduced your retirement plan holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?

If any other of our presidents had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

If any other of our presidents had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If any other of our presidents had given the Queen of England an IPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought it to be a proud moment for America?

If any other of our presidents had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you have approved?

If any other of our presidents had visited Austria and made reference to the nonexistent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

If any other of our presidents had filled his Cabinet and circle of Advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their Income Taxes, would you have approved?

If any other of our presidents had stated that there were 57 states in the United States , wouldn't you have had second thoughts about his capabilities?

If any other of our presidents would have flown all the way to Denmark to make a five minute speech about how the Olympics would benefit him walking out his front door in his home town, would you not have thought he was a self-important, conceited, egotistical jerk?

If any other of our presidents had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was "The 5th of May" (Cinco de Mayo), and then continue to flub it when he tried again, wouldn't you have winced in embarrassment?

If any other of our presidents
had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel
to go plant a single tree on Earth Day,
would you have concluded he's a Hypocrite?

If any other of our presidents' Administrations had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11?

If any other of our presidents had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest, with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans, would you want it made into a major ongoing Political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

If any other of our presidents had created the positions of 32 Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America, would you have approved?

If any other of our presidents had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Can't think of anything? Then you'd better start worrying. He's done all these things in 28 months -- and you have less than 19 months to come up with an answer.

Every statement and action in this email is factual and correctly attributable to Barrack Hussein Obama. Every bumble is a matter of record and completely verifiable.

"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."  

You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don't multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

Dr. Adrian Rogers
Dr. Rogers' 1996 work Ten Secrets for a Successful Family 

Liberal vs Conservative: A Spiritual Battle.

·         Posted by Lloyd Marcus on June 5, 2011 at 10:53pm

·         View Lloyd Marcus's blog

Without beating around the bush, I believe the battle being fought in America today goes beyond politics; right vs left. It is a spiritual battle; good vs evil.

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” Ephesians 6:12

The mindset of the American left is a spirit of Antichrist which is man making himself God.

Before writing me off as a Bible nut, please hear me out. Understanding this reality will explain much of the left's behavior. Because they believe man is God, in their insane arrogance, the left think they can fix everything; legislate equal outcomes and even save or destroy the planet.

Make no mistake about it folks, we are in a spiritual battle. Ask yourself. Specifically, what about Sarah Palin inspires such visceral hatred from the left? The word is “wholesome”.

For the most part, Palin promotes love for God, family and country. She is passionately determined to thwart Obama's plan to “fundamentally transform America”.

While realizing Palin is human and does not walk on water, Palin epitomizes heartland principles and values embraced by most Americans. Thus, we are Palin and Palin is us.

The large number of Christians in the tea party believe in right and wrong. The left has a huge problem with the concept of right and wrong. Their religion of Liberalism embraces Moral Relativism.

For these reasons, Palin and tea party are as repulsive to liberals as showing Dracula the cross.

There is definitely an anti-wholesome, anti-goodness vibe coming out of Hollywood. Hollywood leftists are vehemently anti death penalty. They rally around convicted murderers. They think anyone harming a puppy should be beaten within any inch of their life. These Hollywood libs pride themselves as being Lords of Compassion and Tolerance.

And yet, these same libs have a cow whenever someone merely suggests to a woman that she think twice before aborting her baby. Tell me there “ain't” something spiritually wrong with such a mindset.

Because liberal elitists think man is God, they assume moral authority to confiscate as much control over our lives we simple minded god fearing peons will allow, including procreation.

I picked up a government funded brochure at my local library which basically said birthing babies is an irresponsible abuse of the planet.

Folks, this is leftist control freak hogwash! The seven billion people who live on the planet could fit in Texas enjoying about the same amount of living space as residents of New York.

God said be fruitful and multiply. But then, what the heck does God know?

In her book, “Godless”, Ann Coulter said, “If a Martian landed in America and set out to determine the nation's official state religion, he would have to conclude it is Liberalism, while Christianity and Judaism are prohibited by law”.

I concur with Ms Coulter. The mainstream media is controlled by zealots of Liberalism who I believe are driven by a spirit of Antichrist; man is God. Thus, only man can and will fix everything.

Why does the left aggressively demand that we show utmost respect for every religion under the sun except Christianity? Remember when libs Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar stormed off the set of The View TV program when they concluded Bill O'Reilly dissed Muslims?

And yet, Rosie O'Donnell outrageously stated “Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America”. Not one peep of disagreement or disapproval from the left.

Islam suppresses women. And yet, liberal self proclaimed feminists Goldberg, Behar and O'Donnell illogically defend Islam. These three feminists despise the extraordinarily successful Christian liberated woman, Sarah Palin. Rosie O'Donnell even lamented that Osama bin Laden did not get a fair trial.

Unquestionably, these women have issues with America and Christians; a spirit of Antichrist. At the center of Christianity is a divine Jesus. If Jesus is God, the left is not.

Even our most liberal president ever, Obama, dissed heartland Americans for “bitterly clinging to their god and guns”. Would a true Christian berate folks for finding security in trusting God?

Like an episode of Star Trek, the left believes universal peace can be achieved via America apologizing and admitting to the world that “we suck”, surrendering our power, signing treaties and singing a few verses of “Kumbaya”.

They believe the greatest source of evil in the world is warmongering Christian white guys like George Bush. If only Bush had, “Given peace a chance”.

Liberals always cater to man's lowest base instincts. They hate standards for behavior, labeling all rebuke of bad behavior as being intolerant and judgmental. And yet, they believe without divine influence, man is capable of someday achieving universal peace. Totally absurd.

Christians believe that though we strive to do the right thing, the heart of man is critically flawed which is why we were in need of a savior, Jesus Christ.

Obama's promise to “fundamentally transform America” is a spiritual attack on our freedom, liberty and culture.

Despite the left's relentless attempts to ban God from America's public square, the emergence and power of the tea party tells me God is still on our side.

Mr. Obama, though your liberal zealots perceive you to be “the messiah”, God is still on the throne. Come November 2012, you're fired!

Lloyd Marcus, Proud Unhyphenated American

Vice Chair, www.CampaignToDefeatObama.com

THREE OBAMA OFFICIALS IMPLICATED IN SEDITIOUS PLOT
TO DISMANTLE US CONSTITUTION

URGENT UPDATE: NEW EVIDENCE COMES OUT OF OBAMA ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS' INVOLVEMENT IN PLAN TO EFFECTUALLY REWRITE THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS. SOROS-FUNDED EFFORT TO FORCE AMERICA INTO ACCEPTING A MARXIST MANIFESTO BY 2012 UNDERWAY IN OBAMA FACTION, LED BY KEY EXECUTIVE BRANCH APPOINTEES.  

Just days after Marxist Free Market Saboteur Steve Lerner's plans for mass May Day national economic disruptions have become known via secretly caught exposure of a taped meeting with other extremists, now new evidence implicates the Obama White House in sedition. Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein; his wife Samantha Power, Senior Director of the National Security Council; and Department of Justice Attorney General Eric Holder are key players in a related plot to dismantle and destroy America's Constitutional republic.

In April 2005, Sunstein opened a conference at Yale Law School sponsored by George Soros' Open Society Institute entitled, "The Constitution in 2020." The event was designed as a forum to craft the agenda and assign the tasks for changing the nature and interpretation of the Constitution into a fully "progressive" Marxist Manifesto by the year 2020. Sunstein was a natural fit for the conference, as his 2004 book, "The Second Bill of Rights: FDR'S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever" proposed a radical new document to replace America's traditional Bill of Rights.

The conference was co-sponsored by the American Constitution Society, another hard Left Marxist organization which seeks to rewrite the Constitution. Attorney General Eric Holder not only previously served on the ACS Board of Directors, but is keynote speaker for their 2011 Convention.

The Obama faction onslaught against America is coming from all sides. A union thug with White House connections plots to crash the American economy while high ranking Obama officials seek to subvert the Constitution and Bill of Rights. We MUST compel Congress to open investigations and HALT the Obama wrecking crew that is daily dismantling America!

New audio has just been released which outlines a very real plan to collapse the American economy— including crashing the stock market and "bring down the banks" — in an effort to finally and irrevocably bring about the fundamental change, radical change, Obama promised. The sinister plan is set to take place the first week of May… and evidence suggests the plan may go all the way to the White House.  

Steve Lerner is well known in union thug circles as the guy who uses intimidation to ensure success. March 19, 2011 Steve Lerner met with Abby Scher of Brooklyn College CUNY, Gerardo Dominguez of the Mexican Americans Workers Association, John Atols of ACORN and a number of other openly Marxist activists. Surrounded by fellow radicals , Mr. Lerner, unaware he was being recorded, felt comfortable enough to lay out his step by step plan to "put a boot in the wheel" of the American economy – crashing the stock market and orchestrating a complete banking collapse – in an effort to force Marxism upon the masses. Full audio with transcripts of Lerner's plot can be found on You Tube, at The Blaze website where this story broke, and all over the Internet.

Lerner identifies this as a union-driven plan, presumably crafted by his cronies at the SEIU, and he calls for the aid of community organizers. But evidence suggests Lerner may already have the assistance of the Community Organizer in Chief –Barack Hussein Obama.

White House visitor logs show that Stephen Lerner has visited the White House repeatedly over the last two years. At least one of these visits was arranged by the office of then White House Political Director Patrick Gaspard – one of Lerner's previous SEIU colleagues and former leader of one of the most notoriously militant SEUI chapters. Gaspard, not coincidentally, is a close Obama advisor who is now the Executive Director of the Democratic National Party and a key player on Obama's 2012 election team.

Obama made clear in a now infamous 2008 campaign rally that SEIU's agenda is his agenda. Obama led a SEIU member chant after recalling how he started his early "organizing career" with SEIU troops on the ground, and went on to declare, "Just imagine what we can do together. Just imagine a President whose life's work is your (SEIU's) work"! It seems we no longer need to imagine. The present occupant of the Oval Office has brought sedition to the presidency — the highest office in the land. Barack Obama's own front group "Organizing for America" helped stage the recent Wisconsin "Days of Rage" protests that were notable for union-led violence, death threats and radical acts of intimidation, and now it appears he and his administration may be connected to a far-left coalition actively plotting to collapse the American economy.  

My friends, Stephen Lerner's closed-attendance discussion at The Left Forum was not some simple academic and theoretical discussion of what revolutionary resistance might look like. It was a high-level presentation of a very real, well thought out plan that is underway for economic terrorism, and a recruitment call to leftwing radical leaders of other organizations to join in it. Stephen Lerner's terrorist plans, and actions of incitement and enlistment are outright sedition, all potentially prosecutable offenses.

In normal circumstances, we could count on the Department of Justice to investigate and uphold the rule of law. But alas, as we have seen with Eric Holder's refusal to prosecute colleagues, supporters and friends of Obama, including the election fraud and racist thuggery at the hands of the New Black Panthers, the once venerable DOJ is a rogue agency in a rogue administration, and can no longer be trusted to do its duty. Why have not the murky, possibly orchestrated causes behind the terrible economic crisis of the 2008 national fiscal collapse been investigated and disclosed to the nation? No, we must instead call upon this 112th Congress, and demand an immediate investigation of Stephen Lerner, and all of those who participated in his conspiratorial call to anarchy, sedition and economic terrorism on March 19. That investigation must include disclosure of all the participants and plotters lurking behind the scenes who are actively working to disrupt and destroy America — even if that road leads us directly to the White House.  

This is no longer a matter of speculation. The Marxist plan to smash our commercial republic is alive and active within the corridors of power in America as never before. Their plans to launch their latest assault on these United States is scheduled for, of course, May Day — May 1, 2011 — and has been sounded to their foot soldiers as a very real and potentially calamitous call to harm our nation. We were warned when Obama first appeared on the national scene that he was at the least an academic Marxist surrounded by radicals, and a menace to the security, sovereignty and prosperity of the nation. Now there is evidence in abundance to confirm that judgment. We MUST force Congress to act NOW – before the evil forces that mean to destroy America are able to implement their plans. The very survival of our country is at stake if we do not take seriously the threat within. We implore you, fax Congress TODAY.

For America,

Patriot PAC – www.PatriotPAC.org

The irony of this article appearing in the English edition of Pravda (Russian on-line newspaper) defies description.  Why can a Russian newspaper print the following yet the American media can't/won't see it?   

American Capitalism Gone With A Whimper  

      
It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American descent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people. 
  
True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists. 
  
Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters. 
  
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas than the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a Burger King burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy".  Pride blind the foolish. 
  
Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power.  Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America . 
  
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama.  His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive.  His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America 's short history but in the world.  If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Weimar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe. 
  
These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all.  First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, losses, and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars.  These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison.  Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes.  Should we congratulate them? 
  
These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another.  They are also usurping the rights, duties, and powers of the American congress (parliament).  Again, congress has put up little more than a whimper to their masters. 
  
Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motors) president step down from leadership of his company.  That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now has the power, the self-given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will.  Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions. 
  
So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies.  I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK 's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster.  Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride. 
  
Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but a "free man" whimper. 
  
So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance, and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses?  Senator Barney Frank, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort.  He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive. 
  
The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.  
The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest, and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is.  The world will only snicker. 

Stanislav Mishin© 1999-2009.. «PRAVDA.Ru». When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors.   

Source:Pravda.Ru URL: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0

Return to the top  

justdeva

justindevault