Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for June, 2013

Image

“Hello, Mr. President?”


Chuck Norris

Is It Liberal Craziness Or Something Much Worse?


By /- See more at: http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/2013/06/is-it-liberal-craziness-or-something-much-worse/#sthash.NNzuX0Ny.dpuf

let me thinkSince the complete takeover of our government by the Left in 2008, we have become accustomed to a level of craziness that surpasses belief. Oh sure, you cannot lay the responsibility for the disappearance of common sense as we used to know it at Obama’s feet; the craziness began long before he took over.

It has just gotten much worse. Our society at this point resembles a house that is falling in from a termite infestation.

The undermining has been going on for a long time, with those voracious little insects nibbling away at the structure of the house with their tunneling over a long period of time, but the foundation of the house has only recently become so weak as to begin caving in altogether.

As a writer, I used to be able to use hyperbole to make a point. Hyperbole is a form of exaggeration, where you can set up a literary premise that is far-fetched, but people understand that the situation you set up metaphorically is actually what is going on.

For example, I remember a Dave Barry column where he discussed people with outrageous “comb-over’s”, so that as their male pattern baldness proceeds and the follically challenged area grows, the comb-over begins lower and lower until it becomes what Barry calls a “sideburn from hell”.

In recent times, however, it has become more and more difficult to imagine some situation that is so ridiculous that there is not a special interest group advocating it. What seems to be missing is common sense, which is simply a societal understanding of what is “normal”.

This has been replaced by a generalized sense that there are no absolutes, and that to imply that there are means that somehow you are interfering with someone’s “rights”. In point of fact, it is becoming very difficult to have a conversation with a person you have just met about much of anything but the weather, because since society has been replaced balkanized special interest groups, you risk “offending” your new acquaintance by discussing anything but the most trivial matters.

If, in trying to make small talk with a woman you have just met, you say that you would like to buy her a cup of coffee, you may get lambasted for being sexist and condescending, or you may get pilloried for not seeking out an organic, fair-market brew, or who knows what. So, you just comment on the weather.

In light of this craziness, when we read the stories posted daily about children being abused by their schools for incidents having to do with guns or gun imagery, we tend to relegate it simply to Leftist insanity.

Undoubtedly you are already familiar with some of the most famous incidents, which seemed to grow exponentially in both frequency and absurdity immediately following the Sandy Hook incident.

We have the case of the kindergarten boy who brought a cap gun he had recently acquired onto a school bus to show his friend, who had shown him his water pistol the previous day.

School gestapo interrogated him for over two hours, causing him to wet his pants from fear, then called his parents and suspended him for two weeks for his horrible crime.

But it is not necessary to possess a “gun”, toy or otherwise, to incur the wrath of gun-hating liberal school officials. Perhaps the first of these incidents to come to national attention was the infamous “Pop-Tart” case, where an 8 year-old Baltimore student chewed his pastry into the shape of mountain.

Since it wound up looking more like a gun than a mountain, he said, “bang bang.” Anne Arundel County thought police decided that this was an “inappropriate” use of his imagination and promptly suspended him from school.

In a similarly ludicrous vein, a few weeks ago, a seven-year-old Virginia boy was suspended for pretending a pencil was a gun at his Suffolk school.

It is not, however, necessary to have a toy gun, a pencil, or a Pop-Tart to exceed the bound of liberal propriety. A sixth grader at Northern Middle School in Owings, MD, was talking with friends about the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre on the way home from school on the bus.

According to his Dad, “He said, I wish I had a gun to protect everyone. He wanted to defeat the bad guys. That’s the context of what he said. He wanted to be the hero.” The bus driver hauled him back to school to be questioned by the principal, Darrel Prioleau. “The principal told me that with what happened at Sandy Hook if you say the word ‘gun’ in my school you are going to get suspended for 10 days,” the boy said in an interview with WMAL.com.

Worse yet, deputy sheriff of the county was also called in and said “he would need to search their home.”

The deputy arrived at their home 15 minutes later armed with a four-page questionnaire, full of intrusive questions, which the Dad was told he needed to answer in order for the boy to return to school. After the questionnaire was completed, the deputy started to search the home, until the boy’s Dad finally had enough and asked the deputy to leave.

This is unfortunately not the only incident of a child simply talking about a gun that has led to draconian measures by hysterical school officials.

On February 29th, Noah Aguirre, a first-grader at James McGee Elementary School in Pasco, SD, was sent home after another student told their teacher that Noah had a gun with him. In reality, Noah had no gun, but was still was punished for talking with other students about the Nerf guns the family recently bought during a trip to Lincoln City, Ore.

The girl who reported him felt her “health and safety were threatened”. It has been a long time since I was in the first grade, but not long enough to forget how some kids tattle to the teacher to get other kids they do not like in trouble. It would appear that the teacher and officials know very little about the dynamics of interpersonal relations in the first grade.

Since liberals are inherently not very bright, and are sufficiently detached from reality that they are unable to see the abject failure of their various utopian schemes whenever and wherever they have been tried, this sort of idiotic behavior by school personnel doesn’t surprise us.

The tendency is to assume that these incidents are merely aberrations by over-enthusiastic idiots that need to be reined in.

The problem is bigger than that, however. If you looks at these cases as isolated incidents, you will fail to see the forest for the trees. If you connect the dots, a far more alarming picture emerges. Consider “hate speech” legislation;  you can see how far this administration has already gone to abrogate your First Amendment right to free speech.

What is “hate speech” exactly? Well, the legal definition is … that it is up to some judge to decide whether he/she approves of what you said or not. Not only do you no longer have a right to express yourself, you don’t even know whether what you say is “offensive” until someone decides after the fact.

With “hate crime” legislation, we have a new category of crimes based upon what some judge thinks you may have been thinking at the time. So, if you cave in someone’s head with a beer bottle, which is not nearly as bad as if you might have been thinking that you didn’t like the ball team on his jersey when you hit him.

Not only are you no longer allowed to say what you want, you can’t even think it.

Viewed in that light, the anti-gun paranoia playing out in the schools is a very heavy-handed form of liberal bullying. In another context it would be correctly labeled brain washing.

Stories of POW’s brainwashed during the Korean and Vietnamese wars recount how physical and mental techniques included intimidation, deprivation, and reward/punishment to bring prisoners not only to comply but ultimately to identify with their captors.

A lengthy interrogation until the subject loses control of his bladder through fear is a classic example of these techniques. “Zero tolerance” in the schools for any “gun talk”, constant propaganda about how bad guns are, and exaggerated punishment for the slightest infraction are brainwashing techniques that are being used on your children as we speak. Your school may not yet have had an incident that has attracted national attention, but rest assured that the subtle brainwashing is taking place nonetheless.

The best solution to this is to get rid of all the leftists in the school system.

Since that would leave the nation virtually without educators, which might not be a bad thing, the next best solution would be to home-school your children. It is both astounding and instructive to talk to home-schooled kids who have not been exposed to liberal harangues on daily basis and see that they are actually able to think, and that they enjoy shooting as well, by the way.

The third solution is to take your kids to the range. Take your neighbor’s kids, and your kid’s friends if possible. Teach them proper gun use, and let them enjoy their guns. Anyone I have ever taught to shoot, in all my years as an NRA instructor, has absolutely loved the sport.

Those who don’t have usually been introduced to shooting by some idiot who hands them a full-power .44 magnum to learn with instead of a fun .22. Properly introduced to the sport, who doesn’t enjoy shooting reactive targets with a handgun, or shooting clay pigeons with a shotgun? Get the kids away from the computer games and let them see how much more fun the real thing is!

Make no mistake about it, the Left is out to get your guns, and the way they will do it is through your friends, your neighbors, and your children that they have brainwashed. It is up to each and every one of us to make sure that we do not allow this to happen.

Eric Holder Invokes the Doofus Defense


by

Read more: http://patriotupdate.com/articles/eric-holder-invokes-the-doofus-defense/#ixzz2VrAxVRK5

holderfox

People accused of malfeasance aren’t usually tasked with investigating themselves for obvious reasons. The guy caught with his hand in the cookie jar has a tendency to conclude that the cookies are all present and accounted for.

Attorney General Eric Holder, on the other hand, is routinely tasked with investigating his own shenanigans and routinely determines that everything is on the level. Amidst the furor concerning the DOJ’s spying on Associated Press and FOX News journalists, President Obama ordered the formation of a panel to “review existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters.” Heading up the panel will be AG Holder, hardly a disinterested party.

Holder initially testified before Congress that “with regard to the potential prosecution of the press for disclosure of material, that is not something that I’ve ever been involved in, heard of or would think would be a wise policy.” That’s a comprehensive statement with no wiggle room. Hear no evil, see no evil. Then came a bombshell: Holder personally approved a search warrant on FOX News reporter James Rosen’s emails and phone records. Holder knew about at least one such investigation and perjured himself all the same.

The DOJ now says that Holder’s statement was technically true because no one was seriously considering prosecuting Rosen. Apparently the DOJ investigates reporters for violations of the Espionage Act whom it never intends to prosecute. Either prosecuting Rosen was on the table or the investigation was a time-consuming fishing expedition pursued at great cost to the taxpayer. I suspect the former.

This is not the first time that America’s top law enforcement official has been caught telling fibs under oath and for the same purpose—so that he can feign ignorance about what happens in his own DOJ. His defense seems to be that he isn’t responsible for the department’s transgressions because he’s irresponsible and unaccountable. We’ll call this “the doofus defense.”

On May 3, 2011, he testified before Congress that he had only learned of Operation Fast and Furious, the ill-fated gunwalking scandal that placed American guns into the hands of Mexican mobsters, “for the first time in the past few weeks.” His testimony was contradicted by a July 2010 internal DOJ memo directed to Holder that outlined the program by name. Holder invoked the doofus defense, claiming that he doesn’t read many of his briefing memos.

But the memos kept coming. During the summer of 2010, National Drug Intelligence Center Director Michael Walther sent Holder five memos concerning the operation. Lenny Breuer, the head of the DOJ’s criminal division, sent Holder yet another memo relevant to the operation in November of 2010. That’s seven memos that Holder is now claiming not to have read.

Baloney. He knew. The doofus defense may work once but not seven times.

Eric Holder has thus perjured himself on multiple occasions and never faced legal consequences. Obama’s AG is entirely above the law.

Not only is he entitled to lie but also to blow off congressional subpoenas. During the aforementioned Fast and Furious investigation, Holder was ordered to turn over documents relevant to the case. He initially refused, then backtracked. In hopes of staving off a contempt resolution, the AG promised to deliver them personally to Congressman Darrell Issa at a private meeting. When the day arrived, Holder delivered a briefing on the contents of the documents rather than the documents themselves. Congress then voted to find Holder in contempt, which he undoubtedly was.

Lesser mortals would be in jail right now but not Eric Holder. The job of prosecuting the DOJ chief fell to the DOJ. Sound familiar? Deputy AG James M. Cole, a subordinate of Holder, explained in a letter to Congress that, “The longstanding position of the Department of Justice has been and remains that we will not prosecute an Executive Branch official under the contempt of Congress statute for withholding subpoenaed documents pursuant to a presidential assertion of executive privilege.”

Oh, darn. The DOJ would really love to prosecute the DOJ but they simply can’t because Obama won’t let them. I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that the defendant, if charges were to be brought, would be the big cheese at the very department pursuing the prosecution.

Eric Holder has decided that Eric Holder did nothing wrong. Eric Holder is free to go now.

The man appointed to enforce the nation’s laws can’t be bothered to follow them himself. He spies on reporters and furnishes underworld figures with boatloads of guns, then lies under oath and stonewalls congressional investigators to cover his tracks. America’s top cop is a law unto himself, both untouchable and unashamed

Military told not to read Obama-scandal news


WND EXCLUSIVE

Verizon phone records story off-limits to airmen

Published: 17 hours ago

author-image Gina Loudon

Gina Loudon, Ph.D., is host of “The Dr. Gina Show” and a national speaker, analyst and author. She has appeared or been cited by the BBC, ABC, Vanity Fair, Al Jazeera, Huffington Post, CNN, New York Times, Time magazine, Fox News, Fox Business, The Hill, “The Daily Show” with Jon Stewart and many others. Loudon is credited as one of the “100 founding members” of the tea-party movement, founder of Arizona BUYcott and originator of the field of policology – the nexus of politics and psychology. She is the co-author of “Ladies and Gentlemen: Why the Survival of Our Republic Depends on the Revival of Honor.” Follow her on Facebook and Twitter.

President Obama has said the outrage over the federal government’s decision to monitor citizens’ phone activity is all “hype.”

He might want to share his opinion with the U.S. Air Force, which is ordering members of the service not to look at news stories about it.

WND has received an unclassified NOTAM (Notice to Airmen) that warns airmen not to look at news stories related to the data-mining scandal.

Want to know how and why America has so rapidly come to resemble the totalitarian society described by novelist George Orwell in “1984,” one characterized by universal surveillance? It’s all exposed in a special issue of Whistleblower magazine – titled “ONE NATION UNDER SURVEILLANCE: Big Brother is watching in ways Orwell never dreamed.”

The notice applies to users of the Air Force NIPRNET (Non-classified Internet Protocol Router Network), which is the only way that many troops stationed overseas and on bases in the U.S. are able to access the Internet.

The last line of the executive summary states:

“Users are not to use AF NIPRNET systems to access the Verizon phone records collection and other related news stories because the action could constitute a Classified Message Incident.”

Cindy McGee, the mother of an airman stationed in the UAE, spoke with WND.

“The fact that our government is attempting to censor our service members from the truth of what is happening here at home is truly frightening and disheartening,” said McGee.

Her son received the same notice.

McGee continued, “I am outraged that our government is attempting to censor the information from our military that every citizen in this country is potentially being targeted by our government in a massive overreach of their constitutional powers by unconstitutional surveillance of all Americans and storage of that data.”

There have been a multitude of reports already on the latest exploding scandal of the Obama administration.

Last Wednesday, the Guardian broke the news of the top-secret court order requiring Verizon to hand over all of its call data on an ongoing basis to the National Security Agency.

On Friday, the Washington Post reported that the NSA and FBI are gathering data from the servers of nine U.S. Internet companies.

Then reports came out that there are 50 companies from which the government is collecting data.

During a press conference, the president dismissed what he called “hype” over the surveillance programs.

But concern over this broad surveillance is causing legislators to look into what they can do to enable more oversight of these operations.

The latest news detailing how the government keeps track of this massive amount of data and its origins was posted by the Guardian, for everyone in the world to read, except members of the Air Force.

See the memo:

 

Rising Red tide: China encircles U.S. by sailing warships in American waters, arming neighbors


By Bill Gertz – The Washington Free Beacon

 

Friday, June 7, 2013

A Chinese paramilitary policeman stands guard on Tiananmen Square while sessions of the National People's Congress and the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference are held at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing Monday, March 4, 2013. (AP Photo/Andy Wong)

China has been quietly taking steps to encircle the United States by arming western hemisphere states, seeking closer military, economic, and diplomatic ties to U.S. neighbors, and sailing warships into U.S. maritime zones.

The strategy is a Chinese version of what Beijing has charged is a U.S. strategy designed to encircle and “contain” China. It is also directed at countering the Obama administration’s new strategy called the pivot to Asia. The pivot calls for closer economic, diplomatic, and military ties to Asian states that are increasingly concerned about Chinese encroachment throughout that region.


SEE RELATED: Obama urged to ‘punch’ China


“The Chinese are deftly parrying our ‘Pivot to the Pacific’ with their own elegant countermoves,” said John Tkacik, a former State Department Asia hand.

Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to question President Barack Obama about the U.S. pivot during the summit meeting set to begin Friday afternoon in California. Chinese state-run media have denounced the new U.S. policy as an effort to “contain” China and limit its growing power.

The Chinese strategy is highlighted by Xi’s current visit to Trinidad, Costa Rica, and Mexico where he announced major loans of hundreds of millions of dollars that analysts say is part of buying influence in the hemisphere.

U.S. officials say the visit to the region has several objectives, including seeking to bolster Chinese arms sales to the region amid efforts by Russian arms dealers to steal market share.

States including Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Mexico recently purchased Chinese arms but are said to be unhappy with the arms’ low quality. For example, Chinese YLC radar sold to Ecuador in 2009 did not work properly and sales of Chinese tanks to Peru also ran into quality problems. Both states are now looking to buy Russian weaponry, a U.S. official said.

Venezuela, a key oil-producing U.S. adversary, announced Thursday that China agreed to a $4 billion loan for oil development.


SEE RELATED: Best frenemies: U.S. wants closer military ties with China


And in Mexico this week, Xi announced China is extending a $1 billion line of credit for oil development and pledged another $1 billion trade deal.

A joint Mexico-China statement said Mexico pledged not to interfere in China’s affairs on Taiwan and Tibet, a reference to the previous government of Mexican President Felipe Calderon who in 2011 invited exiled Tibetan leader the Dalia Lama, a move that angered Beijing.

U.S. officials say there are concerns that the pro-Beijing shift by the current government of Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto, who visited China in April, will be exploited by China for such political goals, and could be used to generate support for China’s claims to Japan’s Senkaku Islands.

U.S. officials said there are growing fears that some type of military confrontation could break out between China and Japan over the disputed islands that are said to contain large underwater gas and oil reserves.

North of the U.S. border, Canada this week concluded a military cooperation agreement with China during the visit to Beijing by Canadian Defense Minister Peter G. Mackay. The agreement calls for closer cooperation between the two militaries, including bilateral military exchanges.

Chinese ambassador to Canada Zhang Junsai said China is deepening ties to Canada for infrastructure development, in Calgary last month. Chinese state-run companies have spent $30 billion for Canadian oil sands and natural gas, he said.

At a security conference in Singapore last month, the commander of U.S. military forces in the Pacific, Adm. Samuel Locklear, confirmed the earlier disclosure by a Chinese military officer that China’s military has been conducting naval incursions into the 200-mile U.S. Economic Exclusion Zone around U.S. territory.

The locations of the incursions were not given but they likely included submarine or warship visits to the western Pacific island of Guam, a key U.S. military base.

A Chinese military official initially stated at the conference that the incursions were part of a People’s Liberation Army Navy effort at “reciprocating” for frequent U.S. Navy transits through China’s 200-mile EEZs along the coasts. The zones are technically international waters and China has claimed U.S. transits are “illegal” under international law.

It is not clear why China is conducting naval operations it considers illegal for its maritime boundaries inside U.S. EEZs.

“They are, and we encourage their ability to do that,” Locklear said, without explaining why the activity was encouraged or where the Chinese vessels had transited.

Larry Wortzel, a former military intelligence official and specialist on China, said the Chinese military has sent intelligence collection ships into Guam’s economic zone and also the zone around the Hawaiian islands.

“The EEZ transits may indicate that in the future they could revise their position on the Law of the Sea and military activities,” Wortzel said.

Wortzel said he does not see China’s efforts in South and Central America as a counter to the U.S. Asia pivot.

Chinese arms sales, military exchanges, investment and developmenet has been underway for a decade, he said.

The Financial Times, which first disclosed the Chinese EEZ forays, quoted one Chinese military source as saying, “we are considering this as a practice, and we have tried it out, but we clearly don’t have the capacity to do this all the time like the U.S. does here.”

On Chinese inroads in the western hemisphere, Rick Fisher, a China military affairs analyst, said China is moving strategically on Latin America, working methodically as part of a decades-long effort to build economic and political clout there.

“It has cultivated far better military relations with the openly anti-American regimes in the region and could become a sort of political-economic godfather to ensure the survival of the Castro dictatorship system in Cuba,” said Fisher, with the International Assessment and Strategy Center.

Intelligence cooperation with Cuba is “substantial,” Fisher says, and will expand sharply in the region through the activities of its state-run telecommunications firms such as Huawei Technologies and ZTE in the region.

China currently is “promoting almost all of its non-nuclear weapons in that region,” Fisher said.

“It has promoted the Chengdu J-10 4th generation fighter in Venezuela and Argentina, and even Peru may be considering the J-10 for its future fighter program,” he said.

A State Department spokeswoman declined to comment.

At a recent arms expo in Peru, China was selling a 22,000-ton helicopter amphibious assault ship and an export version of its relatively advanced Yuan-class attack submarine.

In Venezuela, China is helping the Caracas government circumvent U.S. arms embargoes by helping repair Venezuela’s U.S.-made gas turbine engines on frigates, he said.

“Another company was marketing several short range ballistic missiles—with no apparent consideration about how it might promote a regional missile arms race,” Fisher said. “The basic U.S. policy is to ‘welcome’ China’s growing influence in Latin America but it is now time for Washington to use both positive and negative pressures to limit China’s strategic military reach into this hemisphere.”

Tkacik said China is quietly evolving on the global stage and implanting itself across the map with major overseas Chinese communities.

“And if they [Chinese nationals] get in trouble, as they did in Libya in 2011, China’s navy and air forces can coordinate to support them,” he said. “This support of émigré Chinese communities around the world has become an overt dictum of China’s new security policy.”

China also has set up commercial bases in key chokepoints around the Caribbean, through its Chinese-run port facilities in Panama, Bahamas, Trinidad, and Venezuela over the past decade.

Tkacik said those facilities are partly aimed at drawing American attention and easing U.S. geopolitical pressure in Asia.

China also is investing heavily in Africa, the Middle East, and Indian Ocean region.

“At bottom, however, China’s strategic targets are closer to home: East Asia, Southeast Asia and the Pacific,” Tkacik said. “That’s why Washington’s Pivot to the Pacific unsettles Beijing so.  It threatens to check Beijing’s rising new influence in the Asia-Pacific.

Tkacik said Chinese naval patrols in U.S. economic zones have been carried out for years through Chinese ocean fishing fleets.

“It doesn’t need to send out military vessels to Guam or Hawaii or the Aleutians except to ‘tweak’ the U.S.,” he said.

Muslims Demand (& Get) Prayer In Public Schools – Attack Off Campus Bible Studies


by

CAIR

So about that “religion of peace” and tolerance, this is how it really works. Muslim supremacism is at the top, everything else is at the bottom. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is leading the charge by pushing for public school policy, and they’re getting it.

CAIR’s impact in the public school system is now being seen in two cases in Michigan.

The first comes from one of CAIR’s press releases, dated October of 2012, in which CAIR had bullied a local school system because of passing out information about a private Bible Study class (something, by the way, that use to actually be part of the public education system in this country). According to the Press release:

The Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MI) said today that a Detroit-area school district has apologized for handing out permission slips for Bible study classes to elementary school students.

CAIR-MI sent a letter to Roseville Public Schools after receiving a complaint from two parents of children who attend Huron Park Elementary School about distribution by teachers of permission slips for the Bible classes at a local Baptist church.

In his letter to the school district, CAIR-MI Executive Director Dawud Walid wrote in part:

“School staff and teachers are not to serve as advocates for one particular religion or congregation within a religion by passing out slips inviting parents to give permission for their children to attend religious instruction. . . According to the United States Supreme Court, the First Amendment clearly requires that public school students and their parents are never given the impression that their school/school district prefers a specific religion over others or sanctions religion in general.”

A school district official today apologized to CAIR-MI for the distribution of the permission slips and said district principals will discuss the issue at an upcoming meeting.

“We thank school district officials for taking quick and appropriate action once this violation of religious neutrality was brought to their attention,” said Walid.

He said CAIR offers a booklet, called “An Educator’s Guide to Islamic Religious Practices,” that is designed to help school officials provide a positive learning environment for students of all faiths.

First of all, let me make one thing crystal clear for anyone espousing the nonsense that education, or anything for that matter can be “religiously neutral.” Everything, education, work, home, community and anything in life boils down to being viewed through one’s worldview, or belief system (which we usually refer to as “religion”).

Second, notice the hypocrisy and downright deceptiveness of CAIR. They scream and decry permission slips to attend a Bible study, but have no problem providing these same facilities, which they want to be religiously neutral, with “An Educator’s Guide to Islamic Religious Practices.”

There is a direct attack on Christianity, as if the Islamic anti-Christian doctrines found in their Qur’an and Hadiths, along with the mass murders of Christians world-wide they engage in weren’t enough.

In another article from April 2013, CAIR shows just how religiously neutral they really are:

The Council on American Islamic Relations of Michigan (CAIR-MI) staff recently met with Dearborn Public Schools Superintendent Brian Whiston to discuss concerns from some parents regarding prayer accommodations in Dearborn Public Schools.

Dearborn Public Schools has implemented a policy which fully accommodates student-led prayer in all the schools, as well as unexcused absences for students who leave early on Fridays for Jumu’ah prayers. CAIR-MI is currently in discussion with Melvindale Public Schools to get similar accommodations for students that are now in place for Dearborn Public Schools.

Get it? Islam is like the homosexual lobby. They want to cry that they are the victims, but the reality is that they are the aggressors. They complain about a permission slip for an off campus Bible study, saying it was a “violation of religion neutrality,” and within months they push the school board to accommodate Islamic prayers in public schools, even granting excused absences for student who leave early for Jumu-ah prayers.

Michigan is the testing grounds for Islamic takeover in the U.S. It seems to be working there. Just how long will it be till they are spreading across the Michigan border with their damnable doctrines? I suppose that is up to you American and Christian patriots. How are you standing against them?

Image

Spy Scandal


Obama-spies-on-us

OBAMA’S WAR ON CHRISTIANS


The ultimate scandal for the most scandalous presidency in U.S. history

OBAMA’S WAR ON CHRISTIANS

 

“Scandal.” That one word pretty much summarizes the Obama administration’s second term – from Benghazi-gate, to the IRS’s all-out war on hundreds of conservative organizations, to the Justice Department’s “criminalization of journalism” through targeting, harassing and seizing the records of news reporters and editors.

And that’s in addition to the many other Obama scandals, from his illegally waged war against Libya and his policy of targeted assassinations of Americans (both designated by a bipartisan panel of constitutional experts as “clearly impeachable offenses”) to the Justice Department’s disastrous “Fast and Furious” gun-running operation which resulted in at least 100 deaths – and countless other outrages.

Yet, the mother of all Obama scandals – indeed, the root of all the rest – receives little attention from the press. In fact, most Americans have never even heard an explicit reference to the primary scandal of the Obama administration. That is the sole focus of the June issue of WND’s acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine.

As Whistleblower Editor David Kupelian says in the issue, headlined “OBAMA’S WAR ON CHRISTIANS“: “Just scratch a little below the surface of all the current scandals, and the mother-lode comes fully into view.”

“Take the IRS scandal. Who exactly are all these 500-plus ‘tea party,’ ‘patriot,’ ‘conservative’ and ‘prolife’ groups being targeted by the revenue agency?” asks Kupelian. “Who populates these organizations? What beliefs and values animate them? By and large, they are Christians and Jews who strongly hold to a traditional, biblical, Judeo-Christian worldview.”

Continues Kupelian: “Haven’t you wondered why the Obama Department of Homeland Security warns law enforcement departments that the real ‘extremist’ threats to America are from pro-lifers, patriots, constitutionalists, amnesty opponents, gun enthusiasts and military veterans? Haven’t you scratched your head trying to figure out why the U.S. military recently threatened to court-martial Christian service personnel just for sharing their faith with others?

“The hard truth is: Barack Obama considers traditional, freedom-loving, center-right Christian America – not Marxism, not Islamism, not a toxic culture nor a stagnant economy – to be his biggest enemy, his greatest obstacle to fundamentally transforming America.”

Highlights of “OBAMA’S WAR ON CHRISTIANS” include:

  • “The biggest Obama scandal of all” by David Kupelian
  • “Banning Christianity from the armed forces” by Joseph Farah, who reports that the U.S. military was recently advised that Christian believers are “monsters” who “terrorize” others with their faith
  • “Under Obama, Christians and conservatives are ‘extremists’” by Bob Unruh, on the current administration’s relentless demonization of opponents of abortion, same-sex marriage and illegal immigration
  • “IRS targeting of conservatives continues” by Jerome R. Corsi, on the public interest law firm that has now sued the revenue agency in federal court on behalf of 25 different organizations
  • “IRS demands Christian pro-lifers reveal ‘the content of their prayers’” – one of the most outrageous abuses in an era of outrages
  • “Why Obama wars against Judeo-Christian America” by David Kupelian, an in-depth and thought-provoking exploration of what’s really behind the never-ending attacks on everything “decent” and “normal”
  • “Obamacare forcing Christian companies to provide abortion pill” by Bob Unruh, showing how some of the Obama administration’s abuses are so egregious that the judiciary is siding against them
  • “New class of people identified as IRS enemies” by Gina Loudon, on the bizarre fact that families that adopt children are far more likely to be audited by the IRS than “millionaires and billionaires”
  • “Warning from Canada: Orwellian future awaits U.S.” by Art Moore, who documents how the lessons of 10 years of same-sex marriage in our neighbor to the north totally shatter the arguments of “gay marriage” supporters
  • “Lesbian journalist: ‘Gay marriage is a lie’” – in a candid moment, journalist-activist confirms everything most opponents of same-sex marriage have long believed
  • “Feds require employees to give open LGBT approval” by Matt Barber, who explains the latest – and astonishingly Orwellian – decree from the Obama Justice Department: No longer is it OK for Christians just to be intimidated and “shut up” regarding “lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders” in the federal workplace – they most verbally support it! As one internal DOJ memo to employees puts it: “Silence will be interpreted as disapproval”
  • “How a revered Christian institution was brought down” by Peter LaBarbera, a poignant, insider look at what really caused the downfall of the Boy Scouts of America
  • “Dobson: Feds must stop silencing and intimidating Christians” by Bob Unruh, in which the evangelical leader confirms that the IRS has been directly targeting traditional-values religious groups – including his own
  • “Assaulting Christians but coddling terrorists” by David Limbaugh, on the U.S. military’s disturbing track record of targeting religious liberty
  • “Reflections by a former Muslim on Obama’s love of Islam” by Nonie Darwish, on how Obama became the “savior of both Islam and socialists”
  • “The world’s most dynamic religion is …” by Dennis Prager, who surprisingly reveals that today’s most influential belief system – and the one increasingly dominating America – is neither Christianity nor Islam
  • “Beware of liberals in evangelicals’ clothing” by Ann Coulter, who exposes the totally irrational “new Christian ethic of compassion-by-personal-encounter”
  • “Christian civil disobedience may be imminent” by Patrick J. Buchanan, who asks: What happens when millions of believers refuse to obey new same-sex marriage laws?
  • “Memo to Christian troops: We’ve got your back” by Matt Barber, who speaks for one public-interest law firm in encouraging American soldiers to “stand tall and proclaim your faith proudly.”

“Fasten your seat belts,” says Kupelian, “because we’re about to go for a wild ride, connecting the dots of the Obama administration’s many outrages, allowing the real scandal underlying all the others to finally come clearly into view.”

Liberals have Corrupted Unions With Absolute Power


 

JayBy Jay Taylor, Senior Vice President – Liberty Alliance, LLC

 

When talking to fellow conservatives, one interesting question to ask them is why they are registered Democrat when they have nothing in common with them. The answer inevitably comes back to Labor Unions. The Union Movement was founded to protect workers, and has a great history in its founding with gaining worker protections, fair wages, and benefits. But now the power has gone too far, and instead of being concerned about workers, Unions seem to be more worried about electing liberals to office. The once proud union history has turned into one of bankrupting companies through ridiculous pensions that no one would be able to pay. Pensions should be outlawed and replaced with retirement accounts, but that’s a story for another day.

Some states have Right to Work laws where union membership is voluntary and you can’t be forced to join as a condition of employment. One of the arguments against Right to Work is that workers enjoy the benefits without paying dues. This is not true. The National Labor Relations Act makes it so unions can represent all, but are not required to do so.1 If union membership is all it’s cracked up to be, then why in Right to Work states do they have lower unemployment?2 You would think that pro-choice liberals would like the ability for workers to be able to choose their membership. They can have separate contracts for their members and if their benefits are competitive for the dues paid, wouldn’t members join? There is the true power of the unions as they collect $9 billion in union dues.2 Which in turn seem to be paid out to liberal politicians that frequently don’t have workers best interests at heart.

One of the most outrageous things was Coal Unions supporting Obama.3 There is no defense for anyone wanting to mine coal to support Obama when he has declared war on coal. It doesn’t make any sense if you want to keep your job. The auto bailout was for the unions since their pension had finally gotten to the breaking point and why the American auto industry has trouble competing.4 Hostess went bankrupt because of union greed.5 We’ve seen numerous cities go bankrupt as their unions demanded more and more of the limited city budgets.6 How are these good for jobs?

The strange relationship between liberal democrats and the union movement is tied to their march towards socialism.7 Both want more government with greater rules and control. The only problem is that once the collective has total control, freedom is lost and becomes a moot point. We need a balance where reason is the centerpiece. Unions started out as a good thing, but have traveled down a dark path where greed and power have corrupted them and now they have forgotten who they are.8

I’ve been forced to join two unions in my life. First was at Kroger and later at the hospital union. Both were college jobs, but they taught me a great deal about unions. I attended a Union Steward class to learn more about the Union but found this to be a two day Republican bashing session. When it did come time to learn about filing a grievance it was a 5 minute “here is this form” and where to turn it in. There was nothing about what a legitimate grievance is, or how the union rules work. My experience was that the Union prevented the lazy workers from getting in trouble or fired and got the same amount of money from the part time people in dues to pay for political activities. The only benefit I see from the Union is padding the liberal’s pockets at the expense of workers.

If you are in a union you need to look carefully at where your dues are being spent and who they are supporting in elections. Unions present a pretty picture of how much they say membership can bring you, but is it a short term gain that in the long run will be a bankrupt mess? Do your homework and research out the facts. For those conservatives out there who register as Democrat because of their union, the facts will amaze you. Don’t be used as a sacrificial political pawn for the liberal socialist agenda. Your fellow conservatives are ready for you to come home.    

  

1 – http://blog.heritage.org/2012/12/11/michigan-unions-freeloader-myth/

2 – http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/12/17/closer-look-at-union-vs-nonunion-workers-wages/

3 – http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/08/fbi-affidavit-union-backed-bill-rights-for-guards-contributed-to-sex-drugs-in/

4 – http://capitalresearch.org/2012/01/the-union-difference-a-primer-on-what-unions-do-to-the-economy/

5 – http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/11/20/hostess-poised-to-liquidate-after-last-minute-talks-with-union-fail/

6 – http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2011/03/08/5_reasons_unions_are_bad_for_america/page/full

7 – http://conservativeoutpost.com/unions_history_their_socialist_agenda

8 – http://www.brighthub.com/office/career-planning/articles/121321.aspx

Read more: http://conservativebyte.com/2013/06/liberals-have-corrupted-unions-with-absolute-power/#ixzz2VZDFzfuK

President Obama mining Facebook, Twitter to predict crimes


Controversial program may offer insight into Verizon scandal

author-image Aaron Klein http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/obama-mining-facebook-twitter-to-predict-crimes/
Aaron Klein is WND’s senior staff reporter and Jerusalem bureau chief. He also hosts “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on New York’s WABC Radio. Follow Aaron on Twitter and Facebook.
usa-network

Clues to the federal government’s reason for collecting the telephone records of millions of Verizon customers may be found in a recently unearthed 2010 project seeking to predict criminal activity using vast quantities of data on citizens mined from social network websites such as Facebook and Twitter.

In February, the Sydney Morning Herald reported the Massachusetts-based multinational corporation, Raytheon – the world’s fifth largest defense contractor – had developed a “Google for Spies” operation.

Herald reporter Ryan Gallagher wrote that Raytheon had “secretly developed software capable of tracking people’s movements and predicting future behavior by mining data from social networking websites” like Facebook, Twitter, and Foursquare.

The software is called RIOT, or Rapid Information Overlay Technology.

Raytheon told the Herald it has not sold RIOT to any clients but admitted that, in 2010, it had shared the program’s software technology with the U.S. government as part of a “joint research and development effort … to help build a national security system capable of analyzing ‘trillions of entities’ from cyberspace.”

In April, RIOT was reportedly showcased at a U.S. government and industry national security conference for secretive, classified innovations, where it was listed under the category “big data – analytics, algorithms.”

Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst for the ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, argued that major ethical dilemmas ensue although RIOT apparently utilizes only publicly available information from companies like Facebook, Twitter and Foursquare.

“The government has no business rooting around people’s social network postings – even those that are voluntarily publicly posted – unless it has specific, individualized suspicion that person is involved in wrongdoing,” Stanley wrote on the ACLU blog.

Stanley wrote that among the many problems with government large-scale analytics of social network information “is the prospect that government agencies will blunderingly use these techniques to tag, target and watchlist people coughed up by programs such as RIOT, or to target them for further invasions of privacy based on incorrect inferences.”

“The chilling effects of such activities,” he concluded, “while perhaps gradual, would be tremendous.”

Ginger McCall, attorney and director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s Open Government program, told NBC in February, “This sort of software allows the government to surveil everyone.

“It scoops up a bunch of information about totally innocent people. There seems to be no legitimate reason to get this, other than that they can.”

As for RIOT’s ability to help catch terrorists, McCall called it “a lot of white noise.”

The London Guardian further obtained a four-minute video that shows how the RIOT software uses photographs on social networks. The images, sometimes containing latitude and longitude details, are “automatically embedded by smartphones within so-called ‘exif header data.’

 RIOT pulls out this information, analyzing not only the photographs posted by individuals, but also the location where these images were taken,” the Guardian reported.

Such sweeping data collection and analysis to predict future activity may further explain some of what the government is doing with the phone records of millions of Verizon customers.

In March 2006, the New York Times first reported the National Security Agency was utilizing phone records to search for patterns.

“In the increasingly popular language of network theory, individuals are “nodes,” and relationships and interactions form the “links” binding them together; by mapping those connections, network scientists try to expose patterns that might not otherwise be apparent,” reported the Times.

In February 2006, more than a year after Obama was sworn as a U.S. senator, it was revealed the “supposedly defunct” Total Information Awareness data-mining and profiling program had been acquired by the NSA.

The Total Information Awareness program was first announced in 2002 as an early effort to mine large volumes of data for hidden connections.

With additional research by Brenda J. Elliott

Al-Qaeda Weapons Expert: Chris Stevens Died From Lethal Injection In Benghazi


by

chris stevens

In a shocking claim, Abdallah Dhu-al-Bajadin, who has been identified by U.S. officials as a known weapons expert for al-Qaeda, said in a recent online posting that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed by lethal injection after a botched plan to kidnap him in Benghazi failed on September 11, 2012.

The Washington Free Beacon reports:

“…according to the March 14 posting on an al Qaeda-linked website, Abdallah Dhu-al-Bajadin, the al Qaeda weapons expert, stated that Stevens was given a lethal injection and that the injection was overlooked during the medical autopsy.

According to Dhu-al-Bajadin, “the plan was based on abduction and exchange of high-level prisoners.”

“However, the operation took another turn, for a reason God only knows, when one of the members of the jihadist cell improvised and followed Plan B,” he wrote on the prominent jihadist web forum Ansar al-Mujahideen Network.

Dhu-al-Bajadin’s claim of assassination also stated that it had been copied to the Ansar al-Mujahidin website from the closed and al Qaeda-accredited website Shumukh al-Islam. That site is only open to members and was initially posted by a member identified as Adnan Shukri for Dhu-al-Bajadin.

The reference to Shumukh al Islam has boosted the credibility of the claim among some U.S. intelligence analysts.

A western intelligence official said Dhu-al-Bajadin is a well-known jihadist weapons experts and a key figure behind a magazine called Al Qaeda Airlines.”

While U.S. officials are not saying that Dhu-al-Bajadin’s claims are true, they aren’t dismissing them either.

Theories abound about what took place in Benghazi. There have been suggestions that Benghazi amounted to nothing more than an international Fast and Furious, which was going to arm the Syrians to overthrow Assad.

However, there is also the theory that Benghazi ended in tragedy as a setup for an October Surprise was to loom just prior to the 2012 elections. Many have suggested that Benghazi was a botched effort to kidnap Ambassador Stevens and trade him for the “Blind Sheik” Omar Abdel Rahman. One such person that put forth that theory was retired Four-Star Admiral James “Ace” Lyons.

While the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) is quite aware of the claim, they are not commenting because they claim that they are engaged in an ongoing investigation into the Benghazi attack. However, Stevens’ body was flown back almost immediately following the attack. I have to ask, was there no autopsy performed on his body to verify the veracity of the claim being made?

Kathy Wright, the FBI spokeswoman, said “While there is a great deal of information in the media and on the Internet about the attack in Benghazi, the FBI is not in a position at this time to comment on anything specific with regard to the investigation.”

The State Department won’t comment either.

CBS reported on September 12, 2012 reported:

The Libyan doctor who treated U.S. ambassador Christopher Stevens says the diplomat died of severe asphyxiation and that he tried for 90 minutes to revive him.

Ziad Abu Zeid told The Associated Press on Wednesday that Stevens was brought to the Benghazi Medical Center by Libyans the night before, with no other Americans and that initially no one realized he was the ambassador.

Abu Zeid said Stevens had “severe asphyxia,” apparently from smoke inhalation, causing stomach bleeding, but had no other injuries.

Catch that? No other injuries. This comes from a doctor at a hospital controlled by Islamic jihadists, according to testimony given to Congress by Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks.

Robert Klein Engler wrote on March 23, 2013 at Canada Free Press something quite different. In what he labeled as an “internet autopsy,” which was examining photographic and video evidence, Engler writes, “The photographic evidence leads us to question the explanation that Stevens’ death was caused by smoke inhalation. There are just too many possible wounds on Stevens’ body for that explanation to be the whole story. Smoke inhalation usually does not leave a wound on the forehead or shoulder that miraculously heals itself in a Benghazi morgue.”

Engler says that the rumors surrounding the claims that Stevens was raped and tortured will continue until they are proven otherwise. “Until the official autopsy results are released to the public we are left to wonder how Stevens died at Benghazi,” Engler wrote. “The White House has repeatedly claimed his death was the result of a protest to a video insulting to Islam. We know this explanation is a lie.”

The Interim Progress Report submitted to members of the House Republican Conference on the events surrounding the September 11, 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, “Libyan doctors tried unsuccessfully to resuscitate Ambassador Stevens upon his arrival at the hospital.” No official cause of death for Stevens has ever been made public.

According to The Free Beacon’s translation of Dhu-al-Bajadin’s post in Arabic,

Dhu-al-Bajadin’s claim was the lethal injection is “more than one place in the human body that autopsy doctors ignore when they see that the symptoms are similar to another specific and common illness… Anyone who studied the art of silent assassination that spies applied during the Cold War would easily identify these parts of the body.”

Pamela Geller comments:

This is devastating if true and gives legs to previous speculation that Ambassador Stevens died in an kidnapping gone bad. The savages wanted (and still want) the Blind Sheik behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing to be released. Jihadists had stormed the US embassy in Cairo on September 11, 2013 demanding that very thing. “The plan was based on abduction and exchange of high-level prisoners.” More proof of an elaborate plan of attack on America while Obama insisted it was free speech that was responsible for the attack. The FBI has done nothing to further the investigation and the murderous savages remain free.

This new information comes on the day that Obama named Susan Rice, a key player in the cover-up of the Benghazi scandal,as his National Security Adviser. America, these are very dangerous and deliberate actors.

What is so troubling is the media’s refusal to ask questions and investigate this bloody and murderous attack on America on 9/11.

It’s been nine months. Are we really to believe that the United States cannot accurately determine what caused the death of one of our ambassadors? Or is this just more of the coverup?

Rand Paul Slams John McCain For Posing With Kidnappers


by

Politics_RandMcCain_603_480x360

As Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) took questions at the Reagan Library over the weekend he took a shot as Senator John McCain (R-AZ), whose trip to meet with Al-Qaeda operatives in Syria, under the cloak that they are Syrian rebels, sparked an outcry from American patriots. Paul said that since McCain had his picture taken with kidnappers, he didn’t know how good of a job the Federal government is doing in vetting those who would receive arms in Syria.

 

A reporter asked Paul, who is as a member of the Senate’s Foreign Affairs Committee, what he thought the top priority for foreign affairs of the United States is.

“I think the top priority for the country constitutionally, historically, and appropriately is defense of the country. That’s what we’re supposed to do in Washington,” he answered to applause.

Paul continued,

“That being said, Reagan’s motto was ‘Peace through strength,’ it wasn’t ‘War through strength.’”

Paul went on to elaborate on this saying that, “There are some, sometimes in our party, who mistake war for defense. If you don’t believe in eternal and perpetual war doesn’t mean you don’t believe in a strong national defense.”

“This is an important distinction,” he added.

Paul then spoke about some in the Republican Party that wanted to give money to Muammar al-Gaddafi in Libya and then a year later wanted to provide money and resources to rebels to overthrow the Libyan leader. “There’s a certain inconsistency,” he commented.

The Kentucky Senator then spoke about his concern with getting involved in a new war in Syria.

“Well people say Assad is such a bad guy,” Paul said. “He is, but on the other side we have al-Qaeda and now Nusra and they say, ‘there are some pro-Western people, and we’re going to vet them. Well apparently we had a senator over there who had his picture taken with some kidnappers, so I don’t know how good a job we’re doing vetting those who are going to get the arms.”

Again, applause erupted because Senator Paul was simply pointing out the truth. I’ll add he should have called for John McCain to be brought up on charges of treason for standing alongside and giving aid to the enemy of America.

Paul then pointed out two ironies that must be overcome if the US wants to get involved in the war in Syria. Here are the ironies:

  1. You will be allied with al-Qaeda
  2. Most of the Christian are on the other side

“You may well be arming Islamic rebels who may well be killing Christians,” he said. “Does that make Assad a good person? No. I don’t think there are any good people in this world and there’s some tragically innocent people who are going to be caught in the middle.”

“I just don’t know that our arming one side is going to make the tragedy any less,” Paul added. “So I think we need to be careful.”

I agree with Paul’s comments. They are level headed and the right way to be thinking about what is taking place. However, I’ll add just one more thing. There is no “may well” when it comes to arming Islamists in that area. We have done it. My guess is this administration, the Democrats and the RINOs will be more than willing to side with one Islamic group against another and spill the blood of Americans, not seeing past the vacuum that will be created in an Assad defeat which will be quickly filled by the Muslim Brotherhood. We’ve already seen it in Egypt and in Libya. What makes anyone think Syria would be any different?

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/06/rand-paul-slams-john-mccain-for-posing-with-kidnappers/#ixzz2VTyZ1hJ5

Gallery

Inspiration, Edification, Encouragement and Comfort


Bread not cake Church He is not here He Is Risen I AM Jesus paid it all LOVE Neither Height The Light Walk By Faith You Are Loved

Taking Back the Narrative


http://www.christianvssecular.com/higher_standards/taking-back-narrative.php?utm_source=Gallagher+article&utm_medium=web+article&utm_campaign=Christian+vs.+Secular

 

Every country and culture thrives on story. Bolstered by narrative, the world is itself a narrative of the age-old struggle between good and evil.

But the main Storyteller is being supplanted by other, lesser storytellers. God and His commandments are being taken out of the picture, and the stories of our children’s lives are being rewritten with a secularist slant.

How is this happening? In their classrooms, on TV and the internet, and at the mall, children are being taught—blatantly and subtly—three major ideas:

  • There are no absolutes (which is an absolute statement, if I ever heard one).Every day, children are learning that acting out, saying whatever comes to mind, and posting whatever they want on the internet are just ways of expressing themselves.

    Our increasingly secularist society is teaching the next generation that there is no “right and wrong.” It’s within your rights to do or say whatever you want—just as long as you don’t kill anyone. Even if you do, no worries. You might be mentally unstable.

    We are becoming afraid to stand for anything, so we are beginning to stand for nothing.
  • Truth is relative.If there are (maybe) no absolutes, then maybe we can make up what we want to believe. After all, Americans customize everything. It’s what we do. Houses, burgers, vacation packages, religions—you name it, we tweak it to fit our tastes and lifestyles.

    Truth is what you want it to be. If you want to believe in hell, that’s nice. If you don’t, that’s nice too.

  • Everyone is a winner.Everyone gets a medal, a gold star, and a pat on the back. After all, we don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings. Our kids don’t have to work to be great; they already are. They don’t have to climb the corporate ladder; they’re special and they deserve the best, regardless of effort. They don’t need to work to provide for their families; the government will take care of them.

    What are we telling them? They’re special. And communism works.

Our children are fast becoming the moral and spiritual casualties of a casual society. We are becoming afraid to stand for anything, so we are beginning to stand for nothing.

Nothing, that is, but mediocrity.

In a room full of sitting people, the one who stands up stands out. If you stand for something, your kids will see it. If you stand for truth, for absolutes, and for God, you will redirect the audience back to the real story and the ultimate Storyteller.

So, where do you start?

  • Read the Bible. It’s a history book, a guidebook for life, and most importantly, the Word of God and absolute Truth.
  • Research the facts. (They can’t put anything on the internet that isn’t true, right?)
  • And don’t let the village raise your children.

Your kids are your kids—regardless of what the government would like you to believe.

Army Punishes Soldier who Served Chick-fil-A


Army Punishes Soldier who Served Chick-fil-A

By Todd Starnes

An Army master sergeant was punished after he hosted a promotion party and served Chick-fil-A sandwiches in honor of the Defense of Marriage Act.

FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE TO JOIN!

The unidentified soldier was investigated, reprimanded, threatened with judicial action and given a bad efficiency report, according to the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty.

“They say he is no longer a team player and was not performing up to standards,” Chaplain Alliance Executive Director Ron Crews told Fox News. “This is just one little example of a case of a soldier just wanting to express his views and now he’s been jumped on by the military.”

The soldier’s story was included in a letter to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights documenting concerns about attacks on religious liberty within the Armed Services.

The Pentagon did not return calls seeking comment.

Last summer the soldier had received his promotion to master sergeant. The promotion coincided with a national controversy surrounding Chick-fil-A’s support of traditional marriage. Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy told a newspaper that he was “guilty as charged” when it came to supporting the biblical definition of marriage. Gay rights advocates were infuriated and some Democratic leaders – most notably the mayor of Boston –  attempted to stop the popular restaurant chain from opening restaurants in their cities.

Crews said the soldier decided to hold a party to celebrate his new position. The invitations read, “In honor of my promotion and in honor of the Defense of Marriage Act, I’m serving Chick-fil-A sandwiches at my promotion party.”

After the party, the solider received a letter of reprimand. Crews said at issue was the combination of the sandwiches and the soldier’s support of DOMA (which happens to be the law of the land).

“There was initially some talk of bringing judicial punishment against him,” Crews said. “He had a letter put in his file and an investigation was initiated to see if he had violated any policy.”

The solider reached out to the Chaplain Alliance for help and they put him in touch with an attorney. Crews said nearly one year later – the soldier is still embroiled in a legal battle.

“He was at the pinnacle of his career,” Crews said. “To make that rank means you’ve done very well throughout your career. He wants to finish serving his time honorably.”

Crews said stories like this are becoming commonplace in the military post-repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

“These stories are the ones that have not been told – about some of the more subtle ramifications of the repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy,” he said.

One service member received a severe reprimand for expressing his faith’s religious position about homosexuality in a personal religious blog.

A chaplain was relieved of his command over a military chapel because he could not allow same-sex weddings to take place in the chapel.

And a chaplain who asked senior military officers whether religious liberty would be protected in the wake of the repeal of the law against open homosexual behavior in the military was told to “get in line” or resign.

Crews said they are sharing these stories to let other service members know there is a place to get help. He said Chaplain Alliance publishes a religious liberty palm card – explaining constitutionally protected liberties to service members.

“If you believe your religious liberties have been violated, here’s what you can do,” he said. “We will see that you get the help that you need.”

As for the soldier who served the Chick-fil-A sandwiches?

“We’re going to stand with this soldier who did nothing wrong,” “There is nothing wrong in saying he wants to celebrate DOMA – which happens to be federal law.

TODD IS THE AUTHOR OF DISPATCHES FROM BITTER AMERICA – ENDORSED BY SARAH PALIN, SEAN HANNITY AND MARK LEVIN. CLICK HERE TO GET YOUR COPY!

 

Image

Investigating Yourself


On-Guard-600-w-logo-4

Analysis: covert collection of phone records could be devastating for Barack Obama


The Obama administration will be bracing itself for a torrent of hostile questions this morning following the apparent revelation that the National Security Agency has been data-mining the phone records of tens of millions of ordinary Americans.

The difficulty for Mr Obama is that even if the NSA is actually doing nothing different than it did for George W Bush

Not to be confused with eavesdropping, or bugging the phones of those suspected of conspiring to commit a terrorist or criminal offence, the top secret court order published by The Guardianappears to show that the NSA has been trawling the anonymous ‘metadata’ of potentially billions of phone-calls.

On the one hand, American might take comfort that the ‘internals’ of their phone conversations – ie the voices themselves – are not being routinely recorded, but on the other, it seems from this leak that potentially everyone with a phone is under some form of surveillance in the USA.

Studies have shown that while anonymous, the ‘metadata’ – records of location data, call duration, unique identifiers – can provide a surprising amount of information, surprisingly quickly when zeroed in on by investigators.

For Mr Obama – a president who prided himself on his liberal credentials – this leak is a potentially devastating revelation since it exposes him to attack on two fronts – from both the libertarian Right and the liberal Left.

Already the administration has been hammered over its aggressive prosecution of leakers, including what appeared to be an attempt to criminalise a Fox News journalist, James Rosen, for working a source to obtain a leak from the State Department about North Korea.

That story caused the New York Times – usually a reliable friend of the Obama administration – to write a seething editorial accusing the Department of Justice of over-reaching, and using its powers to send a “chilling” message to the media.

It is not clear how wide the NSA data-mining project goes, it’s effectiveness as a counter-terrorism tool in identifying potential terrorist or criminal cells or – indeed – whether it has been used for any other purposes.

It appears from previous reports that the NSA’s data-mining operation is not new, and has long been suspected – but this is the first clear-cut proof, in the shape of a highly unusual leak from the secretive Foreign Intelligence Service Court (Fisa), that the practice is occurring.

A report in USA Today newspaper from 2006, quoting anonymous intelligence officials, alleged that the NSA been “secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans” and that the agency was using the data to “analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity”.

Since September 11 and the passing of the 2001 Patriot Act, the American public has accepted a great deal of inconvenience and intrusion in the name of national security. The publication of this court order will re-open the debate on how far the security services’ writ should run.

Politically, the difficulty for Mr Obama is that even if the NSA is actually doing nothing different than it did for George W Bush, the American public – particularly on the liberal left – had believed that Mr Obama’s administration represented a fundamental departure from the excesses of the Bush years.

Now, with the continued debate over the use of drones, the failure to close Guantanamo, the ultra-aggressive prosecution of leaks even to the point, perhaps, of muzzling a free press – the questions from the public and the media are starting to weigh down on the Obama White House.

Already last night, within hours of publication, civil liberties groups who have long warned about the extent of secret surveillance, were jumping on the revelations.

“This confirms what we had long suspected,” says Cindy Cohn, an attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties organization that has accused the government of operating a secret dragnet surveillance program told the Washington Post.

“I don’t think Congress thought it was authorizing dragnet surveillance” when it passed the Patriot Act, Ms Cohn said, “I don’t think Americans think that’s OK. I would be shocked if the majority of Congressmen thought it’s okay.” Over the next few days and weeks, expect a fierce and polarizing debate over just what Americans do feel is acceptable, in the name of their national security.

FBI expert: Quran is ‘revealed word of God’


Agency sterilizes records to satisfy Muslim critics

FBI expert: Quran is ‘revealed word of God’

 

author-image Bob Unruh

Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after nearly three decades with the Associated Press, as well as several Upper Midwest newspapers, where he covered everything from legislative battles and sports to tornadoes and homicidal survivalists. He is also a photographer whose scenic work has been used commercially.
burkha_women

The FBI has censored and modified hundreds of pages of materials to satisfy Muslim critics, including a change that was made because an agency “expert” insisted the Quran “is the revealed word of God.”

The details come from Judicial Watch, which obtained documentation of the hundreds of pages of FBI memos, training documents and other paperwork that the agency purged on the demands of Muslims.

“The FBI is rewriting history in order to help al-Qaida,” said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “This shows that the law enforcement agency is in need of serious top-to-bottom reform.”

Fitton said a lesson learned from the Boston Marathon terrorist attack is that the country is less safe when it allows radical Muslim organizations to tell the FBI how to train its agents and do its job.

“The FBI’s purge of so-called ‘offensive’ material is political correctness run amok, and it puts the nation at risk,” he said. “The Obama administration needs to stop putting the tender sensibilities of radical Islamists above the safety of the American people.”

The organization recently released hundreds of pages of documents from the FBI that demonstrate the effort to purge from anti-terrorism training materials and curriculum anything that a number of unidentified “subject matter experts” deemed “offensive” to Muslims.

For example, according to Judicial Watch, one expert insisted that a particular slide in a training program describing the Quran as the teachings of Muhammad be removed or changed.

The reason?

“The Quran is not the teachings of the prophet,” wrote the expert, “but the revealed word of God.”

According to Judicial Watch, another criticism was leveled against a particular article because it “inaccurately argues the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization.”

Also, another document “inaccurately states” that al-Qaida “is responsible for the bombing of the Khobar Towers and that AQ is ‘clearly linked’ to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.”

Judicial Watch got the materials in two deliveries earlier this year following a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that was filed last July. The original request for the documents, made March 7, 2012, asked for records regarding a Feb. 8, 2012, meeting that FBI Director Robert Mueller set up with various Muslim organizations.

Judicial Watch wanted “any and all records setting criteria or guidelines for FBI curricula on Islam or records identifying potentially offensive material with in the FBI curricula on Islam.”

Judicial Watch explained: “During the February 8 meeting, Mueller reportedly assured the Islamic groups in attendance that the agency had ordered the removal of presentations and curricula on Islam from FBI offices around the country that were deemed ‘offensive.’ As reported by NPR: ‘The FBI has completed a review of offensive training material and has purged 876 pages and 392 presentations, according to a briefing provided to lawmakers.’”

The Washington Examiner noted that while the Muslim Brotherhood is not on the U.S. State Department’s official list of international terrorist organizations, some of its offshoots, including the Palestinian group Hamas, are.

In fact, Mueller himself has described the Muslim Brotherhood as the inspiration for terror in the U.S. and overseas.

Mueller’s comments came in a 2011 House committee hearing, when he was joined by other Obama administration intelligence and law enforcement officials to discuss the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Brotherhood’s motto is: “Allah is our objective. The prophet is our leader. The Quran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

The Muslim critics also didn’t like a statement in the FBI training material that “young male immigrants of Middle Eastern appearance” fit a terrorist profile. Another document, the objected, “seems to conflate ‘Islamic militancy’ with ‘terrorism.’”

The FBI also acted on a claim from one of its “experts” that the anti-terror training needs to accommodate “the current political context.”

It’s just the latest example of the Obama administration’s accommodation of Muslims, critics say.

The administration also has launched a series of Muslim Outreach Summits so that Muslims can tell federal officials how they better can serve their community.

The administration also is holding educational outreaches to let people know that Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal prosecution.

Bill Killian, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, has scheduled an appearance at an American Muslim Advisory Council of Tennessee meeting to “provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims on social media,” according to the Tullahoma News in Tennessee.

“This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion,” he said. “This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.”

Killian said everyone needs to understand that Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal jurisdiction.

He asserted that while some Muslims may blow up buildings, hijack airliners and kill thousands, there are terrorists of other religions as well.

Oklahoma City bombers Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols “were both Christians, as was the guy who shot up the Sikh temple” in Wisconsin,” Killian claimed.

The federal strategy made Judicial Watch’s “Corruption Chronicles” feature.

“In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights,” the organization said.

Judicial Watch noted that the Obama administration already has reached out to personally reassure Muslims that the DOJ is protecting them. In that unprecedented move, Attorney General Eric Holder assured a San Francisco-based group called Muslim Advocates, which urges members not to cooperate with federal investigations, that he is grateful to have Muslims with whom to partner.

The Obama administration also has hired a special Homeland Security adviser, Mohamed Elibiary, who openly supports an Islamist theologian who condemns U.S. prosecutions of terrorists, Judicial Watch said.

In addition, the president has ordered NASA to focus on Muslim diplomacy, and officials with Homeland Security covertly have met with extremist Arab, Muslim and Sikh groups to talk about national security matters.

The State Department lent its weight by sending anti-American imam Feisal Abdul Rauf on a trip to the Middle East for outreach to Muslims.

Explained Judicial Watch: “Over the years, the Obama administration has embarked on a fervent crusade to befriend Muslims by creating a variety of outreach programs at a number of key federal agencies.”

Tullahoma News said Killian wants to let people know about Muslim culture and civil rights laws.

“We want to inform everybody about what the law is, but more importantly, we want to provide what the law means to Muslims, Hindus and every other religion in the country,” he said.

“It’s why we came here in the first place,” he continued. “In England, they were using Christianity to further their power in government. That’s why the First Amendment is there.”

WND reported last week on the “Muslim Outreach Summits.”

WND initially discovered documents referring to the Muslim summits while examining a U.S. Department of Education procurement of data-gathering and report-writing services.

The services are specific to information being assembled by the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, or WHIAAPI, which Obama created via executive order in 2009.

Upon closer inspection, however, WND learned that the Education Department explicitly will direct the selected contractor to chronicle findings and recommendations gleaned from the Muslim Outreach Summits.

The White House views this year’s venues as an extension of a previous outreach to “new immigrants and refugees – some of the most underserved in the AAPI community,” according to a document titled “WHIAAPI 2013 Faith-Based and Community Engagement.”

Complementing the prior effort will be the three “regional convenings,” tentatively scheduled June 15 in Chicago, June 22 in San Francisco and June 29 in New York City.

“These cities are main AAPI immigrant hubs and entry points for new immigrants/refugees,” according to a related document, “Questions Received from Vendors: Development and Preparation of the AAPI Annual Report to the President.”

“Each convening with [sic] include panel discussions/workshops with federal officials on key issues impacting the community and also an open-dialogue session to hear directly from the community about issues of concern.”

Sometime after the three Muslim Outreach Summits, the chosen contractor will develop and then present its summary report to the president and to newly appointed WHIAAPI commissioners.

The contracting action – the first of its kind since its inception in 2008 – will help lay the foundation for the initiative’s future work, the document says.

Coulter: Tips for Right-Wingers on the IRS Scandal


Ann Coulter Letter

Coulter: Tips for Right-Wingers on the IRS Scandal

By: Ann Coulter
6/5/2013 05:19 PM

RESIZE: AAA

Print1
Instead of showing endless loops of IRS employees wasting taxpayer dollars line-dancing — Breaking news: Government employees waste millions of your dollars every single day! — I think it would be more useful for the public to hear a few crucial facts about the exploding scandal at the Internal Revenue Service.At Tuesday’s congressional hearings on the IRS, witnesses provided shocking details about the agency’s abuse of conservative groups.

The IRS leaked the donor list of The National Organization for Marriage to their political opponents, the pro-gay-marriage Human Rights Campaign. This is not idle speculation: The documents had an internal IRS stamp on them. The list of names was then published on a number of liberal websites and NOW’s donors were harassed.

The IRS demanded that all members of the Coalition for Life of Iowa swear under penalty of perjury that they wouldn’t pray, picket or protest outside of Planned Parenthood. They were also asked to provide details of their prayer meetings.

Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash. — who was ordered by the D.C. Circuit Court to pay more than $1 million to John Boehner in 2008 for the sleazy maneuver of publishing an illegally taped private conversation — blamed the conservative groups themselves. “Each of your groups was highly political,” he lectured them, noting that they wouldn’t have been asked any questions if they hadn’t requested tax-exempt status.

Even a fair-minded person — not to be confused with Jim McDermott — might hear about the IRS’ harassment of groups with “tea party,” “patriot” or “liberty” in their names and think: “How do we know the IRS wasn’t equally hard on left-wing groups?”

What might be more helpful than clips of IRS staff line-dancing would be for reporters, say at Fox News, to mention a few examples of the wildly partisan left-wing groups that the IRS has certified as tax-exempt.

Among the many left-wing groups with tax-exempt status are:– ACORN (now renamed as other organizations, but all still tax-exempt), “community organizers” who engage in profanity-laced protests at private homes, dump garbage in front of public buildings and disrupt bankers’ dinners in order to get more people on welfare in order to destroy the capitalist system and incite revolution;

– Occupy Wall Street, which — in its first month alone — was responsible for more than a dozen sexual assaults; at least half a dozen deaths by overdose, suicide or murder; and millions of dollars in property damage;

– Media Matters for America, a media “watchdog” group that has never noticed one iota of pro-Obama bias in the media;

– Moveon.org, which ran ads comparing Bush to Hitler under its 501(c)(4) arm;

– The Center for American Progress, an auxiliary of the Democratic National Committee funded by George Soros and staffed by former Clinton and Obama aides to promote the Democratic agenda;

– The Tides Foundation, which funnels money to communist and terrorist-supporting organizations;

– The Ford Foundation, which has never found a criminal law that isn’t “racist.”

These groups are regarded by the IRS as nonpartisan community groups, merely educational, while dozens of patriotic, constitutional, Christian or tea party groups are still waiting for their tax exemptions.

That’s to say nothing of Planned Parenthood, PBS and innumerable other Democratic front-groups that not only have tax exemptions, but get direct funding from the government.

By contrast, the conservative groups being raked over the coals by the IRS actually were nonpartisan. The tea party forced sitting Republican senators off the ticket in Alaska and Indiana, and toppled “establishment” Republicans in Utah, Delaware, Nevada, Florida and Texas. Far from being a secretly pro-Republican group, the tea party has been a nightmare for Republicans.

Show me one instance where the Center for American Progress was more of a problem for Democrats than Republicans.

It is obviously in the interest of the left to show us liberal groups also harassed by the IRS, so it’s striking that they haven’t been able to produce one yet.

Instead, they hearken back to the Bush years to claim that the IRS once audited the NAACP, which is treated as ipso facto political harassment.

First of all, the NAACP doesn’t exactly have a sterling record of rectitude when it comes to organization funds. In the 1990s, the NAACP used tax-exempt contributions to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars of hush money to the mistress of then-executive director Benjamin F. Chavis Jr. — as detailed in enraged columns by Carl Rowan at the time.

Find a tea party organization that’s done that, and we’ll understand the IRS conducting a three-year proctology exam on the group.

Second, the Bush-era audit of the NAACP was prompted by a blindingly partisan speech given by NAACP chairman Julian Bond at an organization meeting in Philadelphia in July 2004. Bond attacked a slew of elected Republicans by name, denouncing the entire party as one whose “idea of equal rights is the American flag and Confederate swastika flying side by side.”

That’s what we call “black-letter law” on improper activity for a tax-exempt organization. As a 501(c)(3) group, the NAACP is prohibited from supporting or opposing any candidate for elective office.

The NAACP responded to the IRS’ letter by screaming from the rooftops that it was political payback. Consequently, Bush’s IRS commissioner requested that Treasury’s inspector general investigate the IRS’ tax-exempt unit for political bias. The IG’s report found no politics in the NAACP audit and — to the contrary — that more “pro-Republican” groups (18) than “pro-Democratic” groups (12) had been audited.

Nonetheless, the NAACP simply refused to cooperate with the IRS. There was nothing the Bush administration could do. No Republican was going to allow the NAACP’s tax-exempt status to be revoked on its watch. Two years later, the IRS simply issued a letter clearing the group.

Today, the NAACP openly engages in partisan activity, such as a current weeks-long protest of Republican legislators in North Carolina.

Finally, a tip to the Democrats trying to defend the IRS: As a devoted true-crime TV viewer, I can tell you that when you’re caught red-handed, it’s never a good defense to say, “Why would I be so stupid to kill my wife right after taking out a huge life insurance policy on her?”

You were that stupid and you got caught.

Obama’s Super Secret Treaty Which Will Push The Deindustrialization Of America Into Overdrive…


Did you know that Barack Obama has been secretly negotiating the most important trade agreement since the formation of the World Trade Organization?  Did you know that this agreement will impose very strict Internet copyright rules, ban all “Buy American” laws, give Wall Street banks much more freedom to trade risky derivatives and force even more domestic manufacturing offshore?  If you have not heard about this treaty, don’t feel bad.  Obama has refused to even give Congress a copy of the draft agreement and he has banned members of Congress from attending the negotiations.  The plan is to keep this treaty secret until the very last minute and then to railroad it through Congress and have it signed into law by October.  The treaty is known as “the Trans-Pacific Partnership”, and the nations that are reported to be involved in the development of this treaty include the United States, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Peru, Brunei, Singapore, Vietnam and Malaysia.  Opponents of this treaty refer to it as “the NAFTA of the Pacific”, and if it is enacted it will push the deindustrialization of America into overdrive.
The “one world” economic agenda that Barack Obama has been pushing is absolutely killing the U.S. economy.  As you will see later in this article, we are losing jobs and businesses at an astounding pace.  And each new “free trade” agreement makes things even worse.

For example, just check out the impact that the recent free trade agreement that Obama negotiated with South Korea is having on us

  • A 10 percent decline of U.S. exports to Korea
  • The U.S. trade deficit with Korea has climbed 37 percent
  • U.S. auto industry has been crippled
  • Loss of U.S. control where international trade, banking and finance is concerned
  • A projected 159,000 jobs will be lost

Wait a second – I though that “free trade” agreements were actually supposed to increase exports.

So why have they declined by 10 percent?

Did someone make a really bad deal?

And of course we have all seen the economic devastation that NAFTA has wrought.

When NAFTA was pushed through Congress in 1993, the United States actually had a trade surplus with Mexico of 1.6 billion dollars.  By 2010, we had a trade deficit with Mexico of 61.6 billion dollars.

And “free trade” with China has turned out to be a complete and total nightmare as well.

Back in 1985, our trade deficit with China was approximately milliondollars (million with a little “m”) for the entire year.

In 2012, our trade deficit with China was 315 billion dollars.  That was the largest trade deficit that one nation has had with another nation in the history of the world.

But instead of learning from the mistakes of the past, Barack Obama is pressing for more “free trade” agreements.

The New York Times is calling the Trans-Pacific Partnership “the most significant international commercial agreement since the creation of the World Trade Organization in 1995“.  It is reportedly going to include a whole host of provisions which wouldnever be able to get through Congress on their own.  Even though this treaty will affect all of our daily lives, the Obama administration is keeping this treaty a total secret.  In fact, Obama won’t even show it to Congress even though members of Congress have asked repeatedlyto see it…

The agreement, under negotiation since 2008, would set new rules for everything from food safety and financial markets to medicine prices and Internet freedom. It would include at least 12 of the countries bordering the Pacific and be open for more to join. President Obama has said he wants to sign it by October.

Although Congress has exclusive constitutional authority to set the terms of trade, so far the executive branch has managed to resist repeated requests by members of Congress to see the text of the draft agreement and has denied requests from members to attend negotiations as observers — reversing past practice.

While the agreement could rewrite broad sections of nontrade policies affecting Americans’ daily lives, the administration also has rejected demands by outside groups that the nearly complete text be publicly released.

So exactly who in the world does this guy think that he is?  Why won’t Obama let us know exactly what is in this treaty?

Fortunately, there have been a few leaks.  One thing that we have discovered is that this new treaty would reportedly ban all “Buy American laws“.

That certainly would not be popular if it got out.

And do you remember SOPA?

The American people wanted nothing to do with the very strict Internet copyright provisions of SOPA and loudly expressed their displeasure to members of Congress.

Unfortunately, now the provisions of SOPA are back.  It is being reported that most of the provisions of SOPA have been quietly inserted into this treaty.  If this treaty is enacted, those provisions will become law and the American people will not be able to do anything about it.

And according to the New York Times, there are all sorts of other disturbing things that have been slipped into the treaty…

And yet another leak revealed that the deal would include even more expansive incentives to relocate domestic manufacturing offshore than were included in Nafta — a deal that drained millions of manufacturing jobs from the American economy.

The agreement would also be a boon for Wall Street and its campaign to water down regulations put in place after the 2008 financial crisis. Among other things, it would practically forbid bans on risky financial products, including the toxic derivatives that helped cause the crisis in the first place.

Are you starting to understand why the Obama administration is keeping this treaty such a secret?

Free Speech is Only Free When the Government Says it is


By / http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/2013/06/free-speech-is-only-free-when-the-government-says-it-is/

 

silencedIn the wake of the killing of Soldier Lee Rigby in London a few weeks ago, the police took dramatic action to prevent further violence.  They arrested people who posted online comments that were critical of or offensive to Muslims.

I have to admit, after a soldier has been nearly decapitated on a city street, this sort of response is nothing short of courageous!  I can only hope they knocked their doors down and cuffed them with zip-ties.  Lousy verbal terrorists!

Lest you laugh too soon or too loudly, know that today, June 4, in Tennessee, a meeting is taking place that is meant to explain how your comments on, for instance, Facebook or Twitter could be construed as civil rights violations if they are negative or derogatory to Muslims.

You can read about it here, at http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2013/05/doj-social-media-posts-trashing-muslims-may-violate-civil-rights/

I find this a darkly disturbing and profoundly fascinating trend.  I mean, I have known physicians who told me that they could be fired for speaking certain opinions on certain topics.  And it’s very well-documented that college faculty has lost their positions for holding views in favor of Intelligent Design or against Darwinian evolution.

Certainly students are routinely ridiculed by professors for daring to speak in favor of their Christian faith, or for expressing any opinion that flies in the face of the cult of political correctness by opposing same-sex marriage or the latest fashionable political trend.

But I thought all of that was isolated stupidity, confined mostly to academic teaching centers where poor thinking and intellectual bullying are the stuff of greatness and tenure.

I was wrong.  The arrests in the UK are hints of what we may face before long.  Imagine the scenario.  Yet another horrible terrorist event occurs and you, blogger or columnist or Facebook member (and apparent agitator) happen to make some comment about Islamic extremism, or the radicalization of Muslims.

Within a few hours, your online account has a note, warning you to watch your mouth (or fingers).  Perhaps your account is frozen, with a nasty note from your Internet provider, more than happy to turn you in to avoid further hassles from the boys and girls in black.

Or, as in the case of the UK, the feds  (Homeland Security?  Verbal Assault Bureau?  National Hurtful Speech Association?) show up at 4 am in response to your 2 am rant and escort you down to the station for a little chat; all the while packing up your computer as evidence.  (And leaving your Cheetoh’s and Mountain Dew behind, dang it!)

Welcome to America.  Or Amerika!  Welcome to the land where inconvenient amendments to the inconvenient Constitution are routinely and systematically swept under the ever-expanding, ornate rug that is Sharia.

Welcome to the future our founders would never have envisioned.  Welcome to a multicultural nightmare in which the only response to any predation on freedom is to extol the virtue of the oppressors and their philosophies (or theologies, as it were).

A land where right is wrong, war is peace, freedom is slavery and terrorists are simply misunderstood.

Oddly enough, I would never subject my ideological enemies to this sort of harassment.  Let Richard Dawkins call me a cretin and simpleton for my faith.

Let Sam Harris revile everything about Christianity in the most unsavory of terms.  Let any and every atheist blame the ills of the world on Southern Baptists or Catholics or whomever they like.

This is still America and I will still defend their freedom to say it.

But the day that we are subject to speech codes for critical comments, for connecting the dots or for simply hurting the feelings of those whose very way of life threatens the essence of American liberty, on that day, to use a medical analogy, our national respirations will cease.

All that will be left will be our submission and our burial in the dusty annals of history, where weakness dies and oppression, unchecked grows stronger.

Because we are a nation that thrives only on the clean, clear air of free speech.

Today’s Devotional by Dr. David Jeremiah


Wednesday, 6/5/2013 – Today’s Devotional
“Not My Will”
“Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done.” – Luke 22:42
Recommended Reading: Daniel 9:1-19; 1 In the first year of Darius son of Xerxes (a Mede by descent), who was made ruler over the Babylonian kingdom- 2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, understood from the Scriptures, according to the word of the LORD given to Jeremiah the prophet, that the desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years. 3 So I turned to the Lord God and pleaded with him in prayer and petition, in fasting, and in sackcloth and ashes.
4 I prayed to the LORD my God and confessed:
“O Lord, the great and awesome God, who keeps his covenant of love with all who love him and obey his commands, 5 we have sinned and done wrong. We have been wicked and have rebelled; we have turned away from your commands and laws. 6 We have not listened to your servants the prophets, who spoke in your name to our kings, our princes and our fathers, and to all the people of the land.
7 “Lord, you are righteous, but this day we are covered with shame-the men of Judah and people of Jerusalem and all Israel, both near and far, in all the countries where you have scattered us because of our unfaithfulness to you. 8 O LORD, we and our kings, our princes and our fathers are covered with shame because we have sinned against you. 9 The Lord our God is merciful and forgiving, even though we have rebelled against him; 10 we have not obeyed the LORD our God or kept the laws he gave us through his servants the prophets. 11 All Israel has transgressed your law and turned away, refusing to obey you.
“Therefore the curses and sworn judgments written in the Law of Moses, the servant of God, have been poured out on us, because we have sinned against you. 12 You have fulfilled the words spoken against us and against our rulers by bringing upon us great disaster. Under the whole heaven nothing has ever been done like what has been done to Jerusalem. 13 Just as it is written in the Law of Moses, all this disaster has come upon us, yet we have not sought the favor of the LORD our God by turning from our sins and giving attention to your truth. 14 The LORD did not hesitate to bring the disaster upon us, for the LORD our God is righteous in everything he does; yet we have not obeyed him.
15 “Now, O Lord our God, who brought your people out of Egypt with a mighty hand and who made for yourself a name that endures to this day, we have sinned, we have done wrong. 16 O Lord, in keeping with all your righteous acts, turn away your anger and your wrath from Jerusalem, your city, your holy hill. Our sins and the iniquities of our fathers have made Jerusalem and your people an object of scorn to all those around us.
17 “Now, our God, hear the prayers and petitions of your servant. For your sake, O Lord, look with favor on your desolate sanctuary. 18 Give ear, O God, and hear; open your eyes and see the desolation of the city that bears your Name. We do not make requests of you because we are righteous, but because of your great mercy. 19 O Lord, listen! O Lord, forgive! O Lord, hear and act! For your sake, O my God, do not delay, because your city and your people bear your Name.” (NIV)
One of the hardest human challenges is to submit. It begins when toddlers learn to obey their parents when they want to say, “No!” As children of God, we live with that challenge all our life — submitting our will to the will of the Father when all we can think of is “Why?”
When the prophet Daniel was a captive in Babylon, he read from the prophet Jeremiah that Israel’s exile would last 70 years (Daniel 9:2; Jeremiah 25:11). And so Daniel turned to God in prayer to pray in accordance with the will of God. He didn’t complain or protest that Israel was in captivity. Rather, in humility, he agreed with God that Israel deserved to be there (Daniel 9:1-19). Daniel displayed humility (verse 3), worship (verse 4), confession (verses 5-15), and petition (verses 16-19). Yes, he asked for the captivity to end. But he couched his request in submission to God’s will — just as Jesus did in the most difficult moment of His life: “…not My will, but Yours, be done” (Luke 22:42).
If you wish God’s will for your life were different right now, before asking for it to be different, agree with God that His will is worth submitting to.
“The essence of sin is arrogance; the essence of salvation is submission.”Alan Redpath
© 2013 Turning Point

UN Small Arms Treaty May Be Signed Under Cover Of Darkness


by

072512_sr_panel_640

Instead of taking the opportunity to sign the United Nations Small Arms Treaty on Tuesday, the White House has indicated that Barack Obama will sign it sometime before the end of August. This causes some concern as to what type of event the White House is waiting on to exploit the emotions of Americans to gain support for the measure and put pressure on the Senate to ratify it. Many have suggested that the signature will come under cover of darkness, sometime in August, When Congress will not be in town.

Press Secretary Jay Carney said that Obama aims to sign the treaty “before the end of August.” Tuesday was the earliest he could have signed it.

“We believe it’s in the interest of the United States,” he said. “While we look forward to signing the treaty, there are remaining translation issues that need to be resolved.”

The Hill points out,

The National Rifle Association (NRA) opposes the treaty, and the delay would allow Obama to sign the pact during the August doldrums, with Congress out of town.

That time frame appears to validate the concerns of treaty advocates who had worried the administration would wait until the cover of darkness to sign a treaty opposed by a majority of senators.

Rachel Stohl, a senior associate with the Stimson Center, which supports the treaty, said “I think there’s a lot of political hand-wringing going on. They know people are going to be paying attention to this particular issue on this particular day.”

Secretary of State John Kerry released a statement on Monday in which he said the US “welcomes the opening of the Arms Trade Treaty for signature.” He also said that as soon as the process of conforming the official translations is completed satisfactorily, Obama would be looking forward to signing it.

So there needs to be conforming official translations and that, completed satisfactorily. Sounds similar to being ready to sign something that you have no idea what it really says. Obamacare, anyone? Seems like that is the case on an international scale where the treaty has already passed overwhelmingly.

Kerry went on to state:

“The Treaty is an important contribution to efforts to stem the illicit trade in conventional weapons, which fuels conflict, empowers violent extremists, and contributes to violations of human rights. The Treaty will require the parties to implement strict controls, of the kind the United States already has in place, on the international transfer of conventional arms to prevent their diversion and misuse and create greater international cooperation against black market arms merchants. The ATT will not undermine the legitimate international trade in conventional weapons, interfere with national sovereignty, or infringe on the rights of American citizens, including our Second Amendment rights.

We commend the Presidents of the two UN negotiating conferences – Roberto Garcia Moritan of Argentina and Peter Woolcott of Australia –for their leadership in bringing this agreement to fruition. We also congratulate all the states that helped achieve an effective, implementable Treaty that will reduce the risk that international transfers of conventional arms will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes.”

The Secretary of State made no mention of his boss’ current administration providing thousands of weapons to some of the world’s worst criminals to carry out some of the world’s worst crimes which is still ongoing and has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Mexican citizens and at least two federal agents.

The Senate has already signed a resolution to not ratify the treaty thanks to the work of men like Senator Mike Lee (R-UT). Also, 130 members of Congress recently sent a letter to both Obama and Kerry opposing the treaty, writing “We strongly encourage your administration to recognize its textual, inherent and procedural flaws, to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms owners, and to defend the sovereignty of the United States, and thus to decide not to sign this treaty.”

The treaty, while be touted by liberals as something that stops guns from falling into the hands of terrorists, is deeply flawed, leaves open the possibility of changes or different interpretations that would only put a stranglehold on the United States. Furthermore, the treaty will have no effect upon governments, such as the Obama administration, that openly and knowingly provide weapons to drug cartels and negotiates support, along with RINOs in the Senate (not mentioning any names here, but at least one’s initials are John McCain (R-AZ)), with enemies of America to arm them.

Ultimately, no matter what we are told by the politicians, it is an attack upon freedom; a freedom we may just have to one day use to stop the growing tyranny.

One other thing to keep in mind. Iran is also one of the countries that the United Nations installed to help police the treaty. Noticeably missing from oversight on the treaty is the United States.

There is not a question of whether Barack Obama will sign the treaty, only when. Timing is key for him and he demonstrated that by putting his support behind the treaty once again within hours of his re-election.

Let’s keep getting the word out that not only should this treaty be opposed, but should be completely removed from the table of consideration so that it cannot be snuck through in a future Congress.

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/06/un-small-arms-treaty-may-be-signed-under-cover-of-darkness/#ixzz2VIFaLTLd

The Boy Scout Fallout


http://theblacksphere.net/2013/06/the-boy-scout-fallout/

boyscouts

The dust has scarcely settled from the Boy Scouts of America’s landmark vote to allow openly gay young men and boys to participate in scouting, yet already another controversy is brewing with parents and churches caught up in the crossfire.

Nationwide, congregations and families are coming to terms with the BSA policy change. In an effort to remain strong in their biblical convictions, many are being forced to cut ties with the BSA despite years of financial support and mutual trust.

But in doing so, their decision to withdraw support of the nation’s largest scouting organization has come under scrutiny by the liberal media and the leftwing blogosphere. Just days following the vote, Atlanta-area pastor Ernest Easley made national news when he advised his parishioners to cut all ties with BSA.

I never dreamed I’d have to stand up publicly and say to parents: Pull your kids out of the Boy Scouts,” Easley told the Baptist Press May 28. “If you would have asked me that five years ago, 10 years ago, I would have laughed,” Easley said. “And even as I was saying it Sunday morning, I thought, I cannot believe I’m having to address this and encourage parents to pull their children out of the Boy Scouts of America.

Louisville’s largest church, Southeast Christian Church, also made headlines when they cut ties with the Boy Scouts after the national organization decided to drop its ban on gay youth.

We want everyone, including ourselves, to live by biblical standards,” said the Executive Pastor Tim Hester. “Truly for us it’s a logical decision … We cannot be distracted from the mission God has called us to.

The BSA policy change is a sad reality that parents too must come to terms with. Michael Woodward, whose eleven year old son suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome and is particularly vulnerable to outside influences, has also decided to withdraw his support of BSA.

I cannot have my son say the Scout oath “…to keep myself morally straight…knowing that the Scout’s definition of that is now in direct contradiction to God’s definition. I cannot risk having my Asperger son led by a role model that is in fact immoral. He would follow.

So as parents and pastors make the hard choice to cut ties with BSA on account of their new policy, the liberal media has transferred their accusations of bigotry and intolerance from the BSA to its outgoing members and sponsors. Even before making a final decision at this summer’s annual convention, the Southern Baptist Convention has come under attack by those on the left for indicating that they will recommend for its 47,000 churches to pull away from BSA.

Whispers of litigation against these churches have already spurred non-profit legal foundations like Liberty Institute to take up potential lawsuits that are sure to come down the pike. It’s unfortunate that these institutions are being drawn into an ideological fight that they didn’t start nor go looking for.

Churches, families and the Scouts themselves are what some might consider collateral damage of a decade-long battle waged by the LGBT organizations against the BSA to impose their morality on a non-government entity. And thanks to a compliant media, clearly in the LGBT camp, these institutions must fend off accusations of intolerance and bigotry while trying to stand strong in their biblical convictions.

“We hoped to keep sex and politics out of Scouting,” lamented John Stemberger, a lifelong Scout with two sons in scouting, now leading the fight to start a new scouting chapter in defiance of the adopted policy. Unfortunately the LGBT community and the liberal media had other plans.

Sadly, it’s the parents and churches that must unravel this messy BSA policy and tenaciously step through the landmine of media scrutiny as they seek to live biblically in an increasingly anti-Christian society.

Federal Attorney Warns Negative Posts Against Islam Could Get You Prosecution & Imprisonment


by

islam_no_free_speech-Statue-of-Liberty

If you have seen the stories around the globe of how cartoonists, journalists and people simply posting tweets or Facebook posts has gotten them in hot water with Islam and even the government, then you have probably said, “That can’t happen in America,” right? Well hold on to your seat my friend because you are in for a rude awakening.

 

Barack Obama’s Attorney for the Eastern district of Tennessee Bill Killian and Kenneth Moore, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Knoxville Division, want Americans to know that if you say something negative towards Islam or Muslims, the Federal government may imprison you. They will be having an event called “Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society” on June 4, the same day Obama is scheduled to sign the United Nations Small Arms Treaty.

The Tullahoma Times reports,

Killian and Moore will provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims on social media.

“This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion,” Killian told The News Monday. “This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.”

Killian said the presentation will also focus on Muslim culture and how, that although terrorist acts have been committed by some in the faith, they are no different from those in other religions.

Anyone see this as inflammatory?

Anyone see this as inflammatory?

Killian also wants to portray Oklahoma City Bomber Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols as Christians and then link them to terrorism in the same fashion as Islamic jihadists. Please, the entire Christian community came out against the actions of the OKC bombing and neither of these guys were Christians, nor were they following the teachings of the Bible. The Islamic community has yet to condemn terrorism and the Qur’an clearly teaches them to commit violence (See video above). They hide behind certain words to mask the terrorism they are to engage in via the Qur’an. Instead, the Qur’an teaches them to actively engage in jihad. For a thorough dealing with jihad and its historical meaning and understanding, I highly recommend Lebanon-born Walid Phares’ book Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America. That will help you see clearly that nothing has changed in nearly 1,500 years of Islamic history.However, the criminal Attorney General Eric Holder seems to be backing Killian and Moore. Judicial Watch reports,

In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights.

The move comes a few years after the administration became the first in history to dispatch a U.S. Attorney General to personally reassure Muslims that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is dedicated to protecting them. In the unprecedented event, Attorney General Eric Holder assured a San Francisco-based organization (Muslim Advocates) that urges members not to cooperate in federal terrorism investigations that the “us versus them” environment created by the U.S. government, law enforcement agents and fellow citizens is unacceptable and inconsistent with what America is all about.

“Muslims and Arab Americans have helped build and strengthen our nation,” Holder said after expressing that he is “grateful” to have Muslims as a partner in promoting tolerance, ensuring public safety and protecting civil rights. He also vowed to strengthen “crucial dialogue” between Muslim and Arab-American communities and law enforcement.

SignIslamFreeSpeechWesternTerrorismThe DOJ actually became the first to assure Muslims it is dedicated to protecting them. I don’t recall this administration doing the same thing for Christians who are constantly having inflammatory videos and posts put up by Muslims.

Second, Muslims and Arab Americans have “helped build and strengthen our nation”? While I grant there are many Arab Americans who have come here legally, integrated with our society and lived among us and have contributed greatly to the society, I can’t give a full stamp of approval that we have been strengthened by Muslims. In fact, I would say we have been weakened by Muslim influence, specifically I’m talking about those currently in the Obama administration and the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Additionally the Tullahoma Times indicated that the goal is to increase awareness and understanding that American Muslims are not the terrorists some have made them out to be in social media and other circles. While I grant that every person who calls themselves a Muslim is not engaged in terrorism, the reality is that because of the teachings of the Qur’an, you cannot trust what they say, but respond to what they do. Virtually all Muslim mosques in America are funded by Saudi Arabia or other Muslim countries. Virtually all of them also, in turn, fund the Islamic Society of North America, which aligns itself with the Brady campaign to attack the Second Amendment. Additionally these Muslim groups are doing just as the Obama DOJ is doing and that is to go after the First Amendment.

Killian said, “We want to inform everybody about what the law is, but more importantly, we want to provide what the law means to Muslims, Hindus and every other religion in the country. It’s why we came here in the first place. In England, they were using Christianity to further their power in government. That’s why the First Amendment is there.”

fight-islam-for-me-edited-228-x-200So let’s get this straight, the First Amendment is there to protect Islamists in their speech, but not Christians? I see clearly now. Killian clearly doesn’t understand that whole part about “Congress shall make no law” regarding not only the establishment of a religion, but also “impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press” among other things. This means his claim about federal law in this matter is completely unconstitutional and he should be removed from his office.

You’ll recall back in August 2012 that Assistant Attorney General of the DOJ Civil Rights Division Thomas Perez refused to affirm the First Amendment rights of Americans to speak out against other religions. He was questioned four times and all he did was beat around the bush. This is the creeping Sharia that we and many others are warning about.

One wonders just how long it will be until we will be forced to defend our freedom of speech with our freedom to keep and bear arms from Islam and its co-conspirators in government.

Finally, I often hear the famous quotation from Voltaire, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” Well, for those posting this claiming that this should be applied to Christians or Jews, I suggest you take a second look and see who is bringing the hammer down now.

Other links that might be helpful alongside this article:

http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/27/doj-official-refuses-to-denounce-demands-for-saudi-style-blasphemy-law/

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/08/03/Obama-administration-paves-the-way-for-sharia-law

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/islamic_world_tells_clinton_defamation_of_islam_must_be_prevented_in_america.html

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/frontpagemag-com/islamophobia-thought-crime-of-the-totalitarian-future/

http://www.nationalreview.com/content/obama-vs-first-amendment

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2614/obama-administration-bans-knowledge-of-islam

UPDATE: WND reports,

The Obama administration, which is launching a series of Muslim Outreach Summits so that Islamists can tell federal officials how they better can serve that community, says it also is holding educational outreaches to let people know that Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal prosecution.

Are they doing this for Christians? I think not. This leads to the question of why the Obama administration thinks it needs to hear from the Muslim community on how it can better serve them, rather than simply follow the law. But the law, at least Constitutional law, is not in this administration’s vocabulary as evidenced by the numerous violations of the Constitution and the various scandals it is embroiled in.

UPDATE: Want to give Mr. Killian an earful? Here’s the contact information for him.

Eastern District of Tennessee
800 Market Street, Suite 211
Knoxville, TN 37902
Knoxville Headquarters Phone: (865)545-4167 or toll free at 1-800-296-3078
Knoxville Headquarters Fax: (865)545-4176
WebPage: http://www.justice.gov/usao/tne/meetattorney.html

FBI agent Kenneth L. Moore’s contact information:

1501 Dowell Springs Boulevard
Knoxville, TN 37909
Phone: (865) 544-0751
Fax: (865) 602-7212
E-mail: knoxville@ic.fbi.gov

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/06/federal-attorney-warns-negative-posts-against-islam-could-get-you-prosecution-imprisonment/#ixzz2VCAWUdq6

Listen to the Dummy


 This is classic! If you do not know about the Third amendment and need a quick review on all the amendments that count…….listen up!

Listen to the dummy

This dummy is not so dumb after all. Maybe all the anti-gun advocates should be more aware of the third amendment.

 

 

 

IRS Employee: D.C. Ordered Targeting Of Tea Party


by

darrell-issa.pngDarrell Issa (R-CA), Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, brought to light new testimony from Internal Revenue Service (IRS) employees on Sunday. On CNN’s State of the Union Issa pointed out the that the Obama administration’s claim about “a few rogue agents” being the ones guilty of targeting political enemies is patently false and his committee provided transcriptions, in which a Cincinnati IRS employee was clear in stating that they were ordered by Washington, D.C. personnel to heavily scrutinize Tea Party groups. After providing transcripts, Issa gestured towards the image of White House Press Secretary Jay Carney and called him a “paid liar.”

“As late as last week the administration’s still trying to say there’s a few rogue agents in Cincinnati when in fact the indication is they were directly being ordered from Washington,” Issa told Candy Crowley on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Issa’s committee provided CNN partial transcripts of its interviews with Cincinnati IRS agents. Crowley read from one transcript in which an investigator asked an agent if directions for extra Tea Party scrutiny had emanated from Washington. “I believe so,” the agent said. Here’s a partial of the transcript:

Q: In early 2010, was there a time when you became aware of applications that referenced Tea Party or other conservative groups?

A: In March of 2010, I was made aware.

******

Q: Okay.  Now, was there a point around this time period when [your supervisor] asked you to do a search for similar applications? 

A: Yes.

Q: To the best of your recollection, when was this request made?

A: Sometime in early March of 2010.

******

Q: Did [your supervisor] give you any indication of the need for the search, any more context? 

A: He told me that Washington, D.C., wanted some cases.

 

******

Q: So as of April 2010, these 40 cases were held at that moment in your group; is that right?

A: Some were.

Q:  How many were held there?

A: Less than 40.  Some went to Washington, D.C.

Q: Okay.  How many went to Washington, D.C.?

A: I sent seven.

******

Q: So you prepared seven hard copy versions of the applications to go to Washington, D.C.?

A:  Correct.

******

Q: Did he give you any sort of indication as to why he requested you to do that?

[…]

A: He said Washington, D.C. wanted seven.  Because at one point I believe I heard they were thinking 10, but it came down to seven.  I said okay, seven.

Q: How did you decide which seven were sent? 

A: Just the first seven.

Q: The first seven to come into the system?

A: Yes.

*****

Q: Did anyone else ever make a request that you send any cases to Washington?

A:  [Different IRS employee] wanted to have two cases that she couldn’t — Washington, D.C. wanted them, but she couldn’t find the paper.  So she requested me, through an email, to find these cases for her and to send them to Washington, D.C.

Q: When was this, what time frame?

A: I don’t recall the time frame, maybe May of 2010.

******

Q: But just to be clear, she told you the specific names of these applicants. 

A: Yes.

Q: And she told you that Washington, D.C. had requested these two specific applications be sent to D.C. 

A: Yes, or parts of them. 

******

Q: Okay.  So she asked you to send particular parts of these applications. 

A: Mm-hmm.

Q: And that was unusual.  Did you say that? 

A: Yes.

Q: And she indicated that Washington had requested these specific parts of these specific applications; is that right?

A: Correct. 

******

Q: So what do you think about this, that allegation has been made, I think as you have seen in lots of press reports, that there were two rogue agents in Cincinnati that are sort of responsible for all of the issues that we have been talking about today.  What do you think about those allegations?

[…]

A:  It’s impossible.  As an agent we are controlled by many, many people.  We have to submit many, many reports.  So the chance of two agents being rogue and doing things like that could never happen.

******

Q: And you’ve heard, I’m sure, news reports about individuals here in Washington saying this is a problem that was originated in and contained in the Cincinnati office, and that it was the Cincinnati office that was at fault.  What is your reaction to those types of stories?

[…]

A: Well, it’s hard to answer the question because in my mind I still hear people saying we were low-level employees, so we were lower than dirt, according to people in D.C.  So, take it for what it is.  They were basically throwing us underneath the bus.

******

Q: So is it your perspective that ultimately the responsible parties for the decisions that were reported by the IG are not in the Cincinnati office?

A: I don’t know how to answer that question.  I mean, from an agent standpoint, we didn’t do anything wrong.  We followed directions based on other people telling us what to do.

Q: And you ultimately followed directions from Washington; is that correct?

A: If direction had come down from Washington, yes.

Q: But with respect to the particular scrutiny that was given to Tea Party applications, those directions emanated from Washington; is that right?

A: I believe so.

There was another senior IRS Cincinnati employee complained about micromanagement from D.C.:

Q: But you specifically recall that the BOLO terms included “Tea Party?” 

A: Yes, I do. 

Q: And it was your understanding – was it your understanding that the purpose of the BOLO was to identify Tea Party groups? 

A: That is correct. 

Q: Was it your understanding that the purpose of the BOLO was to identify conservative groups? 

A: Yes, it was. 

Q: Was it your understanding that the purpose of the BOLO was to identify Republican groups? 

A: Yes, it was. 

******

Q: Earlier I believe you informed us that the primary reason for applying for another job in July [2010] was because of the micromanagement from [Washington, DC, IRS Attorney], is that correct? 

A: Right.  It was the whole Tea Party.  It was the whole picture.  I mean, it was the micromanagement.  The fact that the subject area was extremely sensitive and it was something that I didn’t want to be associated with. 

Q: Why didn’t you want to be associated with it? 

A: For what happened now.  I mean, rogue agent?  Even though I was taking all my direction from EO Technical [Washington, D.C], I didn’t want my name in the paper for being this rogue agent for a project I had no control over. 

Q: Did you think there was something inappropriate about what was happening in 2010? 

A: Yes.  The inappropriateness was not processing these applications fairly and timely. 

******

Q: You have stated you had concerns with the fairness and the timeliness of the application process.  Did you have concerns with just the fact that these cases were grouped together and you were the only one handling them? 

A: I was the only one handling the Tea Party’s, that is correct. 

Q: Did that specifically cause you concern? 

A: Yes, it did.  And I was the only person handling them. 

Q:  Were you concerned that you didn’t have the capacity to process all of the applications in a timely manner? 

A: That is correct.  And it is just – I mean, like you brought up, the micromanagement, the fact that the topic was just weirdly handled was a huge concern to me. 

Crowley, whose credibility is questionable at best after the entire Obama/Benghazi terrorism fiasco during the 2012 Presidential debates, was not convinced that these transcriptions were “definitive.”

“That one isn’t,” Issa said. “But I will tell you, one of the agents asked for and got a transfer because that person was so uncomfortable that they wanted out of it.”

Issa’s committee will be releasing the full transcripts in the future. However, he said that he was not a liar like White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. In fact, Issa gestured to an image of Carney behind Crowley and said, “Their paid liar, their spokesperson — picture behind — he’s still making up things about what happens and calling this a local rogue.”

The House Oversight Committee will be holding hearings this week which will focus on the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration report on excessive IRS conference spending and abuses of taxpayer money. Between 2010 and 2012, the IRS spent $50 million on at least 220 conferences.

Meanwhile, NBC is reporting that twenty-five conservative and Tea Party groups have filed lawsuits against the IRS, Attorney General Eric Holder and other top IRS officials “alleging that the Obama administration unlawfully targeted the groups because of their political beliefs and obstructed their applications for tax-exempt status.”

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/06/irs-employee-d-c-ordered-targeting-of-tea-party/#ixzz2V7CbXeIX

Gun Control Laws: Judge, Jury and Executioner of Rights?


By / 31 May 2013 /http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/2013/05/gun-control-laws-judge-jury-and-executioner-of-rights/

executionerIn reading the article The Fat Lady Hasn’t Sung: Gun Debate Not Over, I was again struck by the idea of our judicial system being at risk via the gun control issue. What I am about to write will cause some consternation, but read it through to the end and then argue with me.

The article states:

A host of logistical problems – including concerns about violating privacy, misunderstandings about which records should be submitted and a lack of money and training – has prevented federal and state agencies from submitting millions of mental health and drug abuse records to the database that’s used for background checks.”

In the U.S. Constitution is the Second Amendment that we are all familiar with. What we sometimes forget to associate with that is, within that Bill of Rights is the following:

“Amendment V”

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. [my bolding]“

and

“Amendment VI

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. [my bolding]“

The current process of our way of denying someone their Second Amendment rights is in conflict with the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. In the current system, anyone who has had mental problems of whatever sort has their problem reported to the federal government behind the person’s back, and they have no recourse but to immediately lose their right to bear arms.

Forget the whole idea of it being unconstitutional to testify against oneself — for is that not what mental counseling amounts to? — of the Fifth Amendment. Forget, also, finding any witnesses in your favor, the decision is made without that process and if you wish to appeal it, you may, but it will take a lot of work on your part, and possibly a lot of money as well. Attorneys don’t come cheap.

This affects the third part of the Fifth Amendment that is bolded: the right to “life, liberty, or property without due process of the law”. Liberty and property both include the right to keep and bear arms, do they not?

The Sixth Amendment is trashed by our current gun control laws (A.K.A. people control laws) via the fact that there is no witness against you to confront once you have sought mental help. Ever been diagnosed as ADHD? That’s a mental illness.

You lose your right to a firearm. Where is your witness against you? ‘Tis you. Fifth Amendment: allegedly it prevents you from testifying against yourself, but in talking to a mental health professional, you are testifying against yourself! And it is used against you!

Where is your right to bring a witness in your favor? Shall the psychiatrist who reported you testify for you? Don’t count on that, the psychiatrist is the one who turned you in.

That leads us to the last portion of the Sixth Amendment: the right to “have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence [sic]“. When was the last time you heard of anyone being offered a public defender in order to help them get their Second Amendment rights returned to them after they were denied the right to buy a firearm? Has it ever happened? Our Sixth Amendment says that it is supposed to be available. After all, this is happening in a court of law, is it not?

When the law is written in such a way that the law itself becomes our judge, jury and the executioner of our GOD-given rights (for such they are according to our Founding Fathers), then there is a problem with the way the law is written. Gun purchasing laws, as currently constructed, say basically, “IF A, then B and C.” “A” being the mental history, and “B” being your psychiatrist turning you in, and “C” being the loss of your Second Amendment rights.

The law itself has found you guilty of having a mental problem, has therefore removed your Second Amendment right, and you cannot now legally own a gun and are left defenseless in your own home. You cannot defend your life, nor the lives of your wife (or hubby) and children with a gun. You have committed the ultimate sin: you have broken the law of an untarnished mind.

In a nation of  305,528,358 (2008′s number to match the mental health stat) in 2008 approximately 8% of the population who were considered “severely mentally ill”. In 2011 the population was approximately 310,500,000; and 14,612 murders were committed; only 1,000 (6.843%)  committed by those “with untreated severe mental illness“.  That leaves 93.157% of the murders in America committed by those without mental illness.

For the rights of the many to be protected, we must start with the rights of the few. If one person is denied their Fifth Amendment right in a court of law and is forced to testify against himself is that not a declination of the rights of all of us? If they can do it one, they can do it to many.

In America, our justice system is based upon the idea of “Innocent until proven guilty”, apparently we need to add, “Unless you’ve had a mental health issue.”

In Part II of my article, I shall cover some new information from the world of psychiatry and the implications for those affected by the “mental illness” rules of gun control laws.

But now comes the Obama Administration to tell you that Yes, you just might be imprisoned for something you say online, so you’d better Watch What You Say.


by Ace Of Spades31 May 2013 http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/05/31/US-Attorney-Bill-Killian-Posting-Something-Mean-About-Muslims-on-Social-Media-Might-Be-a-Criminal-Action-Under-Federal-Civil-Rights-Laws

US Attorney Bill Killian: Posting Something Mean About Muslims on Social Media Might Be a Criminal Action Under Federal Civil Rights Laws

The First Amendment served us well for a time, but now it’s outdated.

Remember reading that England had arrested a guy for anti-Muslim Twitter postings in the aftermath of the Woolrich slaughter? And remember thinking, “Well, this is America, that can’t happen here”?
Oh yes it can. Obama’s Attorney for the Eastern district of Tennessee wants you to know that if you say something untoward about Muslims, the Federal government may imprison you.

Killian and Moore will provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims on social media. “This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion,” Killian told The News Monday. “This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.” … Killian said Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal jurisdiction.

The posting he offers as a “for instance” is an egregious one. And yet this country has long protected, absolutely, egregious speech, such as hardcore pornography, for a simple reason: Either you are at liberty to say what you will or you are not. If you are constantly double-thinking every word you might say, for fear of being prosecuted, you are self-censoring, in anticipation of a possible prosecution by the government.

Rather than having a system in which people were constantly worried about imprisonment for speech, our country has evolved a simple bright-line code: Speech of all kinds, with a few exceptions that can be counted on three fingers, is absolutely protected.

Remember, the importance of this bright-line, no-exceptions rule of free speech was preached to us, even when some of us might not have liked it so much, as when hardcore pornography was afforded absolute protection under the First Amendment. In the case of hardcore pornography, it was argued — successfully — that having each artist weigh the possibility of an obscenity prosecution was too much of a burden on his free speech rights, and would have, unavoidably, a chilling effect on speech.

That was the rule then, and that was the rationale.

vampire_obama-275x300But now comes the Obama Administration to tell you that Yes, you just might be imprisoned for something you say online, so you’d better Watch What You Say.

Remember when Ari Fleischer said that, without suggesting any kind of legal penalties? Remember how the media freaked out?

But now comes the US Attorney for the Eastern district of Tennessee explicitly telling you that you may be imprisoned if a political appointee decides your political speech has crossed a line.

Somehow, I don’t think Tim Robbins will be portentously howling us that a “chill wind” is blowing across our rights of free expression this week.

Tag Cloud