Our blog has moved! Come to our new location, check out our new look!
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Monday, February 11, 2013
EVEN CODE PINK WANTS OBAMA IMPEACHED
Radical group previously gave strong support to president
In a radio interview, Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin called for the impeachment of President Obama over his policy of permitting drone strikes on American citizens overseas who are members of terrorist organizations.
On WABC Radio’s “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” Sunday, Benjamin affirmed she believes the drone warfare is an impeachable offense.
She said she would go even further and “broaden” a ban on drone strikes to “end the killing of innocent people overseas in countries where we are not at war without any kind of transparency or accountability.”
Asked Klein: “So would you then call, as the co-founder of Code Pink, for the impeachment of President Obama based on these alleged crimes?”
“Sure,” Benjamin responded. “Just like I called for President Obama and George Bush to be taken to the International Criminal Court for war crimes, but it’s not going to happen.”
In a radio interview, Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin called for the impeachment of President Obama over his policy of permitting drone strikes on American citizens overseas who are members of terrorist organizations.
On WABC Radio’s “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” Sunday, Benjamin affirmed she believes the drone warfare is an impeachable offense.
She said she would go even further and “broaden” a ban on drone strikes to “end the killing of innocent people overseas in countries where we are not at war without any kind of transparency or accountability.”
Asked Klein: “So would you then call, as the co-founder of Code Pink, for the impeachment of President Obama based on these alleged crimes?”
“Sure,” Benjamin responded. “Just like I called for President Obama and George Bush to be taken to the International Criminal Court for war crimes, but it’s not going to happen.”
For more of the article go to: http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/even-code-pink-wants-obama-impeached/#jzlJsXflFMEclHf8.99
Investigator: Obama's Homeland Security Forms Cyber Army To Target Anti-Obama Sites
- BirtherReportPrivate Investigator Doug Haggman: Obama's DHS Cyber Army Targets Anti-Obama Sites - VIDEO BELOW: - Hat tip SA.
You can listen to the full TruNews interview by clicking here. Read Haggman's full report on Obama's cyber army by clicking here.
For more of the article go to: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/02/obamas-homeland-security-forms-cyber-army.html
FACEBOOK FAN PAGES CALL DORNER A 'HERO'
- Ben Shapiro
Alleged cop killer and former LAPD officer Christopher Dorner may be suspected in the shootings of five people, including three other police officers, but his support base is growing on Facebook. One Facebook page has 3,000 fans; its title: “I Support Christopher Jordan Dorner.” Another suggests that Dorner run for president: “We propose electing a man who could no longer sit idly by and watch as malicious tyrants abused the innocent.”
The worst, though, is a new page titled, “LAPD Cop Killer Christopher Dorner Is A Hero.” It has 193 likes, and features a picture of a dead police officer. The host comments: “I continue to learn from the posts that good people are sharing about systematic injustice. Thank you again to everyone who is taking this discussion seriously and posting resources for everyone to read.”
One Christopher Dorner fan page now has 556 members. Another has 313 likes. Still another has 1,266 likes. “We Are All Chris Dorner,” says yet another page, with the caption: “Christopher Jordan Dorner is the victim of a manhunt and smear campaign. 5 years ago he was fired from the LAPD for seeking to expose corruption within it …”
Alleged cop killer and former LAPD officer Christopher Dorner may be suspected in the shootings of five people, including three other police officers, but his support base is growing on Facebook. One Facebook page has 3,000 fans; its title: “I Support Christopher Jordan Dorner.” Another suggests that Dorner run for president: “We propose electing a man who could no longer sit idly by and watch as malicious tyrants abused the innocent.”
The worst, though, is a new page titled, “LAPD Cop Killer Christopher Dorner Is A Hero.” It has 193 likes, and features a picture of a dead police officer. The host comments: “I continue to learn from the posts that good people are sharing about systematic injustice. Thank you again to everyone who is taking this discussion seriously and posting resources for everyone to read.”
One Christopher Dorner fan page now has 556 members. Another has 313 likes. Still another has 1,266 likes. “We Are All Chris Dorner,” says yet another page, with the caption: “Christopher Jordan Dorner is the victim of a manhunt and smear campaign. 5 years ago he was fired from the LAPD for seeking to expose corruption within it …”
For more of the article go to: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/02/09/Facebook-fan-pages-Chris-Dorner
LEFT-WING LICKSPITTLES: HOW THE HUFFINGTON POST IS AIDING OBAMA'S BENGHAZI COVER-UP
- Joel B. Pollak
Normally, we at Breitbart News ignore the Huffington Post. It is self-consciously leftist, so there is little point in highlighting its rather comical bias, except when that bias filters into the mainstream media. Sunday night was just such an occasion, when HuffoPo ran two stories in succession that neatly captured the lickspittle mentality of the mainstream media towards President Barack Obama, and the danger it holds for our democracy.
The first story was headlined, “Obsessed.” It described the promised by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to block the confirmations of former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan to the posts of Secretary of Defense and CIA Director, respectively, unless the Obama administration fully explained the president’s actions during the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on Sep. 11.
Graham is no wide-eyed ideologue. Many conservatives consider him a squish on core issues. (I was once present to hear Graham address a gathering of high-dollar donors. He admonished them about the need to address climate change, even using the odd term “carbon pollution” to describe fossil fuel use. One irritated donor turned to me and whispered: “That sound you hear is checkbooks slamming shut across the nation.”)
Yet Graham takes foreign policy very seriously, as well as the fate of Americans serving abroad. He has, after all, been one of them. In pursuing answers on Benghazi, he is doing what the mainstream media ought to have done, and what the nation wants to be done. He is also answering Obama’s challenge in November: “If Sen. McCain and Sen. Graham and others want to go after somebody [on Libya], they should go after me.”
The first story was headlined, “Obsessed.” It described the promised by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to block the confirmations of former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan to the posts of Secretary of Defense and CIA Director, respectively, unless the Obama administration fully explained the president’s actions during the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on Sep. 11.
Graham is no wide-eyed ideologue. Many conservatives consider him a squish on core issues. (I was once present to hear Graham address a gathering of high-dollar donors. He admonished them about the need to address climate change, even using the odd term “carbon pollution” to describe fossil fuel use. One irritated donor turned to me and whispered: “That sound you hear is checkbooks slamming shut across the nation.”)
Yet Graham takes foreign policy very seriously, as well as the fate of Americans serving abroad. He has, after all, been one of them. In pursuing answers on Benghazi, he is doing what the mainstream media ought to have done, and what the nation wants to be done. He is also answering Obama’s challenge in November: “If Sen. McCain and Sen. Graham and others want to go after somebody [on Libya], they should go after me.”
ANN COULTER TO OBAMA: 'SCREW YOU'
"And Obama, look at him. He cares about the children... Screw you! You don’t think we care about the children?”
For original article go to: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/02/05/Ann-Coulter-To-Obama-Screw-You
FACEBOOK TEMPORARILY SUSPENDS TEA PARTY MOM
- Matthew Boyle
In at least the second such encounter in recent weeks, the social media website Facebook has run into issues with conservatives posting information that has caused the site to block Tea Partiers from posting--at least temporarily.
Now, Facebook blocked two stay-at-home Tea Party moms from posting material that’s pro-conservative and critical of liberals including President Barack Obama, Breitbart News has learned. The two moms--Patty and Lisa (they requested Breitbart News not use their last names, as they have “received death threats on our page and would prefer to remain somewhat anonymous”)--have had some issues with regard to posting materials that have gotten caught up in Facebook’s web, starting as early as October 2012.
Then, Patty posted a Breitbart News article, and the photograph contained within the article, on their “100 Percent FED Up” page. The article and photograph were about Rapper Snoop Dogg, and how he tweeted out a picture of a handwritten note containing reasons why somebody should vote for President Barack Obama for re-election.
Merely posting that article from Breitbart News and the photograph with it--with no editorial commentary of her own--earned Patty a three-day block from posting any content on Facebook. Official warnings popped up on her screen advising her that she violated Facebook’s “Community Standards.”
A few months later, Patty posted a photograph of Adolf Hitler bearing the text: “Never forget what this tyrant said: 'To conquer a nation first disarm its citizens.' - Adolf Hitler." Hitler actually said that, but Patty was blocked then for seven days (she ended up getting it reduced to approximately five days by contacting support) from Facebook.
Then, Wednesday evening this week, Patty posted the home address and contact information of Gracia C. Martore, the president and CEO of Gannett. Gannett publishes theJournal News newspaper in New York that recently printed a list of firearms owners’ personal information. Facebook blocked Patty for 30 days, as of Wednesday night, for that post.
As of late Thursday, she remained blocked and could not post anything on Facebook except for private messages.
But Facebook spokesman Fred Wolens told Breitbart News what happened was a mistake on the social media company’s part, and the company plans to fix the issue as fast as they can. With regard to the first two instances--the Snoop Dogg story and the Hitler photo--Wolens told Breitbart News that his team couldn’t find specific records of those blocks. “While we couldn't find the photos from the first two examples, if they were posted as described, they would not violate our policies,” Wolens said.
With the Gannett CEO photo information, Wolens said Facebook found the example and has determined that block to be a mistake. “[That] block was a mistake on our part, and we will follow up with our User Operations team to make sure this does not happen again,” Wolens said. “Additionally, we will reach out to the Page admins to communicate this error.”
Wolens added that “these actions are not politically motivated in any way.”
In at least the second such encounter in recent weeks, the social media website Facebook has run into issues with conservatives posting information that has caused the site to block Tea Partiers from posting--at least temporarily.
Now, Facebook blocked two stay-at-home Tea Party moms from posting material that’s pro-conservative and critical of liberals including President Barack Obama, Breitbart News has learned. The two moms--Patty and Lisa (they requested Breitbart News not use their last names, as they have “received death threats on our page and would prefer to remain somewhat anonymous”)--have had some issues with regard to posting materials that have gotten caught up in Facebook’s web, starting as early as October 2012.Then, Patty posted a Breitbart News article, and the photograph contained within the article, on their “100 Percent FED Up” page. The article and photograph were about Rapper Snoop Dogg, and how he tweeted out a picture of a handwritten note containing reasons why somebody should vote for President Barack Obama for re-election.
Merely posting that article from Breitbart News and the photograph with it--with no editorial commentary of her own--earned Patty a three-day block from posting any content on Facebook. Official warnings popped up on her screen advising her that she violated Facebook’s “Community Standards.”
A few months later, Patty posted a photograph of Adolf Hitler bearing the text: “Never forget what this tyrant said: 'To conquer a nation first disarm its citizens.' - Adolf Hitler." Hitler actually said that, but Patty was blocked then for seven days (she ended up getting it reduced to approximately five days by contacting support) from Facebook.
Then, Wednesday evening this week, Patty posted the home address and contact information of Gracia C. Martore, the president and CEO of Gannett. Gannett publishes theJournal News newspaper in New York that recently printed a list of firearms owners’ personal information. Facebook blocked Patty for 30 days, as of Wednesday night, for that post.
As of late Thursday, she remained blocked and could not post anything on Facebook except for private messages.
But Facebook spokesman Fred Wolens told Breitbart News what happened was a mistake on the social media company’s part, and the company plans to fix the issue as fast as they can. With regard to the first two instances--the Snoop Dogg story and the Hitler photo--Wolens told Breitbart News that his team couldn’t find specific records of those blocks. “While we couldn't find the photos from the first two examples, if they were posted as described, they would not violate our policies,” Wolens said.
With the Gannett CEO photo information, Wolens said Facebook found the example and has determined that block to be a mistake. “[That] block was a mistake on our part, and we will follow up with our User Operations team to make sure this does not happen again,” Wolens said. “Additionally, we will reach out to the Page admins to communicate this error.”
Wolens added that “these actions are not politically motivated in any way.”
CNN USES RESIGNATION NEWS TO TRASH POPE, CATHOLIC CHURCH
Today came the shocking news that 85-year-old Pope Benedict XVI has made the decision to resign at the end of the month, citing advanced age, fatigue, and exhaustion. While MSNBC kept its coverage respectful, CNN showed no such restraint, and immediately used the news as an excuse to launch into a frenzy of Catholic-bashing.
While Piers Morgan, with no evidence whatsoever, used Twitter to spread conspiracy theories...
As a Catholic, I'm not buying this. Popes don't just quit because they're tired. What's going on here??— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) February 11, 2013
You see, according to CNN, the Pope is retiring because dealing with the child abuse scandal exhausted him:
Much of the questioning about "the why" -- about why the Pope would be stepping down -- would be questions about the impact that the sex scandal, that has enveloped the Catholic church, would be having on the Pope.
O'Brien then spoke to her first outside "expert," left-wing filmmaker Alex Gibney, who directed the HBO film "Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God"-- a documentary about the child abuse scandal. O'Brien set Gibney's narrative immediately with this opening question:
"There also has to be some pressure and impact from what you really talked about; the sex scandal that has been a huge problem and enveloped much of the Catholic Church over the last decade."
Gibney fed the conspiracy theory by holding Pope Benedict XVI directly responsible for the scandal before going off on a wild tangent of outright Catholic-bashing:
"The other part that Benedict has played here is as a man going very hard over dissenters in the church. He's tried very hard to uphold charity of doctrine. So a lot of people have been drummed out of oppositions, only for questioning things like forced celibacy, or gay marriage, or the role of women."
Anyone who's watched Pope Benedict for any period of time knows that he's become shockingly frail, and at an alarming rate. That fact is something O'Brien never bothered to bring up. Her agenda, quite obviously, no matter how hard she has to stretch, is to tie The Narrative of the Pope's retirement to the child abuse scandal, because that's what she wants to talk about.
For more of the article go to: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/02/11/CNN-Uses-Resignation-News-to-Trash-Pope-Catholic-Church
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Majoring in Minors: Turning Our Schools into Totalitarian Enclaves
“Unfortunately, children do not organize, have no access to the media, and do not vote. They are relatively powerless to improve their own condition. Children need adults who will advocate for them.”—Professor David Elkind, Tufts University
Just as the 9/11 terrorist attacks created a watershed between the freedoms we enjoyed and our awareness of America’s vulnerability to attack, so the spate of school shootings over the past 10-plus years from Columbine to Newtown has drastically altered the way young people are perceived and treated, trnsforming them from innocent bystanders into both victims and culprits. Consequently, school officials, attempting to both protect and control young people, have adopted draconian zero tolerance policies, stringent security measures and cutting-edge technologies that have all but transformed the schools into quasi-prisons.
In their zeal to make the schools safer, school officials have succumbed to a near-manic paranoia about anything even remotely connected to guns and violence, such that a child who brings a piece of paper loosely shaped like a gun to school is treated as harshly as the youngster who brings an actual gun. Yet, by majoring in minors, as it were, treating all students as suspects and harshly punishing kids for innocent mistakes, the schools are setting themselves and us up for failure—not only by focusing on the wrong individuals and allowing true threats to go undetected but also by treating young people as if they have no rights, thereby laying the groundwork for future generations that are altogether ignorant of their rights as citizens and unprepared to defend them.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the increasingly harsh punishments and investigative tactics being doled out on young people for engaging in childish behavior or for daring to challenge the authority of school officials. Whereas in the past, minor behavioral infractions at school such as shooting spitwads may have warranted a trip to the principal’s office, in-school detention or a phone call to one’s parents, today, they are elevated to the level of criminal behavior with all that implies. Consequently, young people are now being forcibly removed by police officers from the classroom, strip searched, arrested, handcuffed, transported in the back of police squad cars, and placed in police holding cells until their frantic parents can get them out. For those unlucky enough to be targeted for such punishment, the experience will stay with them long after they are allowed back at school. In fact, it will stay with them for the rest of their lives in the form of a criminal record.
Consider the case of Wilson Reyes, a seven-year-old elementary school student from the Bronx who got into a scuffle with a classmate over a $5 bill. In response to the incident, school officials called police, who arrested Reyes, transported him to the police station and allegedly handcuffed the child to a wall and interrogated him for ten hours about his behavior and the location of the money. His family is in the midst of pursuing a lawsuit against the police and the city for their egregious behavior.
A North Carolina public school allegedly strip-searched a 10-year-old boy in search of a $20 bill lost by another student, despite the fact that the boy, J.C., twice told school officials he did not have the missing money. The assistant principal, a woman, reportedly ordered the fifth grader to disrobe down to his underwear and subjected him to an aggressive strip-search that included rimming the edge of his underwear. The missing money was later found in the school cafeteria.
And in Chicago, a 15-year-old boy accused by an anonymous tipster of holding drugs was taken to a locker room by two security guards, a Chicago police officer, and a female assistant principal, and made to stand against a wall and drop his pants while one of the security guards inspected his genitals. No drugs were found.
That students as young as seven years old are being strip searched by school officials, over missing money, no less, flies in the face of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2009 ruling in Safford Unif. Sch. Dist. v. Redding. Insisting that Arizona school officials violated the Fourth Amendment rights of a 13-year-old girl when they strip-searched her on the suspicion she was hiding ibuprofen in her underwear, the justices declared that educators cannot force children to remove their clothing unless student safety is at risk.
Precedent-setting or not, however, the Court’s ruling has done little to improve conditions for young people who are the unfortunate casualties in the schools’ so-called quest for “student safety.” Indeed, with each school shooting, the climate of intolerance for “unacceptable” behavior such as getting into food fights, playing tag, doodling, hugging, kicking, and throwing temper tantrums only intensifies. And as surveillance cameras, metal detectors, police patrols, zero tolerance policies, lock downs, drug sniffing dogs and strip searches become the norm in elementary, middle and high schools across the nation, the punishments being meted out for childish behavior grow harsher.
For more of the article go to: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/52885
So God Made a Democrat
- Daniel Greenfield
God looked down on Washington D.C. and said “I need someone who will steal morning, noon and night. Who will steal from the rich to give to the poor and steal from the poor to give to the rich and fool them all and keep all the loot.”
So God made a Democrat.
God said, “I need college man to come to a farm and tell the farmer that he can’t feed his hogs with lettuce from his own farm or use the manure from his pigs to grow his lettuce. I need an inspector who will tell him how much he can sell his milk for and warn him that his son riding on the tractor constitutes child labor. I need someone to pay a farmer not to farm so that poor people can’t afford bread.”
So God made a Democrat.
“I want a union organizer who hires non-union picketers to keep workers from working, a politician who fights for the people by taking money from billionaires and a clergyman who worships whoever runs on the party line. I want a banker who fights for the poor and gives to the party and a party that pays the poor man eight times to vote for the banker’s man.”
So God made a Democrat.
“I need someone to retire at 55 with generous benefits from a government job. I need lawmakers who will pass laws without reading them. I need teachers who refuse to teach kids unless they’re paid twice as much as any worker in their city. I need people to sit on commissions and make rules about lines of work that they’ve never been in.”
So God made a Democrat
“I need a Catholic who’s for abortion. A Jew who’s for Palestine. A Mormon who’s against the Church. A Baptist who’s for evolution. A Methodist who doesn’t believe in god. And a Muslim who believes in destroying America.”
So God made a Democrat.
He said, “I need someone who starts all the wars and protests against all the wars. Who is first in line to sign up to fight against his country but comes out as a pacifist when it’s time to defend it. I want war heroes who throw their medals over fences and then gather them up again when it’s time to run for office. I want men who are for everything before they’re against it”
So God made a Democrat.
“I need a working class man who who has never worked a day in his life, but always talks about caring for those who do. I need a man who talks all the time about helping women, blacks, lesbians, Eskimos and Martians get ahead and then drops them like a dirty rag when he has what he wants. A man who gets up at 11:30 in the afternoon to help the less fortunate by passing laws that will make them even less fortunate. A man who takes nine tenths of what’s meant for the poor and lets them have the leftovers.”
So God made a Democrat.
“I need a man who believes in himself too much to take responsibility for anything he did. I need a man who is tolerantly intolerant, who is outraged all day by everything in the world except his own outrageous behavior. I need a man who is for freedom of speech except when he’s offended, for freedom of religion except when he disagrees with it and for the right to bear arms but only for those weapons that existed in 1791.”
So God made a Democrat.
God said, “I need a party of jackasses that will always break through the fence and spoil everything that the farmer grows. I need bad men to test good men and liars, cheats and thieves with clipboards to teach neighbors to stick together against them. I need a man with no more conscience than a rattlesnake leading a band of fools with less sense than sheep. And I need him to keep the farmers and ranchers, the workers and doers on their toes so they always remember that evil never rests and keeping it down can sometimes be the hardest work of all.”
So God made a Democrat.
For original article go to: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/53005
God looked down on Washington D.C. and said “I need someone who will steal morning, noon and night. Who will steal from the rich to give to the poor and steal from the poor to give to the rich and fool them all and keep all the loot.”
So God made a Democrat.
God said, “I need college man to come to a farm and tell the farmer that he can’t feed his hogs with lettuce from his own farm or use the manure from his pigs to grow his lettuce. I need an inspector who will tell him how much he can sell his milk for and warn him that his son riding on the tractor constitutes child labor. I need someone to pay a farmer not to farm so that poor people can’t afford bread.”
So God made a Democrat.
“I want a union organizer who hires non-union picketers to keep workers from working, a politician who fights for the people by taking money from billionaires and a clergyman who worships whoever runs on the party line. I want a banker who fights for the poor and gives to the party and a party that pays the poor man eight times to vote for the banker’s man.”
So God made a Democrat.
“I need someone to retire at 55 with generous benefits from a government job. I need lawmakers who will pass laws without reading them. I need teachers who refuse to teach kids unless they’re paid twice as much as any worker in their city. I need people to sit on commissions and make rules about lines of work that they’ve never been in.”
So God made a Democrat
“I need a Catholic who’s for abortion. A Jew who’s for Palestine. A Mormon who’s against the Church. A Baptist who’s for evolution. A Methodist who doesn’t believe in god. And a Muslim who believes in destroying America.”
So God made a Democrat.
He said, “I need someone who starts all the wars and protests against all the wars. Who is first in line to sign up to fight against his country but comes out as a pacifist when it’s time to defend it. I want war heroes who throw their medals over fences and then gather them up again when it’s time to run for office. I want men who are for everything before they’re against it”
So God made a Democrat.
“I need a working class man who who has never worked a day in his life, but always talks about caring for those who do. I need a man who talks all the time about helping women, blacks, lesbians, Eskimos and Martians get ahead and then drops them like a dirty rag when he has what he wants. A man who gets up at 11:30 in the afternoon to help the less fortunate by passing laws that will make them even less fortunate. A man who takes nine tenths of what’s meant for the poor and lets them have the leftovers.”So God made a Democrat.
“I need a man who believes in himself too much to take responsibility for anything he did. I need a man who is tolerantly intolerant, who is outraged all day by everything in the world except his own outrageous behavior. I need a man who is for freedom of speech except when he’s offended, for freedom of religion except when he disagrees with it and for the right to bear arms but only for those weapons that existed in 1791.”
So God made a Democrat.
God said, “I need a party of jackasses that will always break through the fence and spoil everything that the farmer grows. I need bad men to test good men and liars, cheats and thieves with clipboards to teach neighbors to stick together against them. I need a man with no more conscience than a rattlesnake leading a band of fools with less sense than sheep. And I need him to keep the farmers and ranchers, the workers and doers on their toes so they always remember that evil never rests and keeping it down can sometimes be the hardest work of all.”
So God made a Democrat.
For original article go to: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/53005
Clash of Faith and Tyranny
- Sharon Sebastian
Deny God as Creator
The foundation for modern despotism was laid in mid-1800 when the false scientific justification to deny God as Creator started with a man named Charles Darwin. Darwin’s theory of evolution divided humans into superior and inferior status. Darwin, in his own writings, labeled people of color, in particular black people, as sub-par and sub-human. The theory was eventually applied to poor, white Europeans. The appeal of such a theory held great appeal to men who both denied the existence of God and sought personal and political superiority. Among them was Karl Marx, the father of Communism, who was so pleased with Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution that he sent him gifts, including a signed copy of Das Kapital in 1873 inscribed: “From a devoted admirer to Charles Darwin, Karl Marx.“ Equally grateful to Darwin were mass murderers Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Hitler. All wrote of Darwin’s influence on them and their policies to oppress masses of people. (For more on Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Hitler’s views on evolution, see Chapter 5 of Darwin’s Racists – Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, (DarwinsRacists.com).
Socialism seeks to diminish God in society. Marxism’s goal is to ultimately rid society of God
Exposure of both ideologies occurs when the tyrant’s diktats openly collide with God given rights and laws. Christian Purge: The Hitler Factor states: Adolf Hitler allowed religions. Early in his political career, he praised Catholicism. Initially, he also was favorably inclined toward Christianity. In time, as he garnered power, Hitler came to find Christianity particularly troublesome when Christian pastors spoke out against his systematic annihilation of Germany’s Jews. Hitler set out to wash the veneer of Christian beliefs from German society. He sought a new religion that would spring from the Nazi party with the pagan Swastika as its symbol to replace the Cross as he sought to transform Germany into a new nation. In time, Hitler allowed comment that: “You can be German or you can be Christian, but you can’t be both.” Hitler declared, “Evolution was the natural order of things,” allowing him to debase Jewish people, homosexuals and the disabled to a lower evolutionary scale and send them to death camps for extermination. He allowed that, “National Socialism and Christianity cannot co-exist together.” Historians record that Hitler’s religious views vacillated as his power grew until it became difficult to discern if the god Hitler actually worshiped was himself.
Hitler created the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazis) and surrounded himself with men who were atheists or occultists who shared the desire to replace Christianity with a religion that did not require conscience. Men like Hitler’s Deputy Chancellor of the Reich, Rudolph Hess, and Heinrich Himmler, who oversaw the Nazi death camps, were occultists. Himmler stated a preference for the faith of anti-Semitic Muslims who were willing to die for the German cause to attain a reward in their heaven. German school children were indoctrinated to sing praise songs, “Hitler is our Savior, Hitler is our Lord.” Hitler made his memoir, Mein Kampf, the official bible of Nazism.
Again, early in his career, Hitler stated a favorable view of Christianity. Historians reveal that, in time, power turned him inward to self-worship that perpetuated his growing alienation from Christianity resulting in the imprisonment and death of Christians and their pastors. Nazi Germany stands as a warning to all societies that look the other way or tolerate a denunciation or assault on Christianity and Judaism by their political leaders. Marxism and Fascism need to eliminate God so that conscience is muted and the government can become god in people’s lives. First to enable that vulnerability are pastors, rabbis and priests, clergy-in-name-only, who adhere more to the culture than to scripture. Government can displace faux faith, but never true faith.
Karl Marx described Socialism as a progression into MarxismSocialism strips people of initiative, innovation and self-reliance and encourages a dependence on government, “the new god,” from cradle to grave. Historically, Americans have resisted becoming wards of the state. The danger today lies with a plethora of laws being passed that are currently suppressing faith and legislating values and morality out of American life. Laws in process in Congress or already enacted by Presidential executive orders carry fines and penalties to force all people to forego personal and religious liberties. Marxism, Socialism, and Fascism counter America’s founding faith and its inherent freedoms. History begs that Americans take heed if America is to remain one nation under God with liberty and justice for all.
For more of the article go to: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/53007
"German school children were indoctrinated to sing praise songs, 'Hitler is our Savior, Hitler is our Lord.' Hitler made his memoir, Mein Kampf, the official bible of Nazism."Tyrants in-the-making initially display the veneer of compassion for “their people.” They make irrational promises of a utopian existence to garner support of the masses. Their power often emanates from public adulation. Such adulation, combined with a tyrant’s narcissistic inability to be self-critical, imbues a superiority that progresses into self-worship. The greater their power, the more tyrants succumb to self-glorification even to the point of challenging the laws of God. Progressively, they enforce an aberrant legal system with fines, penalties and punishments to force compliance to their will. Those who disagree, pay severe retributions. Devaluing life is key, in that it allows for mistreatment or eventual eradication of selected groups whether they are in opposition or indefensible numbers. Absolute control comes with the power to decide the death of citizens without legal oversight. It is the way of tyrants.
Deny God as Creator
Socialism seeks to diminish God in society. Marxism’s goal is to ultimately rid society of God
Exposure of both ideologies occurs when the tyrant’s diktats openly collide with God given rights and laws. Christian Purge: The Hitler Factor states: Adolf Hitler allowed religions. Early in his political career, he praised Catholicism. Initially, he also was favorably inclined toward Christianity. In time, as he garnered power, Hitler came to find Christianity particularly troublesome when Christian pastors spoke out against his systematic annihilation of Germany’s Jews. Hitler set out to wash the veneer of Christian beliefs from German society. He sought a new religion that would spring from the Nazi party with the pagan Swastika as its symbol to replace the Cross as he sought to transform Germany into a new nation. In time, Hitler allowed comment that: “You can be German or you can be Christian, but you can’t be both.” Hitler declared, “Evolution was the natural order of things,” allowing him to debase Jewish people, homosexuals and the disabled to a lower evolutionary scale and send them to death camps for extermination. He allowed that, “National Socialism and Christianity cannot co-exist together.” Historians record that Hitler’s religious views vacillated as his power grew until it became difficult to discern if the god Hitler actually worshiped was himself.
Hitler created the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazis) and surrounded himself with men who were atheists or occultists who shared the desire to replace Christianity with a religion that did not require conscience. Men like Hitler’s Deputy Chancellor of the Reich, Rudolph Hess, and Heinrich Himmler, who oversaw the Nazi death camps, were occultists. Himmler stated a preference for the faith of anti-Semitic Muslims who were willing to die for the German cause to attain a reward in their heaven. German school children were indoctrinated to sing praise songs, “Hitler is our Savior, Hitler is our Lord.” Hitler made his memoir, Mein Kampf, the official bible of Nazism.
Again, early in his career, Hitler stated a favorable view of Christianity. Historians reveal that, in time, power turned him inward to self-worship that perpetuated his growing alienation from Christianity resulting in the imprisonment and death of Christians and their pastors. Nazi Germany stands as a warning to all societies that look the other way or tolerate a denunciation or assault on Christianity and Judaism by their political leaders. Marxism and Fascism need to eliminate God so that conscience is muted and the government can become god in people’s lives. First to enable that vulnerability are pastors, rabbis and priests, clergy-in-name-only, who adhere more to the culture than to scripture. Government can displace faux faith, but never true faith.
Karl Marx described Socialism as a progression into MarxismSocialism strips people of initiative, innovation and self-reliance and encourages a dependence on government, “the new god,” from cradle to grave. Historically, Americans have resisted becoming wards of the state. The danger today lies with a plethora of laws being passed that are currently suppressing faith and legislating values and morality out of American life. Laws in process in Congress or already enacted by Presidential executive orders carry fines and penalties to force all people to forego personal and religious liberties. Marxism, Socialism, and Fascism counter America’s founding faith and its inherent freedoms. History begs that Americans take heed if America is to remain one nation under God with liberty and justice for all.
For more of the article go to: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/53007
Killer Dorner’s Supporters Are Par for the Left’s Course
- Selwyn Duke
While I was a conservative by age 12, for some time thereafter I viewed liberalism as most do—as just another ideology. Sure, it was an irritating ideology, but an ideology nonetheless. But then something happened. I don’t quite remember if I was 20, 21, or 22, but some experiences in my life and much pondering of the issues and the human condition led to an insight. It hit me like a bolt of lightning:
Liberalism is what evil is masquerading as in our time.
I won’t go into the labyrinthine details of the matter here, but it was a life-changing epiphany that ultimately led to a transition from secular-conservative/libertarian to man of faith and walking, talking anachronism. And it made me realize that liberals aren’t just misguided, which they are—they’re also in bed with evil.
This is apparent in much of what they do, and the support that murdering fugitive Christopher Dorner is receiving from the left is a good example. It doesn’t matter that Dorner is clearly an unhinged man blaming others for his own failures; it doesn’t matter that he shot innocent people; it doesn’t matter that the only sin of one of those innocents, Monica Quan, was being the daughter of a man who Dorner thought didn’t represent him adequately during an LAPD review process, and that another’s only sin was agreeing to become Quan’s fiancé. None of this matters, because Dorner possesses all the qualifications of a leftist zero hero: he’s pro-gun control, admires other zeroes such as Barack Obama and Piers Morgan, and is anti-cop.
Thus are there Facebook pages dedicated to Dorner, such as “We Are All Chris Dorner” (if this means all of the left, it’s a tenable theory), whose creator calls the killer “the victim of a manhunt and smear campaign.” One poster at the page named Aaron Hughes writes, “this guy is a hero.” Another page is “We Support Christopher Dorner,” with postings such as this one from a James McCarthy: “I support you and good hunting ,, tou [sic] are a true patriot.” This is just a small sampling, mind you.
There are also pictures, with captions such as:
Of course, we’ll hear that these are just “exceptions,” but the left has a funny knack for turning exceptions into the rule. And as far as patterns go, it certainly is the rule. Just consider many leftists’ response to a very cute pre-election video of a six-year-old boy giving ten reasons not to vote for Barack Obama. Here’s a handful of their YouTube postings (excerpted from a PatriotUpdate.com article):
While I was a conservative by age 12, for some time thereafter I viewed liberalism as most do—as just another ideology. Sure, it was an irritating ideology, but an ideology nonetheless. But then something happened. I don’t quite remember if I was 20, 21, or 22, but some experiences in my life and much pondering of the issues and the human condition led to an insight. It hit me like a bolt of lightning:Liberalism is what evil is masquerading as in our time.
I won’t go into the labyrinthine details of the matter here, but it was a life-changing epiphany that ultimately led to a transition from secular-conservative/libertarian to man of faith and walking, talking anachronism. And it made me realize that liberals aren’t just misguided, which they are—they’re also in bed with evil.
This is apparent in much of what they do, and the support that murdering fugitive Christopher Dorner is receiving from the left is a good example. It doesn’t matter that Dorner is clearly an unhinged man blaming others for his own failures; it doesn’t matter that he shot innocent people; it doesn’t matter that the only sin of one of those innocents, Monica Quan, was being the daughter of a man who Dorner thought didn’t represent him adequately during an LAPD review process, and that another’s only sin was agreeing to become Quan’s fiancé. None of this matters, because Dorner possesses all the qualifications of a leftist zero hero: he’s pro-gun control, admires other zeroes such as Barack Obama and Piers Morgan, and is anti-cop.
Thus are there Facebook pages dedicated to Dorner, such as “We Are All Chris Dorner” (if this means all of the left, it’s a tenable theory), whose creator calls the killer “the victim of a manhunt and smear campaign.” One poster at the page named Aaron Hughes writes, “this guy is a hero.” Another page is “We Support Christopher Dorner,” with postings such as this one from a James McCarthy: “I support you and good hunting ,, tou [sic] are a true patriot.” This is just a small sampling, mind you.
There are also pictures, with captions such as:
SO WE’LL HATE HIMThen there’s:
Because he can take it. Because he’s not our hero. He’s a silent guardian, a watchful protector. A dark knight.
Once again, this is but a sampling.WANTEDFOR TAKING OUT THE TRASH
Of course, we’ll hear that these are just “exceptions,” but the left has a funny knack for turning exceptions into the rule. And as far as patterns go, it certainly is the rule. Just consider many leftists’ response to a very cute pre-election video of a six-year-old boy giving ten reasons not to vote for Barack Obama. Here’s a handful of their YouTube postings (excerpted from a PatriotUpdate.com article):
And here is one I have to print so it can be cleaned up (as much as liberals’ messes can be):
Note that liberals often use children to spread their message; everything is “for the children”...and by the children and of the children. Obama just surrounded himself with them when signing gun-control executive orders and had little tykes reading statements. We had to watch in 2008 as kids marched for him in videos and sang “Barack Hussein Obama, mm, mm, mm!” But did you ever see conservatives post vile sentiments anytime, anywhere about how they wanted to abuse or kill these children? I spend many hours on the internet and have never seen such a thing. Of course, a leftist may unearth an example—and I wouldn’t be surprised if such a thing were manufactured, NBC-style—but the point is that exceptions on the right actually are just that. Exceptions on the left are everywhere.
For more of the article go to: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/53021
GO F*** YOUR MOTHER YOU LITTLE ****SUCKING HOMOPHOBIC GUN LOVING ****SUCKER IF YOU WERE MY F****** KID I WOULD BE GIVING THE BIGGEST S**T KICKING OF A LIFETIME YOU LITTLE GOOD GOD FEARING GOOD FOR F****** NOTHING F****** ****SUCKER!!!!!!I want to reiterate that we’re talking about a cute, innocent six-year-old child here. And again, we’ll be told that such sentiments aren’t representative of the left, but are they really all that unrepresentative of the passionate left?
TheSwordplaya
Note that liberals often use children to spread their message; everything is “for the children”...and by the children and of the children. Obama just surrounded himself with them when signing gun-control executive orders and had little tykes reading statements. We had to watch in 2008 as kids marched for him in videos and sang “Barack Hussein Obama, mm, mm, mm!” But did you ever see conservatives post vile sentiments anytime, anywhere about how they wanted to abuse or kill these children? I spend many hours on the internet and have never seen such a thing. Of course, a leftist may unearth an example—and I wouldn’t be surprised if such a thing were manufactured, NBC-style—but the point is that exceptions on the right actually are just that. Exceptions on the left are everywhere.
For more of the article go to: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/53021
MOVIE STAR STEVEN SEAGAL JOINS SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO TO TRAIN ARMED ‘POSSE’ AS SCHOOL GUARDS
- Erica Ritz
(TheBlaze/AP) — The self-proclaimed “toughest sheriff” in America joined forces this weekend with action movie star Steven Seagal to train volunteer posse members to defend Phoenix-area schools against gunmen.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio announced the controversial plan in the wake of the December Newtown, Conn., school shooting that left 27 people dead, including the gunman and 20 first-graders.
The exercise Saturday was held at a closed school site in suburban Fountain Hills outside Phoenix where sheriff’s SWAT members acted as shooters and 25 teenagers played the part of students during mock scenarios involving up to three gunmen. According to 3TV, the group practiced with several different types of guns, all firing blanks.
Seagal, best known for his roles in movies such as “Above the Law” and “Under Siege,” will lead training on hand-to-hand defense tactics and other techniques drawing from his expertise in martial arts, according to a sheriff’s office news release.
When faced with criticism in January about the school posse plan, Arpaio snapped back: “Why would people complain about my posse being in front of schools to act as prevention?”
He boldly announced the plan on the grounds of an elementary school, saying at the time he wanted the patrols publicized.
“I want everyone to know about it for the deterrence effect,” Arpaio said, adding that no taxpayer money would be spent on the patrols and volunteers would be supervised over the radio or telephone by actual deputies.
But Arizona Democratic House Minority Leader Chad Campbell called the plan to use Seagal as an instructor “ludicrous.”
“Steve Seagal is an actor. That’s it. Why don’t we also have Clint Eastwood and Chuck Norris and Bruce Willis come out and train them too while we’re at it,” Campbell said with condescension.
Campbell has been a vocal critic of Arpaio’s school posse protection plan, complaining that using untrained, armed civilians to protect students is a bad idea and likely will only make the facilities more dangerous.
“He’s making a mockery out of it. You’re having a movie actor train people how to protect schools?” Campbell said.
Current posse members already are used to bolster the sheriff’s office force by providing police protection at malls during the holidays, directing traffic and transporting people to jail. But the sheriff announced this week that he needs more members to continue the work, calling for 1,000 additional citizens to step up and volunteer.
(TheBlaze/AP) — The self-proclaimed “toughest sheriff” in America joined forces this weekend with action movie star Steven Seagal to train volunteer posse members to defend Phoenix-area schools against gunmen.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio announced the controversial plan in the wake of the December Newtown, Conn., school shooting that left 27 people dead, including the gunman and 20 first-graders.
The exercise Saturday was held at a closed school site in suburban Fountain Hills outside Phoenix where sheriff’s SWAT members acted as shooters and 25 teenagers played the part of students during mock scenarios involving up to three gunmen. According to 3TV, the group practiced with several different types of guns, all firing blanks.
Seagal, best known for his roles in movies such as “Above the Law” and “Under Siege,” will lead training on hand-to-hand defense tactics and other techniques drawing from his expertise in martial arts, according to a sheriff’s office news release.
When faced with criticism in January about the school posse plan, Arpaio snapped back: “Why would people complain about my posse being in front of schools to act as prevention?”He boldly announced the plan on the grounds of an elementary school, saying at the time he wanted the patrols publicized.
“I want everyone to know about it for the deterrence effect,” Arpaio said, adding that no taxpayer money would be spent on the patrols and volunteers would be supervised over the radio or telephone by actual deputies.
But Arizona Democratic House Minority Leader Chad Campbell called the plan to use Seagal as an instructor “ludicrous.”
“Steve Seagal is an actor. That’s it. Why don’t we also have Clint Eastwood and Chuck Norris and Bruce Willis come out and train them too while we’re at it,” Campbell said with condescension.
Campbell has been a vocal critic of Arpaio’s school posse protection plan, complaining that using untrained, armed civilians to protect students is a bad idea and likely will only make the facilities more dangerous.
“He’s making a mockery out of it. You’re having a movie actor train people how to protect schools?” Campbell said.Current posse members already are used to bolster the sheriff’s office force by providing police protection at malls during the holidays, directing traffic and transporting people to jail. But the sheriff announced this week that he needs more members to continue the work, calling for 1,000 additional citizens to step up and volunteer.
Joselyn Wells, a mother of three children at a school in suburban Phoenix, where Arpaio’s posse has begun patrolling, said she was excited to hear about the initiative.
“A lot of people sit around and watch these things happen, watch key signs and no one wants to do anything about it,” she said when Arpaio announced the plan. “Nobody wants conflict, nobody wants to be out in the limelight. And he doesn’t care. He wants to do the right thing.”
“A lot of people sit around and watch these things happen, watch key signs and no one wants to do anything about it,” she said when Arpaio announced the plan. “Nobody wants conflict, nobody wants to be out in the limelight. And he doesn’t care. He wants to do the right thing.”
GRAHAM VOWS TO HOLD UP OBAMA DEFENSE AND CIA NOMINEES UNTIL WHITE HOUSE GIVES MORE ANSWERS ON BENGHAZI
- Christopher Santarelli
(AP) – A leading Republican senator said Sunday he would hold up Senate confirmation of President Barack Obama’s nominees to head the Defense Department and the CIA until the White House provided more answers about the deadly Sept. 11 attack against a U.S. installation in Benghazi, Libya.
The White House took aim at Sen. Lindsey Graham, a persistent critic of Obama’s response to the terrorist assault, by urging quick approval of the president’s second-term national security team and scolding any lawmakers trying to “play politics” with critical nominations.
Graham accused the White House of “stonewalling” requests to release more information about the attack that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya. “We’re going to get to the bottom of Benghazi,” he told CBS.
A Democratic colleague branded Graham’s threat to stall the nominations of former Sen. Chuck Hagel to be defense secretary and John Brennan, Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, to be CIA director as “unprecedented and unwarranted.” Senators should have the chance to vote on the fate of those nominees, said Sen. Jack Reed.
The White House did not address Graham’s demand for more information, but did note that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified Thursday before Congress about the chaotic day of the Sept. 11 attack.
Republicans have accused the Obama administration of an election-year cover-up of the attack, and at the hearing several suggested the commander in chief was disengaged as Americans died.
“We know nothing about what the president did on the night of September 11th during a time of national crisis, and the American people need to know what their commander in chief did, if anything, during this eight-hour attack,” Graham said on CBS.
Graham contended that a six-person rescue team was delayed from leaving the Benghazi airport because of problems “with the militias releasing them and a lot of bureaucratic snafus,” and he said he wants to know whether Obama called any Libyan officials to expedite their mission.
“I don’t think we should allow Brennan to go forward for the CIA directorship, Hagel to be confirmed to secretary of defense until the White House gives us an accounting,” Graham said, adding, “What did he do that night? That’s not unfair. The families need to know, the American people need to know.”
Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the White House’s National Security Council, said, “We believe the Senate should act swiftly to confirm John Brennan and Sen. Hagel. These are critical national security positions and individual members shouldn’t play politics with their nominations.”
Reed said that “to dwell on a tragic incident and use that to block people is not appropriate. To try to find information, to ask legitimate questions, as Senator Graham is doing is completely appropriate. But then to turn around and say, `I’m going to disrupt, essentially, the nomination of two key members of the President’s Cabinet,’ I don’t think that’s appropriate, I don’t think it’s warranted, I think it is an overreaction that is not going to serve the best interest going forward of the national security of the United States.”
Graham would have none of it.
“In a constitutional democracy, we need to know what our commander in chief was doing at a time of great crisis, and this White House has been stonewalling the Congress, and I’m going to do everything I can to get to the bottom of this so we’ll learn from our mistakes and hold this president accountable for what I think is tremendous disengagement at a time of national security crisis,” he said.
Key Senate Armed Services Committee Republican Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., right, the ranking member, right, joined by Lindsey Graham, center, and Kelly Ayotte, left. (Credit: AP)
(AP) – A leading Republican senator said Sunday he would hold up Senate confirmation of President Barack Obama’s nominees to head the Defense Department and the CIA until the White House provided more answers about the deadly Sept. 11 attack against a U.S. installation in Benghazi, Libya.
The White House took aim at Sen. Lindsey Graham, a persistent critic of Obama’s response to the terrorist assault, by urging quick approval of the president’s second-term national security team and scolding any lawmakers trying to “play politics” with critical nominations.
Graham accused the White House of “stonewalling” requests to release more information about the attack that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya. “We’re going to get to the bottom of Benghazi,” he told CBS.
A Democratic colleague branded Graham’s threat to stall the nominations of former Sen. Chuck Hagel to be defense secretary and John Brennan, Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, to be CIA director as “unprecedented and unwarranted.” Senators should have the chance to vote on the fate of those nominees, said Sen. Jack Reed.
The White House did not address Graham’s demand for more information, but did note that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified Thursday before Congress about the chaotic day of the Sept. 11 attack.
Republicans have accused the Obama administration of an election-year cover-up of the attack, and at the hearing several suggested the commander in chief was disengaged as Americans died.
“We know nothing about what the president did on the night of September 11th during a time of national crisis, and the American people need to know what their commander in chief did, if anything, during this eight-hour attack,” Graham said on CBS.
Graham contended that a six-person rescue team was delayed from leaving the Benghazi airport because of problems “with the militias releasing them and a lot of bureaucratic snafus,” and he said he wants to know whether Obama called any Libyan officials to expedite their mission.
“I don’t think we should allow Brennan to go forward for the CIA directorship, Hagel to be confirmed to secretary of defense until the White House gives us an accounting,” Graham said, adding, “What did he do that night? That’s not unfair. The families need to know, the American people need to know.”
Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the White House’s National Security Council, said, “We believe the Senate should act swiftly to confirm John Brennan and Sen. Hagel. These are critical national security positions and individual members shouldn’t play politics with their nominations.”
Reed said that “to dwell on a tragic incident and use that to block people is not appropriate. To try to find information, to ask legitimate questions, as Senator Graham is doing is completely appropriate. But then to turn around and say, `I’m going to disrupt, essentially, the nomination of two key members of the President’s Cabinet,’ I don’t think that’s appropriate, I don’t think it’s warranted, I think it is an overreaction that is not going to serve the best interest going forward of the national security of the United States.”
Graham would have none of it.
“In a constitutional democracy, we need to know what our commander in chief was doing at a time of great crisis, and this White House has been stonewalling the Congress, and I’m going to do everything I can to get to the bottom of this so we’ll learn from our mistakes and hold this president accountable for what I think is tremendous disengagement at a time of national security crisis,” he said.
Dishonored and Disrespected: Obama Disarmed US Marines at Inaugural Parade
- Jim Hoft
A new administration policy? Barack Obama disarmed the US Marines at the Inaugural parade this year.
 |
| Dishonored and disarmed: Bolts are clearly missing from these Marine rifles during President Obama’s inauguration parade. This is an unmistakable insult to the honor of the Marine Corps. (Bob Owens) |
The Examiner reported:
“Didn’t know the Marines had to take the bolts out of their rifles for the Inaugural,” an email forwarded to Gun Rights Examiner from a United States Marine Corps source observed. “Wonder if someone can explain why [they] would be marching in the inaugural parade with no bolts in their rifles!”
The email linked to a YouTube video of the 57th Presidential Inaugural Parade, embedded in this column, featuring Bravo Company Marines from the Marine Barracks Washington. Sure enough, the observation in the email is confirmed by watching the video, with screen shots provided in the photo and slide show accompanying this article.This prompted an internet search to see if others had also noticed, and the Blur-Brain blog had.
“The bolts have been removed from the rifles rendering them unable to fire a round,” the post stated. “Apparently Obama’s Secret Service doesn’t trust the USMC. Simply searching each guy to make sure he didn’t have a live round hidden on him wasn’t enough, they had to make sure the guns were inoperable.
Wondering if this may be an inauguration policy of long standing that transcends administrations, Gun Rights Examiner made a cursory search and found something even more curious. In the 2009 Inaugural Parade, the United States Navy marched with rifles that had not been so disabled
It’s not the first time the Obama Administration disarmed US Marines at an event.
 |
| In March 2012, US Marines were told to leave their weapons outside the tent during Leon Panetta’s speech in Afghanistan. |
Scholar Pelosi: “We Avow the First Amendment and Say People Have the Right to Have a Gun” (Video)
- Jim Hoft
Well, she’s certainly no constitutional scholar. And, it’s really not surprising that she knows next to nothing on the subject. Scholar Nancy Pelosi told FOX News Sunday host Chris Wallace today,
Well, she’s certainly no constitutional scholar. And, it’s really not surprising that she knows next to nothing on the subject. Scholar Nancy Pelosi told FOX News Sunday host Chris Wallace today,
“We avow the First Amendment. We stand with that and say that people have a right to have a gun to protect themselves. in their homes and their jobs, whatever, and that they — and the workplace and that they, for recreation and hunting and the rest.”Umm-kay.
THE GROWING CASE FOR IMPEACHMENT OF OBAMA
What constitutional experts say about high crimes, misdemeanors
- Chelsea Schilling
Should Barack Hussein Obama, the 44th president of the United States, be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors?
It’s not a question yet being asked or debated in the Big Media. But it is a question being addressed by some members of Congress, by an increasing number of pundits by activists on the left and the right – and for more than one or two alleged constitutional offenses.
Some of those who have broached the subject include Reps. Trent Franks, R-Ariz.; Walter Jones, R-N.C.; Trey Radel, R-Fla.; Steve Stockman; former Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas; former Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio; Fox News’ Mike Huckabee; former assistant U.S. attorney Andrew McCarthy; left-leaning investigative reporter Dave Lindorff; talk-radio host Mark Levin; former House Speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich; author and columnist Pat Buchanan and others.
Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution states, “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
The U.S. House of Representatives has the power to commence impeachment proceedings. If the House adopts an impeachment resolution, the U.S. Senate conducts a trial and determines whether to convict or acquit. If an official is convicted, he or she is removed from the position and may be barred from holding office again. The official may also face criminal prosecution.
Only two U.S. president have been impeached by the House: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. However, both presidents were acquitted in the Senate. President Richard Nixon resigned before the full House had voted on his impeachment.
This powerful legislative check on executive and judicial wrongdoing is reserved for the most egregious offenses against the U.S. Constitution and the republic.
During the debates of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, James Madison explained the requirement for impeachment: “[S]ome provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers.”
In the Federalist Papers (No. 65), Alexander Hamilton wrote that a president should be impeached for “offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself.”
WND assembled a bipartisan panel of top constitutional experts to evaluate 12 popular arguments for impeaching Obama:
- Chelsea Schilling
It’s not a question yet being asked or debated in the Big Media. But it is a question being addressed by some members of Congress, by an increasing number of pundits by activists on the left and the right – and for more than one or two alleged constitutional offenses.
Some of those who have broached the subject include Reps. Trent Franks, R-Ariz.; Walter Jones, R-N.C.; Trey Radel, R-Fla.; Steve Stockman; former Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas; former Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio; Fox News’ Mike Huckabee; former assistant U.S. attorney Andrew McCarthy; left-leaning investigative reporter Dave Lindorff; talk-radio host Mark Levin; former House Speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich; author and columnist Pat Buchanan and others.
Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution states, “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
The U.S. House of Representatives has the power to commence impeachment proceedings. If the House adopts an impeachment resolution, the U.S. Senate conducts a trial and determines whether to convict or acquit. If an official is convicted, he or she is removed from the position and may be barred from holding office again. The official may also face criminal prosecution.
Only two U.S. president have been impeached by the House: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. However, both presidents were acquitted in the Senate. President Richard Nixon resigned before the full House had voted on his impeachment.
This powerful legislative check on executive and judicial wrongdoing is reserved for the most egregious offenses against the U.S. Constitution and the republic.
During the debates of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, James Madison explained the requirement for impeachment: “[S]ome provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers.”
In the Federalist Papers (No. 65), Alexander Hamilton wrote that a president should be impeached for “offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself.”
WND assembled a bipartisan panel of top constitutional experts to evaluate 12 popular arguments for impeaching Obama:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)