Silk Road heroin dealer who helped convict Ulbricht will serve 2.5 years

silk road 1

Michael Duch, who sold heroin on the Silk Road and later testified at the trial of the site’s founder Ross Ulbricht, was sentenced today to two-and-a-half years in prison, according to Reuters.

Duch never interacted with Ulbricht, who went by the Dread Pirate Roberts on the site. His testimony in February was used by prosecutors to demonstrate that Silk Road created additional dealers and users. Duch, whose online moniker was “deezletime,” said he started selling drugs to support his own dope habit, which at its peak was costing him $200 to $300 per day.

Continue reading

Advertisements

NSA Now Sending Terrorism Task Force Teams To Homes Over Personal Internet Searches?

Demonstrators Protest NSA Surveillance (Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

By Shepard Ambellas
Intellihub.com
August 1, 2013

According to Michelle Cantalano, six agents from the Joint Terrorism Task Force (TTF) showed up at her and her husbands residence Wednesday, after being prompted by NSA algorithm authorities that the couple had been searching for pressure cooker and backpacks on the Internet. Continue reading

Adam Kokesh Press Release 7/17

As many of you know, Adam Kokesh was arrested on July 9, 2013 at his residence in Herndon, VA. The US Parks Police, aided by the local Herndon police force and a coalition of other agencies raided and ransacked Adam’s home. They provided a warrant only after they had taken Adam into custody and had completed an extensive search. They also detained and harassed all the occupants of the house for an extended period and would not provide reason for the detainment.

The warrant for Adam’s arrest was highly suspect. The warrant was signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson , the same judge that signed the warrant for Edward Snowden’s extradition. In addition, the warrant included an affidavit which has not been released to the public. Continue reading

Secret court creates 100 pages of new law hidden from public

Congress held hearings in 2007 on the secretive FISA court, but detractors say the secretive court operatives without oversight and oversteps its Constitutional bounds.

News reports over the past six months concerning illegal government snooping on citizens and a distressing disregard for Constitutional rights have served to alert many in the populace that their government has become an unrecognizable malevolent force that pits the elitist power structure against “we the people.”   Continue reading

Exclusive: (Another) Whistleblower Says State Department Trying to Bully Her Into Silence

The State Department investigator who accused colleagues last week of using drugssoliciting prostitutes, and having sex with minors says that Foggy Bottom is now engaged in an “intimidation” campaign to stop her.

Last week’s leaks by Aurelia Fedenisn, a former State Department inspector general investigator, shined a light on alleged wrongdoing by U.S. officials around the globe. But her attorney Cary Schulman tells The Cable that Fedenisn has paid a steep price: “They had law enforcement officers camp out in front of her house, harass her children and attempt to incriminate herself.” Continue reading

20 HUGE scandals since Obama took office

Here are 20 impeachable unconstitutional economically terroristic things that have happened since obama took office

-IRS targets Obama’s enemies: The IRS targeted conservative and pro-Israel groups prior to the 2012 election. Questions are being raised about why this occurred, who ordered it, whether there was any White House involvement and whether there was an initial effort to hide who knew about the targeting and when.

– Benghazi: This is actually three scandals in one:  The failure of administration to protect the Benghazi mission.  The changes made to the talking points in order to suggest the attack was motivated by an anti-Muslim video  The refusal of the White House to say what President Obama did the night of the attack

– Watching the AP: The Justice Department performed a massive cull of Associated Press reporters’ phone records as part of a leak investigation.

– Rosengate: The Justice Department suggested that Fox News reporter James Rosen is a criminal for reporting about classified information and subsequently monitored his phones and emails.

– Potential Holder perjury I: Attorney General Eric Holder told Congress he had never been associated with “potential prosecution” of a journalist for perjury when in fact he signed the affidavit that termed Rosen a potential criminal.

– The ATF “Fast and Furious” scheme: Allowed weapons from the U.S. to “walk” across the border into the hands of Mexican drug dealers. The ATF lost track of hundreds of firearms, many of which were used in crimes, including the December 2010 killing of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

– Potential Holder Perjury II: Holder told Congress in May 2011 that he had just recently heard about the Fast and Furious gun walking scheme when there is evidence he may have known much earlier.

– Sebelius demands payment: HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius solicited donations from companies HHS might regulate. The money would be used to help her sign up uninsured Americans for ObamaCare.

– The Pigford scandal: An Agriculture Department effort that started as an attempt to compensate black farmers who had been discriminated against by the agency but evolved into a gravy train delivering several billion dollars in cash to thousands of additional minority and female farmers who probably didn’t face discrimination.

– GSA gone wild: The General Services Administration in 2010 held an $823,000 training conference in Las Vegas, featuring a clown and a mind readers. Resulted in the resignation of the GSA administrator.

– Veterans Affairs in Disney World: The agency wasted more than $6 million on two conferences in Orlando. An assistant secretary was fired.

– Sebelius violates the Hatch Act: A U.S. special counsel determined that Sebelius violated the Hatch Act when she made “extemporaneous partisan remarks” during a speech in her official capacity last year. During the remarks, Sebelius called for the election of the Democratic candidate for governor of North Carolina.

– Solyndra: Republicans charged the Obama administration funded and promoted its poster boy for green energy despite warning signs the company was headed for bankruptcy. The administration also allegedly pressed Solyndra to delay layoff announcements until after the 2010 midterm elections.

– AKA Lisa Jackson: Former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson used the name “Richard Windsor” when corresponding by email with other government officials, drawing charges she was trying to evade scrutiny.

– The New Black Panthers: The Justice Department was accused of using a racial double standard in failing to pursue a voter intimidation case against Black Panthers who appeared to be menacing voters at a polling place in 2008 in Philadelphia.

– Waging war all by myself: Obama may have violated the Constitution and both the letter and the spirit of the War Powers Resolution by attacking Libya without Congressional approval.

– Biden bullies the press: Vice President Biden’s office has repeatedly interfered with coverage, including forcing a reporter to wait in a closet, making a reporter delete photos, and editing pool reports.

– AKPD not A-OK: The administration paid millions to the former firm of then-White House adviser David Axelrod, AKPD Message and Media, to promote passage of Obamacare. Some questioned whether the firm was hired to help pay Axelrod $2 million AKPD owed him.

– Sestak, we’ll take care of you: Former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel used Bill Clinton as an intermediary to probe whether former Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) would accept a prominent, unpaid White House advisory position in exchange for dropping out of the 2010 primary against former Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.).

– I’ll pass my own laws: Obama has repeatedly been accused of making end runs around Congress by deciding which laws to enforce, including the decision not to deport illegal immigrants who may have been allowed to stay in the United States had Congress passed the “Dream Act.”

 

 

http://www.dailypaul.com/288643/20-huge-scandals-since-obama-took-office?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailypaul%2FFClq+%28The+Daily+P.Au.L+-+Peace+%7C+Gold+%7C+Love%29&utm_content=FaceBook

NSA whistleblower supported Ron Paul’s presidential run

Former US Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) (AFP Photo)

With all eyes turned to 29-year-old Edward Snowden, the former CIA analyst who leaked documents about the National Security Agency’s domestic spying is already on his way to becoming the most discussed man in America. Less than 24 hours after the Guardian went public with Snowden’s identity on Sunday, the leaker’s personal life and politics have already taken center stage.

Now at the center of some discussions is Snowden’s endorsement of Ron Paul during last year’s presidential race, a revelation that is providing a rare glimpse into the ideologies of a man who will likely face decades in prison for going public.

According to donation info published by the Center for Responsive Politics’ website OpenSecrets.org, Snowden made two contributions totaling $500 to the presidential campaign of then-Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) during the last calendar year. Snowden made a $250 contribution to Rep. Paul on March 18, 2012, and another $250 donation on May 6.

Rep. Paul was vying for the Republican Party’s nomination as president during last year’s election, ultimately losing that slot to former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. Paul ended his active campaigning phrase shortly after Snowden’s second contribution was made and retired from Congress in early 2013 after serving decades on Capitol Hill.

Although other links between Snowden and Paul haven’t been published yet, the leaker did say in an interview this week that he supported a third party presidential candidate during the 2008 race that ultimately ended in a win for Barack Obama, a Democrat.

A lot of people in 2008 voted for Obama. I did not vote for him. I voted for a third party. But I believed in Obama’s promises. I was going to disclose it [but waited because of his election]. He continued with the policies of his predecessor,” Snowden told the Guardian.

Before Barack Obama won his bid for the White House in 2008, he campaigned on a promise of having the most transparent presidential administration in the history of the United States. Today his office continues to stand by that vow despite spearheading an unprecedented war against leakers. The Obama administration has so far charged seven people under the Espionage Act, and more leakers have been prosecuted under that legislation than by every previous president combined.

Snowden is reported to currently be in Hong Kong after fleeing his apartment in Hawaii at the beginning of last month. He previously worked for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and, most recently, defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. He only worked there for three months before the Guardian published top secret documents last week about the NSA’s phone and Internet surveillance programs, operated for years under a provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and a well-hidden program called PRISM.

The NSA has built an infrastructure that allows it to intercept almost everything. With this capability, the vast majority of human communications are automatically ingested without targeting. If I wanted to see your emails or your wife’s phone, all I have to do is use intercepts. I can get your emails, passwords, phone records [and] credit cards,” Snowden told the Guardian.

I don’t want to live in a society that does these sort of things … I do not want to live in a world where everything I do and say is recorded. That is not something I am willing to support or live under.”

Before the Guardian went public with Snowden’s allegations about the spy program — then later his identity — the leaker went to the Washington Post and asked them to publish his evidence of PRISM.

Snowden asked for a guarantee that The Washington Post would publish — within 72 hours  —  the full text of a PowerPoint presentation describing PRISM, a top-secret surveillance program that gathered intelligence from Microsoft, Facebook, Google and other Silicon Valley giants,” Post reporter Barton Gellman admitted this week.

I told him we would not make any guarantee about what we published or when,” Gellman recalled for the Post. According to Gellman, “The Post sought the views of government officials about the potential harm to national security prior to publication and decided to reproduce only four of the 41 slides.”

Snowden’s attempt to expose the secretive program through the Washington Post draws an eerie parallel to the case of Bradley Manning, the 25-year-old Army private who gave hundreds of thousands of sensitive government files to the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks — but not before his phone calls to the Post and New York Times were ignored.

On the campaign trail last year, then-Rep. Paul said he’d protect Bradley Manning and other whistleblowers if elected to the White House.

“I maintain that government becomes more secret and the people’s privacy is being destroyed. We should protect the people’s privacy and we should make the government much more open,” Paul said last April during a campaign stop in San Antonio, Texas.

“I would certainly lean in the direction of protecting people that are trying to tell the truth,” said Paul. “The more openness the better. That’s what a free society is all about. It wouldn’t be so critical if the government was a lot smaller, but because it is so big it is big issue because there is so much that could be hidden.”

 

 

http://rt.com/usa/snowden-nsa-ron-paul-481/

Philadelphia adopting ‘doomsday’ school-slashing plan despite $400 million prison project

William Thomas Cain / Getty Images / AFP

William Thomas Cain / Getty Images / AFP

Days after Philadelphia officials pushed the city one step closer to a so-called “doomsday” education plan that would see two dozen schools close, construction began on a $400-million prison said to be the second-most expensive state project ever.

Pennsylvania’s School Reform Commission voted on June 1 to approve a $2.4 billion budget, ignoring hours of pleas from students, parents, educators and community members who warned the budget would cripple city schools.

The plan would close 23 public schools, roughly 10 per cent of the city’s total. Commissioners rejected a proposal that would have only closed four of the 27 schools that were on the block for closure.

Without the means to cover a $304 million debt, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported, students can expect to go back to school in September without new books, paper, counselors, clubs, librarians, assistant principals or secretaries. All athletics, art and music programs would be eliminated and as many as 3,000 people could lose their jobs.

Only one of five state commissioners voted against the proposal, warning that Republican Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett’s administration had not looked hard enough elsewhere for proper funds.

That $304 million windfall is unlikely to be filled because the Republican-controlled Pennsylvania House of Representatives recently passed a tax break for corporations that will cost Pennsylvania residents an estimated $600 million to $800 million annually.

 

Reuters / George Widman / Pool PA / DL

Reuters / George Widman / Pool PA / DL

 

Newly unemployed teachers might consider submitting their resumes to the Department of Corrections, though, with the news that the supposedly cash-strapped government is digging deep to spend $400 million for the construction of State Correctional Institutions Phoenix I and II.

The penitentiary, which is technically two facilities, will supplement at least two existing jails, the Western Penitentiary at Pittsburgh and Fayette County Jail. Pittsburgh’s Western Penitentiary was built in 2003 with the original intention of replacing Fayette County Jail, but the prison has struggled with lawsuits claiming widespread physical and sexual abuse of prisoners.

Scheduled to be completed in 2015, the new prison’s cell blocks and classroom will be capable of housing almost 5,000 inmates. Officials said there will be buildings for female inmates, the mentally ill and a death row population.

Journalist Rhania Khalek noted that the racial disparities in the education system and prison complex, where 60 per cent of all people are of color, have created a literal “school-to-prison-pipeline.”

In Philadelphia, black students comprise 81 per cent of those who will be impacted by the closings despite accounting for just 58 per cent of the overall student population,” she wrote. “In stark contrast, just 4 per cent of those affected are white kids who make up 14 per cent of Philly students. And though they make up 81 per cent of Philadelphia students, 93 per cent of kids affected by the closings are low-income.”

 

 

http://rt.com/usa/philadelphia-doomsday-despite-prison-project-292/

No limit to greed

Op-ed: Paying Clinton huge sum to speak at Peres’ birthday is like hiring a stripper for a wedding anniversary

Whichever way I look at this story – the payment of $500,000 (including 18% VAT) for an hour of Bill Clinton – I can’t help but fee disgust and anger. This sort of event would have gone fairly unnoticed, like the million-dollar wedding in the Tshuva family, before the social protest; before we found out about the plundering and discovered that in the end everything comes out of our pockets.

I am willing to pay half a million dollars to have a team of doctors operate on a child for 12 hours and save his or her life. That would be morally justifiable. But $500,000 for a 45-minute lecture by a greedy former American president? Let’s agree on $4,500. Otherwise he can cancel his visit altogether.

Peres’ Birthday
Acre here, Clinton there / Nahum Barnea
Op-ed: There is no justification to spend so much money on Peres’ 90th birthday; he is not the Queen of England
Full Story

And now to President ShimonPeres‘ birthday itself. I am very impressed by the fact that a president who is as old as my mother lives almost 100 times better than she does due to abundant funding, genetics and popular support. I would be glad to be present during his 100th birthday celebrations – if we are still here. But he should celebrate modestly – now and in the future – at the President’s Residence in Jerusalem. I believe this is the time for a small celebration. You’ve celebrated enough.

Yes, we are talking about a medical miracle; a 90-year-old man who has the energy of men half his age. So they should celebrate this at the Sheba Medical and use the money to try and find out how is it that one old man lives like a king while the rest rot.

As for the Jewish National Fund – which is paying most of Clinton’s fee – isn’t it the little blue box containing small change that is supposed to be used to plant trees and build parks? It turns out that the JNF is a huge real estate business that sits on eight billion shekels that belong to us. But it has money to spend on Peres’ birthday because Clinton will be discussing environmental issues.

So plant a tree in Peres’ name; or an entire forest along the border with Gaza called “Peres’ Peace Forest.” But inviting Clinton to speak for $500,000 on the president’s birthday is like hiring a stripper for your wedding anniversary. It’s the last event you’ll be celebrating as a married couple.

 

 

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4388257,00.html

The Untouchables: NY Senate passes bill making ‘annoying’ police a crime

Members of the New York Police Department (NYPD) scuffle with protestors as they guard the entrance to a Citibank as Occupy Wall Street demonstrators march along 42nd Street to protest various businesses during May Day on May 1, 2012 in New York.(AFP Photo / Monika Graff)

The New York State Senate passed a controversial bill on Wednesday that aims to classify ‘aggravated harassment of a police officer’ as a crime, but will it give the authorities the green light for strong-arm tactics if passed?

Sponsored by Senator Joe Griffo, Bill S.2402 would make it a felony to “harass, annoy, or threaten a police officer while on duty.”  

“Our system of laws is established to protect the foundations of our society,” Senator Griffo said. “Police officers who risk their lives every day in our cities and on our highways deserve every possible protection, and those who treat them with disrespect, harass them and create situations that can lead to injuries deserve to pay a price for their actions.”

Griffo said that New York police require extra safeguards because “too many people in our society have lost the respect they need to have for a police officer…. We need to make it very clear that when a police officer is performing his duty, every citizen needs to comply and that refusal to comply carries a penalty.”

The bill, which will now move to the State Assembly, would make it a crime for a person to make any type of physical action aimed at intimidating a police officer. Harassment of a police officer would be recognized as a Class E Felony, punishable by up to four years in prison.

 

A screenshot of the bill

A screenshot of the bill

 

Not surprisingly, the bill has won accolades from police.

“Professionally, I am grateful to see this bill pass through the Senate,” said Utica Police Department Chief Mark Williams, as quoted by the House Majority Press. “Our police officers have a very dangerous job and need the support of our government leaders to help make them safe.”

Williams believes that all too often, individuals are “physically challenging police officers in the line of duty.” Currently, in instances where an officer is physically attacked but does not sustain a physical injury, the only possible charge is a violation, he explained.

These consequences are too lenient for offenders, and send the wrong message to the public, Williams continued.

However, questions may arise as to where the boundaries should be drawn concerning the right of individuals to report on incidents of excessive police force, for example.

In May 2011, New York homeowner Emily Good was arrested by Rochester police while standing in her yard and videotaping police officers who were performing a traffic stop in front of her house.

When one of the officers asked Good what she was doing, Good replied, “I’m just recording what you’re doing; it’s my right.”  The officer then told Good that “we don’t feel safe with you standing right behind us while we’re doing a traffic stop,” and ordered her to go inside her house.

When Good insisted on her right to stand in her yard, she was arrested, handcuffed, and taken away in a police car.  She was later charged with obstructing governmental administration.

 

 

http://rt.com/usa/us-police-harrassment-crime-308/

Hundreds of Gunowners Show up in Temple, TX with Loaded Guns At the “Come and Take it” March

Photo: Temple Daily TelegramHundreds of Gunowners Show up in Temple, TX with Loaded Guns At the “Come and Take it” March

This past weekend Hundreds of Gunowners staged a successful armed march in Temple, TX with Loaded Weapons At the “Come and Take it March”.

http://intellihub.com/2013/06/04/hundreds-of-gunowners-show-up-in-temple-tx-with-loaded-guns-at-the-come-and-take-it-march/

Temple, TX police chief Gary Smith holds a meeting about the “Come and Take It Temple” gun rights rally on 1 June 2013.


 

 

 

Woody Harrelson: “I’m an Anarchist.. I Think People Could be Just Fine Looking After Themselves”

Actor Woody Harrelson shares his thoughts on Obama’s wars and questions the legitimacy of government itself.

Actor Woody Harrelson attends the 7th Directors Guild of America Honors after party at NOBU on October 16, 2008 in New York City. (Photo by Neilson Barnard/Getty Images)I know many of you are probably thinking that this is just a dumb celebrity story, but this is actually a pretty big deal.  Whether we like it or not, a celebrity, any celebrity embracing a message that is counter to the mainstream is going to make that message more palatable to the general population, because unfortunately we still live in a world full of followers.

The idea of anarchism is turned on its head, both in public schooling and the mainstream media.  It is associated with violence and lawlessness, when in reality it is a philosophy that accepts that all aggression against people and their property is immoral.  Thanks to the media and the education system many people associate anarchy with chaos.  With that being the case, it is a huge victory that someone within that media establishment is actually contradicting this misinformation.

Recently actor Woody Harrelson shared his thoughts on Obama’s wars and questioned the legitimacy of government itself in the latest issue of Details magazine:

DETAILS: You’ve said that playing a cop has made you more sympathetic toward the police. Did playing Steve Schmidt in Game Change make you sympathetic to Republicans?
Woody Harrelson: I like Steve Schmidt. But I tend to not like politicians, because it’s a subtle form of prostitution. Or maybe not so subtle.

DETAILS: So you dislike Democrats as much as you dislike the GOP?
Woody Harrelson: It’s all synchronized swimming to me. They all kneel and kiss the ring. Who’s going to take on the oil industry or the medical industry? People compare Obama to Lyndon Johnson, but I think a better comparison is between Obama and Nixon. Because Nixon came into office saying he was going to pull out of Vietnam, and then he escalated the war. A lot of us were led to believe that Obama was the peace president, but there are still, I think, 70,000 troops in Afghanistan. Corporations like Grumman are so powerful that—I don’t know, is this the kind of s— we want to talk about? It’s making me depressed.

DETAILS: Do you want to get more involved in politics?
Woody Harrelson: No. I don’t believe in politics. I’m an anarchist, I guess you could say. I think people could be just fine looking after themselves.

The interviewer immediately changed the subject.

“Government” is another one of those words that mean a million different things to a million different people, but when examined objectively it becomes apparent that organizations of this name always maintain a monopoly on the use of force over a given territory.  This common characteristic is shared by all organizations claiming to be government, regardless of social structure or cultural customs.  With that being said, to define governments as anything other than violent gangs that claim ownership over other human beings, is euphemistic and dishonest.

Most of us grew up surrounded by a false definition of the word “government” just as we were surrounded by a false definition of the word “anarchy”.  We have been told that the word “government” is simply the structural form that a society takes, and the system of organization that groups of people establish for themselves.  This may be one of the most deceptive linguistic tricks to be used since the dark ages, as it implies that structure and organization will cease to exist in the absence of institutionalized violence and central planners.  Since all governments share the common characteristic of establishing and promoting institutionalized violence, we can safely say that when organization and structure is present in a peaceful atmosphere, “government” should be nowhere to be found.  In other words, when there is peaceful structure and organization in a society, there is anarchy, but when a society is organized on a basis of threats and acts of violence, there is government.

One of the most pervasive misconceptions in our culture is the idea that “government” has anything to do with the structure or organization that we see in our society. This is one of the primary reasons why people have such a difficult time considering the very real possibility of a world without the organization known as “government.” When someone suggests that we simply do away with this unjust and unnecessary organization, they are typically met with some very negative reactions from whoever they may be talking to. This kind of conversation typically ends very quickly because both sides have completely different ideas of what the word “government” actually means, making it very difficult to find common ground.

If we attempt to examine government from an outsider’s perspective, we would see a world where people are grouped into two different categories, those in government and those not. At face value, we can see that these two groups of people have completely different standards and expectations, even though they are the same species and have the same basic needs. Looking closer, we can see that these different standards and laws are not neutral, they are very much benefiting those in government at the expense of those who are not. The most important discrepancy to mention here is the fact that those in government have a license to kill anyone who happens to disobey them.

Pointing out this fact is vital in understanding the true relationship between those inside of government and those outside of government, and that is the relationship between slave and master. If someone has the right to initiate the use of force on you if you disobey them, you are essentially their property. If you don’t believe me, go on over to Google and type in “slave definition,” and the first definition you will find is the following: “A person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them.” Now, doesn’t that sound a whole lot like the relationship between people inside government and people outside government? If you can force people to do things against their will, then you are treating them as if they were your property.

However, if you ask any random person on the street to define “government” for you, they would probably give you the story that they were taught in government school. You know, the one about how government is the backbone of civilization, and the means by which people in the community come together for mutually beneficial projects. Well this may sound good, but it isn’t at all true, because the government is comprised by a miniscule fraction of the population, and they would not be able to provide anything at all if it wasn’t for the resources that they forcibly extracted from the rest of society. Therefore, it is safe to say that all functions that are currently being carried out by the organization known as “government” could actually be better served by individuals in the community working together for common goals. Voluntary trade, charity and other peaceful methods of interacting would create a far better society than the one that we see today, which is filled with violence and forced associations.

It is not a new thing for people to confuse government with culture and have the misconception that without a central planning structure, everything that makes a society great would vanish. This fact was recognized by some of the more radical “founding fathers” of America, including Thomas Paine. In his most famous literary effort “Common Sense,” there is a section called “Of the Origin and Design of Government in General, with Concise Remarks on the English Constitution.” In this piece, Paine discusses the difference between government and society.

Paine writes,

“Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher. Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without a government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.”

His statement is as true today as it was during the first American Revolution. Culture, society and security are absolutely capable of continuing in the absence of a central control system.

 

 

http://intellihub.com/2013/06/01/woody-harrelson-im-an-anarchist-i-think-people-could-be-just-fine-looking-after-themselves/

Gun control advocates now admit: IRS intimidation scandal proves Second Amendment needed to stop government tyranny

governmentIn the face of the outrageous IRS intimidation scandal now sweeping across America, gun control advocates are changing their tune. All of a sudden, the idea that the federal government could engage in tyranny against the People of America is no longer a “conspiracy theory.” It’s historical fact right in your face thanks to all the recent scandals now bursting onto the scene: IRS intimidation, secret targeting of non-profit groups for possible “thought crimes,” the Department of Justice seizing AP phone records and so on.

Just which liberals are changing their minds on all this? Piers Morgan, for starters. The man who once called Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America a “very stupid man” on live national television is suddenly reversing course. Here’s what Morgan now says in the wake of the IRS intimidation scandal:

“I’ve had some of the pro-gun lobbyists on here saying to me, well the reason we need to be armed is because of tyranny from our own government, and I’ve always laughed at them. I’ve always said don’t be so ridiculous. Your government won’t turn itself on you. But actually when you look at this [IRS scandal]… actually this is vaguely tyrannical behavior by the American government. I think what the IRS did is bordering on tyrannical behavior, I think what the Department of Justice has done to the Associated Press is bordering on tyrannical behavior.”

Here’s the video: (until YouTube bans it)

InfoWars.com, by the way, is now publicly challenging Piers Morgan to admit the U.S. government has become “fully tyrannical,” not just “bordering on tyrannical.” It begs the question: If using the IRS as a political weapon to intimidate people over thought crimes, books, Facebook posts and prayers isn’t full-on tyranny, what exactly will it take for Morgan to admit a full tyranny is now upon us? The government knocking on his door?

Joe Scarborough also admits gun owners were right all along

Going even further than Piers Morgan, “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough also admits gun owners were right all along, saying:

“I have been saying for months now… that I believe in background checks. After Newton, after Chicago, we need background checks. And my argument has been, don’t worry,background checks aren’t going to lead to a national registry. The government’s never going to create a national registry, right? … I don’t have to even complete my sentence, do I? My argument is less persuasive today because of these scandals. Because people say hey, if they do that with the IRS, asking people what books you read, then how can I trust them with information about my Second Amendment rights? This is DEVASTATING! This IRS scandal is devastating all across the board…”

Well yeah, Joe. This is what we’ve been warning you about all along, you see?

See the video here:

The core philosophy of liberals has just been shattered… government is not trustworthy and compassionate

To be a progressive / liberal person, you have to hold to the belief (i.e. have “faith”) that governments can never go rogue. Governments can never become tyrannies. Governments are always and forever trustworthy and compassionate.

Every progressive government policy logically follows from those core beliefs: government should regulate what people eat, control how businesses run themselves, monopolize national health care, grant amnesty to undocumented illegal immigrants, take all the guns away from the citizens and concentrate power into its own hands. This is all justified because you can trust the government, right? … RIGHT?

Enter exhibit A: The IRS intimidation scandal. The targeting of political enemies. Thought crimes. The IRS demands to know all your Facebook posts, the titles of the books you’ve recently read and even the contents of your PRAYER! The IRS then uses this information to selectively delay only the applications of non-profits that teach the Constitution, or patriotism, or are opposed to Obama. Can you say criminal corruption and total abuse of power? This is anti-American and traitorous!

Enter exhibit B: The Department of Justice, run by the nation’s top criminal Eric Holder,runs a vicious surveillance and secret police campaign against none other than theAssociated Press. When the outrageous behavior of the DoJ comes to light, Eric Holder claims, “I know nothing! Nothing!” (Same story for Obama… they knew nothing!)

Exhibit C: The Benghazi narrative pushed by the White House is now obviously a total lie, and this lie strongly influenced the presidential debates and 2012 election. The Benghazi attack was actually a terrorist attack — and the White House knew it! But they covered it up, lied to the public, and even stood down U.S. forces to make sure the ambassador was killed so that he couldn’t spill the beans on the U.S. weapons transfers being made to terror groups in Syria.

What do exhibits A, B and C prove? That you can’t trust the government!

The illusion of trustworthy government has been destroyed

Now the illusion of trustworthy government has been completely shattered. If the IRS would selectively intimidate and threaten Constitutional groups it didn’t like, what else is the government capable of?

All of a sudden those of us who warned everybody about gun confiscation, FEMA camps and false flags don’t seem so outlandish anymore. Now almost everyone realizes the government is capable of ANYTHING. Especially the Obama administration, which respects no laws and no limits to its power. (Drone strikes, secret kill lists, the continuedrunning of secret military prisons, bypassing Congress with executive orders, and so on.)

Now the Second Amendment makes total sense. Why do we even have a Second Amendment? The honest, blatant answer is so that as a last-ditch firewall against a tyrannical takeover, the American people can march on Washington with rifles in hand and shoot all the criminals dead. That is the essence of the Second Amendment — a last-ditch failsafe for liberty. The only real way to keep government in line, after all, is to make sure those who hold office know that if they become outright traitors to America and refuse to abide by the limits of government described in the Constitution, they might be shot dead by citizens who take their country back by force. (I’m not calling for such an action, by the way. I’m only explaining the historical context of the Second Amendment and what it really means.)

When citizens are well armed and have the power to do such a thing, that power should never actually be needed because the government fears the people and thus stays within the limits of power. But when the people are disarmed, the government fears nothing and so expands out of control, functioning as a rogue, tyrannical cabal of mobsters and criminals. Read your history books if you don’t believe me. This is the repeated story of government’s rise and fall throughout history.

Ultimately, this is why the Obama administration wants to take your guns away: Not to make the children safer but to make the citizens defenseless against government tyranny. And yes, that tyranny exists right now. The debate is over. The gun grabbers lost and the Second Amendment won.

Now, the Obama administration is permanently discredited, and the strength of the Second Amendment movement is stronger than ever. Just as it should be.

So I want to thank Piers Morgan, Joe Scarborough and all the other gun control advocates who are now rethinking the logic of their positions and concluding the government can’t be trusted after all. And if the government can’t be trusted, then it only follows that the citizens are the final defense against government tyranny. Furthermore, that role of citizen defense is only viable if the citizens are well-armed with rifles and hi-capacity magazines.

The more the government knows there are millions of law-abiding citizens who are armed and trained in rifle skills, the less that government is likely to overstep its limited powers and try to concentrate power in its own hands.

 

 

http://www.naturalnews.com/040398_gun_control_trust_in_government_tyranny.html#ixzz2TjwqKO00

Porn Stars Are Enraged That They’re Being Denied Loans And Bank Accounts

Chanel Preston

Chanel Preston knows not everyone approves of her chosen profession.

That’s one of the risks that go with being one of the biggest stars in porn.

But she never thought it would affect her ability to open a bank account.

Preston recently opened a business account with City National Bank in Los Angeles.

When she went to deposit checks into the account days later, however, she was told it had been shut down, due to “compliance issues”.

She found the manager she had originally worked with and asked what had happened. The bank, she was told, was worried about the Webcam shows she had on her site and had revoked the account.

(City National declined to comment on Preston’s accusations and on whether it had any policy regarding accounts tied to the porn industry.)

Preston is hardly the only porn star who has had trouble with the banking industry. Several performers and porn insiders (who were afraid to go on the record due to possible repercussions from their banks) said they have been denied accounts from a variety of financial institutions.

“The people within my [local] bank have urged me to downplay the nature of my business because corporate frowns on it,” said one long-time industry veteran.

The issue seems to be reaching a boiling point, though. Earlier this week, Marc Greenberg, founder of the soft porn studio MRG Entertainment, filed suit against JPMorgan Chase in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleging the bank violated fair lending laws and its own policy for refusing to underwrite a loan for “moral reasons”.

Greenberg says he was approached by a representative of the bank about refinancing an existing loan. But once he started the process, he says he saw repeated delays for four months. That’s when he said he reached out to a JPMorgan vice president for an explanation.

The vice president “was evasive in his response to plaintiff’s application status requests and finally informed plaintiff during a telephone conversation that plaintiff’s loan application was refused due to ‘moral reasons,’ because of JPMorgan’s disapproval of plaintiff’s former source of income and occupation as an owner of a television production company that produced television programs that dealt with the subject of human sexuality,” the complaint reads.

(MRG was sold to New Frontier Media in 2006 for $22 million.)

Greenberg’s attorneys claim they were told by the vice president that the application was denied because of the potential “reputational risk” to the firm.

The rejection, noted the suit, was confounding since Chase had long held the original deed of trust on the home, without any comment on Greenberg’s career.

“JPMorgan purports to be so ashamed of nudity and human sexuality that it cannot process a refinance of a home loan of plaintiff, secured by plaintiff’s house, because plaintiff’s source of income six years ago included production of television programs that contained nudity and human sexuality,” the suit reads.

JPMorgan Chase declined to comment on the accusations due to the pending litigation.

Preston noted she, too, has been denied a loan because of her profession—though at a different bank.

“[The loan officer] asked me ‘are you affiliated with the adult entertainment industry?’ When I said yes, she said ‘We will not give you a loan.’,” she said.

Whether the decision to deny Preston’s business account or Greenberg’s refinance application is discriminatory lending is a matter of debate—and, in Greenberg’s case, something the courts will have to decide.

David Barr, a spokesperson for the FDIC, however, said institutions are permitted to make their own calls on who they work with to a certain degree.

“The decision to open or maintain an account is up to the individual institution,” he said. “The rules are not prescriptive, which means that the bank must make its own assessment to determine the risks associated with an account and whether that account should be terminated or not opened in the first place.”

And it is not uncommon for many businesses to take a moral stand about who they do business with. Indeed, some investment firms make it a point to avoid getting involved with tobacco producers or gun manufacturers because of the social issues tied to those industries.

Porn stars and adult entertainment industry insiders do note that the troubles they’ve experienced are tied to business—not personal—accounts. That may be because personal accounts are opened under their real names, which typically don’t raise an eyebrow, while business is done under more well-known pseudonyms, which is when people take notice.

“It’s kind of obvious about what I do when a young girl goes into a Valley bank with a different female name than the one on [their] driver’s license,” said Preston.

But such friction between people involved in the adult entertainment industry and banking institutions are likely to become more common. With the advent of the Internet, the $14 billion adult entertainment industry is undergoing a transformation.

Film and video distribution is giving way to Internet sites and Web cams. As a result, barriers to entry in the industry are being lowered and more of the industry is being based out of homes and being run through small business arrangements and partnerships, necessitating banking services.

Read more: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100746445#ixzz2TeWLGRAr

Spying on Members of the US Congress: DoJ Tapped Congressional Rooms as Well as Reporters’ Offices

CONGRESS

Has the Obama Department of Justice Violated the Separation of Powers?California Congressman  Devin Nunes (R-CA) says that the Department Of Justice tapped phones in the rooms where Congress members speak informally and off the record, eat, sleep and socialize when they’re not on the floor of the House of Representatives or in their individual offices.These rooms are known as “cloak rooms”, which are the spaces in which a lot of informal conversations occur… both between Congress members, and Congress members and reporters.

 

Congressman Nunes told Hugh Hewitt:

[Congressman  Nunes]:  I don’t think people are focusing on the right thing when they talk about going after the AP reporters. The big problem that I see is that they actually tapped right where I’m sitting right now, the Cloak Room.

[Interviewer]: Wait a minute, this is news to me.

Congressman  Nunes:  The Cloak Room in the House of Representatives.

[Interviewer]: I have no idea what you’re talking about.

Congressman  Nunes: So when they went after the AP reporters, right? Went after all of their phone records, they went after the phone records, including right up here in the House Gallery, right up from where I’m sitting right now. So you have a real separation of powers issue that did this really rise to the level that you would have to get phone records that would, that would most likely include members of Congress ….

Now that is a separation of powers issue here ….

Liberals rightfully lambasted the Bush administration for considering doing something similar.  As Mother Jones reported in 2009:

James Risen and Eric Lichtblau report in the New York Times today that the NSA may have exceeded the wiretapping authority it was given by Congress in 2008.

***

But then there’s this buried in the middle of the story, which isn’t vague at all:

New details are also emerging about earlier domestic surveillance activities, including the agency’s attempt to wiretap a congressman without court approval on an overseas trip, according to interviews with current and former intelligence officials.

….The agency believed that the congressman, whose identity could not be determined, was in contact as part of a congressional delegation to the Middle East in 2005 or 2006 with an extremist who had possible terrorist ties and was already under surveillance, the official said. The agency then sought to eavesdrop on the congressman’s conversations to gather more intelligence, the official said.

The official said the plan was ultimately blocked because of concerns from some officials in the intelligence community about the idea of using the N.S.A., without court oversight, to spy on a member of Congress.

Jesus.  If a member of Congress isn’t a “United States person” protected from warrantless surveillance by every version of FISA that’s ever been on the books, who is?  Shouldn’t this have set off alarm bells at every possible level at NSA, rather than merely being “ultimately blocked” because “some” officials had “concerns” about it?

But – even though top expert say that Obama is trampling on separation of powers and Constitutional liberties more than Bush or Nixon – many Democrats are still hypnotized by what liberal writer Glenn Greenwald calls the “cult of personality“.

Update:  Nunes’ director of communications – Jack Lagner – has issued a clarification:

What Rep. Nunes meant by “tapped” was that the DOJ seized the phone records, as has been widely reported. There was a little confusion between him and the host during the conversation: He did not mean to refer to phone records of the cloakroom itself, but of the Capitol. This refers to the phone records for the AP from  the House press gallery, which the DOJ admitted to looking at. He was explaining that if those phone records were seized, they would reveal a lot of conversations between the press and members of Congress, since reporters often speak to Members from the press gallery phones. The notion of the DOJ looking at phone records from the Capitol of conversations between Members of Congress and reporters is something that concerns Rep. Nunes, bringing up issues related to the separation of powers.

Nunes’ point still stands, though. The Department of Justice collection of phone records of conversations between Congress members and reporters violates the principal of separation of powers.

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/spying-on-members-of-the-us-congress-doj-tapped-congressional-rooms-as-well-as-reporters-offices/5335335

Police Search Door to Door After Mother’s Day Shooting in New Orleans

Victim of shooting at Mother's Day Parade in New Orleans

19 people were wounded in New Orleans over the weekend when an alleged gang shootout broke out in the middle of a mother’s day parade.  three suspects are still at large, and the hunt for them so far has involved similar tactics as those used in Boston.  At this point there is no indication that this was a planned terrorist attack, but regardless, police are still using the full on storm trooper approach that has now become commonplace in the western world.

Blackbluedog.com reported that:

“There were over 300 people participating in the event, north of the city.   Police say that the number of victims stands at 12 and there are three suspects who were responsible.   The individuals who did the shooting were seen running toward Claiborne Avenue and a door-to-door search is being conducted to find those who are responsible.”

While a number of mainstream media sources are reporting that door to door searchers are being conducted, there is no outrage or even concern for the innocent human beings who are having their rights and privacy violated by jackboot thugs.  It is definitely true that this is tragic circumstance, but tragic circumstances are no excuse to violate the rights and privacy of others.  It is definitely upsetting when these kinds of things happen, but we should not let our good-natured emotions be used against us.

With that being said this investigation is also being crowd sourced, and it is likely that people nearby with cell phone camera evidence will make a lot more progress than police breaking down doors.

RT reported that:

“An initial $2,500 cash reward was initially offered, which was later raised to $10,000 amid the massive manhunt for parade shooting suspects. The money is offered to anyone who can provide information that will help track down and arrest the suspects.  In the same way investigators of the Boston Marathon Bombings appealed for crowdsourced photographs, police have urged anyone with any images from the ‘second line’ of the parade to step forward.”

As of now there has been no indication as to whether the police even know who they are looking for or not.  We will bring more details on this story as they become available, and if you have any information about this situation please feel free to comment below.

 

 

http://intellihub.com/2013/05/13/police-search-door-to-door-after-mothers-day-shooting-in-new-orleans/

NJ Senators Caught Scheming To Confiscate, Confiscate, Confiscate Guns

Several NJ Senators were unknowingly recorded on a hot microphone mocking gun owners and scheming for “a bill to… confiscate, confiscate, confiscate”

 

 

 

It seems that our State Senators in New Jersey look at the Second Amendment as a joke, and mock gun owners who took the time to testify at their committee meeting. Remember New Jersey may have the second most strict gun laws now!
The following link is to a You Tube video:

Video Description:

Audio captured and brought to attention by NJ2AS members

Loretta Weinberg (D-37), Sandra Cunningham (D-31), and Linda Greenstein (D-14), Nellie Pou (D-35)

What’s that you say?! They aren’t coming for our guns you say?!

This is INCREDIBLE!

We’ve narrowed down to who we believe was speaking in this video.

From waypasthadenough

The Second Amendment, as the rest of the Bill of Rights, is an acknowledgement of our natural-born rights, not a granting. The entire Bill of Rights is about keeping the governments in their place. The Second Amendment is about the common person’s right to own weapons of war so that we can keep the governments in their place by keeping the ‘monopoly on force’ in the hands of the people where it belongs, as in ‘We the people.’ Remember that? It will not be infringed any further and the ‘gun laws’ in existence will be repealed. End of discussion.

Guns don’t kill, governments do. Gun free zones are the problem, they allow armed criminals to kill. Arm the teachers, the administrators and the parents. Don’t allow the “Liberal”(commie) trash who control the so-called educational system to teach mindless pacifism that is ensconced in their arrogance of false civility.

If we have violent criminals in prison who have been convicted of a crime and can’t be trusted with weapons why is the govt. turning them back out on the street? So they can point at them and say “See, the sheeple can’t be trusted with guns.” The ‘crime’ argument is a red herring.

Time to repeal all of the ‘gun laws’ including GCA ’68 and the NFA; Shut down the evil BATF Nazis and try them for treason, and murder where appropriate and distribute their retirement funds among their victims; Then enforce the Bill of Rights on places such as Commiefornia and New Yawk and Chigawgo and if necessary bring the troops home and have them restore Liberty here and remove Amerika’s natural born traitors in the process.

Millions will dig the ditch they are told to dig then wet their pants when the machine gun bolts slam home and die stupidly wondering “How did this happen to me?” The tiny minority will have to do what will be required.
It’s time to stop arguing over the culture war. It’s time to stop hunkering down for the apocalypse. It’s time to stop waiting to get beamed up. It’s time to start thinking Normandy.
If you sit home waiting your turn you deserve to have your gun taken from your cold dead hands.
The Founders didn’t wait for the Brits to knock down their doors. They gathered at the green and stood up like men and they killed government employees all the way back to Boston.
What will you do when it’s time to hunt NWO hacks, republicrats and commies(“Liberals” and ‘progressives’)?
Don’t understand? Go to willowtowndotcom and read the quotes page first. Then read my column “Prepping for Slavery.”

More from IntelliHub:

NJ State Senator’s Hot Mic On Guns: “Confiscate, Confiscate, Confiscate”

by Dean Garrison
Freedom Outpost
May 12, 2013

A few air-headed New Jersey State Senators proved that claim on Thursday when they had their own unknown “open-mic” moment. Though this may never compare to King Obama’s intimate moment with Medvedev, it has to rank as one of the top ten open-mic moments in the history of communist America.

The Examiner Reports:

A microphone left on after the gavel fell at a New Jersey Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee hearing Thursday shows the “true view” of some of the senators toward gun owners, and provides proof that gun confiscation is a goal on which they agree, the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs revealed in an email to members and supporters today. The group is the official NRA state association.

“The discussion that was caught, apparently among several senators and staff, is outrageous, and reveals legislators’ true view of gun owners,” ANJRPC reports.

“The discussion appears to be among Senator Loretta Weinberg (D37), Senator Sandra Cunningham (D31), Senator Linda Greenstein (D14), and at least one member of Senate Democratic staff,” the gun group’s email explains.

Interesting lines allegedly coming from Weinberg, Cunningham, Greenstein and company include the following:

“We needed a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate.”

“They want to keep the guns out of the hands of the bad guys, but they don’t have any regulations to do it.”

“They don’t care about the bad guys.  All they want to do is have their little guns and do whatever they want with them.”

“That’s the line they’ve developed.”

I personally don’t care about personal attacks toward gun owners and pro-2nd amendment Senators. Sticks and stones, as they say…

What should concern the people of the great State of New Jersey and Americans all across the land is this “confiscate, confiscate, confiscate” garbage.

It is unclear which of the Senators uttered these remarks but I have a message for her and all of her sexually retarded, emotionally immature friends.

MOLON LABE! Yeah I’m talking to you princess…

“A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.” -Sigmund Freud, General Introduction to Psychoanalysis. (1920)

Come on. You didn’t think I would throw those insults without a solid psychological basis for doing so. Did you? I’m no Sigmund Freud but when she repeats the word three times I feel like she must be triply-troubled. We had better get her on that confiscation list for the mentally unstable as soon as possible. She might be a left-wing terrorist in the making. Just saying.

 

 

http://beforeitsnews.com/scandals/2013/05/nj-senators-caught-scheming-to-confiscate-confiscate-confiscate-guns-2431296.html?utm_campaign=&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=http%3A%2F%2Fwhatreallyhappened.com%2F&utm_content=awesm-publisher&utm_term=http%3A%2F%2Fb4in.info%2Fg4X6

19 people shot at New Orleans Mother’s Day parade

New Orleans shootings

 

(LATimes) A 10-year-old boy and a 10-year-old girl were among 19 people shot and wounded at a Mother’s Day parade in New Orleans on Sunday,  police said.

Most of the victims were grazed, including the children, but three people were reported in serious condition. Both children were in good condition.

The FBI attributed the incident to “street violence,” not terrorism.

The victims were in the “second line” — the name for the informal street parades that regularly wind through New Orleans behind marching bands and dancers. The idiosyncratic local tradition has sometimes stirred debate in the city after shootings marred previous events.

“Just a very tragic day for us again in New Orleans, especially on Mother’s Day,” Mayor Mitch Landrieu told reporters Sunday evening.  “We have mothers that were shot, sisters that were shot, little children that were shot.”

On Sunday, participants and onlookers were milling about on the streets and the sidewalks of east New Orleans’ 7th Ward when shots rang out in quick succession at 1:47 p.m.

A video uploaded to social media after the shooting appeared to capture the sounds of at least two guns, which police confirmed.

Landrieu said there was no reason to believe the shooters were part of the procession.

Two participants told the Los Angeles Times that the second line, which featured music, drinking and dancing, had veered off its planned route right before the shooting.

“We were about 50 feet away from the actual shooting,” Happy Acee, 24, told The Times. “It sounded like there were six or seven shots that rang off, and we ended up hitting the deck. … and literally people [were] just running over the top of us, just trying to get away.”

“Right before it happened, there was some idiot on his trampoline on the left side [of the parade route], and everybody was looking at this fool” when the shooting began, Gretchen Ramke, 30, told The Times. “Somebody yelled, ‘Everybody get down!’ — not the shooter — and we hit the street, and I got bruised. I think somebody jumped on top of me.”

Mary Beth Romig, a spokeswoman for the FBI in New Orleans, told the Associated Press that federal investigators have no indication that the shooting was an act of terrorism. “It’s strictly an act of street violence in New Orleans,” she said.

A “full contingent” of officers had been accompanying the procession and saw three men running away from the scene that were deemed suspects, New Orleans police said in a statement.

Many of the wounded were grazed by bullets and ricochets, Remi Braden, spokesperson for the New Orleans Police Department, told The Times in a written statement.

“At this point, there are no fatalities, and most of the wounds are not life-threatening,” Braden wrote. “But all medical conditions are not known at this time as victims were rushed to nearby hospitals. Detectives are conducting interviews, retrieving any surveillance video in the area and, of course, collecting all evidence.”

Shermaine Tyler, 32, told the New Orleans Times-Picayune that she was at her home about a block from the second line when the shooting began.

“Me and Mom were going to the second line. I told her I didn’t want to go because there are always shots at a second line,” Tyler said. “And the second I heard shots, I heard shots fired, we ran outside and one man fell in my lap who had been shot.” She said he’d been shot in his groin and hand.

Gambit, a New Orleans publication, reported that a noted local journalist, Deborah ‘Big Red’ Cotton, had been wounded in the shooting and was in guarded but stable condition at a hospital, where she underwent surgery.

Shootings have marred previous second-line parades throughout the city, to some controversy — particularly for Cotton, who’d written about such violence before.

Three were wounded after a parade ended in 2006; another shooting occurred near a second-line parade in the 7th Ward in 2010 that left one woman dead. Cotton had written about one of the previous attacks and defended the second-line tradition, which dates to the 1800s.

“When you have a society that parades 40 weekends a year, there’s bound to be a murder that falls on the same day and possibly within the vicinity of the parade,” Cotton wrote in Gambit in 2010.

Lauryn Hill Jailed Over Taxes, References Slavery in Court Statement

Lauryn Hill

Lauryn Hill was kidnapped by agents of the state and placed in a cage for failing to hand over a significant amount of her income to the government.

Intellihub.com
May 7, 2013

Musician Lauryn hill has been sent to jail for failing to pay her taxes on time, and was very vocal about the injustice of her situation in the court room, rightfully identifying her situation as an example of modern slavery.

USA Today Reported that:

Grammy award-winning singer Lauryn Hill was sentenced Monday to three months in federal prison for failing to pay taxes on more than $2 million in earnings during a five-year period.  U.S. Magistrate Judge Madeline Cox Arleo in Newark, N.J. federal court also sentenced the famed rapper and actress to three months of home confinement with electronic monitoring after the prison term. Hill must also serve a year of supervised release and pay a $60,000 fine in addition to paying her tax debt to the IRS.

Very articulately she told the judge:

“I am a child of former slaves who had a system imposed on them. I had an economic system imposed on me.”

“Someone did the math, and it came to around $600 million,” she said. “And I sit here before you trying to figure out how to pay a tax debt? If that’s not like enough to slavery, I don’t know.”

“This wasn’t a life of jet-setting glamour,” she said. “This was a life of sacrifice with very little time for myself and my children.”

“I didn’t make music for celebrity status,” she told the court. “I made music for artistic and existential catharsis, which was not just necessary for myself but it was also necessary for the generations of oppressed people who hadn’t had their voices expressed like I was able to do it. Music is not something I do from 9 to 5. It’s a state of being, and like a doctor who delivers babies, I’m on call all the time because that’s the kind of work this is.”

Hill revealed in a message posted to her Tumblr account last month that she’s been working on new music.

“It has been reported that I signed a new record deal, and that I did this to pay taxes. Yes, I have recently entered into an agreement with Sony Worldwide Entertainment, to launch a new label, on which my new music will be released,” Hill wrote. “And yes, I am working on new music.  I have been working towards this for a long time, not just because of my current legal situation, but because I am an artist, I love to create, and I need the proper platform to do so.”

Some people would point out that Lauryn Hill had plenty of money, and that she could have easily handed over her extortion fee and still be able to eat.  However, if a wealthy woman was walking down the street and was attacked by a mugger, would people still carry that same perception?  Would everyone condemn this person for attempting to stand up against her mugger or hide some money in her sock?  Because Lauryn Hill, and every other person who is forced to fill out a tax form, is by principle a victim of theft.

Thanks to a lifetime of propaganda, people will argue relentlessly that taxation is not an act of violence, they will deny that it perpetuates a complicated form of slavery, and many times get deeply offended when you point out the fact that it is theft.

Yet, peaceful people are taken against their will and thrown in cages every day for not paying taxes. If this action was not carried by the state, everyone would recognize it as a violent kidnapping.  Whats worse is the fact that if any of these people made any attempts to defend themselves on their own property as they would against any other intruder, they would have been killed and treated as if they were the aggressor.

Just months ago we reported that Wesley Snipes was finally released after spending over 3 years in jail for the same reason.

Gun crime has plunged, but Americans think it’s up

US-POLITICS-GUN-PROTEST

 

Source: Los Angeles Times

Gun crime has plunged in the United States since its peak in the middle of the 1990s, including gun killings, assaults, robberies and other crimes, two new studies of government data show.

Yet few Americans are aware of the dramatic drop, and more than half believe gun crime has risen, according to a newly released survey by the Pew Research Center.

In less than two decades, the gun murder rate has been nearly cut in half. Other gun crimes fell even more sharply, paralleling a broader drop in violent crimes committed with or without guns. Violent crime dropped steeply during the 1990s and has fallen less dramatically since the turn of the millennium.

The number of gun killings dropped 39% between 1993 and 2011, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported in a separate report released Tuesday. Gun crimes that weren’t fatal fell by 69%. However, guns still remain the most common murder weapon in the United States, the report noted. Between 1993 and 2011, more than two out of three murders in the U.S. were carried out with guns, the Bureau of Justice Statistics found.

The bureau also looked into non-fatal violent crimes. Few victims of such crimes — less than 1% — reported using a firearm to defend themselves.

Despite the remarkable drop in gun crime, only 12% of Americans surveyed said gun crime had declined compared with two decades ago, according to Pew, which surveyed  more than 900 adults this spring. Twenty-six percent said it had stayed the same, and 56% thought it had increased.

It’s unclear whether media coverage is driving the misconception that such violence is up. The mass shootings in Newtown, Conn., and Aurora, Colo., were among the news stories most closely watched by Americans last year, Pew found. Crime has also been a growing focus for national newscasts and morning network shows in the past five years but has become less common on local television news.

“It’s hard to know what’s going on there,” said D’Vera Cohn, senior writer at the Pew Research Center. Women, people of color and the elderly were more likely to believe that gun crime was up than men, younger adults or white people. The center plans to examine crime issues more closely later this year.

Though violence has dropped, the United States still has a higher murder rate than most other developed countries, though not the highest in the world, the Pew study noted. A Swiss research group, the Small Arms Survey, says that the U.S. has more guns per capita than any other country.

Experts debate why overall crime has fallen, attributing the drop to all manner of causes, such as the withering of the crack cocaine market and surging incarceration rates.

Some researchers have even linked dropping crime to reduced lead in gasoline, pointing out that lead can cause increased aggression and impulsive behavior in exposed children.

The victims of gun killings are overwhelmingly male and disproportionately black, according to Bureau of Justice Statistics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. Compared with other parts of the country, the South had the highest rates of gun violence, including both murders and other violent gun crimes.

Group Aims to Give Out Free Shotguns in 15 Cities

If a group at the National Rifle Association convention gets it way, free shotguns will be handed out in Chicago.

CBS Chicago reports the group made the bold announcement at a convention in Texas, and as you might imagine it is causing quite a controversy.

The group is called the Armed Citizen Project, and as, their name says they want to arm citizens by giving them shotguns.

They aim to give out shotguns to people in fifteen cities including Chicago.

They’ve already started giving out the guns in Houston where at least four mothers have received free guns.

The group’s founder says they give the free guns to people living in medium to high crime areas so they can defend themselves from criminals.

Kyle Coplen founded the group based on his belief that guns are the ultimate deterrent to would-be criminals.

“It’s our hypothesis that criminals do not want to die in your hallway. We think that society should use that fear to deter crime,” said Coplen. “We’re giving folks the tools with which to defend their life, liberty and property, we’re training them how to use the weapons and empowering citizens.”

In Houston, Coplen says he hopes to arm one fourth of the neighborhood where his group is now giving away guns. Then signs would be put up warning criminals that the neighborhood is armed.

Coplen says they want to come to Chicago but are checking with their lawyers to make sure any legal concerns are addressed ahead of time.

Chicago has traditionally had more restrictive gun laws, and that’s why the Armed Citizen Project says they want in so they can put their theory to the test here.

In February, CBS Houston reported that Coplen gave away 20-gauge single-shot shotguns to residents in mid- and high-crime neighborhoods to test whether or not the weapon will help reduce crime in the area. Coplen said the weapons are not of much value to criminals, but are especially useful for citizens looking to protect themselves from criminals.

http://www.ktva.com/home/outbound-xml-feeds/Group-Aims-to-give-out-free-shotguns-in-15-cities-206274261.html

10 signs that you are one of the ‘sheeple’

(Image credit: Peewubblewoo/Flickr)

 

Here are 10 behaviors that will identify you as homo ovis, a new mutant breed of beings devolving, who outwardly appear human but behave more and more as herd animals. They are easily frightened, unable to fend for themselves, pathologically needing to conform to the norm, in effect, becoming one of the eX-Men.

Note: be sure to read Locust’s previous articles, “Saving America in three steps” and “Trapped in an insane, perpetual and DAFT global war

I will try to keep the preaching down to a minimum, because I myself am all of these things, and yet, also none of them. I am you and you are me (and we are all together). Well, that’s enough vague philosophizing.

Cue intro music (preferably Devo) — You might be one of the sheeple if…

1. You read this all passively.

2. You are comfortable in your language cage. I get a big kick out of the roller coaster ride that is progressive thought. Up and down they go, around and around. Someone writes an article about how we must “invent our own language” and stop using “the words of our oppressors.”

Someone else then mentions the “Global War of Terror” — re-using, bringing back to life (zombie journalism) a canard invented by the propaganda writers of the moron Bush.

“But, locust, we have to use that term, because everybody else does.” This is the DAFT war, folks, the Defense against Future Terrorism war, and please notice that I am making up language for our own use, because I refuse to use the language of the Powers Really In Charge (PRICs) — see, I just did it again.

3. You are a Republican. I can understand why many of the top 1% belong to this increasingly extremist group, because they profit from it.

For the rest of you, give a few moments of thought as to why exactly you belong to and support this party. Preferably, write these reasons down.

Of course, I have an ulterior motive. Thinking and writing will cause you to become less of a Republican. I openly state my intentions because I consider you as family and I will not lie to you. I’m relatively honest, and I deliberately said that just for the pun of it.

4. You are a Democrat. For those who have conveniently forgotten, let’s jump in the Wayback machine and journey back to 2006. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi literally crowed about how the new Democratic-led Congress had stopped all unfunded spending.

It might occur to you that the Federal debt has gone up by trillions of dollars since then, which is a lot of unfunded spending and certainly makes her a liar and a hypocrite at the very least. This has no effect upon her standing within the party or with her constituents.

Obviously, the bar for honesty and public service is really, really low if you are a Democrat. Like, below ground-level low.

5. Whichever party you belong to (or none at all), you are not angry as hell at your elected officials. They continue to get paid, they continue to give themselves perks and great health insurance, even as the majority of Americans descend into serfdom.

Obviously, the bar for self-abuse and denial is really, really incredibly low for non-politician American citizens. Cavern-low.

6. You maintain a large credit card debt. You work your ass off, and then sign a big chunk of your paycheck over to some bankster.

Tell me again why you work so hard. Do your expensive bangles and baubles really make you happy? If so, why? You need exterior things to give your life meaning and stature? So sad.

7. You shop at Wal-Mart or any other in-convenience store. Sure, people die in some far-away country tragically, slaving away in a sweatshop until a fire rages through the shoddy building or the roof collapses or the worker-ant-people die from abuse. But hey, you get cheap stuff.

If a fellow human falls in the forest but you don’t hear him scream, does it really happen?

8. You depend on the government. I’m too busy to check, so I’ll pull a number out of my tiny arse, here. Over 120% of Americans receive money from the federal government (hey, John McCain gets 3 separate pensions — there’s a man who is riding first class on the gravy train).

For a good laugh, go read a history book about how America was built by self-made inventors and entrepreneurs and hard workers. You have plenty of time while you’re waiting for your government check to arrive.

9. You believe anything, anything at all, that comes out of your TV set.

My neighbor was ranting about how disgusting Steve Harvey is on the show Family Feud. He is a loud-mouth, potty-mouth buffoon who insults people and likes to make children cry.

I have almost convinced her that this is all deliberate, that everything is done for specific reasons, especially that of making people angry, setting them apart and against each other. Thus “Family Feud,” “Storage Wars,” etc.

10. You have read all the way down here and you still haven’t done anything or thought about doing anything to change things, or to change yourself.

You are a passive reader, your brain is shrinking and dying, and the odds are increasing that you will be a sacrificial animal.

The good news is, you can use your increasingly empty cranium for extra storage space for the baubles and bangles that cost others their lives to make and cost you in ways that you ignore.

I’d love to hear your opinion, take a look at your story tips and even your original writing if you would like to get it published. Please email me at Admin@EndtheLie.com

http://EndtheLie.com/2013/04/28/10-signs-that-you-are-one-of-the-sheeple/#ixzz2RsBrNzQK

Baby burned to death on bonfire in Chile after cult leader decided she was the antichrist

Four people have been arrested after a baby was thrown on a bonfire and burned to death in ChileA three-day-old baby was thrown on a bonfire and burned to death in an horrific ritual because a cult leader had decided she was the antichrist and that the end of the world was near.

Police in Chile have arrested four people accused of taking part in the ritual in which the baby was placed on a board with her mouth taped before being thrown into the flames.

The baby was taken to a hill in the town of Colliguay near the Chilean port of Valparaiso on Nov. 21 where the ritual took place.

The baby’s mother, 25-year-old Natalia Guerra, had allegedly approved the sacrifice.

Miguel Ampuero, of the Police investigative Unit, Chile’s equivalent of the FBI, said: ‘The baby was naked.

 

‘They strapped tape around her mouth to keep her from screaming. Then they placed her on a board.

‘After calling on the spirits they threw her on the bonfire alive.’

Authorities said the 12-member sect was formed in 2005 and was led by Ramon Gustavo Castillo Gaete, 36, who remains at large.

Wanted: Chilean authorities said the 12-member sect was formed in 2005 and was led by Ramon Gustavo Castillo Gaete, 36, who remains at largeWanted: Chilean authorities said the 12-member sect was formed in 2005 and was led by Ramon Gustavo Castillo Gaete, 36, who remains at large

‘Everyone in this sect was a professional,’ Ampuero said. ‘We have someone who was a veterinarian and who worked as a flight attendant, we have a filmmaker, a draftsman. Everyone has a university degree.’

Police said Castillo Gaete, the ringleader, was last seen traveling to Peru to buy ayahuasca, a hallucinogenic brew plant that he used to control the members of the rite.

 

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2314866/Baby-burned-death-bonfire-Chile-cult-leader-decided-antichrist.html#ixzz2RWIgLyt3

Americans Under Siege – Has Tomorrow Become a Reality?

Activist Post

Just a little over a year ago, President Obama signed an Executive Order titled National Defense Resources Preparedness. This act stirred up a hornet’s nest of controversy – both for and against. At one end of the spectrum were those that thought this was an overt act signalizing unilateral militarization of our country. Others felt this was a ho-hum restatement of existing presidential controls.

Whatever your feelings at the time, it is now a year later and events of the past couple of weeks bring more questions than answers to those who seek the truth. Sadly, it is my opinion that Americans are under siege by our own government and by the mysterious and secretive powers that control our elected officials. More and more, ordinary citizens are filled with angst as we witness the wholesale cannibalization of our freedom and of the Constitution.

To echo my own words: I begin to wonder whether there is some grand plan. Perhaps there is some master puppeteer poised to pull our strings when and if the rise to elitism reaches the pinnacle.

So with much personal angst, I have begun to believe that the rank-and-file citizens of the United States of America are being herded down the path to a Police State. Or, better put, will soon be running from the rising tsunami of the police state.
WHAT IS A POLICE STATE?

According to Wikipedia:

A police state is one in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political life of the population. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little or no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive.

The inhabitants of a police state experience restrictions on their mobility, and on their freedom to express or communicate political or other views, which are subject to police monitoring or enforcement. Political control may be exerted by means of a secret police force which operates outside the boundaries normally imposed by a constitutional state.

So let me get this right: A police state occurs when the government takes over control of the country by restricting the freedom of the population. Residents of the police state are required to obey the occupying authorities and may be punished for not doing so. They may be required to perform non-military, government-mandated duties serving at the pleasure of the chief executive, the military and the PTB. They may be detained indefinitely if considered a threat, rendering the protections of the Constitution null and void. And, finally, their goods and their lives become the property of the government.

TOMORROW HAS BECOME A REALITY

As someone who for the most part lives a quiet and even boring life, I find myself shocked at the reality of the recent Boston lockdown. Military patrols, door-to-door searches, curfews, involuntary disruption of transportation systems, cell phone surveillance and mandatory confinement to one’s home sounds more like Nazi Germany than America to me.

And what about the rights of the accused? Regardless of how heinous the alleged deed, this is still America where you are innocent until proven guilty. And no Miranda rights? What is with that?

The new reality is that the government may come knocking on our doors, ordering us to stay put. Do we fight or do we acquiesce? The answer to this question is complicated and requires a bit of soul searching as we try to separate fact from myth, reality from fantasy and conspiracy from paranoia.

LOCKDOWN VERSUS SHELTER IN PLACE

Another thing. Especially troubling is the recent widespread use of the term “Shelter in Place” to describe a mandatory lockdown where all day-to-day activities are forced to come to halt. In Boston, people were basically told to cower in their homes and to stay put. The term used was “shelter in place”.

Anyone who has been prudently prepping for the big one – be it an earthquake, hurricane, tornado or other disaster – knows that having the knowledge and ability to shelter in place is a good thing and not something to be feared. And it bugs the heck out of me to see this term abused by both the government and the media as they describe a lockdown and the mandatory restriction of movement.

Sheltering in place is something you do following the release of hazardous contaminants following a radiological, biological, or chemical event. And yet Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick said:

We’re asking people to shelter in place — in other words, to stay indoors with their doors locked and not to open the door for anyone other than a properly identified law enforcement officer.

This to me sounds like a lockdown within the confines of a prison system. It makes me mad and is just one more indication that our government will do whatever it takes to discredit the preppers who plan and prepare for a real emergency.

ADVICE – IF YOU CARE TO TAKE IT

Notwithstanding the horrifying events that took place during the 2013 Boston Marathon and the short period thereafter, my advice, if you care to take it, is to keep living your life with your eyes and your mind wide open. Moreover, this is not the time to be a slacker when it comes to your preps.

Continue prepping in an ordinary and non-obtrusive manner by gathering emergency food and supplies. Learn coping skills for stressful times and practical skills that you can use if the lights go out and there is no power. Stay healthy so you can reduce your reliance on medical supplies.

Most of all, try not to become overwhelmed by bad news. But don’t ignore it either. Practice your faith and your belief in yourself. Just remember that you are not alone in your thoughts and that you must hang in there, prepping wise, to ensure your safety and long-term survival.

THE FINAL WORD

A lot has been speculated this past week. Was Boston a false flag event? Was there a cover-up? Was this a drill gone wrong created by the the alphabet soup agencies that are supposed to protect our country and its citizens? And was the reaction of public officials a blueprint for future attacks?

What is the truth and what are the lies? I suspect that with the abundance of disinformation being perpetuated by both the mainstream and alternate press, we may never know.

One thing I do know, however, is that I agree with Michael Snyder and his article Mourn For America: Whenever A Tragedy Happens They Take Even More Freedom From Us. He writes:

If you cower in fear when a bully comes after you, what is the bully going to do? The bully is just going to keep coming after you because his actions are being rewarded. Those that are trying to create fear love it when you become fearful. It is exactly what they want.

Obama Signs Firearm And Ammo Killswitch

 

President Obama has side-stepped Congress by implementing portions of the UN Small Arms Trade Treaty through an executive order which can be used to ban the import of all firearms, ammunition and related supplies and accessories.

While patriots across the nation rejoiced when the US congress rejected flat on its face an attempt to force the United States into the UN Small Arms Treaty just weeks later a more sinister ulterior motive has been revealed.

Today, President Obama by passed congress and signed an executive which gives the federal government a power to completely ban the importation of guns, ammunition and even parts and accessories related to firearms.

While the UN Small Arms Treaty would have prevented the United States from both importing and exporting weapons, Obama has effectively signed on to the treaty with his new executive order while allowing the United States to export weapons of deaths to covertly funded clandestine operations in overseas nations where it seeks to further its imperialistic agenda.

At the same time, with nearly every other nation in the world signing on to the UN Small Arms treaty, other nations are now banned from doing the same which further leverages the United State’s power of shotgun diplomacy in nations that refuse to be puppets for the globalist elites that control America.

Back in the homeland Americans now face a dire situation.

With the United States government already having complete control over domestic corporations the power to ban all international imports effectively create what is nothing short of a firearm and ammunition killswitch.

At the same time, despite our elected representatives rejecting such legislation flat on its face, dictatorial executive orders continue to be enacted.

Not only are we being subject to international rules and regulations mandated by the UN, without any representation in the process, we also not longer are being represented in major political decisions being made at home.

This comes as the media has spent the last several days repeatedly selling the public on the notion that it is okay for the government to suspend the constitutional rights of a citizen at anytime and haul them off to a CIA blacksite to be tortured in the wake of the Boston Bombings.

In this video BeforeItsNews.com staff writer Alexander Higgins joins Arch Angel to discuss the newly signed executive order and how it has effectively set the stage for the government to completely suspend the constitution.

This hard hitting piece from Mac Slavo at ShtfPlan.com explains the order in detail.

Obama To Ban Importation of Ammo, Magazines and Accessories Without Congressional Approval

Over the course of the last month, while Americans were distracted with the threat of nuclear war on the Korean peninsula and the devastation wrought by the Boston bombings, President Obama was quietly working behind the scenes to craft laws and regulations that will further erode the Second Amendment.

Congress, and thus We the People, may have unequivocally rejected federal legislation in March which aimed to outlaw most semi-automatic rifles, restrict magazine capacity, and force national registration, but that didn’t stop the President from ceding regulatory control over firearms importation to the United Nations just two weeks later. What the UN Arms Trade Treaty, passed without media fanfare by 154 counties, would do is to restrict the global trade of, among other things, small arms and light weapons. Opponents of the treaty argue that loopholes within the new international framework for global gun control may make it illegal for Americans to purchase and import firearms manufactured outside of the United States.

To further his gun-grabbing agenda, however, President Obama and his administration didn’t stop there.

Now they’re taking another significant step against Americans’ right to bear arms – and they’re doing it through Presidential Executive Action, a strategy that, once again, bypasses Congressional oversight and the legislative process.

…it appears that the BHO Administration is taking executive action on firearms importation. Take a few minutes to read this: After Senate setback, Obama quietly moving forward with gun regulation. Here is the key portion of the article:

“The Importation of Defense Articles and Defense Services — U.S. Munitions Import List references executive orders, amends ATF regulations and clarifies Attorney General authority “to designate defense articles and defense services as part of the statutory USML for purposes of permanent import controls,” among other clauses specified in heavy legalese requiring commensurate analysis to identify just what the administration’s intentions are. Among the speculations of what this could enable are concerns that importing and International Traffic in Arms Regulations [ITAR] may go forward to reflect key elements within the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.”[Emphasis added.]

Depending on how it is implemented, the implications of this change could be huge. With the stroke a of a pen and without the consent of Congress, ATF bureaucrats could make ANY gun part or accessory (including magazines) or ammunition that were originally manufactured or perhaps even those designed for military use no longer legal for importation for civilian use. That might mean no more milsurp parts sets. No more milsurp magazines. No more milsurp ammo. No more milsurp optics. Perhaps not even spare firing pins. This could be ugly.

I strongly recommend that you stock up on magazines, ammunition and spare parts for any of your imported military pattern guns, as soon as possible! Once an import ban is implemented, prices will skyrocket.

Source: James Rawles’ Survival Blog via The Prepper Website

Just five days ago the President vowed to push forward on gun control without Congress and Nancy Pelosi argued that no matter what Congress says, gun control is inevitable.

This latest round of Executive Actions is what they meant.

A direct on attack on the Second Amendment is difficult if not impossible, so they are trying to slither their way in through the backdoor by restricting international trade so we can’t import new firearms, by restricting access to accessories and gun parts, by heavilytaxing ammunition and gun purchases, by mandating policies like forcing gun owners to have liability insurance, and of course, by identifying potentially dangerous gun owners and simply taking their firearms because of public safety concerns.

The President recently suggested that the American people have spoken, and that they want guns to be restricted, banned and heavily regulated.

If that’s so, then how is that a bipartisan Congress overwhelmingly rejected the President’s bid to restrict and outlaw private ownership of millions of weapons and gun accessories?

Going through the United Nations and now implementing Executive Actions to bypass America’s Constitutionally mandated system of checks and balances is an act of desperation.

Those who would take our rights have been left with no choice but to try and force their agenda upon us through dictatorial means.

Executive Action: Obama To Ban Importation of Ammo, Magazines and Gun Accessories Without Congressional Approval

 

Over the course of the last month, while Americans were distracted with the threat of nuclear war on the Korean peninsula and the devastation wrought by the Boston bombings, President Obama was quietly working behind the scenes to craft laws and regulations that will further erode the Second Amendment.

Congress, and thus We the People, may have unequivocally rejected federal legislation in March which aimed to outlaw most semi-automatic rifles, restrict magazine capacity, and force national registration, but that didn’t stop the President from ceding regulatory control over firearms importation to the United Nations just two weeks later. What the UN Arms Trade Treaty, passed without media fanfare by 154 counties, would do is to restrict the global trade of, among other things, small arms and light weapons. Opponents of the treaty argue that loopholes within the new international framework for global gun control may make it illegal for Americans to purchase and import firearms manufactured outside of the United States.

To further his gun-grabbing agenda, however, President Obama and his administration didn’t stop there.

Now they’re taking another significant step against Americans’ right to bear arms – and they’re doing it through Presidential Executive Action, a strategy that, once again, bypasses Congressional oversight and the legislative process.

…it appears that the BHO Administration is taking executive action on firearms importation. Take a few minutes to read this: After Senate setback, Obama quietly moving forward with gun regulation. Here is the key portion of the article:

“The Importation of Defense Articles and Defense Services — U.S. Munitions Import List references executive orders, amends ATF regulations and clarifies Attorney General authority “to designate defense articles and defense services as part of the statutory USML for purposes of permanent import controls,” among other clauses specified in heavy legalese requiring commensurate analysis to identify just what the administration’s intentions are. Among the speculations of what this could enable are concerns that importing and International Traffic in Arms Regulations [ITAR] may go forward to reflect key elements within the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.”[Emphasis added.]

Depending on how it is implemented, the implications of this change could be huge. With the stroke a of a pen and without the consent of Congress, ATF bureaucrats could make ANY gun part or accessory (including magazines) or ammunition that were originally manufactured or perhaps even those designed for military use no longer legal for importation for civilian use. That might mean no more milsurp parts sets. No more milsurp magazines. No more milsurp ammo. No more milsurp optics. Perhaps not even spare firing pins. This could be ugly.

I strongly recommend that you stock up on magazines, ammunition and spare parts for any of your imported military pattern guns, as soon as possible! Once an import ban is implemented, prices will skyrocket.

Source: James Rawles’ Survival Blog via The Prepper Website

Just five days ago the President vowed to push forward on gun control without Congress and Nancy Pelosi argued that no matter what Congress says, gun control is inevitable.

This latest round of Executive Actions is what they meant.

A direct on attack on the second amendment is difficult if not impossible, so they are trying to slither their way in through the backdoor by restricting international trade so we can’t import new firearms, by restricting access to accessories and gun parts, by heavily taxing ammunition and gun purchases, by mandating policies like forcing gun owners to have liability insurance, and of course, by identifying potentially dangerous gun owners and simply taking their firearms because of public safety concerns.

The President recently suggested that the American people have spoken, and that they want guns to be restricted, banned and heavily regulated.

If that’s so, then how is that a bipartisan Congress overwhelmingly rejected the President’s bid to restrict and outlaw private ownership of millions of weapons and gun accessories?

Going through the United Nations and now implementing Executive Actions to bypass America’s Constitutionally mandated system of checks and balances is an act of desperation.

Those who would take our rights have been left with no choice but to try and force their agenda upon us through dictatorial means.

 

 

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/executive-action-obama-to-ban-importation-of-ammo-magazines-and-gun-accessories-without-congressional-approval_04232013

New Law Protects 2nd Amendment from Feds

GunBarrel

 

WND – by Garth Kant

It was called the strongest pro-gun bill in the country, and now it’s the law in Kansas.

The law is designed to counter the push by liberal federal lawmakers for increased restrictions on gun rights. It nullifies any new limits on firearms, magazines and ammunition – whether enacted by Congress, presidential executive order or any agency.

If Congress would have passed the Senate amendment expanding federal background checks, for example, the Kansas law would nullify it in the state.

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback, a Republican, signed Senate Bill 102 into law yesterday, which exempts Kansas from any laws the federal government might pass that would infringe on Second Amendment rights.

Specifically, the Kansas law prevents federal law enforcement officials from enforcing any laws restricting Second Amendment rights.

To ease concerns by some lawmakers over showdowns, federal officers would not be handcuffed or jailed, but they would be prosecuted.

The law is significant not just because of its intent, but because of who signed it. Brownback is a major political figure in the Republican Party who served as a congressman and a senator for the state until election as governor in 2010. Throwing his weight behind a “nullification” law lends credibility to a growing trend.

An impressive 32 state legislatures have now introduced pro-Second Amendment “nullification” bills. The progress of the bills can be tracked at the Tenth Amendment Center’s website.

Montana began the trend with its Firearms Freedom Act. The law is currently tied up in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard arguments last month. The Cato and Goldwater Institutes have filed a friend-of-the-court brief, “arguing that federal law doesn’t preempt Montana’s ability to exercise its sovereign police powers to facilitate the exercise of individual rights protected by the Second and Ninth Amendments.”

As WND reported, several more states have now passed laws modeled after Montana’s Firearms Freedom Act. Earlier this month, Arizona joined Wyoming, South Dakota, Utah, Tennessee and Montana.

The laws are generally justified by references to the Second, Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. The Second Amendment guarantees the right to firearms. The Ninth Amendment makes it clear that citizens have rights not specifically listed in the Constitution. And the Tenth Amendment says states have powers not specifically given to the federal government or specifically denied to states.

Supporters of states’ rights have said the Tenth Amendment can nullify federal laws that are unconstitutional or beyond the federal government’s powers.

“Nullification” has been used as a legal argument to try to overturn everything from pro-slavery laws to Obamacare, always unsuccessfully. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, federal law is superior to state law and that federal courts have the final say on interpreting the Constitution.

But with the momentum of 32 states having introduced pro-Second Amendment nullification bills, that may change.

Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center, said there are many ways to nullify a law.

“The courts can strike a law down. The executive branch could refuse to enforce it. People in large numbers might refuse to comply. A number of states could pass a law making its enforcement illegal. Or a number a states could refuse to cooperate in any way with its enforcement.”

Before it became law, Boldin called the Kansas measure the strongest nullification bill in modern American history.

A key provision of the Kansas’ Second Amendment Protection Act reads:

(a) Any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the government of the United States which violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is null, void and unenforceable in the state of Kansas.

Boldin wrote yesterday that another key part of the law is that Kansas “would not be allowed to participate in any federal gun control measures that restrict the individual right to keep and bear arms as understood in 1861.”

That’s because any federal laws undermining the Second Amendment would not be part of what Kansas agreed to when it joined the U.S.

According to Boldin, there is another key factor that may swing power in the favor of states seeking to enforce nullification laws.

He wrote, “The federal government does not have the manpower to enforce all its laws. State and local law enforcement often times carry the water during investigations and actual arrests.

“If states pass laws banning both state and local participation – in any way – with the enforcement of a federal law – that federal law would never be enforced.”

As WND reported earlier this month, a key supporter of Montana’s Firearms Freedom Act says nullification laws are needed to break a near-monopoly on guns by the federal government.

According to Gary Marbut of the Montana Shooting Sports Association, the “current federal scheme of regulating the supply system for new firearms in the U.S. is so complete it might actually constitute a government monopoly on the supply of firearms.”

“Under current federal regulation, no firearm may be made and sold to another person without federal government permission – not one firearm,” he said.

To submit to a government gun monopoly, he said, would be to believe “that the Constitution is an old, dead, obsolete and meaningless piece of paper, the Ninth Amendment is as worthless as the rest, and has no relevance to the [Montana Firearms Freedom Act].”

Derek Sheriff reported at the Arizona Tenth Amendment Center that Arizona’s bill asserts the state’s “sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment and the people’s unenumerated rights under the Ninth Amendment.”

“They also emphasize the fact that when Arizona entered the union in 1912, its people did so as part of a contract between the state and the people of Arizona and the United States,” he said.

Kurt Hofmann of the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner said the surging movement across the states is “a challenge to the federal government’s grotesquely expansive use of the interstate commerce to regulate – well … everything, whether it has anything to do with interstate commerce or not.”

“Liberty doesn’t just happen – it needs to be worked for,” he said. “Getting that work done can make the difference between having to work for liberty, and having to fight for it.”

Marbut, who has described himself as the godfather of the Firearms Freedom Act movement, has reported previously that while the Constitution’s Commerce Clause can be viewed as regulating interstate commerce, it also can be viewed as having been modified when the later Second Amendment assuring citizens of the right to own weapons was adopted.

No less significant, he suggests, is the Ninth Amendment, which states, “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

Boldin said Washington likely is looking for a way out of the dispute.

“I think they’re going to let it ride, hoping some judge throws out the case,” he told WND. “When they really start paying attention is when people actually start following the [state] firearms laws.”

WND reported that when Wyoming joined the states with self-declared exemptions from federal gun regulation, officials there took the unusual step of including penalties for any agent of the U.S. who “enforces or attempts to enforce” federal gun rules on a “personal firearm.”

The penalties could be up to two years in prison and $2,000 in fines for an offender.

But the bellwether likely is to be the lawsuit agaisnt the Montana law, which was the first to go into effect.

As WND reported, the action was filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Montana Shooting Sports Association in U.S. District Court in Missoula, Mont., to validate the principles and terms of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, which took effect Oct. 3, 2009.

Marbut argues that the federal government was created by the states to serve the states and the people, and it is time for the states to begin drawing boundaries for the federal government and its agencies.

 

 

 

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/new-law-protects-2nd-amendment-from-feds/#vemd78M1tKKbBb4f.99

Bloomberg Says Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing

Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly. (Photo John Moore/Getty Images)

In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Monday the country’s interpretation of the Constitution will “have to change” to allow for greater security to stave off future attacks.

“The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry,” Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference in Midtown. “But we live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”

Mr. Bloomberg, who has come under fire for the N.Y.P.D.’s monitoring of Muslim communities and other aggressive tactics, said the rest of the country needs to learn from the attacks.

“Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11,” he said.

“We have to understand that in the world going forward, we’re going to have more cameras and that kind of stuff. That’s good in some sense, but it’s different from what we are used to,” he said.

The mayor pointed to the gun debate and noted the courts have allowed for increasingly stringent regulations in response to ever-more powerful weapons.

“Clearly the  Supreme Court has recognized that you have to have different interpretations of the Second Amendment and what it applies to and reasonable gun laws … Here we’re going to to have to live with reasonable levels of security,” he said, pointing to the use of magnetometers to catch weapons in city schools.

“It really says something bad about us that we have to do it. But our obligation first and foremost is to keep our kids safe in the schools; first and foremost, to keep you safe if you go to a sporting event; first and foremost is to keep you safe if you walk down the streets or go into our parks,” he said. “We cannot let the terrorists put us in a situation where we can’t do those things. And the ways to do that is to provide what we think is an appropriate level of protection.”

Still, Mr. Bloomberg argued the attacks shouldn’t be used as an excuse to persecute certain religions or groups.

“What we cant do is let the protection get in the way of us enjoying our freedoms,” he said.  “You still want to let people practice their religion, no matter what that religion is. And I think one of the great dangers here is going and categorizing anybody from one religion as a terrorist. That’s not true … That would let the terrorists win. That’s what they want us to do.”

 

 

 

http://politicker.com/2013/04/bloomberg-says-post-boston-interpretation-of-the-constitution-will-have-to-change/

Nancy Pelosi: No Matter What Congress Says, Gun Control Is “Inevitable”

 

After President Obama’s aggressive push for gun control went down in flames on Wednesday, Pelosi immediately promised the American people that she would continue to ignore her oath of office and, instead, attack the Constitution.

 

Nancy Pelosi has been sworn into Congress eleven times. Each time, she has taken the same oath to defend the American Constitution. This oath states, in relevant part, that “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same….”

Proving that both her listening and critical thinking skills are a bit sub par, Pelosi believes she’s taken a different oath, one that obligates her and her fellow Congressmen to “protect and defend the constitution and the American people.” In other words, based on an imaginary oath to protect and defend the American people, she is violating her real oath to protect and defend the American Constitution.

After President Obama’s aggressive push for gun control went down in flames on Wednesday, Pelosi immediately promised the American people that she would continue to ignore her oath of office and, instead, attack the Constitution. During a press conference, she announced that gun control is “inevitable.” Said Pelosi, “It’s a matter of time. It might be inconceivable to the NRA that this might happen; it’s inevitable to us.”

Ignoring that recent polls show that only 4% of the American people give the gun control issue priority in their lives, Pelosi blithely announced that “Something must be done, because that’s what the American people expect and what they deserve. We’re just not taking no for an answer.”

Using the usual illogical thinking we’ve come to expect from Democrats, she attacked those Democrats who voted against gun control of turning their back on public safety – even though there’s no evidence that any of the proposed legislation would keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazy people. Buoyed by magical thinking, Pelosi tried to shame those Democrats who placed their careers and the Second Amendment ahead of the Progressives’ gun grab, people control agenda:

 

It always makes me wonder at a time like this how important we each think we are, that any one of us thinks our survival politically is more important than the safety of our children, that we can’t have the courage to take a vote. You’re afraid of the gun lobby? How about the fear of the children who had to face that violence in the classroom?

Now that you’ve had a moment to laugh at Pelosi’s ignorance and irrational thinking, remember that this is not the time for those who genuinely support the Constitution to relax.  The Left, in its overwhelming arrogance, will never stop its quest to disarm American citizens. Because we know human nature, and because we know evil exists, we also know that there will be other Sandy Hooks, and that the Progressives will again try not to let a crisis go to waste.

Even though the gun bills died in the Senate, they didn’t in Connecticut, or New York, or Colorado, or Maryland.  It’s up to us to remind other Americans that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. If we give up on this message, then the next time something bad happens, or the time after that, or even the time after that, Nancy Pelosi will win.

BREAKING ~ Glenn Beck: Major cover-up of Boston suspect from prominent Saudi family by Obama Administration

BREAKING ~ Glenn Beck: Major cover-up of Boston suspect from prominent Saudi family by Obama Administration From “The Glenn Beck Program” (Monday, April 22, 2013 edition)

I think most Americans don’t know what to think, I think this is driving a lot of people over the edge. Take a look at this! MCB

Terrorism. Chaos. Fear of the future. In the age of Obama, America is undergoing a “fundamental transformation” – that much everyone knows.

But what few seem to realize about this transformation is that the sheer stress of living in today’s America is driving tens of millions to the point of illness, depression and self-destruction. Consider the following trends:

Suicide has surpassed car crashes as the leading cause of injury death for Americans. Even more disturbing, in the world’s greatest military, more U.S. soldiers died last year by suicide than in combat;
Fully one-third of the nation’s employees suffer chronic debilitating stress, and more than half of all “millennials” (18 to 33 year olds) experience a level of stress that keeps them awake at night, including large numbers diagnosed with depression or anxiety disorder.
Shocking new research from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that one in five of all high-school-aged children in the United States has been diagnosed with ADHD, and likewise a large new study of New York City residents shows, sadly, that one in five preteens – children aged six to 12 – have been medically diagnosed with either ADHD, anxiety, depression or bipolar disorder;

Many Bostonians Love And Worship The Miltiarized Police State

The video and images depicting the havoc caused in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing were undoubtedly a disturbing sight. Even more disturbing were the sights and sounds of Bostonians celebrating and cheering the capture of suspect number two following the implementation of a full-blown militarized police state in and around Boston. These mindless sheep were cheering the suspect’s capture despite the fact that the FBI and local police forces have still failed to produce any concrete evidence proving that either of the two suspects planted the bombs. Even worse was how many of these mindless zombies were cheering the militarized police forces that put the city under a state of martial law in the name of capturing a single 19-year-old young man.

It is a documented fact that these militarized police forces conducted warrantless unconstitutional door to door searches and restricted travel for no justifiable reason. These types of warrantless searches are a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. The actions taken by Governor Deval Patrick and the militarized police goons were unlawful according to the supreme law of the land and a misuse of government resources. Even after conducting these unlawful searches for hours on end the storm troopers still failed to find the suspect that they were looking for. Once the so-called lock down was lifted the suspect was found minutes later by a man who saw something suspicious near his boat after he was allowed to leave his home. If these idiots didn’t roll out full-blown martial law throughout the area and simply asked for the public’s help in locating this person, the suspect would have been found much sooner. This is just one reason why it is disgusting to see how so many brainwashed robots were cheering the police forces who conducted these illegal operations.

The state of martial law in and around Boston undoubtedly resulted in a tremendous amount of revenue lost for businesses in and around the area. Of course the stooges in the corporate media won’t talk about that or the legality and the wisdom of such a boneheaded operation. The reason they won’t is because the roll out of a militarized police force in the name of safety and security is now an accepted norm in America.

People just don’t seem to understand that operations like these do not guarantee your safety or security. As I’ve pointed out in previous articles covering the Boston Marathon bombing, there was a huge police presence at the Boston Marathon. Despite the vast number of police and security forces, they still failed to prevent the bombing. When one understands that the government has a historical track record of staging attacks like these in order to justify different agendas, it makes perfect sense as to why all of these security forces couldn’t prevent the attack. However, if we were to assume that this was a real attack that wasn’t sanctioned by official channels, this was a huge police failure. Of course we don’t see anybody in the media questioning the failure of the police to keep people safe do we? Instead, we see talking head propagandists calling for more police, more security, more searches, more cameras and other assorted bull shit.

What we are witnessing is similar to what we saw after the September 11th attacks when the corporate media failed to scrutinize the obvious incompetence of military officers who failed in their duty to protect the country. Instead, many of those people who displayed gross incompetence in dealing with the September 11th attacks were given promotions. Undoubtedly this was done to keep these people happy and discourage them from blowing the whistle on the countless anomalies that occurred that day.

The bombings have also presented new opportunities for re-emphasizing the worship of the militarized police state at professional sporting events. Worshipping members of the military and police at baseball games, football games and other breads and circus spectacles has become a quasi-religious experience for people ever since the September 11th attacks. We were able to witness this in full force at the recent Boston Red Sox game at Fenway Park that took place following the capture of the 2nd suspect. A pre-game ceremony remembering the victims of the Boston Marathon bombing included a video presentation combining sappy music with images of American flags and police. Not surprisingly, the presentation drew a pavlovian like reaction of cheers and applause from the fans. Red Sox player David Ortiz would even come out thanking Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and Boston Mayor Tom Menino proclaiming that it was their fucking city and that nobody was going to dictate their freedom. Perhaps Ortiz forgot that the same people he was thanking were responsible for putting the entire city under martial law just a short period of time ago. Footage showing the actions of SWAT teams forcing families out of their homes without any warrants or probable cause have been posted all over different video sharing web sites. Here’s a clip from CNN reporting on the specifics of the unlawful searches including how they were breaking into people’s homes.

The worship of police officers and members of the military being portrayed as heroic figures has become a national mental illness perpetuated by exaggerated media propaganda and fear mongering. Even though there might be a few good police officers who do their job and uphold civil liberties, there are far too many cases of the police abusing their authority and engaging in an assortment of illegal activities. Many police officers are nothing more than common criminals who enjoy bullying people around. People in third world countries already have a general understanding that the police are corrupt and shouldn’t be trusted but unfortunately it looks like most Americans haven’t quite grasped this concept yet.

 

 

http://www.blacklistednews.com/Many_Bostonians_Love_And_Worship_The_Miltiarized_Police_State/25478/0/38/38/Y/M.html

Rabbis tell 60,000 in NY: Get rid of the Internet if you know what’s good for you

Sunday's Citi Field gathering. (YouTube screen capture)

 

In an extraordinary gathering of nearly 60,000 ultra-Orthodox Jews, leading rabbis of the yeshiva and Hassidic world all but banned the Internet.

A halachic decision rendered by Rabbi Shmuel Halevi Wosner, one of the senior rabbis in the Orthodox world, said the Internet could be used for work purposes in an office — but only if absolutely necessary, and with the use of a filter. There was no justification for Internet use at home under any circumstances.

The ruling came during a five-hour program Sunday at the Citi Field baseball stadium in Queens, NY, in which prominent rabbis from the so-called Lithuanian (non-Hassidic) yeshiva world along with Hassidic rabbinical leaders discussed the dangers of the Internet and how to cope with them. While some speakers seemed to advocate a more moderate approach that might have allowed the compromise of a “religious” or highly filtered Internet, most were dead set against it, stating categorically that all Jews who considered themselves Orthodox were obligated to stay as far away from the Internet as possible.

Much of the program was conducted in Yiddish. Several of the speakers stressed the “historic significance” of the day, with one, Rabbi Efraim Wachsman of Yeshiva Meor Yitzchok in Monsey, NY, telling the assembled that the event was a “historic crossroads. Your strength and resolve today will decide what Judaism will look like in a few years from now.”

Those who wished to ensure their future, and more importantly their children’s futures, as Orthodox Jews, would do well to heed the words of the “gedolim” — the rabbinical leaders addressing the gathering — the audience was warned.

Speakers drew on Biblical, Talmudic, rabbinical, and general philosophical sources to back their positions. The ethos of the Internet, which values ever faster access and ever greater instant gratification was contrasted unfavorably with the traditional Jewish values of patience and perseverance.

“The Internet, is about the moment, the fleeting,” said Wachsman, terming people hooked on Web surfing click vegetables.

“People say the gedolim don’t understand the Internet,” he continued. “That could be true. But they understand the trends, and they understand that the instant gratification is the opposite of the holiness needed to become a Torah scholar. The nation of Torah, the nation that gave the world so much wisdom, is now turning into a people of yentayachne.com,” using the Yiddish term for “nasty gossip.”

At least a third of the Internet — “and that is probably an old report” — was full of content that no Jew should be looking at, he said, although he did not use the term pornography.

Wachsmann singled out for special condemnation the damage caused by social media to the stature of rabbis and Jewish scholars. He was referring to the numerous blog posts in which leaders have been excoriated for their silence and inaction on such issues as child molestation in the Orthodox community.

Several of the speakers called on yeshivas to deny admission to applicants who had Internet at home, and Rabbi Wosner included this principle in his halachic decision. Speaking in Yiddish, Rabbi Don Segal, who has been spiritual adviser in numerous yeshivas, said that even those who thought they needed Internet at work should try to find ways to avoid using it, as it was perhaps the “evil inclination” convincing them that they truly needed it.

In a letter sent to event organizers, Bnei Brak’s Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky, perhaps the senior authority in the ultra-Orthodox world today, wrote that the Internet was “a great destruction for the Jewish people, with many reaching the lowest levels. There is no home that has these devices that has not fallen prey to terrible sins…. It is the obligation of everyone to gather together and destroy this evil inclination.”

Anyone who felt he had need for Internet use without a filter was required to obtain permission from a rabbi, he wrote.

Rabbi Mattiyahu Salomon of the Lakewood Yeshiva, who was the driving force behind the event, emphasized in his remarks the importance of protecting Jewish children from the ravages of the Internet, which destroys their intrinsic holiness. He also asked members of the audience to pray for the protection against “the great danger in Israel that a law may be passed to draft yeshiva students into the army. We know the Torah is the protection of the Jewish people,” he said. “[Yeshiva students] are the army, and to take them from their studies” would bring tragedy to the Jewish people.

Some 42,000 men participated in the sold-out event at Citi Field in Queens, New York, along with nearly 20,000 in a nearby stadium, added at the last minute for the overflow demand. Women were able to view the proceedings via closed-circuit TV.

Numerous protests took place outside the stadiums, including one by a group proclaiming that “the Internet is not the problem,” and another protesting rabbinical silence on the child abuse scandals. At least one blogger who had proclaimed somewhat lukewarm support for the eventsaid he felt “fooled” by what had gone on. “Nothing positive about the Internet was discussed,” he wrote. “Websites with Torah and the ability to communicate with friends and family was ignored. In short, this event set the clock back to zero. I was wrong. Things are more bleak than I presumed.”

Officially, there was no Web coverage — for obvious reasons — yet numerous live feeds sprang up online enabling people around the world to see the event. The feeds were furnished by attendees who used smart devices to record and upload the proceedings, and many of these people were sending out tweets on Twitter describing the goings-on, to the extent that the hashtag “asifa” (the term used to describe the gathering) was high on Twitter’s trending topic list while the event was taking place.

As could be expected, many of the tweets were furnished by skeptics,with enough to populate a list of the funniest, like this one: “Were it not for social media I would not be able to keep track of the asifa.”

Joe Biden: We Won’t Allow Congress To Get In Our Way On Guns

According to Vice President Biden, “President Obama literally has a buttload of executive actions coming down the pike” on gun control, the phrasing of which stirs disturbing surrealist images in my mind.

Okay, I paraphrased him. His actual words were, “[T]he president is already lining up some additional executive actions he’s going to be taking later this week.” I still can’t tell, Biden–are you speaking literally or figuratively? You haven’t specified!

You know what? On second thought, I think a ”literal buttload of executive actions” would be less disturbing than “additional executive actions.”  This is of course doublespeak for “executive orders,” a term this administration has been cautious to avoid, despite running the government on these orders. Liberals don’t like executive orders—or at least they pretend not to—so this administration uses the term “executive action.”

Obama spent his first term trying to get Congress to pass the most unpopular legislation of modern times, socialized health insurance, in the form of Obamacare. That was at a time when healthcare was at the bottom of Americans’ list of priorities for our benevolent leaders to work on.

Obama won that battle as only a corrupt politician can: unfairly, with bribes.

The President has chosen the battle to waste his second term on, and that is gun control, yet another issue near the bottom of Americans’ list of priorities. Fortunately for them (us), it appears as though Obama has lost, with the Senate voting down the Manchin-Toomey background-check bill.

Obama was visibly angry the other day, pouting at the podium to publicly shame those who voted against the bill, which would have expanded background checks to personal and gun-show sales, but only for law-abiding citizens–those who don’t commit mass-shootings–and not to those who would commit mass-shootings since those people don’t submit to background checks.

“No matter,” says Biden, as paraphrased by me again. “We don’t like the way the vote turned out, so Obama’s going to ignore the vote, bypass the rules, and just write his own laws from the Oval Office. What do you think this is, a constitutional republic? You think it matters whether your representatives represent you or not? We in the executive branch make the rules, not your representatives.”

You have to wonder at some point if this administration really does believe that congressional voting procedures are a mere formality they must go through, the hoops through which they must jump in order to keep up the illusion that the will of the American people is represented. They are either knowingly being tyrannical, dictatorial, or else they do not understand that voting in Congress is not just for show. As in so many other areas of this administration, it comes down to those two possibilities: either Obama’s failures stem from a place of malice and ill will, or from a cavity in his brain that renders him incompetent and ignorant.

Whatever it is, neither possibility bodes well for us.

Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/04/joe-biden-we-wont-allow-congress-to-get-in-our-way-on-guns/#ixzz2R1SrwTlD

Transition Towns: Agenda 21 Comes to Life

Transition towns are a movement modeled after the UN’s Agenda 21 to create communities that adhere to the initiative that center around reducing CO2 emissions.

Under the alarmist perspective of man-made climate change, founders Rob Hopkins and Naresh Giangrande created the Transition Model based on studies conducted by Ben Brangwyn on global relocalization agendas.

At an initial Transition Bristol meeting in the UK, the Tudor Trust began funding this initiative. This led to the creation of the Transition Initiatives Primer , an explanatory guide to the scheme and fake grassroots groups who coerced communities into adopting the plan.

Transition Initiatives were created in Australia, Canada, England, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Scotland, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, USA, and Wales. Training courses have been developed to ensure that this ideal becomes a global movement. Issues under Transition Initiatives governance are food production, manipulation techniques in dealing with local governments, sustainable housing, reduction of public energy consumption, adaptation of communities to resemble transition cities and control over local economies.

A propaganda film entitled In Transition 1.0 was produced with the global audience in mind, giving more credence to this UN takeover of our local communities.

Groups like the West Coast Environmental Law (WCEL) have been pushing for Transition Towns for several years. In British Columbia alone, they have begun to take root in Victoria Vancouver ,Nelson , Salt Spring, Powell River and the Cowichan Valley.

The Green Communities Program has help spread the propaganda of SmartGrowth ideology through SmartGrowth BC and the SmartGrowth Bylaws Guide a marketing tract on British Columbia bylaws that support UN Agenda 21.

The dangers that Transition Towns impose on our sovereignty and individuality are:

• They refocus town planning and infrastructure on implementation of Agenda 21
• They appear to be grassroots operations
• They promote the Peak Oil mythology as an energy scare-tactic
• They support SmarthGrowth which is code for Agenda 21
• They aspire to control framing, disburse ability to farm, and pressure governmental policies on farming that reflect Agenda 21
• Use the hoax of man-made climate change as the purpose for imposing policy control by building cities that are designed to reduce carbon emissions
• Securitize local food stores, businesses, healthcare and fuel
• Ensure SmarthGrowth controls all citizens ability to acquire any needs for human survival
• Create internal advocacies that band together to purvey Transition Town propaganda to elected officials and local governments

By working on the ground level, Transition Towns can over take states and nations quicker than funneling through the bureaucracy of national governments.

To anticipate any problems, this movement has secured a legion of lawyers to be hired at the whim of the Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund , a WCEL “society” developed to infuse the court system with legal disputes to intimidate lawmakers into submitting to their “suggestions”. They impose “identifying structures and rules that encourage . . . favored strategies” as defined by the Transition Town movement.

By erecting a parallel structure to the local governments in place, that can ensure authorization by those local government through time honored and patient hounding of officials in community meetings where they use the Delphi Technique to coerce innocent citizens into backing their agendas. In this way, at community meetings the “grassroots” advocates of Transition Towns can assume a false devil’s advocate position and divide and conquer the attendees at the meetings to ensure their desired outcome is supported by the end of the meeting.

In the end places like Victoria are being over-run by the Transition Town movement which has convinced the Victoria City Council to send a bill to the taxpayers for an estimated $140,000 to influence and network a fake organic movement with the assistance of the Occupy Movement in Victoria, BC.

This is why the UN Agenda 21 is so insidious. It attacks at the local level, getting the citizens of these towns and cities to fight for its implementation; all the while hiding its true nature.

The future of our world under Agenda 21 means buffer zones, areas designated inhabitable for humans in the name of biodiversity and the securitization of all resources need for base human survival. And the UN will be at the helm.

This is the dream of the global Elite.

http://www.occupycorporatism.com/transition-towns-agenda-21-comes-to-life/

Amnesty To Include A 50 Percent Increase of legal immigrants if S744 passes

Not only will 12 to 20 million illegal aliens enjoy new found legality and freedom to roam and work within America if the senate amnesty S744 bill passes, the senators added a whopping 50 percent additional legal immigration number to the bill.

They added those numbers in light of the fact that 47 million Americans exist on food stamps because they cannot secure jobs. Nearly 40 percent of African-Americans cannot secure jobs.  Our working poor stand in welfare lines, food kitchens and food banks.

We import over one million legal immigrants annually more than all other countries combined. Our country cannot handle those numbers, but Congress expects to pass yet another amnesty and add even more millions of people to America.

Since 1965, the Immigration Reform Act started the flood of humanity into America at 1.1 million year after year and decade after decade. However, this new bill piles insult onto injury.

Washington Bureau journalist Brian Bennett said, “The U.S. admits about 1 million legal immigrants per year, more than any other country. That number could jump by more than 50% over the next decade under the terms of the immigration reform bill that a bipartisan group of senators expects to unveil as early as Tuesday. The impact would be felt nationwide, but areas that already have large immigrant communities would probably see much of the increase.”

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), one of the few rational voices in the senate said, “New workers would depress wages and crowd out Americans looking for work during a time of persistently high unemployment.  The masters of the universe in glass towers and suites, they may not be impacted by this, but millions of struggling American families will. We do need to be sure we aren’t exacerbating unemployment and wage erosion in America.”

The human Katrina-like surge would arrive in chain-migration known as family reunification, work permits, anchor baby amnesty and 50,000 lottery visas.

Bennett said, “In addition to family unification, which allows people into the country permanently, the bill also aims to increase temporary visas for both high-wage and low-wage workers. The number of visas for high-tech workers could nearly double to more than 120,000 per year. At the other end of the wage scale, a new visa system would allow businesses to bring in workers for jobs including janitors, housekeepers and meatpackers. The numbers would start small, but as the unemployment rate declined, it could reach 200,000 a year by the end of the decade. And growers could bring a total of about 330,000 new farm workers into the country during the decade.  Those low-wage temporary workers eventually would be allowed to seek permanent residency.”

Most Americans lack any understanding of the long term consequences of the numbers that will swamp America’s cities, communities, schools and hospitals.

What does it mean to import 1 million immigrants legally into America annually?  Answer: if you take a 747 Jumbo jet that carries about 500 passengers, it means 2,000 flights fly into America from all over the world every year and dumping their passengers onto America to feed, house, water, educate, medicate, incarcerate and provide jobs.

That added one million people creates endless need for water, energy and resources.  Their numbers impact our environment, quality of life and standard of living.  Their numbers degrade and diminish every aspect of American life.

Those senators expect to add 50 percent more immigrants to that one million number to make it 1.5  to 1.6 million newcomers every year.  The consequences scream off the charts.

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion/2013/04/amnesty-to-include-a-50-percent-increase-of-legal-immigrants-if-s744-passes-2443758.html

OBAMA THROWS TANTRUM OVER GUN CONTROL DEFEAT

President Barack Obama lashed out defiantly and viciously at political opponents who defeated his efforts to expand federal gun regulations today. Standing with families of victims of the Newtown school shooting at the White House, the president claimed that opponents of expanded federal background checks had “no coherent arguments” for their position, and that the “gun lobby” had “willfully lied” in the course of the debate.

Ironically, while accusing others of lying, President Obama resorted to false claims and statistics about current laws, including the repeatedly debunked argument that 40% of gun sales are private, and that guns can be bought over the Internet without background checks. It was partly the dishonesty of those very arguments that had led potential supporters of new bipartisan legislation to doubt the administration’s motives in supporting the bill.

The administration’s defeat came earlier Wednesday, when the Senate failed to pass a cloture motion to end debate on a bipartisan proposal introduced by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA). Only 54 votes of the necessary 60 votes could be found to support an expanded federal background check system (among other changes), partly because of fears that extending such checks would require the creation of a federal gun registry that could lead to confiscation.

The failure brought an end to four months of fervent campaigning by the president during which he used the Newtown disaster–or, in the eyes of many critics, exploited it–to make an argument about the urgent need for new laws, even if such laws would not have prevented the Newtown atrocity itself. Many Democrats rallied behind him, hoping at first to pass a new assault weapons ban, then abandoning that effort for more modest regulations.

Along the way, the administration lost the support of Democratic Senators in conservative states, many of whom will face re-election in 2014. President Obama made clear his intention to use Wednesday’s defeat to rally supporters against Republicans, whom he blamed directly and angrily, suggesting that they had defied the will of the American people and attempted to silence the families of Newtown victims who had a “right” to be heard in the debate.

Forced to cover a rare political defeat for the president, the mainstream media largely echoed his emotions. Virtually all of CNN’s correspondents agreed that the Manchin-Toomey bill had been defeated because of the power of the National Rifle Association and the fear of politicians afraid to take on Second Amendment activists. None considered that support for gun control has been declining, or that the legislation itself was deeply flawed.

Again and again, President Obama noted that 90% of Americans, and a majority of National Rifle Association members, supported expanded background checks. The former constitutional law lecturer seemed to expect that that majority’s will should be self-executing, ignoring the fact that constitutional rights like the Second Amendment exist precisely to protect minorities against majoritarian passions and presidential demagoguery.

Indeed, while the president described the failure of the legislation as a failure of “Washington,” it was also–and primarily–a failure of his administration. A White House operation and Obama campaign apparatus that is regarded as brutally effective ought to have been able to sell a proposal allegedly supported by 90% of the voting public. Yet persistent troubles in execution and failures of policy raise questions about whether Obama secretly preferred failure to success.

His opponents, the president insisted, refused to make it more difficult for “dangerous criminals” to buy weapons–ignoring one of the core arguments of the other side, namely that dangerous criminals frequently ignore the law to obtain weapons, while law-abiding citizens bear the burden of new rules and restrictions. He reduced his opponents’ motives to pure politics, accusing them of being afraid of being punished by an organized, determined minority.

Rarely have Americans ever seen a president attack his opponents so viciously, expressing and evoking such visceral emotions–especially at a time of mourning. President Obama’s tirade contrasted with his reserved, measured response to the Boston Marathon bombings, in which he urged Americans to speak and act with restraint. If this has been, as he claimed, “a pretty shameful day in Washington,” the president’s tantrum was the most shameful moment of all.