Bobusnr

Uncatagorized

Archive for the category “Mein Kampf”

SHOCKING EVIDENCE HITLER ESCAPED GERMANY


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.wnd.com/

 

Posted by:Jerome R. Corsi’s

Newly declassified FBI, U.S. intel files raise startling questions

Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun

WASHINGTON – Everyone knows Adolf Hitler committed suicide by gunshot in his underground bunker on April 30, 1945.

At least, that has been the conventional wisdom.

Now comes WND senior staff reporter Jerome R. Corsi’s new book, “Hunting Hitler: New Scientific Evidence That Hitler Escaped Germany.”

Examining declassified FBI and U.S. military intelligence files, Corsi makes a compelling case that U.S. investigators suspected from the beginning Hitler had escaped. For political purposes, the evidence indicates, they were willing to go along with the cover story that in the final days of World War II, Hitler married his mistress Eva Braun, and the two took their lives in a joint-suicide ritual just before the Soviet Army entered Berlin.

But the truth is, no one actually saw Hitler commit suicide. There are no photographs documenting a joint suicide of Hitler and Eva Braun, and the bodies of the two were never recovered or preserved for positive identification.

In 2009, Corsi pointed out, Nicholas Bellatoni, the Connecticut state archaeologist, was allowed by the Russian Federation State Archive in Moscow to examine skull fragments the Russians have claimed for decades are proof Hitler committed suicide.

Bellatoni’s startling findings prompted Corsi to investigate further.

“What caused me to question Hitler’s suicide was Bellatoni’s DNA analysis that proved conclusively the skull fragments belonged not to Hitler, but to a 40-year-old woman unrelated to Eva Braun,” Corsi said.

In “Hunting Hitler,” Corsi posits Hitler made his way to Argentina with the help of U.S. intelligence agents that had been secretly working with the Nazis since 1943. Allen Dulles, then an agent of the Office of Strategic Services, or OSS, the predecessor agency to the CIA, was communicating secretly with top Nazis from his office in Bern, Switzerland, Corsi said.

Corsi brings to light many troubling questions, including:

  • Why were the Americans unable to obtain physical evidence of Hitler’s remains after the Russians absconded with his body?
  • Why did both Stalin and Eisenhower doubt Hitler’s demise?
  • Why did nobody in Hitler’s bunker hear any shots fired?
  • Did U.S. intelligence agents in Europe, including the OSS and Allen Dulles (who later headed the CIA under President Eisenhower), aid Hitler’s escape, as they did with so many other Nazis?
  • Argentinean media reported Hitler arrived in the country and it continued to report his presence. Why have the findings not made it to the US?

Corsi relies on autopsy reports, interrogation transcripts, documents from Soviet archives, CIA reports, extensive research in the National Archives and Records Administration in Washington, D.C., and in College Park, Md., and more to back up his case.

Did U.S. intelligence help Hitler get away?

His evidence is shockingly abundant, and his clear argument lends credence to a new theory that disembowels the double-suicide narrative.

“The story Hitler and Eva Braun committed suicide was a cover story, designed by U.S. intelligence agents at the end of World War II to facilitate the escape not only of Hitler and Eva Braun, but also of top Nazi war criminals such as Adolf Eichmann who was discovered in 1960 hiding in Argentina,” Corsi argued.

He presents documentary evidence Allen Dulles’ wartime mission in Switzerland included helping Martin Bormann, Hitler’s secretary, to funnel billions of dollars of Nazi ill-gotten financial gain out of Germany and invest in the U.S. and Argentinian stock markets to provide a financial cushion to survive in hiding after the war.

In the National Archives at College Park, Corsi discovered a clipping from the U.S. military newspaper “The Stars and Stripes” published Oct. 8, 1945, reporting a shocking statement made by General Dwight D. Eisenhower, then the supreme commander of the Allied Forces.

The short piece read: “There is ‘reason to believe’ that Hitler may still be alive, according to a remark made by Gen. Eisenhower to Dutch newspapermen. The general’s statement reversed his previous opinion that Hitler was dead.”

Corsi asks why Eisenhower’s shocking claim has gone largely unreported in U.S. newspapers and history books even until today.

Was Hitler on the U-530?

Tracing Hitler’s escape route, Corsi found in the National Archives documentary evidence Hitler got to Argentina in a German submarine, the U-530 that mysteriously surfaced outside the harbor at Mar del Plata under the command of Otto Wermuth and his executive officer, Karl Felix Schuller, after having spent weeks making surreptitious drops of passengers along Argentina’s Atlantic shore.

Hidden away in the National Archives, Corsi found a U.S. naval intelligence report written July 18, 1945, by the Naval Attaché in Buenos Aires who notified Washington there was reason to believe U-530 had landed Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun in the south of Argentina before the submarine journeyed on to surrender at Mar del Plata.

Corsi had newspaper reports translated of Hitler and Braun being welcomed by wealthy Nazi sympathizers among Argentina’s large German community. The Germans there had constructed a mansion hidden away in the dense mountain forests of Bariloche to provide the Nazi führer with comfort and security in his elder years.

Argentine newspaper report

Corsi writes: In 1943, architect Alejandro Bustillo, at the request of German supporters of Hitler then living in Argentina, designed and constructed an elaborate resort residence for Hitler and Eva Braun, Residencia Inalco, located in a remote area between San Carlos de Bariloce Villa La Angostura, bordering the Nahuel Haupi Lake, outside the city of Bariloche, in the province of Río Negro, Argentina.”

In southern Argentina in the region of the Andes adjoining Chile, he writes, “the surroundings and the Hitler residence were selected and designed to have a distinct feel of Hitler’s Obersalzberg retreat above the town of Berchtesgaden in the Bavarian Alps. Hitler moved into the residence in June 1947.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/shocking-evidence-hitler-escaped-germany/#IMS7lfwoJYpXjGQv.99

OBAMA: EVERYBODY HATES ME!!!


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from: http://www.nationalenquirer.com

 

Posted by:NATIONAL ENQUIRER online staff

OBAMA: EVERYBODY HATES ME!!!

AS his popularity plummets to historic lows and his presidential legacy is in tatters, BARACK OBAMA has suffered a shocking secret meltdown.

Oh did the little boy get his feelings hurt well think about all of the folks that lost their insurance because of YOU !!!!!

White House insiders say the deeply depressed Commander-in-Chief is hardly eating or sleeping, hasn’t talked to First Lady Michelle, 49, in weeks and is convinced everyone hates him!

“Barack is shattered that his presidency and his life are in free-fall,” says a source.

 “He can’t believe the American public has turned on him so viciously, mainly because of the Obamacare disaster. No one has been able to help him.

“Michelle has tried everything she can to comfort him, but he just snaps, ‘Go away. Leave me alone.’

“Barack watches news reports, reads the papers and sees the shocking poll results – and he loses it.

“When he saw one report that his approval rating had plummeted to a staggeringly low 37 percent, he had a total meltdown.

“He buried his head in his hands, saying, ‘Everybody hates me.’ When he raised his head, his eyes were glistening with tears.

“He’s lost the confidence and affection of the public that he so desperately needs to go on with the hardest job in the world.

A recent CBS poll said the 52-year-old President has a lower job approval rating than Toronto Mayor Rob Ford – who admitted to smoking crack and is still five points HIGHER than Obama!

“That was the last straw for Barack,” says the insider. “He was mortified and humiliated.”

OH WELL LIVE WITH IT YOU SCREWED IT UP NOW LIVE WITH YOUR MISTAKES JACKWAD

 

MYSTERY GROWS: JOURNALIST DIED PREPPING OBAMA EXPOSÉ


English: November 2008 U.S. Presidential Elect...

English: November 2008 U.S. Presidential Election map, winner county by county Red = McCain, Blue = Obama (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from:

 

Posted by:JEROME R. CORSI

Major probe tied to agent suspected of sanitizing president’s passport records

author-imageJEROME R. CORSI

hastings-crash

NEW YORK – Before his death in a fiery car crash, Michael Hastings was preparing to publish a major investigative piece tied to the undercover agent who is suspected of sanitizing President Obama’s passport records prior to the 2008 presidential election.

The mystery has only deepened since the Los Angeles Coroner’s Office ruled that drugs in his system at the time of the June 18 crash, including amphetamines and marijuana, likely did not contribute to the crash.

Hastings, 33 years old at the time of his death, wrote for Gentleman’s Quarterly, Rolling Stone and Buzzfeed, reporting on national security issues.

His June 2010 article in Rolling Stone featuring remarks highly critical of the Obama administration made by Gen. Stanley McChrystal — then the commander of allied forces in Afghanistan — led to President Obama relieving McChrystal of command.

Reported drug use

The autopsy two months after Hastings’ death found small amounts of amphetamine in his blood, suggesting he may have taken methamphetamine several hours before his death. Traces of marijuana also suggested Hastings had smoked the drug hours before he had taken the methamphetamine.

Hastings died when his Mercedes, traveling at a high rate of speed, crossed into the median on a deserted Highland Avenue at 4:20 a.m. and struck a tree. The automobile burst into flames, charring Hastings’ body so badly that it took several days to make a positive identification.

Los Angeles newspapers have suggested Hastings had become obsessed with Edward Snowden’s revelations about the National Security Agency’s massive domestic surveillance capabilities and with disclosures the Department of Justice had obtained of the phone records of Associated Press reporters.

His neighbor and close friend, Jordanna Thigpen, told the LA Weekly that just before his death, Hastings’ behavior had become erratic because of his increasing concerned that helicopters commonly seen in the Hollywood Hills were spying on him and that his Mercedes had been tampered with.

“He was scared, and he wanted to leave town,”          Thigpen told the newspaper.

She recalled that the night before his death, Hastings asked Thigpen if he could borrow her Volvo because he was afraid to drive his own car.

Fox News reported family members told investigators that Hastings, who supposedly had been “sober” for 14 years, had begun using drugs the month before his death. The drugs included the hallucinogenic DMT, although it was not detected in a blood report conducted after the crash.

Fox News further reported a family member told investigators Hastings was seen passed out at home about three hours before the crash and that he had been smoking marijuana the night of the crash.

Investigators told Fox News that Hastings was found after the crash with a medicinal marijuana identity card in his wallet and that he apparently was using the drug to ease post-traumatic stress disorder experienced after his assignments in Afghanistan and Iraq.

A security video that captured Hastings’ car crash showed a flash of light before the car hit the tree, raising suspicions Hastings’ death may have been caused by an explosion.

San Diego 6 News has reported that a witness in a nearby business is claiming the explosion occurred before Hastings’ car hit the tree. An explosion before impact, which would slow down the vehicle, would explain the minimal damage observed on the palm tree. Other physical evidence at the crash site also is not consistent with a high-speed, out-of-control impact.

Security Video of crash

 

Brennan and the CIA

On Aug. 12, Kimberly Dvorak reported for San Diego 6 News that Hastings at the time of his death was working on an exposé on CIA director John Brennan.

In July, a source provided the station with an email hacked from “super secret CIA contractor” Stratfor’s President Fred Burton and subsequently posted on WikiLeaks that suggested Brennan was in charge of the Obama administration’s surveillance of investigative journalists.

Michael Hastings and Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett at President Obama’s election-night victory party in 2012 (Photo: John V. Santore)

Though rumors persist that Hastings was near completion of a new exposè on Brennan to be published shortly in Rolling Stone, the magazine so far has not published any such piece.

Obama’s passport records sanitized

WND has previously reported that Brennan played a controversial role in what many suspect was an effort to sanitize Obama’s passport records prior to the 2008 presidential election.

On March 21, 2008, during the 2008 presidential campaign, two unnamed contract employees for the State Department were fired and a third unnamed State Department contract employee was disciplined for breaching the passport file of Democratic presidential candidate and then-senator Barack Obama.

The Washington Times on March 20, 2008, noted that all three had used their authorized computer network access to look up and read Obama’s records within the State Department’s consular affairs section that “possesses and stores passport information.”

Contacted by the newspaper, State Department spokesman Sean McCormick attributed the violations to non-political motivations, stressing that the three individuals involved “did not appear to be seeking information on behalf of any political candidate or party.”

“As far as we can tell, in each of the three cases, it was imprudent curiosity,” McCormick told the Washington Times.

Exactly how the State Department came to that conclusion, McCormick did not disclose.

By the next day, the story had changed.

The New York Times reported March 21, 2008, that the security breach had involved unauthorized searches of the passport records not just of Obama, but also of then-presidential contenders Sens. John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

Again, the New York Times attributed the breaches to “garden-variety snooping by idle employees” that was “not politically motivated.”

Like the Washington Times, the New York Times gave no explanation to back up its assertion that the breaches were attributable to non-political malfeasance.

Still, the New York Times report said then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had spent Friday morning calling all three presidential candidates. Rice had told Obama that she was sorry for the violation. She said she “told him that I myself would be very disturbed if I learned that somebody had looked into my passport file.”

The newspaper quoted Obama saying he appreciated the apology but that he expected the passport situation “to be investigated diligently and openly.”

According to the New York Times report, Obama’s tone of concern was obvious.

“One of the things that the American people count on in their interactions with any level of government is that if they have to disclose personal information, that is going to stay personal and stay private,” Obama told reporters. “And when you have not just one, but a series of attempts to tap into people’s personal records, that’s a problem, not just for me, but for how our government is functioning.”

The New York Times noted that the files examined were likely to contain sensitive personal information, including Social Security numbers, addresses and dates of birth as well as passport applications and other biographical information that would pertain to U.S. citizenship. Only at the end of the article did the paper note that State Department spokesman McCormick had emphasized the most egregious violation appeared to have been made against Obama.

Obama was the only one of the three presidential candidates involved who had his passport file breached on three separate occasions. The first occurred Jan. 9, 2008, followed by separate violations Feb. 21 and March 14. Moreover, all three of the offending employees had breached Obama’s files, while the passport files of McCain and Clinton had been breached each only once.

The Brennan connection

The New York Times noted the two offending State Department contract employees who were fired had worked for Stanley Inc., a company based in Arlington, Va., while the reprimanded worker continued to be employed by the Analysis Corporation of McLean, Va.

The newspaper gave no background on either corporation other than to note that Stanley Inc. did “computer work for the government.”

John Brennan was sworn in as CIA director in March

At that time, Stanley Inc. was a 3,500-person technology firm that had just won a $570 million contract to provide computer-related passport services to the State Department, while Brennan, who then headed Analysis Corp., was serving as an adviser on intelligence and foreign policy to Obama’s presidential campaign.

By Saturday, March 22, 2008, the Washington Times reported that the State Department investigation had focused on the contract worker for the Analysis Corporation, because he was the only one of the three involved in breaching the passport records of both Sens. Obama and McCain, the two presidential candidates whose eligibility as “natural born” citizens under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution were in question.

Consistent with the claim that the motive for the passport breach merely was mischief, the three State Department contract employees received relatively light penalties. Two were fired and one was reprimanded.

Although at the time the State Department promised a full-scale investigation, the public was kept in the dark.

In July 2008, the State Department’s Office of Inspector General issued a 104-page investigative report on the passport breach incidents, stamped “Sensitive But Unclassified.” The document was so heavily redacted, it was nearly worthless to the public. Scores of passages were blacked out entirely, including one sequence of 29 consecutive pages that were each obliterated by a solid black box that made impossible the determination even of paragraph structures.

One investigative reporter, Kenneth Timmerman, said a well-placed but unnamed source told him that the real point of the passport breaches was to cauterize the Obama file, removing from it any information that could prove damaging to his presidential eligibility.

According to this theory, the breaches of McCain’s and Clinton’s files were done for misdirection purposes, to create confusion and to suggest the motives of the perpetrators were attributable entirely to innocent curiosity.

Brennan tilts toward Islam

WND has reported that in a speech delivered Aug. 9, 2009, to the Center for Strategic and International Studies that is archived on the White House website, Brennan commented that using “a legitimate term, ‘jihad,’ meaning to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal” to describe terrorists “risks reinforcing the idea that the United States is somehow at war with Islam itself.”

Brennan advised that U.S. foreign policy should encourage greater assimilation of the Hezbollah terrorist organization into the Lebanese government.

WND further reported that in a July 2008 article in The Annals, a publication of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, Brennan argued it “would not be foolhardy, however, for the United States to tolerate, and even to encourage, greater assimilation of Hezbollah into Lebanon’s political system, a process that is subject to Iranian influence.”

Continued Brennan: “Hezbollah is already represented in the Lebanese parliament and its members have previously served in the Lebanese cabinet, reflections of Hezbollah’s interest in shaping Lebanon’s political future from within government institutions. This involvement is a far cry from Hezbollah’s genesis as solely a terrorist organization dedicated to murder, kidnapping and violence.”

At the August 2009 press conference for the CSIS, Brennan declared: “Hezbollah started out as purely a terrorist organization back in the early ‘80s and has evolved significantly over time. And now it has members of parliament, in the cabinet; there are lawyers, doctors, others who are part of the Hezbollah organization.”

Middle Eastern terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah frequently maintain civilian units of doctors and lawyers to emphasize their outreach with local politicians and to increase their political acceptance in the international arena.

Conceivably, the Istanbul-based Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief, better known by the Turkish acronym IHH, would fit into Brennan’s definition of the charitable side of organizations such as Hezbollah, despite IHH’s ties to al-Qaida. The links to the terror organization have been amply documented by experts such as former investigating judge Jean-Louis Bruguiere, who led the French judiciary’s counter-terrorism unit for nearly two decades before retiring in 1977.

Despite this history, IHH is not included on the State Department’s current list of 45 groups designated as foreign terrorist organizations, which names both Hezbollah and Hamas.

In his speech to the New York University law school students posted on YouTube by the White House, Brennan included a lengthy statement in Arabic that he did not translate for his English-speaking audience.

Noting that he was as an undergraduate with the American University in Cairo in the 1970s, Brennan proceeded to use only the Arabic name, “Al Quds,” when referring to Jerusalem. He said that during his 25 years in government, he spent considerable time in the Middle East, as a political officer with the State Department and as a CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia.

“In Saudi Arabia, I saw how our Saudi partners fulfilled their duty as custodians of the two holy mosques in Mecca and Medina,” he said. “I marveled at the majesty of the Hajj and the devotion of those who fulfilled their duty as Muslims of making that pilgrimage.”

WND previously reported Brennan participated in a meeting with Muslim law students facilitated by the Islamic Society of North America, a group that was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the prosecution of the founders of the Holy Land Foundation of Texas. The founders were given life sentences “for funneling $12 million” to Hamas, the group currently in political control of the Gaza.

WND further reported that at the meeting with Muslim law students, Brennan declared himself a “citizen of the world” who believed the U.S. government should never engage in “profiling” in pursuit of national security.

    Read more at

http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/mystery-grows-in-journalists-death-prepping-obama-expose/#fczrUjvR8tf8cOTI.99

‘UNIVERSE-SHATTERING’ TWIST IN OBAMA BIRTH PROBE


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.wnd.com

 

Posted by:BOB UNRUH

Arpaio investigator: ‘This is beyond the pale of anything you can imagine’


author-image

The lead investigator in Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse investigation of President Obama’s birth certificate says the case has taken a startling turn, and sheriff’s investigators now are assisting the Cold Case volunteers.

“When this information is finally exposed to the public, it will be universe-shattering,” Mike Zullo told WND. “This is beyond the pale of anything you can imagine.”

Zullo explained that because it’s an active investigation that could produce criminal charges, he’s unable to reveal details at the moment.

But the allegations, he said, which go far beyond a fraudulent birth certificate, could be public as early as March.

The issue arose once again because of the death Wednesday in Hawaii of state Health Department chief Loretta Fuddy in a plane crash. She was the official who waived state prohibitions and provided to the White House a copy of a document that Obama presented to the public as his birth certificate.

It’s the document that Arpaio’s investigators have concluded is fraudulent.

Amid conspiracy theories circulating the Internet, Zullo told WND today that Fuddy’s death – she was the only fatality among nine people aboard a small airplane that crashed off the coast of Molokai – appears to be a tragic accident, not foul play.

He said his investigation does not depend on any information from Fuddy.

In an interview today with author and talk-radio host Carl Gallups of PPSimmons News and Ministry Network and the author of “The Magic Man in the Sky,” and
the new
“The Rabbi who Found Messiah,” Zullo said his investigation of the Obama fraud case “does not hinge on Ms. Fuddy.”

“While her death certainly is a tragedy, it in no way hampers our investigation in this matter,” he said.  “If people truly believe that her untimely demise was somehow related to an attempt to silence her for ‘what she may or may not know,’ then there are several more people in Hawaii who should be very, very concerned.

“Again, I want to emphasize,” Zullo said, ‘Sheriff Arpaio and I do not, at this time, believe her death was connected to any nefarious circumstances.”

The birth certificate dispute dates back to before the 2008 election. Critics, including Hillary Clinton, raised the issue about Obama’s status as a “natural-born citizen.” Not defined in the Constitution, it probably was thought at the time of the writing of the Constitution to be someone born of two citizen parents.

Obama fails that test because his father was a Kenyan student visiting the U.S.

Arpaio assigned his Cold Case Posse to look into the issue before the 2012 election, when constituents approached him and asked him to check whether Obama would be an ineligible candidate on the presidential election ballot.

In a recent radio interview with Gallups, Zullo affirmed the investigation had been expanded to the county sheriff’s office and was “moving in a direction that was not anticipated by us.”

“The whole [issue] is more nefarious than you can imagine,” Zullo said, crediting Arpaio for ordering the investigation and sticking with it.

“He knows in his gut that something is wrong,” Zullo said.

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed without success. One case is pending before the Alabama Supreme Court for which Zullo provided evidence.

Still a live issue

Zullo has testified that the White House computer image of Obama’s birth certificate contains anomalies that are unexplainable unless the document had been fabricated piecemeal by human intervention, rather than being copied from a genuine paper document.

“Mr. Obama has in fact not offered any verifiable authoritative document of any legal significance or possessing any evidentiary value as to the origins of his purported birth narrative or location of the birth event,” he explained. “One of our most serious concerns is that the White House document appears to have been fabricated piecemeal on a computer, constructed by drawing together digitized data from several unknown sources.”

Zullo also has noted that the governor of Hawaii was unable to produce an original birth document for Obama, and it should have been easy to find.

See some of Zullo’s evidence:

More recently, Grace Vuoto of the World Tribune reported that among the experts challenging the birth certificate is certified document analyst Reed Hayes, who has served as an expert for Perkins Coie, the law firm that has been defending Obama in eligibility cases.

“We have obtained an affidavit from a certified document analyzer, Reed Hayes, that states the document is a 100 percent forgery, no doubt about it,” Zullo told the World Tribune.

“Mr. Obama’s operatives cannot discredit [Hayes],” the investigator told the news outlet. “Mr. Hayes has been used as the firm’s reliable expert. The very firm the president is using to defend him on the birth certificate case has used Mr. Hayes in their cases.”

The Tribune reported Hayes agreed to take a look at the documentation and called almost immediately.

“There is something wrong with this,” Hayes said.

Hayes produced a 40-page report in which he says “based on my observations and findings, it is clear that the Certificate of Live Birth I examined is not a scan of an original paper birth certificate, but a digitally manufactured document created by utilizing material from various sources.”

“In over 20 years of examining documentation of various types, I have never seen a document that is so seriously questionable in so many respects. In my opinion, the birth certificate is entirely fabricated,” he says in the report.

Investigator Douglas J. Hagmann of the Northeast Intelligence Network reported this monththat in October an affidavit was filed in a court case, under seal, that purportedly identifies the creator of the Obama birth certificate.

He said Douglas Vogt, an author and the owner and operator of a scanning business who also has an accounting background, invested over two years in an investigation of the authenticity of document.

Vogt, along with veteran typesetter Paul Ivey, conducted “exhaustive research of the document provided to the White House Press Corps on April 27, 2011 – not the online PDF, a critical distinction that must be understood,” Hagmann said.

“Using their combined experience of 80 years in this realm, they conducted extensive examinations of the ‘copy’ that was used as the basis for the PDF document. They acquired the same type of equipment that was used back in the late 1950s and early 1960s in an attempt to recreate the document presented as an ‘authenticated copy’ proving the legitimacy of Barack Obama. Instead, they found 20 points of forgery on that document and detail each point of forgery in the affidavit,” wrote Hagmann.

“Even more interesting, Mr. Vogt claims to have identified the ‘signature’ of the perpetrator, or the woman who created the forged document, hidden within the document itself. Her identity, in addition to the identity of other conspirators and their precise methods are contained in a sealed document supplementing the public affidavit.”

Grounds for impeachment

Last month, WND columnist Christopher Monckton wrotethat the controversy he calls “Hawaiigate” should be “the central ground of impeachment.”

“First, the dishonesty is shameless and in your face. Mr Obama’s advisers, once they realized the ‘birth certificate’ was as bogus as a $3 bill, knew that if they simply went on pretending that $3 bills are legal tender the hard-left-dominated news media would carefully and continuously look the other way, pausing occasionally to sneer at anyone who pointed out that, in this constitutionally crucial respect, the ‘president’ has no clothes,” Monckton wrote.

“Secondly, not one of the numerous agencies of state, as well as federal government, whose duty was and is to investigate the Mickey-Mouse ‘birth certificate’ has bothered even to respond to the thousands of requests for investigation put forward by U.S. citizens.

He said that in Hawaii last year, he watched “as a senior former state senator called the police and, when they came, handed over to them compelling evidence that the ‘birth certificate’ had been forged.”

“The police, correctly, passed the file to the state’s attorney general, a ‘Democrat,’ who did nothing about it,” he said.

“In Washington, D.C., I watched as a concerned citizen from Texas telephoned the FBI and reported the ‘birth certificate’ as being a forgery. They said they would send two agents to see him within the hour. No one came.”

‘You tell me about eligibility’

One of the highest profile skeptics has been billionaire Donald Trump.

Trump said he can’t be certain that Obama is eligible to be president, and he pointedly noted that a reporter who was poking fun at the issue admitted he can’t either.

Trump repeatedly has insisted Obama has not documented his eligibility. At one point, he offered $5 million to the charity or charities of Obama’s choice if he would release his passport records and authorize the colleges he attended to release his applications and other records.

Trump argues that those documents would show whether or not Obama ever accepted scholarship or other aid as a foreign student, which could preclude him from being a “natural-born citizen.”

Trump’s conversation with ABC’s Jonathan Karl started with Karl noting that Trump took on the “not serious” issue of eligibility.

“Why does that make me not serious?” Trump demanded. “I think that resonated with a lot of people.”

Karl replied: “You don’t still question he was born in the United States, do you?”

“I have no idea,” Trump said. “I don’t know. Was there a birth certificate? You tell me. You know some people say that was not his birth certificate. I’m saying I don’t know. Nobody knows, and you don’t know either. Jonathan you’re a smart guy, and you don’t know.”

When Karl admitted he was “pretty sure,” Trump jumped on the statement.

“You just said you’re pretty sure … you have to be 100 percent sure,” he said. “Jonathan, you said you’re pretty convinced, so let’s just see what happens over time.”

Among the many records the Obama camp has refused to release are the marriage license of his father (Barack Sr.) and mother (Stanley Ann Dunham), name change records (Barry Soetero to Barack Hussein Obama), adoption records, records of his and his mother’s repatriation as U.S. citizens from Indonesia, baptism records, Noelani Elementary School (Hawaii) records, Punahou School financial aid or school records, Occidental College financial aid records, Harvard Law School records, Columbia senior thesis, Columbia College records, record with Illinois State Bar Association, files from his terms as an Illinois state senator, his law client list, medical records and passport records.

Monckton, citing Zullo’s sworn affidavit in a court case, published a sworn mathematical analysis demonstrating the near-zero probability that the White House “birth certificate” is genuine.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/universe-shattering-twist-in-obama-birth-probe/#PTbxD5m8MosGThBl.99

Barack Obama (AKA Barry Soetoro, AKA Barack Mounir Ubayd, AKA Barak Soebarkah, AKA Barack Obama II) IS ALL THINGS NOT AMERICAN.


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from: http://www.westernjournalism.com

 

Posted by:

comparefools

 

HE IS NOT ONE OF US.

This presentation is a logical layout presentation of verifiable facts that you can see and verify the Evidence for Yourself.

First he is an Illegal alien, second he is a Communist, third, he is a Muslim, fourth, he hates Liberty and Freedom and The Rule of Law.

BARACK OBAMA’S most attacked targets are THE PEOPLE OF THE USA.

Obama HARMS AMERICANS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

HIS UNLAWFUL usurpation can be verified easily, if one cares to know what the TRUTH is:

BARACK OBAMA IS AN ILLEGAL ALIEN.

LOOKING AT THE REFERENCES IN THE FOLLOWING LIST WOULD CONVINCE EVEN AN AGNOSTIC.

If you seek TRUTH investigate the following references.

ALL OF BARACK OBAMA’S IDENTITY DOCUMENTS ARE FORGED OR STOLEN.

If he were really a USA citizen, he would have real Documents, the only reason not to have them is he Is NOT a USA citizen.

1) BARACK OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE IS A FORGERY:

Documents plus lucid thought that show The White House Slideshare Birth Certificate is not just a forgery, but a Laughably poor forgery at that. Obama must really have been rushed to present it, because it is awful and has a dozen “TELLS” of Forgery even a 5th grader can understand and believe.

Anyone that thinks the same should copy this post and distribute it everywhere.

A Simple Proof of Forgery. One does not need to be a rocket scientist or Adobe Acrobat Expert to see FRAUD in Barack Obama’s White house posted Birth Certificate. It is easy to see the Forgery “Tells”.

In case you do not trust anyone like I don’t: Visit the White House Slide Share Website anyone, see it for yourself: http://www.slideshare.net/whitehouse/birth-certificatelongform

Simple proofs/tells of forgery of Barack H Obama’s White House Birth Certificate.
I am amazed that I can post proofs of Forgery on HIS, the COMMIES White House Website, and it is not removed by anyone. How Arrogant that Narcissist is.

Here are some obvious “Proofs/Tells” of Forgery. A Teen in his underwear in his parents basement must have been the one to make this Absolutely Comedic Forgery of Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate.

Simple Proofs/Tells of forgery.

1. Scratch Out in 18a & 19a. Official Gov Docs don’t have them.

2. Check in 18a is fraud. No other Data Box on this doc or era typewriter has this.

3. No reason for Delayed or Late registration. See why on the Aloha website in Note #7….!!!

What Obama’s BC Note #7 says, “Born in Kenya, Registered in Hawaii Per
Grandmother” ! That is So Funny!

4. Data Entry Block 6c has overlapping characters: “ap”, “ty” and “Gy” overlap. That means they used Kerning to space the printed characters. Kerning did not exist in 1961, invented much later.

5. Smiley face in Alvin’s Signature. Forrest Gump did not invent Smiley until 1968.

6. The shadow “9″s in Data Block #9 and #12b mean the Data Block is Blank, nothing there. Duh, there is something there. Ms U Lee who signed this document is 96 years old and told Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Mike Zullo that the 9 code is for a data base and it means the block is empty.

7. See Real Hawaiian Registration of Obama’s Kenyan Birth.
http://alohareporter.com/2010/03/18/hawaii-considering-law-to-ignore-obama-birthers/

8. See Real Kenyan BC’s, both a Photocopy and a certified Copy at:
http://thepowerhour.com/news4/obama_kenyan_birth_certificate.htm

Any of these Tells Proves the Document is a Forgery. This many says that it is
an Amateurish and Comedic forgery.

2) BARACK OBAMA’S SELECTIVE SERVICE REGISTRATION IS A FORGERY (DRAFT CARD):
For you folks that have not seen The Liar In Chiefs Forged Selective Service
Registration, the Forgery tell is so Simple a First Grader can see the Proof of
Forgery.

All SSR’s have a 4 digit date code. Obama’s SSR is the only SSR in the Whole
Universe of the Galaxies of all Space/Time that has only a 2 digit date code.
The forger could not easily get a 1979 date so he did get a 2008 date block,
cut it in half and flipped the “08″ over, inserted the “80″ into the stamp and stamped the “80″, instead of the “1979″ as it should have been. All 18 year old males are required to register for the draft, at least that was so in 1979 when Obama supposedly turned 18. But anyway, the Point of the Fraudulent SSR is to make Americans “THINK” that Obama is an “American”.

HE IS NOT ONE OF US.

Oh PSS, It is a FELONY, to forge a government document and claim it as if it
was valid. So Obama is a Felon for his SSR, and BC, and His Stolen SSN. There it is again, The Criminal In Chief of the USA, Barry Soebarkah.
http://www.theobamafile.com/_eligibility/DraftRegistration.htm

3) BARACK OBAMA’S SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER: 042-68-4425 IS STOLEN. Oh, Yes the first ILLEGAL ALIEN THAT NEEDS TO BE CHECKED OUT ON E-VERIFY IS BARACK H OBAMA II. His Stolen Social Security number fails E-verify. It has been checked so many times by NON-Believer & Kool-Aid Haters that the SSA has disabled it from being checked. It starts with “042″ which means it was issued in Connecticut. Hawaii prefixes are 575 and 576. Barack’s first job was at an Ice Cream Parlor in Hawaii and his parents never lived in Connecticut. The SSN is issued ONLY in your Home State.

Please check it out for yourself. The Stolen SSN is, 042-68-4425. It is all over the internet, that Social Security Number belongs to Harrison J Bounel who was born in Russia in 1890 and was listed in a Connecticut Census in 1940.

SSNs are not reissued. But I think that O’ILLEGALALIEN is trying to change that, by FIAT.

You can read the story of the “skip Tracer that stumbled upon the data that links both Obama and Bounel to the same SSN: 042-68-4425. A story of the data and the connection was put together by a Skip Tracer named Albert Hendershot and can be viewed on the World Net Daily website at
http://www.wnd.com/2011/08/336889/

To See the video of Al Hendershot showing how he found that Obama and Bounel have the same SSN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma9xCv-8zsg

4) BARACK OBAMA’S LITERARY BIOS, WRITTEN BY HIMSELF, for Acton & Dystel,

IT SAYS ‘BORN IN KENYA and raised in Indonesia”. Barack Obama’s Literary Bios was written by himself, don’t believe the LIE: “he did not write it”.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/The-Vetting-Barack-Obama-Literary-Agent-1991-Born-in-Kenya-Raised-Indonesia-Hawaii

LIARS LIE, CHEATERS CHEAT, AND MURDERERS, MURDER. AND Barak Soebarkah (his last real name), AKA Barry Soetoro, AKA Harrison J Bounel, AKA Barack H Obama II, AKA Barak Mounir Ubayd;

Barack Obama HAS DONE ALL THREE.

Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/liberal-legal-expert-obama-become-danger-constitution/#JQEZ9PMpG89SCeLD.99

 

The Schizophrenia of Barack Obama


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from:

http://www.americanthinker.com

 

Posted by:Steve McCann

Barack Obama is a man with only one core conviction.  He has, as the basic foundation of his otherwise disorganized and uncertain belief system, the irrefutable tenet that the United States, because of its European roots, has been the epitome of oppression and arrogance throughout its history.  Therefore, he is able to rationalize the need to say or do anything as the transformation of American society and the end of the pre-eminent status of the United States are his sole objectives.  He has, thus, adopted a pre-meditated schizophrenic personality wherein he comports himself as an apologist and appeaser on the international stage and a narcissistic autocrat at home.

The autocrats that ran roughshod throughout the nineteenth and twentieth century were determined to aggregate power in a central authority and to achieve an exalted position for their countries.  Barack Obama, on the other hand, is determined to denigrate and diminish the stature of his nation as he otherwise emulates the tactics of these despots.

Beyond his one immutable and core tenet, Obama wavers between acceptance of hybrid fascism with its emphasis on crony capitalism and inflexible government dominance of the individual and the economy on the one hand, and on the other post-World War II European-style socialism rather than rigid socialist/Marxist ideology.  This may be anathema to the hard core left from whence he came, but little do they understand that Barack Obama is driven by retribution not ideology.

After five years, Barack Obama has gone a long way in accomplishing much of what he set out to do, namely, the end of the pre-eminent status of the United States and setting the stage to even the score with the European descendants that dominate American society.

Barack Obama began his presidency by donning the hair shirt and groveling before the nations of world begging forgiveness for what he perceived to be the sins of America’s past.  It is America’s enemies and their loud and false protestations that frame the basis of Obama’s outreach and appeasement mindset.  This servile mindset by Barack Obama has projected an image of weakness which begets chaos, and chaos is what the international scene has become whether in the Middle East, Asia, Russia or Latin America.

Barack Obama, determined to become the Muslim world’s best friend, has instead unleashed the dogs of war in the Middle East.  With the latest agreement in hand, he has essentially told Iran they are free to develop enriched uranium through the most difficult and time-consuming stages,  and to meddle, unchallenged,  in the affairs of Lebanon and Syria as well as Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt.  He has given tacit support to Hamas and the Palestinian Authority in their confrontation with Israel as U.S. policy is to browbeat and intimidate the Israelis into accepting any agreement with them, all the while insisting on Israel’s acquiescence to Iranian nuclear capability. 

In an eerie replay of history, the Middle-East has become the Balkans of 1912-14, wherein any inadvertent action or misunderstanding could trigger not only a regional but global conflict.  Whereas the spark that initiated World War I was due to the egocentric and nationalist ambitions of many European countries, the underlying factor of any major war in the Middle East will be the abandonment of American resolve and the deliberate erosion of its economic and military power.

Beyond the Middle East, Russia and China are more emboldened than ever, openly mocking the United States and its leadership.  China has begun acting as if it were already the pre-eminent power in East Asia.  Russia has succeeded in intimidating the United States into abandoning a crucial missile defense system, thus allowing Russia a free hand to effectively reconstitute the old Soviet Union while browbeating its neighbors in Europe, and more recently becoming a major antagonist in the tinderbox that is the Middle East.

Seventy-two months ago Barack Obama officially declared his candidacy for President.  Only now are a few within the mainstream media and ruling elites in America slowly awakening from their self-induced infatuation and beginning to understand who he is.  It has become difficult to totally ignore the lawlessness, overt intimidation, demagoguery and outright lies spewed forth by Obama relative to the passage and implementation of ObamaCare.

However, this pattern has been repeated consistently over the past five years in his dealing with the American people as Barack Obama has followed in the footsteps of those 20th century despots resolved to accumulate power.

1.     Obama has been determined to keep the populace in a constant state of turmoil.  He has endorsed the escalation of vitriol aimed at inciting retaliation against the tea party movement, Republicans and conservatives.  In an effort to promote class strife, the demonization of the wealthy has never been so sustained and blatant. The incendiary charge of racism has become the default accusation directed at anyone disagreeing with Barack Obama.  As a result, racial animosity is approaching levels not seen since the 1960’s.

2.     He has created a de facto secret police through the use of the Internal Revenue Service, the EPA and other government agencies to intimidate and harass his political enemies and to browbeat the American citizens into acquiescing to his edicts and demands.

3.     He has actively bypassed Congress governing by presidential fiat whether in the case of illegal immigration, the environment, labor statutes, and presidential appointments or by simply ignoring whatever laws he chooses.

4.     He is a firm believer that no lie, in the advancement of his agenda, is too egregious to tell, no strategy to destroy one’s political enemies is out of bounds, and the creation of false crises and faux enemies is not only legitimate but essential for the implementation of his plan to transform and denigrate America.

5.     He has an unrelenting willingness to use and discard people.  Throughout his life Barack Obama has used and manipulated the gullible into being foot soldiers for his personal ambitions — whether an entire race of people (African-Americans) by playing on his skin color or the elite ruling establishment wallowing in “white guilt.”  The Hispanic population has become the latest group to be manipulated in an effort to turn them against the rest of the populace utilizing the wedge issue of amnesty for illegal immigrants.

6.     He is someone who would willingly inflict pain and suffering on the American people in order to permanently destroy his political enemies and accumulate near dictatorial power for the government he controls.  Barack Obama’s megalomania does not allow him to care a whit for the citizenry or the long-term future of the country he pushing into bankruptcy or the nation’s ability to survive in a hostile world.

Despite the debacle that is ObamaCare, there remains a stubborn unwillingness on the part of far too many to recognize what motivates Barack Obama.  Perhaps it is unfathomable to them that they could have been wrong about someone who was the epitome of their superficial ideal candidate.  Perhaps they are blind to the danger because of the belief that this country, the wealthiest and most powerful nation in the history of mankind could ever be brought to its knees by anyone. However, that someone is Barack Obama.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/12/the_schizophrenia_of_barack_obama.html#ixzz2mZZThcUG

Expert Testifies to Congress that Obama’s ‘Ignoring Laws’ Could Lead to Overthrow of Government


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.mediaite.com

 

Posted by:Noah Rothman

During a congressional committee hearing about the constitutional limits imposed on the presidency and the implications of President Barack Obama’s disregard for implementing the Affordable Care Act as written, one expert testified that the consequences of the president’s behavior were potentially grave. He said that the precedent set by Obama could eventually lead to an armed revolt against the federal government.

On Tuesday, Michael Cannon, Cato Institute’s Director of Health Policy Studies, testified before a congressional committee about the dangers of the president’s legal behavior.

“There is one last thing to which the people can resort if the government does not respect the restrains that the constitution places on the government,” Cannon said. “Abraham Lincoln talked about our right to alter our government or our revolutionary right to overthrow it.”

“That is certainly something that no one wants to contemplate,” he continued. “If the people come to believe that the government is no longer constrained by the laws then they will conclude that neither are they.”

“That is a very dangerous sort of thing for the president to do, to wantonly ignore the laws,” Cannon concluded, “to try to impose obligation upon people that the legislature did not approve.”

Obama’s overhaul of spy programs so far cloaked in more secrecy


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from: http://www.mcclatchydc.com

 

Posted by: Anita Kumar

The White House in Washington D.C.

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama has faced withering criticism around the globe for his secret spying programs. How has he responded? With more secrecy.

Obama has been gradually tweaking his vast government surveillance policies. But he is not disclosing those changes to the public. Has he stopped spying on friendly world leaders? He won’t say. Has he stopped eavesdropping on the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund? He won’t say.

Even the report by the group Obama created to review and recommend changes to his surveillance programs has been kept secret.

Critics note that this comes after he famously promised the most open administration in history.

“They seem to have reverted to a much more traditional model of secrecy except when it’s politically advantageous,” said Steven Aftergood, who directs the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, and is an expert on – and prominent critic of – government secrecy. “That’s normal but not consistent with their pledge.”

For five months, former government contractor Edward Snowden has steadily released classified information to the media that shows the breadth of the federal government programs that have guided intelligence gathering since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Documents show the National Security Agency had been collecting telephone and email records on tens of millions of Americans and foreigners, eavesdropping on allies such as Germany and Brazil, and spying on a host of global institutions.

As criticism swelled at home and abroad, Obama said the nation should examine how the government can strike a balance between national security and privacy concerns. He said at an August news conference that Americans will resolve any disagreements about the NSA programs through “vigorous public debate.”

Yea right this will not happen

But what started out as a national examination largely turned into a private review with few public meetings, little document disclosure and next to no public debate, say some lawmakers, technology organizations and civil liberties groups. And now, as those behind-the-scenes reviews begin to wind down, Obama is not providing details of the results.

“As part of the overall review of our intelligence-gathering practices, decisions are being made by the president and implemented by the president, but beyond that, I have to ask you to wait until the reviews, the various reviews have been completed and we have more to say,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

Sherwin Siy, vice president of legal affairs at Public Knowledge, which promotes Internet openness and provided recommendations to the White House on this issue, said administration officials are asking Americans to trust them, but their past actions have provided no reason to do so. “Where are the reserves of trust supposed to come from?” he asked.

On his first day in office, Obama offered a sweeping promise of transparency, issuing a number of executive actions to provide more openness at every level of the federal government and greater disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

“My administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in government,” Obama wrote at the time. “Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in government.”

But over the last five years, watchdog groups say, Obama has relied on state secrets and secret laws to make national security decisions with little congressional or public oversight, much as did his predecessor, President George W. Bush.

In recent months, Obama and James Clapper, the director of the Office of National Intelligence, have made statements that diminished the scope of – or outright denied the existence of – surveillance programs.

Carney and other administration officials say they are prohibited by law from revealing more details because the surveillance programs are classified and revelations could threaten national security.

Sascha Meinrath, director of the Open Technology Institute at the New America Foundation, which pushes Internet freedom and provided recommendations to the White House on this issue, suggested it declassify more programs in order to talk about them. “The blowback is only going to get worse,” he said.

In the past several months the government has released some documents, primarily about phone and email record collections. Some are heavily redacted, with thick black lines obscuring numerous dates, names and entire paragraphs.

Clapper says that he has released them at Obama’s request to be more transparent, but many were released as a result of court orders as part of a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy advocacy group.

“The American people deserve an open conversation about how the administration is interpreting its authority to conduct surveillance of Americans,” said Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., who has advocated for NSA changes. “I believe we can protect our national security and our constitutional rights, and I would like to see the administration make a genuine effort to respond to the many legitimate concerns that have been raised. So far, its efforts have raised more questions than they have answered.”

In response to criticism about NSA programs, Obama expects to receive recommendations from at least two government groups – an advisory group he created this summer and an independent organization within the executive branch with presidentially nominated members.

The first panel – the Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technology – provided an interim report to National Security Adviser Susan Rice and Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Lisa Monaco last week, but it was not released to the public. A final report is due Dec. 15, but it’s not clear if the entire document would be made public. “We expect that the outcomes of their work will be made public in some way,” said Caitlin Hayden, a National Security Council spokeswoman.

The second panel – the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board – recently held its first substantive hearing since its creation by Congress in 2004. It plans to provide recommendations to the White House but has not released a timetable.

Mark Jaycox, a policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said he doesn’t expect the administration to change much even amid the intense criticism. This administration, he said, has always held fast against similar criticism. For example, it resisted for years bipartisan pressure to release more information about its top-secret targeted killing program.

“It’s a pattern of the Obama administration,” he said.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/25/209465/obamas-overhaul-of-spy-programs.html#storylink=cpy

America’s real president wears a skirt


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from:http://canadafreepress.com

 

Posted by: Judi McLeod 

Author

Barack Obama is not the Emperor Without Clothes; he’s a president in a skirt.

 

Nor is Obama, in effect the real President of the U.S.  Without even a single vote cast her way, Valerie Jarrett is.

From a well-hidden lair somewhere in the White House, Senior Advisor to the President Valerie Jarrett builds the figurative bombs that Obama later throws at America.

Tied to a Teleprompter and instructed what to say, Obama only ventures out to speak mainly to captive audiences of high school and university students, easily impressed from having been spoon-fed the indoctrination of anti-American Marxism in their classrooms.  Only those who cheer him on in canned applause for later media sound bites are allowed wherever Obama speaks.

Many repeatedly ask why it is that Valerie Jarrett gets to travel, like a modern day Cleopatra,  with her own contingent of secret service agents in tow, and why she is the only known person with 24-7 access to the Obama private living quarters in the White House.

 

The answer is obvious: payback.

Jarrett payback comes from being the first one to give both Barack and Michelle Obama a stab at life in public office.

“But even before Michelle married Barack, she was consulting him about her career decisions. Jarrett was Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley’s deputy chief of staff when she first met Michelle and offered her a job—whereupon Michelle asked Jarrett to meet with her and Barack to discuss his reservations about the offer.” (Vanity Fair, December, 2007).

Barack’s “reservations” were put aside, and the rest,  as they say,  is history. 

In other words, had it not been for Valerie Jarrett, Michelle and Barack would still be what they were before getting Jarrett-power-boosted into the White House:  disgruntled activists sitting around forever fomenting for revolution with the likes of unrepentant domestic terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.

For more than four years, almost everything Obama does and is doing is painful to the citizens of the United States of America, and in fact to millions of people around the globe who depend on a strong America to continue with their lives.  On November 11‘s Veterans Day, the man who has almost completed his gutting of the American military will be televised laying wreaths at Arlington Cemetery and his wife will be a keynote speaker at a Veteran gathering.

All of this is taking place in the real pain of some 2 million Americans being thrown off their health insurance by ObamaCare, which Obama blames on “bad apple” insurance companies.

The silence of the insurance companies, who have been White House-ordered to remain silent, is as ominous as it is deafening.

And talk about sitting around fomenting for revolution from the safety of the sidelines:

On October 28, the woman who tells Obama what to do sent this message on Twitter. “FACT:: Nothing in #Obamacare forces people out of their health plans.  No change is required unless insurance companies change existing plans.”

From her cover of stealth, Jarrett fights ObamaCare blowback with brazen lies.

But even in the depressing dark of Jarrett’s unsolicited control of America, a light of hope could be coming from Egypt, a nation the Obama administration tried to control through its open backing of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Canada Free Press (CFP) Cairo columnist Ali Al Sharnoby tells us that on Monday, November 4, the Mohamed Morsi trial gets underway,  and that even if just to save his neck from the hangman’s knot, Morsi is expected to sing like the proverbial canary spilling the long-suspected links between Barack Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood.

November 4th happens to be Valentine’s Day in Egypt.

Hopefully Egypt will say: ‘Happy Valentine’s Day, Valerie Jarrett’.

 

 

You are the Terrorist Now


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from:joeforamerica.com

 

Posted by:Rodney Lee

Are you a conservative, a libertarian, a Christian or a gun owner? If you answered yes to any of those questions, you are a “potential terrorist” according to official U.S. government documents.

behead

 

At one time, the term “terrorist” was used very narrowly.  The government applied that label to people like Osama bin Laden and other Islamic jihadists.  But now the Obama administration is removing all references to Islam from terror training materials, and instead the term “terrorist” is being applied to large groups of American citizens.

Here are 72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered “Potential Terrorists” In Official Government Documents. Hat tip to Michael Snyder at Activist Post:

1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”

2. Those that advocate for states’ rights

3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”

4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”

5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”

6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”

7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”

8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”

9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”

10. “Anti-Gay”

11. “Anti-Immigrant”

12. “Anti-Muslim”

13. “The Patriot Movement”

14. “Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians”

15. Members of the Family Research Council

16. Members of the American Family Association

17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union’”

18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol

19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform

20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition

21. Members of the Christian Action Network

22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”

23. Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”

24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21

25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps

26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”

27. The militia movement

28. The sovereign citizen movement

29. Those that “don’t think they should have to pay taxes”

30. Anyone that “complains about bias”

31. Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”

32. Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”

33. Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”

34. Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”

35. Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”

36. Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”

37. Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”

38. Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”

39. Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”

40. “Militia or unorganized militia”

41. “General right-wing extremist”

42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.

43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”

44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”

45. Those that are “anti-global”

46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”

47. Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”

48. Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”

49. Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”

50. Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”

51. Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”

52. Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”

53. Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”

54. Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”

55. Anyone that is “anti-abortion”

56. Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”

57. Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”

58. “Rightwing extremists”

59. “Returning veterans”

60. Those concerned about “illegal immigration”

61. Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”

62. Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”

This would mean that the DHS is a terrorist organization!

63. Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”

64. “Anti-abortion activists”

65. Those that are against illegal immigration

66. Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner

67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations

68. Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”

69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr

70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”)

71. Those that believe in “end times” prophecies

72. Evangelical Christians

You could very well be in disagreement or even be repulsed with some of the items on this list – but so what? This is supposed to be a free country with a First Amendment to guarantee the Right to speech. Instead, free speech is becoming a thing of the past, and we are rapidly becoming an Orwellian society that is the exact opposite of what our founding fathers intended.

Read more at http://joeforamerica.com/2013/10/terrorist-now/#MuubmBHYQSxFrqyj.99

 

Obama’s Military Purge


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from:http://canadafreepress.com

 

Posted by:Arnold Ahlert 

usa-nazi-banner

Author

Is the Obama administration in the midst of a military purge? This year alone, nine senior commanding generals have been fired by the administration, and retired generals and current commanders who have spoken to TheBlaze believe that political ideology is the primary impetus behind the effort. “I think they’re using the opportunity of the shrinkage of the military to get rid of people that don’t agree with them or not toe the party line,” a senior retired general told website. “Remember, as Rahm Emanuel said, never waste a crisis.” The general spoke on the condition of anonymity because he still provides the government with services and believes this administration would retaliate against him.

The terminations have a distinctly political odor surrounding them in at least three cases. In all three of these cases, Benghazi is at root. U.S. Army Gen. Carter Ham was heading the United States African Command when our consulate came under attack on September 11, 2012. Ham told Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) he was never given a “stand down” order preventing him from securing the consulate. Yet the Washington Times, citing sources in the military, said he was given the order and immediately relieved of command when he decided to defy it. The Times further noted that Ham “retired” less that two years after receiving the command when all other commanders of similar stature have stayed on far longer. Sources told TheBlaze Ham was highly critical of the Obama administration’s decision not to send reinforcements to Benghazi.

Rear Adm. Charles Gaouette, Commander of Carrier Strike Group Three for the Navy, was relieved of duty for allegedly using profanity and making “racially insensitive comments.” Though he was cleared of criminal violations under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, administrative penalties have effectively ended his career. In testimony regarding Benghazi, Gaouette, who was in charge of Air Craft Carriers in the Mediterranean Sea on the night of the attack, told Congress there may not have been time to get flight crews to Libya. But under cross examination, he admitted he could have sent planes to that location.

Major General Baker, a two-star general who served as commander of the Joint Task Force-Horn at Camp Lamar in Djibouti, Africa, was fired for alcohol and sexual misconduct charges. The U.S. reportedly runs counter-terror operations out of Djibouti, and once again, military officials told TheBlaze Baker was involved in some aspect of Benghazi.

The other six were terminated for a variety of alleged offenses. Army Brigadier Gen. Bryan Roberts, commander of Fort Jackson beginning in 2011, was fired for adultery. Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Gregg A. Sturdevant, director of Strategic Planning and Policy for the U.S. Pacific Command and commander of the aviation wing at Camp Bastion, Afghanistan, was terminated over a successful attack on that facility by the Taliban, resulting in two American deaths and the destruction of eight American planes. Sturdevant claims British forces were responsible for security at the base prior to the attack.

Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Charles M.M. Gurganus was terminated for questioning the “winning hearts and minds” policies that led to “green on blue” murders of American officers by “trusted” Afghan recruits. Other Afghan recruits led a platoon into an enemy ambush. Army Lt. Gen. David Holmes Huntoon Jr was “censored” for “an investigation” into an “improper relationship,” according to the Department of Defense. A blog written by a 26-year-old cadet medically discharged from West Point claims the three-star general was under investigation because a West Point Superintendent “improperly used” his office, and because of an insufficient investigation of a lewd email chain perpetrated by the men’s rugby team. Nothing was officially released by the DoD regarding any of the charges.

The last commanders, three-star Vice Admiral Tim Giardina, and Major General Michael Carey, were fired within 48 hours of each other. Giardina was the deputy commander of the U.S. Strategic Command, an entity that oversees all nuclear-armed missiles, bombers and submarines. He was commander of the Submarine Group Trident, Submarine Groups 9 and 10, which comprise all 18 of our nuclear-armed submarines. He was fired for the alleged use of counterfeit gambling chips at an Iowa casino. Carey, commander of the 20th Air Force, a role that put him in charge of 9,600 people and 450 Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles at three operational wings, was fired “due to a loss of trust and confidence in his leadership and judgment,” said Air Force spokesman Brig. Gen. Les Kodlick. The decision to fire Carey was made by Lt. Gen. James Kowalski, the head of the Air Force Global Strike Command. Obama fired Giardina.

The firing of military leaders goes much further than top generals, however. On its Facebook page, Breitbart.com compiled a list of more than 197 military commanders, mostly at the rank of Colonel or above, who have been purged by the Obama administration since 2009.

According to military.com, allegations of sexual misconduct account for the firing of 30 percent of military commanders over the past eight years. That figure that increases to 40 percent when “ethical lapses” such as sexual assault and harassment, pornography, drugs and drinking are lumped together. But there are other dubious reasons why these commanders have been terminated, ranging from unspecified dereliction of duty, to improper saluting.

One of the largest purges occurred on the last day of November in 2011, when the administration terminated 157 Air Force Majors, a move the Chapman University of Military Law and its associated AMVETS Legal Clinic characterized as illegal. They noted that the Department of Defense specifies that absent extenuating circumstances, service members within six years of retirement would ordinarily be retained, and allowed to retire on time and collect benefits.

The Air force cited budget shortfalls as their primary reason for the terminations. Yet as institute director Maj. Kyndra Rotunda explained, based on the Defense Department’s Instruction 1320.08, “derogatory information” is the only reason officers can be terminated. “The defense department’s own regulation does not authorize what the defense department is doing,” Rotunda contended at the time. “The Airmen relied on the law when they entered service and now the Secretary wants to change that law, without authority.”

Earlier that same month, two-star Major Gen. Peter Fuller was relieved of his command in Afghanistan, after he told Politico that Afghan President Hamid Karzai and other government officials in that country were “isolated from reality.” Ironically, Fuller was fired by Gen. John Allen, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, who was himself the subject of an FBI investigation a year later, for his role in the sex scandal that led to the resignation of CIA Director and retired general David Petraeus. Despite the FBI informing the Pentagon it had uncovered thousands of pages of emails between Allen and Florida socialite Jill Kelley, President Obama subsequently expressed “faith” in Allen’s ability to continue doing his job. It is impossible to determine whether Allen’s ideology played a role in maintaining that faith.

2012 also saw several terminations of officers based on questionable rationale. In May, Commander Derick Armstrong, commanding officer of the guided missile destroyer USS The Sullivans, was relieved of duty by Vice Adm. Frank Pandolfe “as a result of an unprofessional command climate that was contrary to good order and discipline,” according to a Navy news release. A week earlier, the Navy relieved Cmdr. Dennis Klein of command of the submarine USS Columbia, citing a loss of confidence in his ability to serve effectively.

Stars and Stripes listed several other Navy commanders relieved of duty in 2012. While some on the list were terminated for seemingly legitimate reasons, a curious lack of specificity applied to others. They include Capt. James CoBell, commanding officer of Oceana Naval Air Station’s Fleet Readiness Center Mid-Atlantic, who was let go for “leadership issues”; Cmdr. Franklin Fernandez, commanding officer of Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 24, for a “loss of confidence” in his ability to command due to allegedly “driving under the influence”; Capt. Marcia Lyons, commander of Naval Health Clinic New England, for problems with her “command climate”; and Capt. Sean McDonell, commander of Seabee reserve unit Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 14 in Jacksonville, FL, for mismanagement and unspecified “major program deficiencies.” Several others were fired for “inappropriate personal behavior” or “personal misconduct.”

Theories for these purges run the gamut. One posits that anyone associated with Benghazi had to go. Another states that many of these firings are an effort to clean up “operational failures,” most notably a 2007 incident in which six nuclear-tipped missiles went missing for 36 hours. Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, who has been an outspoken critic of the Obama administration, believes it is part of the president’s strategy to reduce America’s standing in the world. “[Obama is] intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon, and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged,” he contended.

Vallely’s assessment was echoed by a source at the Pentagon who wished to remain anonymous because the source was not authorized to speak on the subject. He or she contended that “young officers, down through the ranks, have been told not to talk about Obama or the politics of the White House. They are purging everyone and if you want to keep your job—just keep your mouth shut.”

This theory finds validation when one considers the Obama administration’s larger assault on the military. The military is the last organized bastion of conservative values, due in large part to the nature of the military itself. Yet, in recent years, the push to embrace progressive values, such as openly gay servicemen, women in combat and diversity worship have been pursued with vigor. Even the aforementioned effort to “win the hearts and minds” of Islamists in Iraq and Afghanistan, as opposed to pursuing victory, marks a sea change from traditional military values.

Not only is the Obama administration apparently on a mission to undermine the integrity of the military in this way, but it has also revealed itself to be entirely intolerant of dissent of any kind. Whether it is reporters or domestic opposition groups such as the Tea Party, Obama has made clear he will aggressively pursue anyone who defies his agenda. Now it seems that chilling message his been sent to the military as well.

 

 

 

Killing ObamaCare


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.americanthinker.com

 

Posted by:Jay Clarke

The ObamaCare disaster is in its early stages and already, Americans of every political stripe are in shock as millions of insurance plans are canceled, premiums skyrocket, hours are cut, jobs are lost, businesses are decimated, and our choices evaporate. Even the left-wing media are beginning to realize that Obama‘s signature domestic achievement is a catastrophe.

The complete flop of the http://www.healthcare.gov/website launch has deeply embarrassed Barack Obama and the Democrat Party that created the ObamaCare monster in the dead of night. Using shady parliamentary maneuvers and against the will of the American people, they imposed and inflicted upon the entire nation a bill they hadn’t read and didn’t understand. And now their chickens are coming home to roost as government (and their own) incompetence is put on full display.

But it is possible that We the People can stop this thing before it’s too late and before Barack Obama’s socialist makeover of America becomes permanently entrenched. We should stop feeding this beast and allow it to die a slow, lingering death.

We should starve ObamaCare.

Since http://www.healthcare.gov went live almost four weeks ago, the fear of this very thing has descended upon the left and their media buddies. It goes like this:

The ObamaCare website launch is a PR disaster of epic proportion which strains the credibility of Barack Obama as super-genius and the entire concept of ObamaCare. If people do not have faith in the system (or its chief proponent) they may not enroll in ObamaCare and if they do not enroll, especially the younger and healthier types, ObamaCare may actually fail. If only very poor, very unhealthy people enroll, the signature domestic policy achievement of Barack Obama (force-fed to the American public) will collapse.

An even bigger fear on the left is that the ObamaCare debacle will cause Americans en masse to question the cardinal doctrine of leftism. Namely, that the government is the best instrument for delivering the basic necessities of life and establishing social justice by redistributing wealth. When the people stop believing that government is the answer to our problems, liberalism will have been dealt a serious, possibly fatal, blow.
So, what would happen if young people and middle-aged and older folks just refused to participate?

What if we all just… said… “NO!”?

What if millions upon millions of Americans refused to be a part of the ObamaCare national takeover and refused to purchase insurance through the exchanges?

What if tens or hundreds of thousands of young, healthy people refused to purchase health insurance at all?
Answer: ObamaCare would fall.

This would mean buying coverage outside of the exchanges or not buying it at all. Due to ObamaCare’s coverage mandates, buying insurance outside the exchanges will be costly as insurers implement new requirements. One answer may be to purchase a high-deductible plan at a lower cost and then purchase supplemental plans that will help pay your deductibles and out of pocket costs. Many licensed health agents understand this process called “bundling” and have used it for years to help their clients. Still, you’ll probably pay more for health insurance than you’re paying now.

However, buying insurance through the ObamaCare exchanges is to accept tax credits and subsidies which are nothing more than redistributed wealth stolen from our fellow Americans. Much of it, $700 billion, stolen from our parents and grandparents by Obama’s raid of Medicare. Participating through the exchanges therefore, helps to empower the socialist agenda of the radical left and, if at all possible, it must be avoided.

Clearly, we are talking about a rebellion of sorts. A massive demonstration of civil disobedience (typically beloved by the left) which would certainly cause panic in the White House and liberal halls of power as regular Americans defy the strong-arm tactics of Barack Obama and his Democrat allies.

Some might think this is a radical idea. But, when a government becomes destructive of the God-given rights of the people, the people have no choice but to disobey. Any laws passed by government that are clearly unconstitutional or destructive of the natural rights of free men and women must be opposed. Our most effective weapon is the tried and true practice of peaceful, nonviolent civil disobedience much like that witnessed in the 1960s.

Of course, this type of action may come with a price tag for those who choose this path. In the 1960s, civil rights protesters were attacked with dogs, water cannon, beaten with batons, and assassinated.

But, the cause was worthy of the suffering endured.

And so it is today.

Civil disobedience is not for the faint of heart. In this battle, the IRS may come knocking and seek to penalize those who do not purchase health insurance. For the moment, the IRS’s primary mechanism for penalizing such people is to withhold their tax refunds. So, what if we saw to it that no excess funds are withheld from our paychecks? When the IRS goons look to seize our tax refunds as a penalty, they’ll have nothing to withhold. If millions of Americans adopted this approach, the IRS would be unable to effectively enforce ObamaCare’s penalty provisions.

In 1776, fifty six men signed the Declaration of Independence and pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. Every one of them paid a price for his patriotism and refusal to yield to the tyranny of King George III.

Today, America is in peril. We face an encroaching tyranny which is as profound as that faced by the signers of the Declaration. Our federal government is lawless, out of control and shows no respect for the Constitution. The ability of our children and grandchildren to live as free people is under tremendous threat from radical leftists who seek nothing less than the total transformation of our nation into a socialist state.

ObamaCare is the linchpin of that transformation.

Absent the actions of the American people, the radicals will succeed, resulting in a continual and perpetual loss of personal freedom until America is America no more. We and our descendants deserve to live in freedom. Our families and our ancestors paid for it in blood. It is our birthright.

Faced with such an existential danger from within our own federal government, the act of civil disobedience is no longer a choice for free men and women. It is a moral and patriotic imperative.

How do we battle this onslaught?

Defiance.

Refuse to comply with immoral and illegal laws.

Refuse to participate in ObamaCare. Defy its mandates and penalties.

Refuse to accept ObamaCare’s subsidies and tax credits stolen from fellow Americans.

This is where this American generation must draw the line and where we must make our stand for freedom.

Today, the barbarians aren’t at the gates, they are within them — within the White House and the United States Congress.

The fight over ObamaCare is for all the marbles. It is the cornerstone of the radical leftist transformation of America and it must be defeated.

“An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law”

— Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/10/killing_obamacare.html#ixzz2j4bWC6Hr
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

 

Dialing 1-800-F**K-YOU


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG.

 

Here is some information and my rules:

 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

 4) I welcome input from all walks of life.

 

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

 

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

 

Thank you for visiting!

 

Reblogged from: http://www.americanthinker.com

 

Posted by:Stella Paul

I just had the worst dream. I was standing center stage, eager to unveil my fancy new website. I pressed the button; the website crashed, and 7 billion people started laughing at me.

Do you think Obama ever had that dream? Nah, neither do I. Images like that spring from an inborn sense of accountability, a drive to make good on promises and to earn genuine respect.

The last time Obama sought to earn genuine respect was when he invented roof hits with his pot-smoking Choom Gang.

And ever since those high times in Hawaii, our Stoner Emeritus has trafficked in hustle, fraud, and thuggery, each mysteriously charmed step of the way.

So what did Obama hope to achieve with his 2,700-page poison pill of ObamaCare?

Simple. Cast your mind back to that golden age one month ago, before you were forced to spend countless precious hours of your mortal life, trying to log onto a $500-million dysfunctional website.

Twas then that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius summoned the media to proclaim the coming glories of ObamaCare. And, lo, the miracle of “health-care” reform arose through the shimmering mists, as she revealed its national hotline number: 1-800-F**K-YO.

And that, dear readers, is the point of the whole shebang.

16 million of you have lost insurance and don’t know how you’ll get health care for you and your loved ones? Well, 1-800-F**K-YOU.

Your premiums have doubled, trebled, quadrupled, and you don’t see how to put food on the table and pay for insurance? Let’s make things perfectly clear: 1-800-F**K-YOU.

Doctors quitting? Hospitals shedding staff? Medical device companies taxed to ruination? The entire insurance business destroyed? Millions of jobs lost or stomped into part-time, to comply with ObamaCare regulations? Hey, fellow Americans, 1-800-F**K-YOU.

Fined for not buying a product that you can’t buy, because our website doesn’t work? Forced to buy it, and we’re not, because we gave ourselves a magic exemption? A hale and hearty 1-800-F**K-YOU. We work for Great and Godly Government, got that?

And we’re so confident that we can shove this toxic stew down your gullets that here’s what we’re going to do.

We’re not making any deals about defunding or delaying, no matter how catastrophic we know our website will be. Of course not!

Instead, we’re shutting down the United States government. We’re paying government workers to put up barricades in front of open-air war memorials to keep out 90-year-old war heroes.

We’re sending riot police to threaten veterans in wheelchairs to make sure they don’t get away with paying respect to their fallen brethren.

We’re closing Yellowstone Park and locking up elderly tourists under armed guard. Then we’re making them travel 2.5 hours out of the park, forbidding them to stop at private bathrooms along the way.

You want us to explain how forcing Japanese tourists to go in their pants will help even one sick child? OK, we’ll explain: 1-800-F**K-YOU. That’s how.

We’re threatening to arrest Catholic priests who celebrate mass on military bases, leaving some of America’s bravest without religious services. Why threaten Catholic priests and not Protestant ministers? Because 1-800-F**K-YOU. That’s why.

We’re forcing senior citizens with walkers and scooters to leave their fully-paid-for homes, and we’re demanding that legitimate private charities and businesses close their operations. What statute allows us to arbitrarily evict American citizens from their homes and business? Statute 1-800-F**K-YOU. That statute.

We’re blocking access to graveyards and forcing children to take dangerous white knuckle rides to school. Want your kids to be safe when they travel? Well, we want ObamaCare “for the children.” So 1-800-F**K-YOU.

You think you can brush us off? You think you can stop us? Haven’t you figured out we’re not playing that kind of game? This whole witches brew of ObamaCare was dreamed up in jail by a Congresswoman’s husband, doing time for 16 counts of bank fraud. You think we want it to work?

We’ve got our hands on every lever of power in the greatest country in the world. We’ve steamrolled our way to $17 trillion in debt, and now we’re spending money to cover up Mount Rushmore to force Americans to buy a product they don’t want from a website that doesn’t work — and nobody has arrested us yet or led us away in a net.

Now pick up that phone and start calling.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/10/dialing_1-800-fk-you.html#ixzz2j4YPAbn4

DHS Ammo Purchase Is A Violation Of Your Constitutional Rights


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules: 1) I do not like Liberal Ideology; 2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog; 3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner; 4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments. I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting! This is a Reblogged from http://www.isthatbaloney.com  Posted by Alan LeStourgeon Thank you Sir! DHS Ammo Purchase is Unconstitutional

The Department Of Homeland Security purchased 1.6 Billion hollow-point rounds in the last year alone. This unprecedented buy-out crippled the ammunition supply of our country and violated the 2nd Amendment, which states our rights to bear arms.

The DHS is funded by Congress so if they buy all the ammo on the market then there is none left for you and I, which by default is a direct violation your constitutional rights by your own government.

This violation is so egregious that on June 5th, the House Of Representatives voted to limit the amount of ammo the DHS can purchase and stockpile and is forcing them to submit a detailed report of their purchasing history.

Why would a non-military government agency such as the DHS put themselves at risk of intense scrutiny and oversight such as this? Wouldn’t it be wiser to just keep things smooth and not rock the boat like they have?

Since the DHS is not a military entity they do not follow the international military law set out during the Geneva Convention and many other international agreements, which is why they could purchase hollow-point rounds which are illegal for military use.

A non-military entity with unlimited funding and enough ammo and weapons to wage ware on US soil for decades reminds me of one thing.

The last time the World saw a force like the DHS brandishing their power was during World War II, and it was called the Gestapo…

ohitler

A massive private police force with unlimited power that can exercise its will with abandon on US citizens, if that’s not a violation of your constitutional rights I don’t know what is.

Remember obama wanted a private police force here it is!

When you see fully armored personal standing on the corner of your hometown with a big DHS printed on their backs you’ll know I was right and you’d better bust your butt to get out of Dodge as quickly as possible.

 

 

President Barack Obama owes world explanation about why he supports al-Qaeda


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://canadafreepress.com 

Posted by Judi McLeod

 Author

If ever there was a terrorist attack that cries out the name “President Barack Hussein Obama!” the massacre at Kenya’s Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi is it.

The Somalian terrorist group, al-Shabaab, which has links to al-Qaeda has claimed responsibility for the slaughter of at least 62 people, including Canadian diplomat Annemarie Desloges and an as yet unnamed other Canadian. Annemarie’s husband, Robert Munk was injured and has since been released from hospital.

Imagine this horrific scene: Terrified shoppers hid behind counters as the gunmen went on the rampage using guns and grenades. (Daily Mail, Sept. 22, 2013)

Today 10 to 15 hostages are still trapped in the shopping center as security forces lay siege to the building, from which Armed police managed to lead about 1,000 people to safety.

This time the radical Islamic terrorists live-blogged their carnage on Twitter.

Campaigning on the slogan “Obama here, Obama there” promising voters he would have a “direct line to the White House”, Barack Obama’s half brother, Malik Obama went down to humiliating defeat, garnering only 2,792 votes and trailing the winner by 140,000 votes.

With typical Obama family ‘blame the other guy’ tactics, Malik accused the Kenyan Election Commission of concealing the official results.

Earlier this week Malik Obama denied that his Lois Lerner-approved Barack H Obama Foundation has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Malik Obama is not the only Barack Hussein Obama relative knocking himself out in Kenya.

Two days before yesterday’s terrorist attack, Obama’s cousin, Raila Odinga, ‘Your Agent for Change’ was naming his shadow cabinet as Kenya’s Opposition leader.

Sore loser Odinga has lost two presidential elections.  When the Supreme Court ruled against nullifying the results of last March 4th’s general elections, he left for South Africa to avoid the swearing in of President Uhuru Kenyatta on April 9, 2013.

That was small potatoes compared to the result of his 2007 presidential failure.

Odinga’s presidential loss in 2007 led to claims of voter fraud and mass rioting with overtones of ethnic cleansing.

“A man beats at a smouldering ambulance’s number-plate with his machete. “See,” he explains, “this belongs to the government of Kenya.” Mobs cry out for their fellow Luo, Raila Odinga, to be made president of Kenya. They plead for guns. An earnest man pushes to the front of one mob. “What we are saying is give violence a second chance.”

“In the past few weeks, Kisumu has been ethnically cleansed. The Luos have driven out 20,000 or so Kikuyus from a population of 380,000; few will return. Every Kikuyu business and home has been looted and burned.

“Odinga had signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Muslim leaders, which eventually led to the deeper incorporation of Sharia into the Kenyan legal system, with the accompanying loss of women’s rights.

“Obama had campaigned with Odinga and strongly endorsed him and the atrocities committed by Odinga’s followers eventually forced a coalition government in which Odinga became Prime Minister and sold out Kenya’s civil rights to Islam.”(Daniel Greenfield, frontpagemag.com, April 6, 2013)

Barack Obama sold America’s civil rights out to Islam when on Sept. 17, 2013 he waived the ban on arming terrorists to allow aid to Syrian opposition which includes members of Al-Qaeda.

Incredibly, Odinga Raila, self-touted on his webpage as ‘Your Agent for Change’ was at the ravaged mall scene.  Former Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga told reporters at the mall that he has been told officials couldn’t determine the exact number of hostages inside the mall. (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation).

“There are quite a number of people still being held hostage on the third floor and the basement area where the terrorists are still in charge,” Odinga said.

Blood relatives notwithstanding, Barack Obama owes an explanation to his Kenyan brothers why he openly supports al-Qaeda.

Nairobi Video

STATEMENT BY THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA ON ATTACK IN NAIROBI, KENYA
Prime Minister Stephen Harper today issued the following statement on the terrorist attack that took place at a shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya, which has claimed the lives of many, and left many more injured. At this point, we can confirm that two Canadians have died, including one Canadian diplomat.
“Canada condemns in the strongest possible terms this cowardly, hateful act that apparently targeted innocent civilians who were simply out shopping.
“The hearts and prayers of all Canadians go out to the families and friends of all those affected by this senseless tragedy, and we extend our deepest condolences to those suffering the loss of Annemarie Desloges, one of our diplomats who has died in the attack.
“Annemarie Desloges was a distinguished public servant of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration who served in Canada’s High Commission to Kenya, as a liaison officer with the Canada Border Services Agency. She will be remembered and honoured.
“Terrorist attacks like this seek to undermine the very values and way of life that Canadians cherish, and they reinforce the need for us to continue taking strong actions to protect the safety of Canadians no matter where they are in the world.
“Acts of terror cannot be allowed to go unpunished. Canadian staff at our mission are offering Kenyan authorities every possible assistance to bring the perpetrators of this heinous attack to justice.

High German Electricity Rates Coming to the USA?


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from canadafreepress.com

Posted by Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh 

For Germany, it all adds up to a disaster in the making and an explosion of electricity prices per kWh, at least 40% or more

Author

Environmentalists have told us that we must reduce the escalating levels of CO2 or we risk a complete meltdown of our entire global ice cap and massive planetary destruction. Not only is the ice cap 60 percent larger this year but we have been in a cooling period for the past 16 years.

Even the United Nation’s expert on global warming, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), had to admit that their computer modeling predicting global warming Armageddon was wrong.

Based on this alarmist erroneous information, most countries have made and are making fundamental changes to the way they live and do business. Germany was one of the first European countries to jump on the wind and solar renewable energy bandwagon, abandoning nuclear power generation after the Fukushima disaster in Japan. Consequently, according to Spiegel Online International, Germans were forced to pay the highest electricity rates in Europe. “Germany’s energy poverty” hit the underprivileged the hardest when “electricity became a luxury good.” Welfare and pension checks were not adjusted to accommodate for higher prices. Over 300,000 Germans a year have their electricity cut off because they cannot afford to pay their electric bills. “Two-thirds of the price increase is due to new government fees, surcharges and taxes.”

The renewable energy is generating so many tax surcharges, Germans can no longer keep up – there is a surcharge to finance the power grids, and collateral damage charges from energy surplus or deficit, depending on the weather and the time of the day.

In winter time, when the wind stops blowing, the coal and oil power plants are fired up to provide electricity, releasing more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, the maligned carbon dioxide that is so necessary for plant life to thrive.

Wind turbines are turned off if there is too much electricity coming from the grid. But consumers have to pay for the “phantom electricity” the turbines are theoretically generating.

On numerous occasions, Germany pays fees to dump already subsidized green energy. Experts call this “negative electricity prices.”

Plants, like ArcelorMittal steel in Hamburg that use up a lot of energy, are asked to shut down production if there is an electricity shortage in order to protect the smart grid. Ordinary electricity customers “are expected to pay to compensate these businesses for lost profits.”

Wind turbines on the offshore wind farms on the island of Borkum in the North Sea are spinning but are not connected to the grid yet – the connection cable won’t be ready until next year. The turbines must be kept running with Diesel fuel in order to prevent rusting.

There are many other hidden costs:

  • the ocean cables – and they are not cheap;
  • a giant yellow electrical socket the size of a building that is supposed to store and transport electricity through the cables at a cost of one billion euros but has a lifespan of 20 years;
  • stopping the entire wind generation operation during high seas;
  • stopping the operation when porpoises and their young are spotted (their hearing might be affected but nobody seems to care if humans are affected by the annoying hum);
  • low demand for electricity in the sparsely populated coastal regions, necessitating the installation of high-voltage power lines which transport electricity to the center and southern regions of Germany with a high population concentration;
  • no incentive for electricity storage because it may cause the smart grid to become unstable.

For Germany, it all adds up to a disaster in the making and an explosion of electricity prices per kWh, at least 40% or more. For those 300,000 or so Germans who cannot pay their bills annually, it is a cave dwelling existence in the dark.  If we consider Obama administration’s “War on Coal,” coal that generates 49% percent of our electricity, high prices are coming soon to our homes via the drone attached to our houses, the Smart Meter.

I recall my childhood with my grandparents who only lived 5 miles from town but did not have electricity until the mid-1970s. It was very hard reading by an oil lamp. We had to go to bed at sundown. No radio, no TV, no reading in the dark, no reading during the day, too many chores to do, nothing but a primitive lifestyle revolving around planting, weeding, and harvesting crops. We gathered in pitch darkness in the road sometimes and exchanged stories about daily happenings. Must must we go back to this lifestyle and why?

 

Let The Arms Trade Treaty Gather Dust


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from canadafreepress.com

Posted by CCRKBA

Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) has already warned Kerry that the treaty “will collect dust alongside the Law of the Sea Treaty

BELLEVUE, WASecretary of State John Kerry may have signed the controversial United Nations Arms Trade Treaty today, but tomorrow it begins gathering dust in the U.S. Senate, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms predicted.

CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb noted that Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) has already warned Kerry that the treaty “will collect dust alongside the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and the Kyoto Protocol, to name a few, which have all been rejected by the U.S. Senate and the American people.”

“If Secretary Kerry and President Barack Obama pursue this farce,” Gottlieb warned, “the full fury of American firearms owners could come back to haunt them. Second Amendment sovereignty is not up for grabs, and we will encourage our members and supporters to contact their senators about this treaty.”

For the ATT to be ratified requires two-thirds confirmation by the Senate. But Gottlieb noted, as did Sen. Inhofe in his letter to Secretary Kerry, that 53 senators have already indicated they will reject any treaty that threatens the Second Amendment.

“If this was all theatrics by the Obama administration,” Gottlieb observed, “the president and Secretary Kerry need better script writers. And we will remind the administration of the warning it received Wednesday morning from Sen. Bob Corker, ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The Senate has not given its advice or consent on this treaty, so ‘the Executive branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty.’ How does that look to the world when an administration can’t get one of its pet projects approved on Capitol Hill?

“We know that anti-gunners have this ‘thing’ about symbolic victories,” he concluded, “but just how much of a symbol is it if the treaty is filed in the dust bin? After Fast and Furious, Benghazi and Syria, that’s just what the Obama administration needs, another symbol of international ineptitude.”

New signs of rising illegal immigration into US


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from Associated Press

Posted by Erica Werner and Christopher Sherman

 

news-politics-20130923-US-Illegal-Immigration

FILE – In this June 13, 2013 file photo, US Border Patrol agent Jerry Conli…

WASHINGTON (AP)The number of immigrants crossing the border illegally into the U.S. appears to be on the rise again after dropping during the recession.

The total number of immigrants living in this country unlawfully edged up from 11.3 million in 2009 to 11.7 million last year, with those from countries other than Mexico at an apparent all-time high, according to a report released Monday by the Pew Research Center‘s Hispanic Trends Project.

The change is within the margin of error, and there will be a more precise census measure released later this year. Still, based in part on other factors such as increased U.S. border apprehensions, the sharp decline in illegal immigration from 2007-2009 has clearly bottomed out, with signs the numbers are now rising, Pew said.

Pew said that among the six states with the largest numbers of immigrants here illegally, only Texas had a consistent increase in illegal immigration from 2007 to 2011, due in part to its stronger economy. Its number was unchanged from 2011 to 2012. Two states — Florida and New Jersey — had an initial drop but then increases during the same 2007-2011 period. Three states — California, Illinois and New York — showed only declines.

“As a whole, with the recession ending, the decrease in illegal immigration has stopped,” said Jeffrey Passel, a senior demographer at Pew.

Passel noted that historically the level of illegal immigration has been closely tied to the strength of the U.S. economy and availability of jobs. Since 2009, the average U.S. unemployment rate has dropped from 9.3 percent to 8.1 percent last year, with signs of strength in the construction industry, which yields jobs generally attractive to newly arrived Latino immigrants.

The Pew analysis is based on census data through March 2012. Because the Census Bureau does not ask people about their immigration status, the estimate on illegal immigrants is derived largely by subtracting the estimated legal immigrant population from the total foreign-born population. It is a method that has been used by the government and Pew for many years and is generally accepted.

Analysts said it was hard to predict whether immigrants in the country illegally could eventually exceed the record total of 12.2 million in 2007. Continued modest increases are possible, but another big surge like the one seen in the late 1990s and early 2000s isn’t likely, due in part to demographic factors such as Mexico’s aging workforce.

“Labor demand in the U.S. is still slack and wages are eroding, whereas there are jobs in Mexico and wages are slowly rising as labor force growth there decelerates,” said Douglas Massey, a professor of sociology and public affairs at Princeton University who is co-director of the Mexican Migration Project. “The pressures for mass migration are diminishing for now, but who knows what kind of disasters lie ahead?”

Analyses of census data from the U.S. and Mexican governments show that the number of immigrants here illegally peaked at 12.2 million in 2007, during the U.S. housing boom, and before the recession hit. It then dropped roughly 7 percent to 11.3 million in 2009, the first two-year decline in two decades, due to the weak U.S. economy which shrank construction and service-sector jobs. Much of the decline came as many Mexican workers who already were here saw diminishing job opportunities and returned home.

Since then, the U.S. economy has shown some improvement, while public opinion regarding immigrants has shifted in some cases in favor of granting legal rights. For instance, some state legislatures this year have passed immigrant-friendly measures such as college tuition breaks and rights to driver’s licenses, even as others enacted laws aimed at tightening the system.

A look at some immigration details, by the numbers:

—In all, the number of Mexicans here illegally stood at roughly 6 million last year, down from the 2007 peak of 6.9 million and largely unchanged since 2010. Mexicans now make up 52 percent of immigrants in the U.S. illegally, down from 57 percent in 2007.

—The level of illegal immigration from countries other than Mexico rose to a record 5.65 million, higher than the 5 million in 2009 and apparently surpassing the 2007 peak of 5.25 million. The record number in 2012 is a preliminary determination because of margins of error in the surveys.

—In past surveys, non-Mexican immigrants here illegally have come primarily from Central America, at roughly 15 percent; followed by South America, the Caribbean and other parts of Latin America at 12 percent; and Asia, at roughly 10 percent. The Obama administration has recently said that unrest and poverty in many Central American nations are a large factor behind illegal immigration into the U.S.

—Separately, U.S. Border Patrol data show a modest increase in the number of apprehensions at the Mexican border from 2011 to 2012, increasing to 365,000. That was because of growing apprehensions of non-Mexicans, as opposed to Mexicans, which declined. Historically, increases in border apprehensions have tended to coincide with increases in illegal immigration.

—In particular, analysts have said that immigrants are shifting their migration paths from Arizona to deep southern Texas, due in part to that state’s stronger economy, as well as increases in Central American immigrants who seek a more direct route to the U.S. Agents from the Border Patrol in Texas’ Rio Grande Valley have apprehended nearly 150,000 so far this fiscal year, a 58 percent increase over 2012. About 94,000 of those border crossers arrested have been from countries other than Mexico.

The latest numbers on illegal immigration come as prospects for passage of a comprehensive U.S. immigration bill appear dim. A bill passed by the Democratic-controlled Senate and backed by the White House includes billions for border security as well as a 13-year path to citizenship for the 11 million immigrants already here illegally.

But most House Republicans have rejected this comprehensive approach, and the House Judiciary Committee has moved forward with individual, single-issue immigration bills that could come to the floor sometime later this year or next. It’s unclear whether the GOP-dominated House will ever pass legislation that could form the basis for a final deal with the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Steve A. Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington group that advocates tighter immigration policies, said the immigration issue will be tough to resolve.

“The numbers remind us the problem of illegal immigration isn’t going away anytime soon,” he said, “unless we take steps to enforce the laws or have legalization of those here illegally.”

———

Associated Press writers Erica Werner in Washington and Christopher Sherman in McAllen, Texas, contributed to this report.

———

LAWMAKER ‘CONFIDENT’ CIA GAGGING EMPLOYEE


Here is some information and my rules:

I do not like Liberal Ideology;

Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

I welcome input from all walks of life.

However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments. I encourage “civil” discussion.

We may not agree on “ideology”.

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

Thank you for visiting!

Reblogged from: http://www.wnd.com

Posted by: GARTH KANT

Stands by story after agency calls his Benghazi charge ‘false’

author-image

WASHINGTON — It’s not everyday the CIA effectively calls a member of Congress a liar, especially a veteran who is so well-respected on both sides of the aisle.

But Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., isn’t backing down and is too seasoned to be intimidated.

He is standing by his comment that a CIA employee has been suspended for refusing to sign a nondisclosure agreement, or NDA, preventing him from discussing the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, that resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens.

The Washington Free Beacon reported the CIA told a reporter Wolf’s allegations are “categorically false.”

Wolf is too diplomatic to get into an argument with the CIA in the media.

But he told WND he is “confident” what he says is true.

Wolf also told WND how the whole issue arose.

He said his office received a tip about an “employee of the CIA who is being disciplined because he wouldn’t sign a nondisclosure agreement.”

The congressman’s office contacted the law firm representing the employee, and the firm confirmed “there is a person there who is their client” and “they gave us a name, I think, by accident.”

The law firm declined his assistance, as Wolf said they told him, “We will work this thing through the normal legal process, and we don’t need any congressional help.”

He explained, “I don’t know what their plans were. We offered to help. My office works on a lot of whistleblower cases, and they said, ‘No, they were going to go through the normal procedure,’ and I’m not sure what normal procedure they’re talking about.”

But, Wolf said, “We have given people the names of who’s involved.”

WND asked the congressman if he has been in contact with the numerous people forced to sign NDAs.

“We’ve been in touch with people who are in touch with people,” he said. “There are different nondisclosure agreements. There are NDAs signed by the CIA, and NDAs signed by people on the ground who were not employees of the CIA,” such as independent contractors.

Asked why the CIA would call Wolf’s claim false, he replied, “I’m not going to get into an exchange back and forth. Maybe John Brennan knows, I don’t know.”

CIA Director John Brennan denied a CNN report that the agency has forced employees to sign NDAs and take polygraph tests.

CNN called it “an unprecedented attempt to keep the spy agency’s Benghazi secrets from ever leaking out.”

In the past Wolf had declined to speculate why the administration is trying to keep people quiet, but WND asked the congressman if he’d heard anyone discuss possible reasons for the pressure.

“Well, would it be fair to say they don’t want people to know what happened?” he asked rhetorically.

“I think everyone who was on the scene at the time of the attack ought to be brought before Congress, subpoenaed, because that protects them, and given the opportunity to testify under oath in public.”

Wolf has been leading the charge to form a bipartisan select committee to investigate Benghazi, and has extensively discussed with WND his reasons for that on a number of occasions.

His bill to establish a select committee currently has 171 cosponsors, which is nearly three-fourths of the Republican majority in the House.

The Virginian said it would be very easy to find out who should testify, “because the CIA and others know who was on the ground, their human resources (departments) know, so the committee could find out.”

While he seemed frustrated with what appears to be an administration stonewall on Benghazi, the senior statesman remained optimistic.

“I think eventually the truth will come out, but it will come out slowly,” he said. “And perhaps in six months or a year, somebody will come forward. Eventually these things come out.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/lawmaker-confident-cia-gagging-employee/#pVscCbPBlU6LPcsl.99

 

Liberals in Retreat


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.nationalreview.com 

Posted by John Fund

Three elections across the globe deliver an unpleasant shock to liberal ideologues. Recall supporters walk the line in Colorado. John Fund   Three elections in the last week have challenged long-held liberal premises about how elections are fought and what the public wants. It’s worth examining those results in such widely separated places as Australia, Norway, and the Rocky Mountains of Colorado. In Colorado, liberals are already in denial about the fact that two Democratic state senators were recalled from office in districts Barack Obama carried by some 20 percentage points only ten months ago. The recalls were organized by citizens upset with the lawmakers’ votes in favor of a gun-control measure. The two senators also helped pass bills perceived as being against the interests of rural areas and helped push through a fraud-prone election law that shifted the Centennial State to all-mail voting.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Democratic National Committee’s chairwoman, said the results simply reflected voter suppression, pure and simple.” Matt Vespa of Red State scoffed at her flimsy explanation: More Democrats and independents signed the two recall petitions than did Republicans, he noted, which “only further discredits DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s insane claim that her side lost due to voter suppression.”

Liberals are also claiming that the black arts of the National Rifle Association skewed the results. But the gun-rights group came very late to support the recalls, and the Denver Post reports that pro-gun-control groups spent some $3 million versus only $540,000 by recall supporters. Grover Norquist, a board member of the National Rifle Association, claims once again that liberals mistook “position for passion” on an issue. In the wake of the Newtown massacre of last December, the Left believed public opinion had finally turned in favor of gun control; in support of this view, they cited surveys showing overwhelming support for background checks and limits on ammunition magazines. As Michael Tomasky of the Daily Beast wrote, “You cannot oppose the will of 90 percent of the public and expect no consequences.” But in terms of intensity, the advantage goes to those who oppose restrictions on gun rights and believe that even the most modest of them will only embolden those who ultimately aim to restrict access to guns even further.

As Norquist explains it: “The polls showed many people wanted some new gun-control laws at the same time they told pollsters they didn’t think they would prevent future Newtowns. Understandable outrage at murders accompanied by an acknowledgement it won’t make things better doesn’t make a passionate voter. Gun-rights supporters are always passionate, which is why more laws expanding gun rights have passed since Newtown than laws restricting them.”

What should worry Democrats is that the two Colorado districts that recalled their senators last Tuesday represent the two sides of their electoral coalition. The district in downtown Colorado Springs was urban, trendy, and filled with upper-income social liberals; it voted 59 percent to 38 percent for Obama. The other district in nearby Pueblo and its suburbs was Hispanic, moderate-to-lower income, blue-collar, and more culturally conservative; it voted 58 percent to 39 percent for Obama. “The recall in Pueblo was started by two plumbers and an electrician,” notes Jon Caldara, head of the pro-recall Independence Institute. “Hispanics and blue-collar voters resented interference in what they regarded as their local rights.” And as for the NRA, the Democratic survey firm Public Policy Polling found voters in Pueblo had a positive view of the group. If the Colorado results showed the limits of liberal paternalism’s appeal, voters in prosperous Australia and Norway rebelled against liberal governments they perceived as incompetent and too focused on peripheral issues. In Australia, conservative leader Tony Abbott made opposition to the Labor government’s carbon tax the signature issue of his campaign. Polls showed that the public expressed general concern about global warming, but Abbott knew the polls also showed voters didn’t believe a carbon tax could do much about the climate and would probably serve as an excuse to extract more money from taxpayers. “Labor forgot about the basics of how to practice competent economic policy and went off on wild tangents to appeal to its special-interest backers,” Tim Andrews of the Australian Taxpayers Alliance told me. In Norway, after the 2011 massacre of dozens of teenagers by a white-separatist madman, the ruling Labor government was convinced that their conservative opposition would be discredited and that they could retain power in an economic climate where growth fueled by the nation’s abundant oil reserves was averaging over 3 percent a year. But an independent investigation of how the killer was able to evade capture for hours pointed out incredible bureaucratic incompetence in the national police bureaucracy, and even called into question rules banning almost all policemen from carrying guns. In addition, the leaders of the Conservative party and the libertarian Progress party succeeded in persuading voters that high taxes and suffocating regulations were preventing Norwegians from creating non-oil entrepreneurial ventures that employed people. “As rich and generous as Norwegians are, they want their children to inherit a real economy, and they demand better accountability from their government for the taxes they pay,” Jan Arild Snoen, a Norwegian political analyst, told me last August when a National Review cruise visited Norway. Michael Barone, the co-author of The Almanac of American Politics and an analyst of international elections, tells me that many people driven by ideology often feel elections should revolve around their concerns and reflect their priorities. “That can happen on the left or on the right,” he says. “But liberals are especially prone to not recognizing the public does care if their policies actually work in practice and are in sync with their everyday concerns.” In all three elections held in the last week — from Australia to Norway to Colorado — liberals forgot that their priorities aren’t often those of the average voter. In each case, they were punished for it. — John Fund is national-affairs columnist for NRO.

Post Navigation

Brittius

Honor America

China News

News and Opinions From Inside China

My Opinion My Vote

America needs saving

hillbillysurvival

The greatest WordPress.com site in all the land!

Linux Power Wordpress.com

Just another WordPress.com weblog

redpillreport.wordpress.com/

The ‘red pill’ and its opposite, ‘blue pill,‘ are pop culture terms that have become symbolic of the choice between blissful ignorance (blue) and embracing the sometimes-painful truth of reality (red). It’s time for America to take the red pill and wake up from the fog of apathy.

The Mad Jewess

Mirror Site For Reflection

JUSTICE FOR RAYMOND

Sudden, unexplained, unattended death and a families search for answers

Flyover-Press.com

Dedicated to freedom in our lifetimes

News You May Have Missed

News you need to know to stay informed

Automattic

Making the web a better place

U.S. Constitutional Free Press

Give me Liberty, Or Give me Death!

swissdefenceleague

Swiss Defence League

NY the vampire state

Sucking the money from it's citizens as a vampire sucks blood from it's victims. A BPI site

The Clockwork Conservative

All wound up about politics, history, culture... lots of stuff.

PUMABydesign001's Blog

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts.” Ronald Reagan.

partneringwitheagles

WHENEVER ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT BECOMES DESTRUCTIVE OF THESE ENDS (LIFE,LIBERTY,AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS) IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO ALTER OR ABOLISH IT, AND TO INSTITUTE A NEW GOVERNMENT...

LeatherneckM31

Weapons-grade blogging; quips, quotes and comments 'cause we live in a world gone mad.......

%d bloggers like this: