HPIM0049

No 941 “En mi opinión” Mayo 6, 2015

No 941   “En mi opinión”  Mayo 6, 2015

“IN GOD WE TRUST” LAZARO R GONZALEZ MIñO EDITOR

La madre del año. Gustavo Rojas

Ustedes no sabían que la madre en Baltimore era cubana. Aquí está la prueba:

https://www.facebook.com/LosPichyBoys/videos/10152782350906905/

 

AMENPER: Libertad de Expresión en la Vida Moderna

Parece ser que esta administración con la cooperación de la prensa, ha resuelto el problema de la violencia en nuestras calles e internacionalmente.

La estrategia es rendición incondicional. Desarmar al ejército y a los policías, cumpliendo la petición de los soldados del Yihad y los delincuentes amotinados en nuestras calles.  Simplemente dejarlos que roben y a los Yidahistas que nos maten a todos eventualmente.  Después de todo es sólo propiedades y vidas de infieles.

Los amotinados de diferentes lugares, especialmente en Baltimore no están conformes de que se juzguen a los policías, ahora quieren que se desarme a la policía.

Los servicios de noticias estatales están culpando a las víctimas previstas del intento de asesinato en masa en el tiroteo en un concurso de arte en Garland, TX. Gracias a Dios no hubo bajas porque todavía a la policía le permiten tener armas

La diferencia, en mi humilde opinión, es que los activistas conservadores ‘Ponen la otra mejilla’ simplemente hablan cuando se lo permiten,  mientras que ‘La religión de la paz’  y los activistas amotinados son usan  la fuerza física cuando son incapaces de superar a sus oponentes por medios lícitos. ¿Quién puede discutir con esa lógica? ¿Quién quiere hacer una convención contra Mahoma después de lo que pasó?  Los habrá pero cada día serán más pocos, porque los que se atrevan no vivirán mucho tiempo cuando se desarme a la policía.

Pero resulta que el análisis de la prensa y de nuestro presidente es que no se debe provocar con leguaje controversial. 
La lección aquí es que está bien criticar a cualquier grupo excepto los que suponen una amenaza real de violencia física en respuesta. Esto es evidenciado por el hecho de que los para los medios de comunicación fue muy chistoso el ver un crucifijo en un vaso de orine, y que la ilustración antes mencionada no fue encontrada como que debiera ser ofensiva para los cristianos, pero consideran controversial y peligroso para la comunidad el que unas personas presenten su punto de vista con unas caricaturas cómicas sobre el profeta Mahoma.

Para la prensa liberal esto es extremismo, los musulmanes y los liberales pueden expresarse y burlarse de los conservadores, pero los conservadores tienen que tener un límite en la manera que se expresan porque de otra manera son controversiales y peligrosos.

Pero todavía tenemos libertad de expresión, vamos a no quejarnos del todo, todavía hay una serie de cosas que son una variedad de tipos de discurso libre permisible para ciertas situaciones.
Ejemplos:

Puedes enfrentarte a un liberal blanco a un afroamericano, o un musulmán cuando los ves en la calle, le puedes decir sin temor, por favor ¿Me puede decir qué hora es? O expresar sin temor una opinión, como “Qué día más lindo” aunque esté lloviendo, esa es su libertad de opinión.

Si llega a una peletería y hay un empleado afroamericano o musulmán, usted tiene la autoridad para demandar con un zapato en la mano “¿tiene esto en mi talla?”

Si hay un afroamericano en la ventanilla de una hamburguera usted puede sin temor demandar por su derecho a la libertad de expresión en la ventana de comida: “dos hamburguesas con papitas fritas,  por favor, no le ponga mostaza”.  Si el cocinero afroamericano le pone mostaza porque le da la gana, entonces si usted protesta ya está violando el derecho del afroamericano a poner la mostaza si le da la gana y usted se está convirtiendo entonces en un racista. ¿Pueden comprender y aprender el proceso?

Un ejemplo de libertad de  expresión controversial en un baño público: “Usted le pregunta al afroamericano que está en el cubículo de al lado, oye, acá no hay ningún papel higiénico, ¿me pasas un rollo?”

Si usted hace eso no sólo está haciendo cómo los dueños de plantaciones que abusaban de los esclavos negros, tratando de tener algo por el trabajo de ellos, también está asumiendo el privilegio de poder limpiarse usted, pero está quitándole al pobre negro su medio de limpieza.

Tenemos que irnos adaptando y cambiar nuestra manera de pensar, sólo entonces habrá paz y armonía en el mundo. La realidad es que estos liberales tienen razón.

“EMO” Yo les sugiero a todos, que ensenen a sus hijos y a esposas a usar armas de fuego, revólveres o pistolas. Tenga un rifle de calibre grande y cerciórese que todos saben usarlo, tenga balas en cantidad suficiente para responder una emergencia.  Lleve a su familia a un campo de tiro para que este seguro que saben disparar y conocen las reglas de seguridad y que sepan mantenerlas correctamente en estado de ser usadas. Esto no es un chiste. De eso puede depender su seguridad, de su familia y de sus propiedades, porque a partir de ahora la policía no lo defenderá a usted. O se harán los de la vista gorda o tomaran partido por los que le ataquen.

Lázaro R González Miño. Editor de “En mi opinión”

 

 

FAITH

Jon Stewart Has a Message About Free Speech and the Muhammad Cartoon Contest Shooting in Texas: ‘I Can’t Believe We Have to Reiterate This’

Billy HallowellShare This

  • Tweet This

In the wake of the shooting outside a Muhammad cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, comedian Jon Stewart reminded viewers on Monday night that “it is not OK to shoot other people because you are offended by what they draw.”

Stewart — who certainly didn’t have favorable words for the American Freedom Defense Initiative, the group that organized the event — stood up against anyone who would inflict violence on others over offensive words or ideas.

“[The American Freedom Defense Initiative] is a First Amendment group the same way people from Philly are sports fans,” Stewart quipped. “They like sports, but really they’re just looking for an excuse to punch a stranger and pour beer on someone’s baby.”

That aside, “The Daily Show” host said that he needed to reinforce some important points about free speech.

“I can’t believe we have to reiterate this,” he said. “It is not OK to shoot other people because you are offended by what they draw — even if they drew it to offend you, no shooting of them. Never OK.”

Correspondents for “The Daily Show” then began popping up from behind his desk to ask comical free speech questions about if and when it’s OK to shoot others.

“What if I, like, haven’t shot anyone in a long time?” Jordan Klepper asked.

Jessica Williams added, “What if it’s, like, deer hunting season and I really thought that that cartoon contest was, like, a deer?”

Stewart responded by repeatedly reminding his on-air talent — and the audience — that “responding to cartoons, or words, or ideas with violence is wrong.”

 

 

AMENPER: Presidente Obama celebra Cinco de Mayo en la casa blanca, junto a Mariachis mexicanos…

Esta tarde, el Presidente Obama ofreció una recepción en el salón este de la casa blanca para celebrar el Cinco de Mayo. El presidente dijo que este acto ejemplifica los fuertes lazos culturales y asociación única entre Estados Unidos y México, que el Presidente destacó en su discurso.

El presidente Obama hizo hincapié en que el Cinco de Mayo nos da la oportunidad de recordar “cuán profundamente la cultura México-americana está entretejida en la tela de este país”. El Presidente señaló que la gente de ascendencia mexicana ha influido especialmente comida, cultura, literatura y por supuesto, el comercio de Estados Unidos.

Nos preguntamos: ¿Qué otros feriados extranjeros feriados  como estadounidenses necesitamos celebrar en Washington? –

Tal vez deberíamos celebrar el día de la Bastilla.  Podríamos celebrarlo con una ronda de denuncias ante el Comité para la seguridad pública seguida por las decapitaciones masivas en una guillotina en el Mall de Washington frente al Capitolio de los enemigos del pueblo. Traidores como los miembros del Tea Party y otros conservadores.

Pero creo que debe de haber alguna celebración porque por lo menos los franceses no creen que tengamos que devolverles a Luisiana.

En una celebración del Cinco de Mayo el grupo activista de California “Por la recuperación de la Gran Patria Mejicana usurpada” emitió la siguiente declaración:

 

Con motivo de la invasión norteamericana y el Tratado de Guadalupe-Hidalgo, en los años de 1846-47, México fue despojado del 45 por ciento de su territorio original. Las ideas angloamericanas del Destino Manifiesto que ponderan el derecho de expandirse por derecho divino y de dirigir los destinos de los hombres y mujeres bajo el pretexto “civilizador”, hicieron posible que lo que actualmente comprende los Estados de Texas, Nuevo México, Arizona y California, un millón 528 mil 241 kilómetros cuadrados habitado por más de cien mil personas, pasó ilegalmente a ser propiedad de los Estados Unidos de América. Estos territorios corresponden a Méjico y no dejaremos de luchar hasta que los recuperemos.

 

Obama no se ha hecho solidario de esta petición, pero personas allegadas al presidente han dicho que lo está considerando.

 

 

Report: Almost Half Of ObamaCare Exchanges Struggling Financially

Flickr/Embajada de Estados Unidos en Bolivia

The Obama Administration has admitted it has no back-up plan in place.

Randy DeSoto 

Nearly half of the ObamaCare state exchanges face financial troubles, according to a new report.

The Washington Post reports that some of the factors contributing to the woes include high costs and less-than-anticipated enrollment:

Advertisement

RELATED STORIES

But for the recently completed open enrollment period, sign-ups for the state marketplaces rose a disappointing 12 percent, to 2.8 million people. That compared with a 61 percent increase for the federal exchange, to 8.8 million people, according to Avalere Health, a consulting firm. States with the smallest enrollment growth are among those facing the greatest financial problems.

Currently, there are 17 state exchanges with the rest of the states using healthcare.gov. Some states, like Minnesota, Vermont, and Hawaii, are considering handing over some or all the functions of their exchanges to the federal government. Oregon abolished its state exchange in March.

TRENDING STORIES

The federal exchange, in turn, is on uncertain legal ground, with its fate in the hands of the Supreme Court. The justices are expected to hand down a decision by late June on whether paying subsidies through the federal exchange is authorized by provisions of the Affordable Care Act. If the Supreme Court rules the payments are not authorized, the Obama Administration has admitted it has no back-up plan in place.

JIm Wadleigh, executive director of Connecticut’s state exchange told the Post: “Even if some state exchanges wind up handing the reins to HealthCare.gov, doing so is not free. Each exchange would have to be made compatible with the federal marketplace at a cost of about $10 million per exchange.”

As Western Journalism reported this week, another promised benefit of ObamaCare has been proven false: emergency room visits have increased, not decreased, since its implementation.

 

 

AMENPER: Aquí lo que importa es el “Cash”

No creo que tenga que repetir que soy un proponente de la libre empresa, y un creyente en que cada persona según su capacidad, ingenio y habilidad tiene el derecho a acumular una fortuna para su propio beneficio, porque mantengo que con la creación de trabajos y riquezas contribuye a la riqueza de la nación- que somos todos.-

Así que no tengo envidia de los que tiene más que yo, simplemente admiración.

Pero hay excepciones, estas son cuando la acumulación de las riquezas se producen por medios que nos productivos para el bienestar de la comunidad, que no producen nada como no sea la vacía retórica de la política.

Tenemos el caso de la pareja Clinton, con Hillary que considera que le toca el turno de ser presidente y nos lo trata de imponer en sus discursos millonarios por sus atributos de tener una vagina.

Hillary Clinton y su consorte, Willy el resbaloso Clinton, reportaron ganancias de unos $ 109 millones en los años 2000 a 2014 y siguen sumando.

Estas cifras ponen a los Clinton, que se han convertido en algo de una dinastía política de tIpo monárquico  situados entre el.0.1 por ciento de los contribuyentes en los Estados Unidos, según el Wall Street Journal, o entre las familias más ricas del mundo, según Sunday Times el británico. Por cualquier cálculo, están firmemente arraigados en la porción más rica de la población del mundo.

La revista Forbes indicó, “en el año 2000, último año de Clinton en la presidencia, los ingresos de la primera pareja era $350.000; al año siguiente, se levantó a $ 16 millones. Sus años más lucrativas fueron 2004 y 2007, cuando hicieron dos veces $ 20 millones”. En otras palabras, en 2007 los Clinton hicieron 57 veces más de lo que hicieron en el año 2000.  Y duplicaron esto en el 2014.  Estas son las figuras reportadas, vamos a pensar que no ha habido nada más por debajo de la mesa.

Un poco menos de la mitad de los ingresos de la pareja, aproximadamente $ 52 millones, vienen de contribuciones a los Clinton, principalmente por corporaciones y grupos empresariales, los otros de libros que han escrito, sin mucho valor literario ni político pero comprado por los ingenuos que desgraciadamente abundan. Generalmente en la tarifa de cualquiera de los dos consortes es de  $100.000 a $450.000 por una aparición dando un discurso. Estos pagos se procesan no tanto por el contenido de los discursos, que son insignificantes en todos los sentidos, sino más bien como algo de un lubricante entre los piñones de las empresas y establecimientos políticos. O sea que los resbalosos Clinton ayudan a resbalar a las empresas que son sus contribuyentes.

Esto es simplemente la parte del dinero, o sea una de las personas más rica del mundo, que obtuvo su riquezas no en el sistema de libre mercado pero por el viejo negocio de la corrupción de la venta de favores, que se ha demostrado que es una mentirosa declarada y descarada,, que ha violado todas los principios morales y legales primarios para ocupar un cargo en la dirección del país, sea electa presidente de los Estados Unidos, es preocupante.

Pero está en primer lugar en las encuestas. Esto es lo que me preocupa, no me preocupan los Clinton, siempre hay y habrá personas como estos en la democracia, lo que me preocupa es que los ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos en esta generación no tengan la capacidad para detectarlos y rechazarlos.

Espero que lo que falta para las elecciones del 2016 hagan mi preocupación prematura, porque si no lo es estamos muy jodidos.

 

 

If you think your money is safe in the bank, you need to think again

BANKS TURNING ACCOUNTS OVER TO POLICE FOR SEIZURE!!!!?????

 Criminal banksters turning accounts over to criminal police????
Dept of (UN/IN justice) Eric Holder
Written by Damon Geller

Shocking new revelations demonstrate once again that, if you think your money is safe in the bank, you need to think again.  Coming on the heels of a recent New York Times report that the nation’s biggest banks have willingly turned bank accounts over to the IRS for total confiscation, the Wall Street Journal now reports that banks are working with the Department of Justice to turn customer bank accounts over to the police for seizure!  It’s all done in secrecy, often initiated by the bankers. Tragically, bank account holders don’t even know they’re being targeted until after the money is seized from their accounts.  The banks’ deplorable actions have already resulted in millions of dollars stolen from U.S. citizens without a shred of due process.  And in 80% of the cases, no criminal charges were ever filed. Even more alarming — in a matter of just a few years — these cases of unconstitutional bank account seizures have risen over 500%!  Experts advise that you have only ONE choice if you want to protect your savings and retirement from the corrupt banks and government.

Banks Have Already Been Reporting You

Whenever a banker finds anything suspicious about the activity of a customer, they are required by the federal government to file a suspicious activity report, or SAR.  What constitutes “suspicious activity” is at the judgment of the bank.  According to the handbook for the Federal Financial Institution Examination Council, banks are required to file a SAR with respect to “Transactions conducted or attempted by, at, or through the bank (or an affiliate) and aggregating $5,000 or more” if the bank merely suspects unlawful activity, regardless of whether they have actual evidence.

Banks have minimum quotas of SARs they need to fill out and submit to the federal government.  If they don’t file enough SARs, they can be fined or lose their banking charter, and bank executives and directors can even be imprisoned for noncompliance.  Chances are, your banker has filled one out on you—they submitted 1.6 million SARs against loyal customers in 2013 alone!

Banks Rat out Loyal Customers to the Police

But now, the Department of Justice is urging banks to file additional reports with the police, and they’re giving the police the authority to seize bank accounts without due process, even if no crime has been committed!  Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell proudly explained, “We encourage those institutions to consider whether to take more action: specifically, to alert law enforcement authorities about the problem, who may be able to seize the funds, initiate an investigation, or take other proactive steps.”

So whenever your bank suspects something ‘suspicious’ is going on, the federal government urges them to pick up the phone and rat you out to the cops!  You might think this is no big deal, that you’ll just tell the police where the cash came from and how it’s being used.  Or you might assume that you’ll have your day in court.  Think again.

The IRS Already Seizes Accounts without Due Process

As recently reported by the New York Times, banks have already been reporting millions of cash deposits under $10,000 to the IRS.  From there, the IRS is arbitrarily deeming these deposits suspicious and seizing all the money in these accounts — without any evidence of a crime, without filing criminal charges, and without allowing the account holder to fight the confiscation in court!

What’s more, the number of IRS seizures has increased over 500% in just a few years, and in 80% of the cases the IRS never files a criminal complaint against the individual being seized.  The median amount seized by the IRS is $34,000, while legal costs can easily mount to $20,000 or more.  Individuals who are the victims of seizure often cannot afford to fight.  How big are the accounts the bankers turn over to the government for seizure?  The following are just a few of the horrifying cases exposed by the New York Times:

  • The government confiscated $447,000 from a family business in New York
  • The government confiscated $33,000 from a small restaurant owner in Iowa
  • The government confiscated $66,000 from an army sergeant in Virginia who was saving the money for his daughter’s college educationSo when the police now come walking into the bank to investigate your cash deposits or withdrawals, don’t just assume you will have your day in court.  You may wake up tomorrow and find your bank account has been seized.

Government on the Brink of Disaster

So why are all these seizures of private savings happening?  Because the U.S. government and the Fed pumped trillions of dollars of YOUR money into the banks and stock market over the last several years, catapulting the U.S. debt to $28 trillion by 2018.  And now, the U.S. government and the Fed are completely out of ammo, with the Fed no longer able to buy U.S. treasuries.  They desperately need money to maintain their own power, and taxes are not enough.  So government officials are doing everything they can to keep the Ponzi scheme going, such as seizing the public’s money through inflation, deficits, and outright confiscation.  And now they have enlisted their old pals — the bankers — to help them get unfettered access to YOUR money without due process.

Protect Yourself from Gov’t Confiscation Now

With our desperate government leaning on their banker friends to gain unprecedented access to your money everywhere in the world, you need to take action NOW to protect your savings & retirement.  But when can’t trust your local bank, and when the government has its hands in your bank accounts, retirement accounts, brokerage accounts, and even the cash in your pocket – is any place safe?

Absolutely. There’s ONE asset class this sits outside the financial system and is completely secure from banker corruption, government confiscation and global economic collapse:  Gold & Silver.  Gold & Silver have been the best wealth protectors for over 5,000 years and have survived every government & currency collapse in history.  And when you own PHYSICAL gold & silver, the banks and the government CANNOT seize your savings with a click of a button.

So with the government spending way beyond its limits and seizing control of your financial accounts, the time is now.  Protect your savings & retirement with physical gold & silver before you have nothing left to protect. (Call 800-226-8106 to receive your free copy of Damon Geller’s popular book, “Defend Your Money against Gov’t Confiscation,” or see below)

http://www.wholesaledirectmetals.com/index.php/gold-blog/643-banks-turning-accounts-over-to-police-for-seizure/?cid=BearingArmsDedicated

Banks Quickly Abolishing Your Ability to Use & Store Cash. BY DAMON GELLER

Many responsible citizens believe in paying with cash and storing their cash at home, in a bank, or in a safety deposit box. But banks & governments have suddenly become hell-bent on abolishing your use and storage of cash, by restricting the ways you can spend & deposit your U.S. dollars, and reporting countless cash transactions to the police & government. The question is, why? The frightening fact is, our government has recently instituted numerous programs to track your financial accounts anywhere in the world, but tracking cash is much harder. In addition, our government aggressively pursues numerous programs to confiscate citizen savings & wealth without due process, and it’s much easier to confiscate digital accounts. Thus, cash has become a huge target. So you better act now to move your savings & wealth out of cash and financial accounts, and into private physical assets like gold & silver, before you have nothing left to protect.

The Bankers’ War on Cash

When JPMorgan Chase recently informed customers that the bank will no longer allow cash to be stored in safety deposit boxes, it capped off a frightening trend in banker restrictions on cash usage & storage internationally:

  • Citi’s Willem Buiter recently advocated abolishing cash altogether in order to “solve the world’s central banks’ problem with negative interest rates.”
  • Chase instituted a new policy which “restricts borrowers from using cash to make payments on credit cards, mortgages, equity lines, and auto loans.”
  • The Justice Department has ordered bank employees to consider calling the police on customers who withdraw $5,000 dollars or more.
  • HSBC is now interrogating its account holders in the UK on how they earn and spend their money as well as restricting cash withdrawals for customers.
  • Banks in the U.S. are making it harder for customers to withdraw and deposit cash, with Chase imposing new capital controls that mandate identification for cash deposits and ban cash being deposited into another person’s account.
  • Chase banned international wire transfers while restricting cash activity for business customers (both deposits and withdrawals).
  • The French government announced it will restrict French citizens from making cash payments over €1,000 euros.

Why the War on Cash?

At the very least, banks imposing restrictions on the use of cash amounts to an attack on anonymity and an example of how financial institutions are positioning themselves to handle the fallout of the next economic crash – at the expense of customers. But it goes even deep than that. Consider the lengths to which our government has gone to track your money worldwide, and the extent to which they have confiscated citizen savings without due process of law.

As the U.S. spirals toward insolvency due to massive over-spending and Fed money-printing, the U.S. government is pulling out all the stops to gain access to your money – no matter where it is across the globe. First, the government started seizing citizen bank accounts with no due process. Then, the Department of Justice and local police started seizing cash from innocent citizens. Now, the IRS threatens foreign nations and financial institutions across the globe to turn over your private data and financial accounts, with the threat of financial warfare if they don’t comply. They’re even threatening our very allies, despite the fact that they have no authority whatsoever over foreign nations!

So in short, if our government is going to these lengths to track down your money and even confiscate citizen savings without due process, isn’t it much easier to track and control digital accounts than cash? Yes. So how does the government remedy this challenge? Join the banks in a war against cash.

Convert Your Savings into Gold & Silver

Yes, we’re all required by law to report our income and pay our taxes. But that doesn’t give the government & banks the authority to track every financial move we make and restrict our usage and storage of cash. These moves reek of absolute desperation on the part of the government & banks. And they have every reason to be desperate. Our national debt has reached the breaking point, and banks are once again gambling trillions on the outrageous derivatives that took down the global economy in 2008. And our entire financial system hangs in the balance.

So do you want to remain vulnerable to the whims of government & banks, or do you want to fully protect your savings & retirement? To get true protection, there’s one asset class that sits outside the system, is completely private, and cannot be tracked and controlled by the government or banks: physical gold & silver.

Physical gold & silver have been the world’s greatest wealth protectors for over 5,000 years, shielding citizens from government & banking collapse during the worst crises in history. And physical gold & silver cannot be instantly seized with the stroke of a keyboard. So invest in gold & silver now, before you have nothing left to protect.

(Call 800-226-8106 to receive your free copy of Damon Geller’s popular book, “Defend Your Money against Gov’t Confiscation,” or fill in the form below)

 

 

 

Jorge A. Villalón:

 
 

SEARCHING FOR “MARRIAGE” IN THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

By Publius Huldah
May 6, 2015
NewsWithViews.com

During April 2015, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Obergefell v Hodges and consolidated cases. The questions presented for the Court to decide are: [1]

  1. Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a State to license a marriage of two people of the same sex?
    2.Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage of two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out of state?[2]

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment says:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.” [emphasis mine] [3]

Obviously, §1 says nothing about “marriage” or “homosexuality”. So how can it be said to authorize the supreme Court to FORCE States to accept same sex marriage?

Simple! All they have to do is redefine “liberty” in §1 to get it to mean whatever they need it to mean in order to get the result they want in the cases before them.

And that is precisely what the supreme Court has been doing. In Roe v. Wade (1973), they looked at the word, “liberty”, in §1 and said it means “privacy”, and “privacy” means you can kill your baby. The Court said under Part VIII of their Opinion:

“…This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is … is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy…”

In Lawrence v. Texas (2003), they looked at the word, “liberty”, in §1 and said it means “consulting adults have the right to engage in private acts of homosexual sodomy”:

“We conclude the case should be resolved by determining whether the petitioners were free as adults to engage in the private conduct in the exercise of their liberty under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment…” (1st para under II)

“…The case does involve two adults who, with full and mutual consent from each other, engaged in sexual practices common to a homosexual lifestyle. The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives. The State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime. Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct …” (3rd para up from end) [emphasis mine]

Do you see? The supreme Court uses the word, “liberty”, in §1 of the 14th Amendment to justify practices they approve of and want to force everybody else to accept.[4]

And by claiming that these practices constitute “liberty rights” which arise under §1 of the 14th Amendment, they evade the constitutional limits on their judicial power.

I’ll show you.

The Judicial Power of the Federal Courts is Strictly Limited by The Constitution!

The Constitution does not permit federal courts to hear any case the Judges want to hear. Instead, a case must fall within one of a few categories before federal courts have jurisdiction to hear it.

Article III, §2, clause 1, lists the cases federal courts have the delegated authority to hear. They may hear onlycases:

  1. Arising under the Constitution, or the Laws of the United States, or Treaties made under the Authority of the United States [“federal question” jurisdiction];
  2. Affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers & Consuls; cases of admiralty & maritime Jurisdiction; or cases in which the U.S. is a Party [“status of the parties” jurisdiction]; and
  3. Cases between two or more States; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States; and certain cases between a State and Citizens of another State or Citizens or Subjects of a foreign State [“diversity” jurisdiction].

Alexander Hamilton writes in Federalist No. 83 (8th para):

“…the judicial authority of the federal judicatures is declared by the Constitution to comprehend certain cases particularly specified. The expression of those cases marks the precise limits beyond which the federal courts cannot extend their jurisdiction…” [emphasis mine]

If a case does not fit within one of these categories, federal courts may not lawfully hear it.

In Federalist No. 80, Hamilton explains the categories of cases over which federal Courts have jurisdiction.

Since the “right” to same sex marriage is claimed to arise under §1 of the 14th Amendment, we will focus on Hamilton’s discussion of cases “arising under this Constitution”; or, as Hamilton puts it, cases:

“…which concern the execution of the provisions expressly contained in the articles of Union…” (2nd para) [emphasis mine]

“Expressly contained”. Hamilton then gives examples of such cases: If a State violates the constitutional provisions which prohibit States from imposing duties on imported articles, or from issuing paper money [Art. I, §10], the federal courts are in the best position to overrule infractions which are “in manifest contravention of the articles of Union. [i.e., Constitution]”

Do you see?

So! Where are provisions addressing marriage and homosexuality “expressly contained” in our Constitution?

The answer any competent 8th grader should be able to give is, “Nowhere!”

 

Fabrication of “constitutional rights” in order to Usurp Judicial Power.

So now you see how Justices on the supreme Court evaded the constitutional limits on their judicial Power: They fabricatedindividual “constitutional rights” so that they could then pretend that the cases “arise under the Constitution”!

But power over abortion, homosexuality, and marriage is nowhere in our Constitution delegated to the national government over the Country at Large.[5]

The supreme Court has usurped power over these objects. Their opinions are void for lack of jurisdiction and are proper objects of nullification.[6]

It is time for The People and The States to man-up and smack down the supreme Court. Scrape the Court’s barnacles offOur Constitution! State Legislatures must make laws directing all State and local governments and Citizens to ignore such usurpatious opinions of the supreme Court.

© 2015 Publius Huldah – All Rights Reserved

Endnotes:

  1. The briefs of the parties are HERE. The Questions Presented are set forth on pages 2 & 3.
    2. If a same-sex marriage is contracted in one State pursuant to the laws of that State, are other States obligated, under the “full faith and credit clause”, to acknowledge the marriage as valid? Article IV, §1 states:

“Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.” [boldface mine]

At the time of our Framing, “marriage” does not appear to have been encompassed within “public Act or record”. InFederalist No. 42 (next to last para), Madison comments on the clause in connection with criminal and civil justice. An Act of the First Congress (May 26, 1790) which implemented the clause addresses laws made by State legislatures. Anamendment to the 1790 Act (March 27, 1804), addresses “records” which may be kept in any public office of the State. But this cannot have included marriage records because a number of the original 13 States recognized common law marriage. And even for States which required formalities (e.g., Virginia), marriages could be accomplished by publication of banns and subsequent recordation in church and parish records – which were not “public records”. Marriage licenses issued by the States were a later development. The meaning of the clause which prevailed when the Constitution was drafted and ratified remains until changed by formal Amendment to the Constitution. So the full faith and credit clause does NOT require States to recognize marriages contracted under the laws of other States.
3. Professor Raoul Berger shows in Government by Judiciary: The Transformation of the Fourteenth Amendment, that the purpose of §1 of the 14th Amendment was to extend citizenship to freed slaves and protect them from southern Black Codes which denied them basic rights.

Professor Berger shows in Chapter 11 (page 222 of his book) that “due process” is a term with a “precise technical import” going back to the Magna Charta. It means that a person’s life, liberty or property can’t be taken away from him except by the judgment of his peers pursuant to a fair trial! Berger stresses that “due process of law” refers only to trials – to judicial proceedings in courts of justice. It does not involve judicial power to override State Laws!

In short, the due process clause of the 14th Amendment was to protect freed slaves from being lynched, imprisoned, or having their stuff taken away except pursuant to the judgment of their peers after a fair trial! It had nothing to do with “liberating” the American People from moral laws established thousands of years ago.

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment is badly written, uses vague terminology, and violates the “expressly contained” rule. One has to read, as Professor Berger did, the discussions in Congress and the text of the Civil Rights Act of 1864 to know what § 1 is about. But our moral and spiritual decline began in the early 1800s; from there, intellectual collapse quickly follows.
4. They even claim the right to keep on redefining “liberty” to include additional practices they might in the future want to force everyone to accept. They said in Lawrence v. Texas:

“Had those who drew and ratified the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth Amendment or the Fourteenth Amendment knownthe components of liberty in its manifold possibilities, they might have been more specific. They did not presume to have this insight. They knew times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress. As the Constitution endures, persons in every generation can invoke its principles in their own search for greater freedom. (majority opinion, next to last para) [emphasis mine].

  1. Because Congress has “exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever” over the federal enclaves described at Art. I, §8, next to last clause; Congress may make laws addressing these objects for those limited geographical areas. See also Art. IV, §3, cl 2. And pursuant to Art. I, §8, cl. 14, Congress may make laws addressing these objects for active duty military personnel.
    6.The short and clear paper HERE proves that nullification of unconstitutional acts of the national government is the remedy advised by our Framers. One cannot honestly dispute this.

Publius Huldah is a retired attorney who now lives in Tennessee. Before getting a law degree, she got a degree in philosophy where she specialized in political philosophy and epistemology (theories of knowledge). She now writes extensively on the U.S. Constitution, using the Federalist Papers to prove its original meaning and intent. She also shows how federal judges and politicians have ignored Our Constitution and replaced it with their personal opinions and beliefs.h

 

Watch: National Black Party Chairman Says America Is At War With Them

These comments are hardly his first foray into the controversial. James Beattie 

Hashim Nzinga, the national chairman of the New Black Panther Party, contended the United States has “declared war on us,” citing “military police in the black neighborhood.”

“America is about protecting the rich and the powerful,” Nzinga said on last week’s edition of the New Black Panther Party’s “Black Panther Radio,” according to Breitbart.

RELATED STORIES

So if we say we are at war, we should be applauded like George Washington. We should be applauded like Thomas Jefferson. We should be applauded like the Founding Fathers of the country.

“This is not the hate hour, this is the love hour,” Nzinga continued. “We have to love ourselves enough to be willing to die or kill to save our babies and to save a black nation that is dying before our eyes.”

These comments are hardly the New Black Panther Party’s leader’s first foray into the controversial. Speaking to supporters last August, Nzinga suggested the president was not born in this country– hardly a left-wing position–as Freedom Outpost reported at the time:

 

 

Now this gentleman sure does tell it like it is.      

 

 

 

Luis Carril: 95 year old hero!

Letter To Obama at Whitehouse Sent from 95 year Old Pearl Harbor Survivor!!

Fantastic!!

 

This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii  

for his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes all over the country.

A humble man without a political bone in his body, he has never spoken out before about a government official, until now. He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the

president.

 

Dear President Obama,

 

My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year. People meeting me for the first time don’t believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert.   

I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos’n Mate. Now I live in a “rest home” located on the western end of Pearl Harbor , allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service

to my country.   

One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man.   

So here goes.   

I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do, but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish.

I can’t figure out what country you are the president of.  

You fly around the world telling our friends and enemies despicable lies like:   

” We’re no longer a Christian nation”   

” America is arrogant” – (Your wife even

announced to the world,” America is mean- spirited. ” Please tell her to try preaching

that nonsense to 23 generations of our

war dead buried all over the globe who

died for no other reason than to free a

whole lot of strangers from tyranny and

hopelessness.)   

I’d say shame on the both of you, but I don’t think you like America, nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do, for the obvious gifts this country has given you. To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the

White House.   

After 9/11 you said,” America hasn’t lived up to her ideals.”   

Which ones did you mean? Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British? Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man, that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War? I

hope you didn’t mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellas I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around, because we stand for freedom.   

I don’t think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination. You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected.   

Take a little advice from a very old geezer, young man.   

Shape up and start acting like an American. If you don’t, I’ll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue . You were elected to lead not to bow, apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves.   

And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. You mean you don’t want us to do what you did when that white cop used force

to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts , who was putting up a fight? You don’t mind offending the police calling them stupid but you don’t want us to offend Muslim fanatics by calling them what they are, terrorists.  

One more thing. I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you’re the Commander-in-Chief now, son. Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the

mission, give them to him. But if you’re not in this fight to win, then get out. The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you’re thinking of.   

You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president.   

You’re not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy. That’s not our greatest threat. Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now.   

And I sure as hell don’t want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle…

 

 

Sincerely,

 

Harold B. Estes

Snopes confirms as true:  

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/haroldestes.asp  

When a 95 year old hero of the “the Greatest Generation” stands up and speaks out like this, I think we owe it to him to send his words to as many Americans as we can.

Please pass it on.

 

 

 

FAITH

Islamic State Militants Crucify Three Libyan Brothers, Put Their Mutilated Bodies on Display

May. 5, 2015 1:01pm Sharona Schwartz

  • Share This
  • Tweet This

Three brothers have been crucified by Islamic State militants, according to Libyan media, after one of the brothers was accused of supporting the Libyan government, an act the extremist group considers to be apostasy under Shariah law.

Mohamed, Ali and Faraj Harir, members of a well-known local family, were publicly crucified as a warning to other residents of the town of Derma not to challenge the Islamic State’s authority, the Christian Post reported.

The Libya Herald published a graphic photo of the mutilated bodies that were strung up by their hands and necks with blue and red rope and propped outside the Islamic State’s court.

 

Islamic State militants consider supporting the Libyan government to be an act of apostasy. (Image source: YouTube)

The Libyan publication described the executions, which occurred late last month, as “horrific.”

Newsweek reported that besides the three Harir brothers, at least two Harir sisters as well as a fourth brother were also killed by the Islamic State after family members clashed with the group.

“They took them and crucified them near the court,” an Islamic State activist who witnessed the crucifixion told Newsweek. “They were kept for five hours and then some of the elders came and took them to bury them.”

The men were crucified after they refused to hand over one of the brothers accused of supporting the Libyan Army to the Islamic State, according to the Christian Post.

The Libya Herald suggested that the brothers may have already been dead when they were displayed for passersby in order to increase the impact of the threat to the town’s residents.

The Jerusalem Post on Monday offered more background on the Islamic State’s use of crucifixion:

ISIS has long used crucifixion as means of embarrassing those they kill, as, in their eyes, comparing the dead to Jesus Christ is a great insult. It is the stated goal of the terrorist organization to eradicate Christianity from all their territories.

A group calling itself a Libyan branch of the Islamic State group released a video in February showing thebeheading of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians on a Libyan beach.

In April, the group released a video showing a similar mass slaying of Ethiopian Christian men

 

Jorge A Villalon: How to Radicalize an Entire London Borough

Note: Thursday there are election in UK there is a strong indication that Islam candidate can gain some seats, well let’s pray that UK wake up and the conservative gain control.

by Samuel Westrop
Schoolchildren in Tower Hamlets grow up under the shadow of non-violent but extremist ideology, funded by the British government. Meanwhile, the British media and politicians are busy debating the causes of radicalization.

  • “Non-violent” but extremist Islamic movements seek to offer their own networks as alternatives to the jihadists.

In February, three London schoolgirls flew to Istanbul, from where they travelled by road to Syria to join the Islamic State. British police have confirmed that at least 700 Britons have now joined the terrorist group as fighters. Over the past year alone, 22 British women, most under the age of 20, are believed to have travelled to Syria to become “jihadi brides.”

These three London schoolgirls, who lived in the borough of Tower Hamlets, were not the first from there to travel to Syria. They were not even the first Islamic State recruits from their school — nor, it seems, will they be the last.

In February, three girls from Bethnal Green Academy, in London’s Tower Hamlets, travelled to Syria to join the Islamic State as “jihadi brides”: 15-year-old Amira Abase (left), 15-year-old Shamima Begum (middle), and 16-year-old Kadiza Sultana (right).

In December 2014, a friend and fellow pupil of the three London schoolgirls travelled to Syria after being “in covert phone contact with an unknown woman.” These four 15- and 16-year-old Islamic State recruits were all pupils at the Bethnal Green Academy in Tower Hamlets.

The Telegraph recently revealed that a fifth Bethnal Green Academy pupil also attempted to leave Britain to join the Islamic State, but was stopped after policeboarded the aircraft as it was about to take-off.

Then, in March 2015, a British court made four more pupils of Bethnal Green Academy “wards of the court” and confiscated their passports. The four girls, also age 15 and 16, were “barred from travel after showing an interest in going to Syria.”

What made a total of nine young girls, from the same London school, attempt to travel to Syria and join the Islamic State?

For one of the girls, The Guardian cited “upheavals at home… 18 months of sadness following death of mother from cancer and father getting remarried.”

Muhammad Abdul Bari, a prominent British Islamist leader, based in Tower Hamlets, claimed the girls were “definitely convinced by the slick IS media. I think it was online radicalisation.”

The Daily Mail has reported, meanwhile, that Abase Hussen, the father of one of the girls, was previously filmed “at the head of an Islamist rally led by hate preacher Anjem Choudary and attended by Michael Adebowale, the killer of soldier Lee Rigby.”

These claims perhaps illuminate the motivation of one or two of the girls, but they do not explain how nine young girls, all from the same school, attempted, with some success, to join the world’s most ruthless terrorist movement.

Bethnal Green Academy has denied that its students could have been radicalized at school. The principal, Mark Keary told the BBC that, “Police have advised us there is no evidence radicalisation took place at the academy.” He added that, “Students are unable to access Facebook and Twitter on Academy computers.”

A number of teachers at the Bethnal Green Academy, however, do seem to harbor extremist views. Tasif Zaman, a “Graduate Achievement Coach” at Bethnal Green Academy, has expressed support for Babar Ahmad, a British Islamist convicted on terrorism charges by a U.S. court in 2014. After the September 11attacks, Ahmad ran a website that urged recruits to take martial arts courses, read books on military warfare and train with weaponry. Ahmad’s website called for jihad against “infidels” and explained how to send funds to named Taliban officials in Pakistan. Tasif Zaman has also called for the release of Shaker Aamer, whom the senior Al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah once described as an “extremely active” recruiter for the terror group.

Another staff member at Bethnal Green Academy, Nabila Akthar, serves as the “Student Voice and Events Coordinator.” Akthar is also “Head of Membership Services” for the Leaf Network, an Islamic group that regularly hosts extreme Islamist activists, including:

  • Muddassar Ahmed, who works closely with Tablighi Jamaat, an extreme Islamic sect, which security officials have named as a recruiting ground for Al Qaeda;
  • Anas Al-Tikriti, a leading British Muslim Brotherhood operative and a vocal supporter of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas; and
  • Farooq Murad, the son of the “Supreme leader” of Jamaat-e-Islami and a trustee of the Islamic Foundation. The Foundation’s other trustees, in 2003, werereported to be on a UN list of people associated with the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

The assumption that radicalization is an online process has been widely cited, but little evidence is ever offered. That local Islamist leaders, such as Muhammad Abdul Bari, echo these claims, only serves the interests of “non-violent” but extremist Islamic movements, which seek to offer their own networks as alternatives to the jihadists.

The Quilliam Foundation, a Muslim counter-extremism think tank, has concluded that, “the vast majority of radicalized individuals come into contact with extremist ideology through offline socialisation prior to being further indoctrinated online.” In 2008, a briefing note written by the British security services noted: “personal interaction is essential, in most cases, to draw individuals into violent extremist networks.”

Islamist movements such as Jamaat-e-Islami and the Muslim Brotherhood have been keen to attribute support among British Muslims for the Islamic State to “slick IS media.” They do so to downplay evidence that their own “non-violent” Islamist groups are part of the conveyor belt theory of radicalization, in which some extremists gradually become terrorists.

The role of “non-violent” extremists within the conveyor belt, however, is not solely the influence of a single preacher, activist or group. The teachers at Bethnal Green Academy, despite their extremist views, were not directly responsible, of course, for the radicalization of nine young schoolgirls. These teachers are, however, part of a culture of extremist Islamic thought, under which these young girls grew up.

The dominance of Islamist ideology is a systemic problem in certain areas of Britain. Tower Hamlets offers a particularly vivid example of the pervasive influence of Islamist ideology over a local Muslim population.

In a recent speech, Home Secretary Theresa May said the borough of Tower Hamlets was beset with “corruption, cronyism, extremism, homophobia and anti-Semitism.” The Mayor of Tower Hamlets, Lutfur Rahman, was recently removed from office after a High Court hearing found him guilty of electoral fraud. The journalist Andrew Gilligan reports that Rahman, “achieved power with the help of the Islamic Forum of Europe, an extremist group that wants a sharia state in Europe.”

The Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) is a key Islamist institution in Tower Hamlets. Undercover filming in Britain has revealed IFE activists explaining that they exercised “consolidated… influence and power” over the local government of Tower Hamlets.

Speakers invited by the IFE have included the late Al Qaeda leader, Anwar Al-Awlaki, as well as Afghan warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, whose forces have fought alongside the Taliban against British troops.

The IFE was originally established by the Jamaat-e-Islami operative Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin, sentenced to death in November 2013, by the Bangladeshi War Crimes Tribunal, for his role in the abduction and murder of 18 journalists and intellectuals when he led the Al-Badr killing squad during Bangladesh’s 1971 War of Liberation.

In 1995, a British television documentary reported that another leading Tower Hamlets Islamist, Abu Sayeed, was also a senior member of the Al-Badr death squad, and had similarly fled Bangladesh to live in Britain. In Britain, Sayeed became a “head teacher of a Muslim school and a co-opted member of Tower Hamlets Education Council.”

As yet another example, in 2013, Tower Hamlets Councillor Lutfa Begum stated, at a council meeting, that the “IFE do lots of jobs for Tower Hamlets local people. They are working with… local schools. They are working with teachers.”

The Islamist-dominated local government and schools, and extremist groups, appear to be all heavily intertwined.

These problematic institutions in Tower Hamlets have been propped up with taxpayer’s money that was designated for counter-extremist purposes. In 2013-14, Tower Hamlets council allocated 451,000 euros (about $500,000) to the Al-Huda Mosque and Cultural Centre, which manages its own “supplementary school.”

During that period, the mosque hosted an event with Abu Suhaib Bassam, an Islamist preacher who has called for the killing of blasphemers; encouraged Muslims to commit to jihad, and who has said: “The love of this worldly life and the hatred of death — this is the symptom of the disease of the Jews.”

In 2011, Lutfur Rahman’s Tower Hamlets Council granted £105,887 (about $170,000) to the Osmani Trust, a charity run by trustees of the IFE. According to the journalist Andrew Gilligan, some of this money was paid as part of the government’s “preventing violent extremism” program. The Osmani Trust runs weekend schools, organizes workshops in Tower Hamlets primary schools and works to “help young people into education.”

One of the managers at the Osmani Trust, Muhammad Rabbani, also trained recruits for the IFE. In 2009, Rabbani told his recruits: “Our goal is to create the True Believer, [and] to then mobilise these believers into an organised force for change who will carry out dawah [preaching], hisbah [enforcement of Islamic law] and jihad.”

Rabbani is now the Managing Director of CAGE, a pro-terror lobby group linked by the media to the Islamic State executioner “Jihadi John.”

The East London Mosque, another important Tower Hamlets Islamist institution, is an affiliate of the IFE. The mosque has a long history of promoting extremist speakers. In October, the mosque hosted Imam Abdullah Hasan, an Islamist preacher and IFE activist who describes Jews as “devil-worshippers” and haspraised Osama Bin Laden.

Since 2006, the East London Mosque has received at least £3 million (over $4.5 million) of taxpayers’ money, some of which was funded by the government’s counter-extremism program.

More importantly, the East London Mosque manages its own school, the London East Academy. In March, the Evening Standard reported that Zubair Nur, a 19-year old graduate of the school, was believed to have joined the Islamic State.

There had been warnings. In October 2014, after emergency inspections by the education regulator Ofsted, Sir Michael Wilshaw, the chief inspector of schools,stated that students at the school were at risk of “extremist influences and radicalisation.”

Furthermore, one of London East Academy’s governors, Gulam Robbani, was Mayor Lutfur Rahman’s election agent. Robbani’s fellow governors at the schoolincluded other local government officials as well as Abdul Qayyum, the Imam of the East London Mosque. Qayyum was also a signatory to the Istanbul Declaration, a document that advocates attacks on Jewish communities and British troops.

Schoolchildren in Tower Hamlets grow up under the shadow of extremist ideology, much of it funded by the British taxpayer. Meanwhile, British media and politicians are busy debating the causes of radicalization. Factors they cite include: online propaganda, institutionalized Islamophobia, British foreign policy,poverty, or even the pressure of police scrutiny. None of these claims, however, has ever been substantiated.

The most important influence, in fact, seems to be the prevailing extremist culture imposed on British Muslims by “non-violent” Islamist networks, and which successive British governments have allowed to cultivate. By permitting Islamist groups to represent British Muslims, and then equipping them with funds and political recognition, Britain has actually advanced intolerance — and for far too long.

Over the past decade, a considerable number of commentators, moderate Muslim activists and the occasional journalist have warned of the dangers of allowing extremist preachers and terror-connected groups to exert such extensive influence over local government, schools, universities, charities, prisons and even interfaith groups.

Although these issues have consumed national debate for years, very little has been done in response. It is not surprising that British Muslim schoolchildren are now rushing off to fight with terrorist groups such as the Islamic State. Tower Hamlets is only a microcosm of a much larger problem of radicalized Muslim communities all across Britain. The question of the extremist grip over British Islam is still waiting to be properly addressed.

Follow Samuel Westrop on Twitter

E mail:jorgeavillalon@bellsouth.net

Impeach Obama Train Just Moved Into High Gear… Keep Those Faxes Coming

Western Center for Journalism (newsletter@wcjournalism.org)

To: LazaroRGonzalez@hotmail.com

One Step Closer To Impeaching Barack Hussein Obama!
       UPDATE: It’s official. Congressman Ted Yoho has just introduced H. Res. 198… a bill that lays the groundwork for the IMPEACHMENT OF BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.

And now, it’s up to each and every one of us to separate the cowards and liars in Washington for those who truly value the Constitution. It’s time for each and every one of us to separate those who merely give lip-service to the notion that Barack Hussein Obama is LAWLESS from those who are willing to back up their words with action.

H. Res 198 has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee and it’s time for patriotic Americans to demand that EVERY Republican Member of Congress cosponsor this bill and move it to the floor of the House of Representatives for an up-or-down vote.

And we need to make it clear that co-sponsorship is a litmus test and that any Member of Congress who does not add their name as a cosponsor is telling the American people that they support the Obama Dictatorship.


We Are Laying A Red Line. This Is The Rubicon.” -Congressman Ted Yoho


And what is Yoho’s warning to Barack Hussein Obama? As stated in a recent interview, he is saying: “We are laying a red line. This is the Rubicon. [You] are forewarned: do not cross this line.”

But make no mistake, Yoho’s legislation simply doesn’t lay down a red line for Barack Hussein Obama. It lays down a red line for every future occupant of the Oval Office as well by specifically defining eleven separate violations that constitute “high crimes and misdemeanors” under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

H. Res 198 says to Barack Obama and every future occupant of the White House:If you cross the line… if you commit any of one of the eleven violations of the public trust enumerated in H. Res 198… expect to be IMPEACHED!

And Yoho knows that his resolution is going to cause a “firestorm.” According to Breitbart, Yoho “anticipates [that] liberal commentators and Democrats will accuse the GOP of racism” for even daring to raise the subject of Barack Obama’s impeachment in Congress.  Yoho’s response? … Bring it on…

“If people want to play the race card, and they will, that’s their choice. If they want to play the political card – ‘it’s because he’s a Democrat and you don’t like him’ – that’s their choice. My job is to uphold the Constitution and I don’t care who the president is.”

Yoho went on to say that Mr. Obama’s Dictatorial Amnesty Decree was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Yoho calls it a “blatant, in-your-face ‘I’m above the law and I’m going to do what I want. I’m a dictator, I’m a king'” moment. and Yoho, for one, is no longer willing to simply sit back and accept Mr. Obama’s dictatorial rule.

And now, each and every patriot reading this appeal must make a choice. Yoho has bravely placed his neck on the chopping block. Will you back his move? Or will you show him — by your lack of action — that doing what the American people want constitutes political suicide? 

Patriotic Americans Must Back Yoho’s Play. The Time To Jump On The Impeachment Train Is Upon Us… It Is Now.


As previously stated, Yoho’s resolution lists eleven specific violations that fit the Constitution’s standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and many of those actionsALREADY apply directly to Barack Hussein Obama.

Among those specific actions are “failing to take care that the laws be faithfully executed through signing statements or systematic policies of non-enforcement” and“substituting executive agreements for treaties.”

Quoting Yoho, Breitbart writes: “Other impeachable offenses would include initiating war without congressional authorization, spending funds in defiance of appropriations laws, and refusing to comply with congressional subpoenas for documents of testimony ‘issued for a legitimate legislative purpose.'”

Yes, impeachment is a bold move, but Barack Obama has shown that he is not afraid to be bold. Congress must be just as bold and Yoho’s resolution will lay the groundwork for bold moves that will lead to the removal of Barack Hussein Obama from office.

In Washington these days, lies are called truth and the truth is called bigotry and racism. A Great Depression is called an economic recovery. We are told that the only means of saving the middle class is to tax it into non-existence. Illegal aliens now have more rights than American citizens and the great pretender, who has usurped the White House, kowtows to the very Islamic terrorists who have vowed to destroy us.

The insanity must stop and there is only one way to cure the disease that is eating away at our country. There is only one way to reverse the Constitutional crisis that presently plagues us.

Barack Obama must NOT be given two years of dictatorial rule to achieve his dream of fundamentally transforming this nation. Obama must be removed. At the very least, he must be put in check and an overwhelming show of grassroots support to Congressman Ted Yoho’s resolution is a way to make that happen. 

The time to finally impeach Barack Hussein Obama is upon us… the time is now. 

Floyd Brown 

The  Western Center for Journalism is a 501©3 educational organization. Contributions are tax-deductible as allowed by IRS regulations. Personal and corporate contributions are allowed.

“FREEDOM IS  NOT  FREE”

“En mi opinión”

Blooger:  https://www.blogger.com/home

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s