The Founding Father's Real Reason for the Second Amendment
And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, below (u-tube HERE).
The Leaders Are Here... Palin, Cruz, Lee, Paul, Chaffetz....
T'S A WONDERFUL LIFE
Can You Really Still Believe That None of These People Would Have Done a Better Job???
Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday.
Kurt Nimmo - Infowars.com - May 9, 2012 – h/t to MJ
The city of Austin, Texas, was looking for an excuse to steal Joe Del Rio’s modest home. It found one – it insisted he had a “bunker” beneath the house.
Actually, it was a fallout shelter built during the Cold War, something millions of Americans were encouraged to build by the federal government, beginning in 1961 under the Community Fallout Shelter Program.
The city began its theft by sending the code enforcement team to Mr. Del Rio’s home early one Saturday morning in May of 2010. After the retired Air Force reservist, Vietnam veteran, and former state employee put on some clothes and opened the door, he was rushed by an Austin Police SWAT team. He was detained and interrogated over a period of ten hours.
Neighbors were told to evacuate and the home was searched for more than four hours as emergency personnel staged units nearby. Cops found several weapons and 55-gallon drums they considered suspicious. There was nothing sinister about the drums and the legal weapons were returned to Del Rio after the cops examined them.
Authorities accused Del Rio of having a bunker beneath his house. “The code officers went out to investigate it and the individual was fairly cooperative and showed them what he had been working on, which turned out to be a multi-level underground structure,” Doug Matthews, director of communications for the City of Austin, told the Statesman.
Matthews said the city “had some concerns about the structural integrity of the building and the contents of what was down there,” but this turned out to be a pretext for what would come – not only the wholesale theft of the house, but also socking Del Rio with a bill for $90,000 after the city sued him and then poured 264 tons of concrete into the “bunker” and put up a fence around the perimeter. It yanked the meter off the house, making it uninhabitable.
But this was not the end of Mr. Del Rio’s nightmarish ordeal. The city then condemned the house and took possession of it without paying a single cent in compensation. The elderly Vietnam War veteran was handed over to Adult Protective Services since he is a senior citizen and made homeless, thanks to the government of Austin.
“In my opinion, they wanted my property to start with, and this was a way to take my property away from me,” Del Rio said this week. “The ordeal they put me through was unnecessary. I’ve gotten the runaround. I think they want the property. Condemning it is a cheap way to get it.”
I just got a message from a friend in Arizona "we have a 'situation' here outside Bisbee. A rancher who's house is within yards of a major immigrant pass has been beaten and nearly killed by the Bisbee Police. i am not sure they even have jurisdiction where he is. They confiscated all his weapons. I have asked him to write a statement, but after that, not sure where to go what to do. If you have any suggestions... It is my thinking that he has been targeted for the proximity of his land. He is elderly. During the beating one officer grabbed and tugged on his pacemaker. he was hospitalized overnight. They refuse to give him a receipt for the 7 weapons they took. They threw him to the ground when he was asked to come out of the house and he did so - in a t shirt and shorts, barefoot"
Cassie McSasserson OK this is the story "I will tell all I know. I am not yet sure how far he wants to go with this. He has been badly frightened. I would not want to go ahead without his permission. What he told me last night (I was there fixing his computer) is that (obviously if you could see his property) he owns a major thourofare from Mexico to Naco and Bisbee. He said it is the best path because he owns a ravine that goes to the border. he has never hurt anyone, is elderly and ill.
Well, last week, a Coyote (human not animal) was bringing a bunch across and were giving his 30-yr-old daughter a very hard toime, driving by slow, looking in windows and all. So, he went out with his AK47 and popped a few into the air to get them to go away. The Coyote called the police and they sent a SWAT team. He said between 6 and 10 cop cars pulled in and speakered to him to come out of the house unarmed. He came out in a t-shirt, shorts and no shoes. They grabbed him, threw him on the ground, mashed his head into the gravel and started pounding on his pacemaker. Sorry I do not recall what he told me they were saying to him. They skinned his knees (he has photos) and cut up his head near where he has previously had a stroke - that scared him they were pounding on the part of his head where he had had a stroke, and were pounding on his pacemaker and grinding him into the dirt. They then went into his house - he says without permission or even ASKING and confiscated 6-7 weapons. They took him to Police dept. were he started to look really bad and so they took him to the hospital, where he was kept overnight. The next day, from the hospital he called and asked about a ride back (small town we have no public transport or taxi - he would have had to walk 10 miles home) they said no and that they didn't have to give him a receipt for his weapons. That is where I came in the picture - a few days later.
When I was at his place last night, I saw 5 illegals within 200 yards of his house. But also when I was there and he was telling me the story, he broke down and cried 3 times during the telling. Also as I was there, he would drop little bits of info so it is hard for me to put it all together. I told him I would help him if he wanted, that he has to write out a statement of every detail and I would get it to people. He at that point was ready to commit suicide, I thought. He is a recovering alcoholic and has started drinking over this so it was really hard for me to get the story. They have fucked this man up. I asked him how many illegals has he turned in over the years, and he told me about 200 and that BP Border Patrol, always thank him. Then... as I was leaving, he tells me that if he calls BP from his house phone, they don't answer anymore. If you could see where his property lays, you would think as I do, they just want his property and will kill him to get it.
He kept telling me that the SWAT team acted as if it was a Drill or a training thing. He said it was surreal, and he feels as if he has been raped. he has not yet decided how far he wants to go, or if he should try to sell, or what but the property has been in his family for generations - his family is one of two or three in the area that originally settled here. I promised to talk to him tomorrow as I still have more computer works to do and so i will see where he is, then. But as I was leaving and I told him i would help him if he wants to fight, he sort of perked up and said yes, I want to fight. But tonight, at my neighbors for dinner he had a mini-stroke or something and we rushed him home. I think really, he is scared to death and thought he was alone until i showed up and said I would help, if he wants it. I think he needs to write out the statement and get it to me as he promised, and we go from there..."
It is starting to get ugly my fellow patriots!! h/t to Yvonne
Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito Bullets and Beans
Lest it should not be forgotten, you do not have to have taken an oath to be responsible for right from wrong, it is incumbent on every citizen to act:
The police are the public and the public are the police;
The police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen. Sir Robert Peel
The nine principles by Sir Robert Peel
The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.
Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
Police seek and preserve public favor not by catering to public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient.
Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence
Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
These principles listed above may have been Sir Robert Peel’s principles. However, the Metropolitan Police’s founding principles and, de facto the founding principles of all other modern (post 1829) UK police forces, was summarized by Sir Richard Mayne (the first commissioner) in 1829 in the following terms:
The nine principles by Sir Richard Mayne
To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
To recognize always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behavior and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
To recognize always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
To recognize always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
To seek and preserve public favor, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humor; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
To recognize always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
To recognize always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.
In a broad sense these principles were continued to be taught until the time of Sir Robert Mark when he introduced his little “blue book” in the 1970’s:
The principles of Sir Robert Mark
“The primary object of an efficient police is the prevention of crime: the next that of detection and punishment of offenders if crime is committed. To these ends all the efforts of police must be directed. The protection of life and property, the preservation of public tranquility, and the absence of crime, will alone prove whether those efforts have been successful and whether the objects for which the police were appointed have been attained.”
Mark does go on though to make the point that the above is done with the consent of the public and is not done by way of imposing on the public.
Since Sir Robert Mark every commissioner has had his own set of “principles”, for instance Sir Peter Imbert had “The Plus Program” and so on.
Notwithstanding the generality of my last comment, poster versions of Sir Richard Mayne’s principles could still be seen within the Met Police Training school as late as the early 1990’s (for historical purposes).
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, long defenders of electronic rights, has written a legal guide
(NaturalNews) The U.S. Constitution is clear about the issue of privacy. In fact, the Fourth Amendment states, in part, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..."
With that in mind, it's safe to say it's more than just a little disturbing to know that, in certain circumstances, police can search your cell phone and computer(s), even if you don't want them to and even if they don't yet have a warrant to do so.
The good news is, someone out there has recognized the problem and has taken steps to help you protect that vast amount of data you have stored on your smart phone or laptop.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, long defenders of electronic rights, has written a legal guide designed to help you better understand your rights and, more importantly, when police can - and cannot - legally confiscate and search your personal electronic devices.
"In the heat of the moment, it can be hard to remember what your rights are and how to exercise them," says EFF Senior Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "Sometimes police can search your computer whether you like it or not, but sometimes they can't. We wrote this guide to help you tell the difference and to empower you to assert your rights when the police come knocking."
Adds EFF Staff Attorney Hanni Fakhoury, "With smart phones, tablet computers, and laptops, we carry around with us an unprecedented amount of sensitive personal information.
"That smart phone in your pocket right now could contain email from your doctor or your kid's teacher, not to mention detailed contact information for all of your friends and family members," Fakhoury continued. "Your laptop probably holds even more data -- your Internet browsing history, family photo albums, and maybe even things like an electronic copy of your taxes or your employment agreement. This is sensitive data that's worth protecting from prying eyes."
· Always say "no" when police ask if they can search your server, personal computer or cell phone because if you give them permission to search, they don't need a warrant - even to enter your home; · If police tell you they have a search warrant, ask to see it because you have a right to; · Make sure police are only searching the areas outlined in the warrant; · Be silent - you don't have to help the police or answer their questions, and that means you don't have to give them your encryption keys or passwords; · If you do decide to talk, don't lie because lying to the police is a crime; · Finally, if you can consult with a lawyer before police conduct a search or even just talk to you, that's ideal. This guide is extremely helpful in this digital age when being secure in our "papers" and effects now includes our data-filled electronic devices. Know your rights; that is your best protection.
Consistently watch the other hand my friends… we are living in scary times. Technology may make things easier for you… but it also makes it easier for Big Brother and the other bad guys (pedophiles, robbers, etc) to keep an eye on you and your loved ones… and they are!
CRIMEARE U.S. COPS PREPARING WIDESPREAD USE OF FACIAL RECOGNITION IPHONE?
Starting as early as September, cops across the country may be using a new iphone-based device to identify people based on a picture of their face, iris scan, or a fingerprint reader, raising concerns about how the data will be gathered, stored, and used.
The device in question is called the MORIS, which stands for Mobile Offender Recognition and Information System. Made by BI2 Technologies of Plymouth, Mass, it runs on the iphone platform. The company states that it has contracts with 40 government agencies to deliver 1,000 devices this fall.
Unlike other currently used biometric technologies, the MORIS does not require a separate digital camera or upload time, and automatically scans known databases for criminal warrants and other relevant history. The Wall Street Journal gives specifics on how this new device works:
“To scan a person’s iris, police officers can hold the special iris-scanning camera on device, called MORIS, about 5 to 6 inches away from an individual’s irises. After snapping a high resolution photo, the MORIS system analyzes 235 unique features in each iris and uses an algorithm to match that person with their identity if they are in the database.”
“For the facial recognition, an officer takes a photo of a person at a distance of about 2 feet to 5 feet. Based on technologies from Animetrics Inc., the system analyzes about 130 distinguishing points on the face, such as the distance between a person’s eye and nose. It then scans the database for likely matches.”
As for the usage of the devices, the law does not appear settled on whether police need consent to take a person’s photo. Generally speaking, the law does not prohibit taking photos of people in a public place. But taking and storing photos for law enforcement purposes- particularly if the subject is in custody- could trigger a different standard of rules. The law becomes even more vague on issues such as whether an iris scan constitutes a search.
Below is a video presentation for the Brockton Police Department showing facial recognition and iris scanning technologies that have been demoed and will soon be in use by various law enforcement units in Massachusetts. The presenters show the devices, discuss the database, and describe the features designed to help law enforcement officers.
US Troops overseas have used a variety of biometric tools for years to vet allies and identify insurgents and terrorists. But the MORIS is poised to become the first widespread, mobile usage of such technology here in the US by local and federal law enforcement.
Law enforcement analysts believe the device could prevent the wrong inmates from obtaining prison release, to identify accident victims and keep track of the homeless. While there are many privacy and civil liberties concerns associated with law enforcement’s widespread use of facial recognition devices, the landscape of biometrics is already rapidly changing with programs such as Facebook Facial Recognition:
Important info for anyone- just like "Minority Report" - please read the threads below as well.
After frantic calls and a hearing with Registry officials, Gass learned the problem: An antiterrorism computerized facial recognition system that scans a database of millions of state driver’s license images had picked his as a possible fraud.
It turned out Gass was flagged because he looks like another driver, not because his image was being used to create a fake identity. His driving privileges were returned but, he alleges in a lawsuit, only after 10 days of bureaucratic wrangling to prove he is who he says he is.
John H. Gass hadn’t had a traffic ticket in years, so the Natick resident was surprised this spring when he received a letter from the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles informing him to cease driving because his license had been revoked. Tweet 4 people Tweeted this ShareThis “I was shocked,’’ Gass said in a recent interview. “As far as I was concerned, I had done nothing wrong.’’ After frantic calls and a hearing with Registry officials, Gass learned the problem: An antiterrorism computerized facial recognition system that scans a database of millions of state driver’s license images had picked his...
Palms have taken on a new meaning at some doctors' offices and hospitals. More unique than fingerprints, palm readings are helping keep patients straight and safe.
Face.com has been used to tag over 25 billion faces in over 7 billion photos since launching in late 2007. Facebook users had been using the Face.com facial recognition app to tag friends in photos for two years before Facebook stepped on the Israel-based company’s toes by making facial recognition a default feature for photo tagging this year.
How to protect your mobile phone and computer from illegal police searches
(NaturalNews) The U.S. Constitution is clear about the issue of privacy. In fact, the Fourth Amendment states, in part, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..." With that in mind, it's safe to say it's more than just a little disturbing to know that, in certain circumstances, police can search your cell phone and computer(s), even if you don't want them to and even if they don't yet have a warrant to do so.
The good news is, someone out there has recognized the problem and has taken steps to help you protect that vast amount of data you have stored on your smart phone or laptop. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, long defenders of electronic rights, has written a legal guide designed to help you better understand your rights and, more importantly, when police can - and cannot - legally confiscate and search your personal electronic devices. "In the heat of the moment, it can be hard to remember what your rights are and how to exercise them," says EFF Senior Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "Sometimes police can search your computer whether you like it or not, but sometimes they can't. We wrote this guide to help you tell the difference and to empower you to assert your rights when the police come knocking."
Adds EFF Staff Attorney Hanni Fakhoury, "With smart phones, tablet computers, and laptops, we carry around with us an unprecedented amount of sensitive personal information.
"That smart phone in your pocket right now could contain email from your doctor or your kid's teacher, not to mention detailed contact information for all of your friends and family members," Fakhoury continued. "Your laptop probably holds even more data -- your Internet browsing history, family photo albums, and maybe even things like an electronic copy of your taxes or your employment agreement. This is sensitive data that's worth protecting from prying eyes."
· Always say "no" when police ask if they can search your server, personal computer or cell phone because if you give them permission to search, they don't need a warrant - even to enter your home; · If police tell you they have a search warrant, ask to see it because you have a right to; · Make sure police are only searching the areas outlined in the warrant; · Be silent - you don't have to help the police or answer their questions, and that means you don't have to give them your encryption keys or passwords; · If you do decide to talk, don't lie because lying to the police is a crime; · Finally, if you can consult with a lawyer before police conduct a search or even just talk to you, that's ideal.
This guide is extremely helpful in this digital age when being secure in our "papers" and effects now includes our data-filled electronic devices. Know your rights; that is your best protection.
You really need to read the comments on this video. Evidently if your computer has a video camera, web cam, the gov't can go in and activate it. Also I saw this advertised on TV today http://thefutureoftv.org/
Cable companies installing HIDDEN CAMERAS in your boxes!!
Did You Go Digital Last Night? Does Your Latest Must-Have Tech Gadget Have Hidden Surveillance for Our Police State Nanny System? http://ur1.ca/44yio from newteevee: If you have some tinfoil handy, now might be a good time to fashion a hat. At the Digital Living Room conference today, Gerard Kunkel, Comcast's senior VP of user experience, told me the cable company is experimenting with different camera technologies built into devices so it can know who's in your living room.
Kunkel also spoke on camera with me about fixing bad Comcast user experiences, the ongoing BitTorrent battle and VOD. But he mostly towed the corporate line on these issues (the monitoring your living room came up after my camera was put away).
FACT NOT BECK CONSPIRACY OR ANYONE ELSES: U.S. SOCIALISTS & UNION ACTIVISTS INVESTIGATED BY FBI FOR PROVIDING MATERIAL SUPPORT TO ISLAMIC TERRORIST & INTERNATIONAL MARXIST GROUPS THEY WORK WITH
Police officers are being asked to stand in solidarity with the unions. And why shouldn’t they? No one has a problem with teachers or the vast majority of everyday union members. But the people who are leading these protests, like Van Jones, are engendering revolution and a chaotic spirit across the country. Jones is even part of a new New York state curriculum which contains anti-police rhetoric and focuses not on how police help the community but on police brutality. If you know a police offer, please, pass this show on to them. All the research for yesterday’s show can be found underneath the video.
Police officers are being asked to stand in solidarity with the unions. And why shouldn’t they? No one has a problem with teachers or the vast majority of everyday union members.
But the people who are leading these protests, like Van Jones, are engendering revolution and a chaotic spirit across the country. Jones is even part of a new New York state curriculum which contains anti-police rhetoric and focuses not on how police help the community but on police brutality.
If you know a police offer, please, pass this show on to them. All the research for tonight’s show can be found here.
Links to stories and information used in tonight’s program:
4. Report on Labor Movement from Freedom Road Socialist Organization — USA by Joe Iosbaker, Labor Commission Chair http://www.wpb.be/icm/98en/98en15.htm
John Nichols, a political writer at The Nation magazine, will be providing live analysis for Al Jazeera during our special US election coverage beginning at 22GMT on Tuesday, November
John Nichols is The Nation‘s Washington correspondent and editorial page editor of the Capital Times in Madison, Wis. He is the author of Against the Beast: A Documentary History of American Opposition to Empire; Jews for Buchanan; and Dick: The Man Who Is President and co-author, with Robert McChesney, of It’s the Media, Stupid!; Our Media, Not Theirs; Tragedy & Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections and Destroy Democracy; and, most recently, The Death and Life of American Journalism.
Why not a News Americorps, where we send young people into communities to work at community radio stations, to work in-to develop news sites in underserved places, maybe to supercharge a high school radio station, something like that? And why not, at the same time, supercharge funding to begin to get to something akin to European levels for public media, public broadcasting, and especially community stations around this country? There are simple things we could start doing right now, and these are not recreating the wheel. These are really policy choices.
HILLARY CLINTON REAL NEWS (MARCH 2)
In fact viewership of Al Jazeera is going up in the United States because it’s real news…You may not agree with it, but you feel like you’re getting real news around the clock instead of a million commercials and, you know, arguments between talking heads and the kind of stuff that we do on our news which, you know, is not particularly informative to us, let alone foreigners.”
HILLARY CLINTON PRIVATE MEDIA SOT (MARCH 2)
We are engaged in an information war // our private media can’t fill that gap. In fact, our private media, particularly cultural programming often works at counter purposes to what we truly are as Americans and what our values are.
HILLARY CLINTON INFO WAR SOT
We are in an information war. And we are losing that war. I’ll be very blunt in my assessment. Al Jazeera is winning. The Chinese have opened up a global English language and multi-language television network. The Russians have opened up an English language network.
HILLARY CLINTON VALUES ARENA (MARCH 2)
We’re not competing in the way we need to compete in the information values arena. Al Jazeera is. The Chinese have opened up a global English network and a network in other languages. Russia has opened up a global English network. We are missing in action.
HILLARY CLINTON NO COMPETITION (MARCH 2)
Why are Americans watching Al Jazeera? Because we don’t have anything to compete with it. So they’re turning to Al Jazeera. So Let’s try to figure out how we’re going to win the information war.
(Reuters, 2/4/11) Egypt coverage gives Al Jazeera surge in U.S. viewers
Meanwhile, the channel has experienced a surge in its U.S. online audience. By Friday itswebsite’s live feed had been seen by 9.4 million viewers, Al Jazeera said. Of those, 3.5 million viewers were in the United States.
Lacking a major TV distribution deal in America, the channel has focused on web distribution.The full 24-hour channel of Al-Jazeera English is only offered in three U.S. TV markets, the largest being Washington D.C through Comcast, Verizon FiOS and Cox, to a possible audience of 2.4 million, said a spokeswoman for Al Jazeera.
Since January 28,traffic to its website has spiked about 1,000 percent, with about half that audience of U.S. origin. Before its coverage of the Egypt <http://www.reuters.com/places/egypt> ian demonstrations, the channel had 60,000 followers on Twitter. It now has nearly 180,000, said Mohamed Nanabhay, head of online services at Al Jazeera English. Its Facebook followers have doubled to 340,000, he said.
MSNBC, 2/28: It’s been so wonderful to see al jazeera merge as a key voice in news right now and if you look on their traffic, and you see that they’ve tripled in the last month, it’s quite incredible
NPR: I spoke earlier today that former State Department official named Katie Stanton. She’s now vice president at Twitter. She says everyone, including government officials here in the States, are turning to Al Jazeera as a trusted source of news.
JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC: Let’s start with Al Jazeera. I was concerned because cable companies were not picking it up. I wanted Americans to know what people in the Middle East were saying.
BRIAN STETLER, NYTimes: One-point-six million people in the U.S. have watched Al Jazeera English online since Friday. I’ve been one of them. It’s been fantastic.
The leftist organizations are circling their wagons using the theory that the enemy of my enemy is my friend even though in the end, if they actually came to power, those groups would then begin the process of destroying each other. But in the meantime they are aligning to gain power and they will use anyone they can in the process, which is what is happening with the unions getting the police, firefighters and teachers to stand with the radical groups that they are aligned with.
thecommunists, I remained silent; I was not a communist.
Then they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.
Then they came for the trade unionists, I did not protest; I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, I did not protest; I was a Protestant.
Then they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; I was not a Jew.
When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.
Election 2014 - What Is Really At Stake
Help Stop Voter Fraud!! Stand for the Constitution and God
Time to remember that: "We Surround Them", not the other way!
Stand Up Against Voter Fraud... Demand Re-Counts and Verification Until It is Right!! A Little Ink Goes a Long Way Toward Honesty... 1 Person 1 Vote... No More Mickey Mouse or Dead People Voting
"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about IT! --Albert Einstein
Call Congress Today and Tell Them To Vote Against Cap and Trade
The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality -- Dante Alighieri / Often Quoted by Mark Twain
Thanks for calling the Congressional switchboard. Keep up the pressure: "NO on Cap and Trade"!!! "NO Vote on Obamacare", NO on another Stimulus Bill, NO to the never ending parade of "Power Grab Bills", and ABSOLUTELY NO on the Climate Change Treaty in Copenhagen!!
"No" on Cap and Trade and "No" on Government Controlled Healthcare!!! And Keep up the good fight! Keep up the Pressure on both the House and Senate! These are 2-fights the American People cannot afford to lose!!!
If you choose not to go this route… call and fax your Senator and as many of them on the list yourself, but don’t sit idly by!!
United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121
We apologize in advance for any Videos or links that are not functioning in these or other older posts. Internet information... like 'true' history in our student's textbooks are under constant attack by the Progressive Movement and even more so under the present administration. Try to save what you can to your own computer.
"...there comes a time, ladies and gentlemen, when ideology can cause death. I am so tired, so tired, of zealots, primarily on the left, putting their insane personal agendas above the safety of fellow Americans. Do you think the brave soldiers and Marines operating in dangerous areas right now want [unreleased photos of alleged abuse of prisoners] all over al-Jazeera and the terror websites? So let's look out for the military, OK? Nancy Pelosi has an obligation to get the loons in her party under control. If the Speaker can't do that, she doesn't deserve her position." ... Bill O'Reilly
Updated:If you'd like to contact Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, here's the contact information that you'll need.
