Thursday, June 13, 2013
America Has A Bigger Problem Than Edward Snowden
See additional comments on Tea Party Nation.
A poll from Reuters/Ipsos shows that more
Americans view Edward Snowden as a patriot than a traitor. The 31
percent of the sample who viewed Mr. Snowden as a patriot is about the
same percentage of the people who supported the patriots in our first
American Revolution. As more scandals are unveiled in this “transparent”
administration, the level of frustration is rising. But at some point,
this frustration will turn to action.
The United States’ federal government has a
bigger problem than Mr. Snowden. People understand that an oath to
uphold the Constitution means more than an oath of secrecy. This is
something that “our” federal government understands but is trying to
override. With intimidation. From both parties. We need a poll that asks
whether our federal government is comprised of patriots or traitors. We
can start with the names of the people in the war room who watched the
murder of Christopher Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Sean Smith and Glen Doherty
in Benghazi.
I am still waiting for Congress to hold
closed door hearings with immunity for whistle blowers on Prism. But it
appears that people (including Congressmen) are in fear of their lives.
America has a bigger problem than Edward Snowden and we now find
ourselves in the same position as our founding fathers did under British
tyranny. Have you read the Declaration of Independence lately? If you are one of the 46% who are undecided, I suggest that you read it and chose a side.
More @ Zero Hedge
One-size-fits-all system is immoral or Vote Libertarian
VERBATIM
By Kent McManigal
As originally posted: Clovis News Journal
June 6, 2013
Most libertarians would be perfectly happy to stand aside as you form any society your little heart desires
As originally posted: Clovis News Journal
June 6, 2013
Most libertarians would be perfectly happy to stand aside as you form any society your little heart desires
You could form a democracy, republic, theocracy, dictatorship, or even a nostalgic “Communist Utopia.”
Whatever melts your butter.
It’s none of my business how you organize your community, as long as it is consensual.
As long as you give the rest of us the same respect.
Therein lies the problem.
Most forms of government don’t permit any competition, or even any real variety, in their vicinity, and the true believers tend to believe it’s OK to kill in order to prevent others from opting out or forming a parallel system.
They are even willing to risk everything they value and believe in just to prevent others from forming their own way of operating outside the one-size-fits-all system that is in fashion.
Instead of “live and let live” they prefer “if you don’t like it you have the same opportunity to vote to change the government that everyone else has.”
Besides being ridiculous and socially suicidal, they completely miss the point.
Since libertarians don’t fall for the belief that it’s right to force a minority to live under the rules of the majority — especially when those rules are understood to be immoral and unethical — then we know it would be wrong to do so even to impose what we know would be in everyone’s best interest.
The suggestion is like saying you must drink whiskey until you can manage to “vote” it into water. It’s not going to happen like that.
Libertarians are at a distinct disadvantage in this game since we can’t pretend it’s OK to kill people if they won’t agree to live by the Zero Aggression Principle, at least until they attack someone or the property of another. See the problem?
It’s amusing that those who claim their system is “best” seem the most terrified of allowing anyone the freedom to experiment with alternative ways. It’s as if they don’t really believe their own propaganda and are afraid that a better way might actually be found, and that it might become popular enough to replace their system.
The good news for you is that if libertarians ever become the majority, they’ll not interfere with you as long as you keep your hands to yourself and don’t damage the private property of those outside your group.
After all, we’ll always need living reminders around so our kids can see the folly of statism with their own eyes.
— Farwell’s Kent McManigal champions liberty. Contact him at: dullhawk@hotmail.com
Abolitionists Unpopular in Boston
Not
included in the abolitionists goal of eradicating sin and slavery was
finding a peaceful and practical solution to the moral dilemma inherited
from the British, and perpetuated by New England slave trading and
numerous mills hungry for slave-produced cotton. The abolitionists
themselves caused secession as the South departed due to incessant
anti-slavery agitation and New England’s role in fomenting slave
insurrection and race war in the South.
Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman
North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission
"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"
Abolitionists Unpopular in Boston:
“The
truth is, that the Anti-slavery party had, as it were, two creeds, the
exoteric and the esoteric. According to the former, the popular faith,
slavery is the great evil, a calamity to any country addicted to it;
and, like every other national evil, should, as far as possible, be
checked by legislation, and still more by force of public opinion, but
above all, should be in no way promoted by any act of the government.
This is substantially the Republican creed; and owing chiefly to the
exertions of the Abolitionists, this Republican creed became practically
the creed of the North.
But
amongst themselves the Abolitionists, pure and simple, have an esoteric
creed, more logical perhaps, but less accommodating. With them slavery
is an absolute sin – not an evil, but a crime.
Slavery being thus in
itself a crime, the nation is bound to suppress it at all costs and all
dangers; and if that should be found impossible, the nation has no
choice but to put away the accursed thing, and to renounce all
partnership in the profits of iniquity.
This
esoteric faith was held by a very small and, I suspect, at the moment, a
decreasing party. New England was the headquarters of the
Abolitionists, and yet the outward evidences of their power – I might
almost say of their existence – were few indeed. In all Boston, with its
shoal of papers, there was not one Abolition daily newspaper. The
Courier, the most largely circulated of any Boston paper, reprinted
every morning at the head of its articles the resolution passed by the
House of Representatives in February, 1861, with a view of averting the
danger of Secession: “That neither the Federal Government, not the
people or Governments of the non-slaveholding States, have a purpose or a
constitutional right to legislate upon, or interfere with slavery, in
any of the States of the Union.”
From
this text the Courier preached regularly against the Abolitionists, and
especially against Wendell Phillips, whom it pursued with a bitter
personal animosity. The Boston Herald, a halfpenny paper, which has a
large popular circulation, was still more fiercely anti-Abolitionist.
Writing
of the gradual emancipation project of President Lincoln, it stated
that the scheme “meets with no favour, and is not acceptable to even the
Border Slave States. Emancipation, as advocated by Mr. [Charles] Sumner
and others, is condemned by all the States South, and by one-half of
the public in the Free States.”
The
Post, which was a moderate Republican paper, and is perhaps the
best-written and most respectable of American newspapers, used to
declaim against bringing forward the question of emancipation at all,
till Secession was suppressed.
On
the whole, I should say that the tome of Boston society is very like
that of the press. To advocate pro-slavery doctrines would be decidedly
unfashionable; to advocate immediate Abolition would be hardly less so.
Moderate anti-slaveryism is obviously the correct thing. Till within
the last few years, to avow the Abolition creed of Boston was to exclude
yourself from society. With the “John Brown year,” as the report of
the Anti-Slavery Society termed 1860, a change came. For the first time
almost, American Abolitionism emerged from the sentimentalism of the
Uncle Tom phase, and became a living fact and stern reality; and its
professors won that respect which society always accords to power.
The
rural districts are, I suspect, the stronghold of New England
Abolitionism. In the country, much more of the old Puritan feeling is to
be found than in the towns. During the access of the temperance mania,
which had the power to pass the Maine liquor law, but not power enough
to carry it into effect, the Massachusetts farmers in many places cut
down their apple trees with their own hands, in order to hinder the
possibility of cider being manufactured again.
The
same uncompromising spirit undoubtedly prevails still; and wherever
Abolition sentiments have made their way in the country villages, the
descendants of the Puritans are for cutting down slavery, root and
branch, without stint and without mercy.”
James Clapper Admits He Gave "Least Untruthful" (LIED) Response
You have to hand it to the New Left. They cannot even directly admit when they lie under oath. No, they have to call it being “untruthful” as if that somehow mitigates the fact that they lied. To the New Left, truth can be stated in degrees, apparently. Case in point is James Clapper, the National Intelligence Director under the Obama administration. This guy is the point man for national and domestic security. He has given testimony before Congressional panels and essentially stated that no one’s privacy was intentionally violated, though it might have been accidentally violated.
That was before revelations by Eric Snowden, NSA whistleblower. Since Snowden’s claims have come to the fore, Clapper has had to backtrack, but has done it in an interesting way. Rather than simply admit, “I lied,” Clapper said he has been untruthful, but even the way he said that makes him appear as though it wasn’t really his fault. Clapper “has now admitted he gave the ‘least untruthful’ answer to a direct question in March about the extent of surveillance on US citizens. The admission sets up a critical test of Clapper’s relationship with the congressional committees that oversee him – committees the Obama administration is relying on for its defense of the surveillance efforts.”
Wow, so in the end, Clapper states that his answer was the “least untruthful.” The least untruthful. That doesn’t even make sense? How can something be the least untruthful? It’s a double negative, isn’t it, which makes it a positive? Shouldn’t it be the least TRUTHFUL? Not for James Clapper. It’s the least UNtruthful. Thanks for saying what you mean, Jimmy. But maybe he did say what he meant…
More @ Freedom Outpost
“About 22 percent of the guards at Andersonville died doing their duty”
Southern Cross of Honor Dedication, Dewey Rose, GA
On Saturday, June 1st, I had the privilege of attending the Southern Cross of Honor Dedication and Wreath Presentation
in honor of Private Isham Johnson Booth, Company D, 1st Georgia Reserves, Elbert
County Georgia, father of last living Georgia real son H.V Booth in Dewey Rose,
GA.
The Georgia Society Order of Confederate Rose, Nancy Hart
Chapter No. 1 & Georgia Division Sons of Confederate Veterans, Lt. Dickson
L. Baker Camp 926 sponsored the event.
It was a beautiful, well attended ceremony, and I was honored
to represent the Va Flaggers and thrilled at the opportunity to meet Mr. Booth.
More @ The Virginia Flaggers
Maher 'Retarded' Poke at 5-Year-Old Trig Palin Ripped by Mom
Sarah Palin went after Bill Maher Wednesday night via Twitter responding to a report that the left-wing HBO host called her 5-year-old son Trig, who has down syndrome, "retarded" during a comedy performance Saturday night at the Palms Pearl Concert in Las Vegas.
Describing Maher as a "bully," the former Alaskan governor challenged him to meet her when she’s in his "neck of the woods this weekend."Sarah Palin ✔ @SarahPalinUSA
I'm in your neck of the woods this weekend, little Bill. Care to meet so I can tell you how I really feel? http://shar.es/wLpR6
Hey bully, on behalf of all kids whom you hatefully mock in order to make yourself feel big, I hope one flattens your lily white wimpy a#*. Hey bully, on behalf of all kids whom you hatefully mock in order to make yourself feel big, I hope one flattens your lily white wimpy a#*."
More @ Newsmax
See How Boehner Responded After Being Asked About Procedure That GOP Members Could Use to Revolt Against Immigration Bill
Via avordvet
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio)
said Thursday he doesn’t “intend” to push an immigration bill that
violates Republican “principles.”
Boehner spoke to reporters during his
regular press briefing after TheBlaze exclusively reported that 70
Republican House members are planning a political showdown
over immigration reform and a bill they say will mean amnesty for
illegal immigrants and election security for progressives and Democrats.
“My goal is always to bring bills to
the floor that have a strong Republican majority,” Boehner said.
“Immigration reform — it’s a very difficult issue, but I don’t intend to
bring an immigration reform bill to the floor that violates what I and
what members of my party — what our principles are.”
More @ The Blaze
Rubio: Contradictory statements to Spanish and English audiences
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) appeared on Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity's nationally-syndicated radio program Wednesday to explain seemingly contradictory statements to Spanish and English audiences about the pending Senate immigration bill.
According to the Washington Examiner’s Byron York, Rubio told Hannity that he “probably should have been more artful in the use of terms” when he claimed on Univision that the bill first legalizes America’s at least 11 million illegal immigrants, then provides for increased border security after.
More @ Breitbart
"...... contribute more by going to the Tripoli airport to meet the casualties upon return......"
Incompetency personified is the best and a liar the worst I can come up with. Oh yeah, just wait for them to become casualties instead of attempting to bring them out unharmed or at least alive. Makes perfect sense to me...........ain't my Army.
The U.S. special operations team in Libya were never ordered to stand down during last September's deadly terrorist attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi.
"They weren't [told] to stand down," Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey testified during Wednesday's House Budget Committee hearing.
Dempsey replied the team's request was denied. However, the decision was not a stand-down order, he said.
"A stand down means don't do anything. They were told ... that the mission they were asked to perform was not in Benghazi, but was at Tripoli airport," the four-star general told the committee.
More @ The Hill
Rumor: Glenn Beck; NSA Used to Blackmail Chief Justice Roberts for Obamacare?
Via John
Before Its News has an anonymous source who has provided this information on the scandal Glenn Beck promises to reveal on Thursday, June 13, 2013.
Here’s the GLENN BECK scandal that he will reveal within 24 hours…
It will be announced that hacked emails were used to blackmail and extort Chief Justice Roberts. Very embarrassing emails were obtained, and he was told to vote to declare Obamacare constitutional, or his family life would be destroyed.PREPARE.
Editor’s Note: Before It’s News contributors have been speculating about this topic since the original Obamacare Supreme Court verdict. Your mileage may vary, but many things are possible in light of the recently divulged NSA spying scandal.
UPDATE: From a reader….what’s apparently on a lot of people’s minds…
FYI, after pondering what the big issue could be yesterday, I too thought that at least part of it would be related to how the Soetoro machine got to John Roberts. I believe that they found actual records proving that he & his wife literally bought their 2 children from an organization in Ireland, had them sent to Costa Rica where the Roberts picked them up. Such an arrangement is apparently illegal for a U.S. citizen to do, but that alone doesn’t rise to the level of an issue so crushingly embarrassing that it would cause a Chief Justice of the United States to violate both his oath of office AND the Constitution itself. There must be something else that forced Roberts to sell out 330 million Americans.
Before Its News has an anonymous source who has provided this information on the scandal Glenn Beck promises to reveal on Thursday, June 13, 2013.
Here’s the GLENN BECK scandal that he will reveal within 24 hours…
It will be announced that hacked emails were used to blackmail and extort Chief Justice Roberts. Very embarrassing emails were obtained, and he was told to vote to declare Obamacare constitutional, or his family life would be destroyed.PREPARE.
Editor’s Note: Before It’s News contributors have been speculating about this topic since the original Obamacare Supreme Court verdict. Your mileage may vary, but many things are possible in light of the recently divulged NSA spying scandal.
UPDATE: From a reader….what’s apparently on a lot of people’s minds…
FYI, after pondering what the big issue could be yesterday, I too thought that at least part of it would be related to how the Soetoro machine got to John Roberts. I believe that they found actual records proving that he & his wife literally bought their 2 children from an organization in Ireland, had them sent to Costa Rica where the Roberts picked them up. Such an arrangement is apparently illegal for a U.S. citizen to do, but that alone doesn’t rise to the level of an issue so crushingly embarrassing that it would cause a Chief Justice of the United States to violate both his oath of office AND the Constitution itself. There must be something else that forced Roberts to sell out 330 million Americans.
More @ Before It's News
Obama Threatens Veto of Religious Protection for Military
Via Billy
The SAP includes a veto threat: “…if the bill is presented to the President for approval in its current form, the President’s senior advisers would recommend that the President veto the bill.”
In other words, Obama says he will veto any bill that forbids his appointees or officers from telling a soldier that he cannot mention Jesus during prayer or have a Bible on his desk, or that keeps those appointees from telling a chaplain (who is an ordained clergyman) what religious teachings he is allowed to give in worship services, or what spiritual counseling he can give to another soldier.
Breitbart News reported last week that Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) passed an amendment in the House Armed Services Committee protecting religious speech of service members in the military. President Barack Obama has now threatened to veto the bill if it passes the full House and Senate.
The White House released a Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) on H.R. 1960, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014. Among other items, the SAP includes as an objection to the bill:Expansion and Implementation of Protection of Rights of Conscience of Members of the Armed Forces and Chaplains of Such Members: The Administration strongly objects to section 530, which would require the Armed Forces to accommodate, except in cases of military necessity, “actions and speech” reflecting the “conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of the member.” By limiting the discretion of commanders to address potentially problematic speech and actions within their units, this provision would have a significant adverse effect on good order, discipline, morale, and mission accomplishment.
The SAP includes a veto threat: “…if the bill is presented to the President for approval in its current form, the President’s senior advisers would recommend that the President veto the bill.”
In other words, Obama says he will veto any bill that forbids his appointees or officers from telling a soldier that he cannot mention Jesus during prayer or have a Bible on his desk, or that keeps those appointees from telling a chaplain (who is an ordained clergyman) what religious teachings he is allowed to give in worship services, or what spiritual counseling he can give to another soldier.
More @ Breitbart
Euthanasia for children nears approval by Belgian Parliament; doctors to mass-euthanize children and Alzheimer's patients
Via NC Renegade
A proposed law on the verge of approval by the Belgium parliament would allow children to decide for themselves whether they should be euthanized ("killed") by medical personnel. Currently, Belgian law limits euthanasia to persons 18 and older, but with the rise of autistic children thanks to biopesticides, GMOs and vaccines, nations are increasingly trying to figure out what to do with all these children who have been permanently damaged by the medical and biotech industries.
The answer, of course, is to simply kill them. It's difficult to kill children off under current law without being charged with murder, however. So this proposed new law would allow doctors to decide whether children of any age (yes, even a five-year-old) can, themselves, "consent" to being euthanized without parental consent.
Not surprisingly, the bill was introduced by the socialist party, since socialists tend to hate humanity no matter what country they live in. The proposed legislation calls for, "the law to be extended to minors if they are capable of discernment or affected by an incurable illness or suffering that we cannot alleviate," reports AFP
A proposed law on the verge of approval by the Belgium parliament would allow children to decide for themselves whether they should be euthanized ("killed") by medical personnel. Currently, Belgian law limits euthanasia to persons 18 and older, but with the rise of autistic children thanks to biopesticides, GMOs and vaccines, nations are increasingly trying to figure out what to do with all these children who have been permanently damaged by the medical and biotech industries.
The answer, of course, is to simply kill them. It's difficult to kill children off under current law without being charged with murder, however. So this proposed new law would allow doctors to decide whether children of any age (yes, even a five-year-old) can, themselves, "consent" to being euthanized without parental consent.
Not surprisingly, the bill was introduced by the socialist party, since socialists tend to hate humanity no matter what country they live in. The proposed legislation calls for, "the law to be extended to minors if they are capable of discernment or affected by an incurable illness or suffering that we cannot alleviate," reports AFP
More @ Natural News
IRS Agents Seen Training With AR-15s at DHS Facility
Via NC Renegade
Representative Jeff Duncan (R-SC) caused an uproar with a tweet
yesterday, stating that he had witnessed IRS agents training with AR-15s
at a DHS facility.
My first thought was that this was no major concern. It is known that the IRS has their own law enforcement officials. Mark Levin revealed in May that he was interviewed by two of these armed agents after making complaints about the IRS.
My first thought was that this was no major concern. It is known that the IRS has their own law enforcement officials. Mark Levin revealed in May that he was interviewed by two of these armed agents after making complaints about the IRS.
More @ DC Clothesline
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)