The History of Article V: Reclaiming Our Heritage – AMAC, Inc. AMAC, Inc.

The History of Article V: Reclaiming Our Heritage – AMAC, Inc.

by Michael Farris -obama- defending constitution laughing

George Mason was a visionary of liberty. He was the chief force behind the Virginia Declaration of Rights in 1776—the document which provided the framework for the Bill of Rights fifteen years later.

As a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, Mason was concerned that despite the best intentions of leaders like James Madison and George Washington, the federal government might grow beyond acceptable limits and invade the people’s liberty.

As the convention was winding towards its end, Mason realized there was a crucial oversight in the proposed method for future constitutional amendments. The proposal on the floor provided that all amendments would be proposed by Congress and then would be ratified by the states.  Mason, however, contended that under this process, Congress would never propose amendments to rein in the power of the federal government. Consequently, there was no ultimate check to keep the government from growing too large.

Like the other key leaders of his generation, Mason understood that the most important protection for liberty was a structure of government that funneled power through a strict system of checks and balances. According to Mason, the states were the ultimate check on the federal government. So Mason suggested, and the Framers unanimously agreed, that the states needed to have a way to propose amendments too.

This is why Article V of the Constitution provides two methods to propose amendments to the Constitution. Congress can propose amendments when two-thirds of both houses of Congress approve an amendment. Alternatively, state legislatures can apply for a convention to propose amendments on a particular topic. Once two-thirds of the states apply, Congress has a mandatory duty to call such a convention by naming the time and place for the convention to begin.

Virginia lost no time applying for such a convention. In November of 1788, before the new government under the Constitution was operational, the legislature of Virginia passed an application under Article V applying for a “Convention of the States” for the purpose of proposing a bill of rights and other similar amendments.mywork

Virginia’s legislature was composed of many of the same people who wrote and ratified the Constitution. They knew what Article V said, they knew what it meant, and they intended to use it. The states were trusted to limit the power of the federal government. And they knew that Article V existed, not for the purpose of rewriting the whole Constitution, but to propose particular amendments. Ultimately, of course, Congress passed a bill of rights and the states were satisfied.

There have been over 400 applications for a Convention of States (COS) passed by the state legislatures in the 226 years since that first application. But, there has never been a COS because two-thirds of the states have never agreed on a particular subject.

This leads us to the first iron-clad rule of constitutional law governing a COS: The states must agree on the agenda for the COS and until the states set the agenda, no convention is convened.

A COS was designed to stop federal abuses of power, which begs the most obvious question in American politics today: Is the federal government abusing its power?

Thomas Jefferson would say that the answer to this question is self-evident.  No sensible person can deny that every branch of the federal government is abusing its power.

Congress legislates on topics using power it does not have. It spends money—trillions of dollars—that it does not have. The President regularly legislates—a power he does not have—through executive orders and regulations. The Supreme Court rewrites the Constitution—a power it clearly does not have—through interpretations of the so-called “living Constitution.”

The Founders would be furious with the federal government’s abuse power even if it was using its power wisely install effective policies. But the chaos, debt, and devastation created by the federal government proves the truth of one of the Founders’ central beliefs: Tyranny never results in wise government.

To be clear, the federal government is not only abusive, it is also incompetent.

The Founders would not be surprised by these abuses, but they would be shocked that we have tolerated them for so long. They would demand an accounting for the gift of liberty that they fought and died to give us. And when we tried to blame Congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court, they would shake their heads. “We gave you Article V,” they would say. “We gave you the power the power to stop tyranny. Why haven’t you used it?”

Internal threats are always the greatest dangers to liberty. We must use the Constitution’s own system of checks and balances to save this nation and our legacy of liberty. And we need to do it now.Image

(Please visit www.conventionofstates.com for more information).

Is This A New Tactic To Stifle The Second Amendment? | Absolute Rights

Is This A New Tactic To Stifle The Second Amendment? | Absolute Rights.

Tactical Firearms Politicians

By Keven Card

We’ve witnessed the IRS targeting of groups at odds politically with the big government agenda of this administration and their allies in Congress. We’ve seen the EPA target the coal industry for discriminatory regulations with the intent of pushing and entire industry out of business. We’ve watched as the U.S. attorney general’s office targeted an American guitar company for using wood they legally purchased. And we believe that in every one of these instances, the government bureaucracy acted for purely political purposes. We’ve even heard the president of the United States state plainly that he’s willing to act administratively to achieve his goals.

So when I heard the story of a Houston-area gun shop owner who suddenly had his loan called in by the bank I have to admit my ears perked. But in this case I remain cautious about jumping to any conclusions. My first thought was the business was mismanaged and the bank was simply foreclosing on a bad client, which turns out not to be true. That’s when the story got interesting.

The owner Jeremy Alcede has been known for irritating the left with the sign just outside his Katy gun shop with statements like “I like my guns like Obama likes his voters undocumented.” This certainly hasn’t won him any fans from the gun control crowd or for that matter, any of the left’s special interest groups.

Tactical Firearms Obama Undocumented

His new sign says “Obama and Icon Bank Trying To End Us On July 1st” because Alcede says, though he’s been in good standing with the bank and has never missed a payment on his loan, the board of directors decided not to renew the loan. On the Tactical Firearms website he claims the bank told them “government does not support loans to the gun, alcohol or hotel industries.”

In the Tactical Firearms case there is another possible explanation too. A member of the board, Mark Evans, is the owner of a new gun shop in Houston, creating a potential conflict of interest. This could explain the vote to call in his loan. But if that’s true, it doesn’t reflect well on Icon Bank, not if that’s how they treat customers in good standing anyway. For this case I’m in the wait for more facts and see what shakes out.

But this isn’t the first time a gun shop has made this claim. According to the Washington Times many gun shops and other business owners have complained about new financial and banking regulations that have unfairly labeled their businesses as high risk and had their loans denied or otherwise restricted.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, posted a report called The Legal Limit Report 4 which outlined 76 “lawless” actions of the Obama administration. Listed at number eight was “Operation Choke Point.” Cruz’s report explains:

Government agencies are engaging in “Operation Choke Point,” where the government asks banks to “choke off” access to financial services for customers engaging in conduct the Administration does not like—such as ‘ammunition sales.

As we’ve seen many times before with the Obama Administration, when they can’t get what they want through the political process, they seem to use administrative measures to accomplish the same goal.

This, then, raises a question: Is what’s happening with Tactical Firearms part of a nationwide effort aimed at enacting a version of gun control without congressional approval? Given the other exposed scandals that demonstrate this administration’s willingness to strong-arm political opponents and citizens, it seems highly likely that it could be true.

Tactical Firearms Icon Bank.jpg

By simple use of deductive reasoning we can reach some conclusions. The housing crisis was used to create the need for the federal government to step in and bail out many banks and financial institutions. This prompted a political response and Congress passed Dodd-Frank, the financial reform package, which the president hurriedly signed into law in 2010.

This law has led to more stringent regulations on an already burdened industry. Operation Choke Point demonstrates that federal government agencies have gained significant influence on these industries and their decisions, through Dodd-Frank. Given that they could easily encourage (by that I mean through use of force) certain behavior from that industry like restricting loans to unfavorable businesses.

How does that lead to gun control?

Indirect control of guns and ammunition sales, that’s how. By restricting loans to gun shops and ammunition resellers, you dry up their inventory. Without the banks loaning money to this industry they can’t buy bulk inventory; that will cause supply to fall well short of demand, dramatically increasing prices. That pushes the price point higher, and the higher the price, the less people can afford to buy. Through this method of gun control, only the companies that are debt-free will survive the crunch, which serves to further reduce the number of businesses that can operate.

Yes it’ll hurt the economy and put people out of work, but this president and his allies in Washington don’t seemed concerned about jobs as much as they are the fundamental transformation of America.

In a press briefing on June 10,2014, one of the Obama Administrations principle press secretaries, Josh Earnest said unequivocally, “The president’s goal is to look for opportunities to act administratively, unilaterally using his executive authority to try to make our communities safer.” In other words, he’ll use administrative actions to enact some level of gun control.

And he just may have a shot at it by hiding behind the robust regulatory environment in Washington to accomplish that goal. It’ll take an honest media and a boisterous populace to expose this Chicago style political thuggery, or a massive change of the guard in Washington, of which neither is highly probable. What is certain is the political machine in Washington has every intention of trying to thwart the Second Amendment more than they ever have before.

So for those of us who are strong advocates of the Second Amendment, hold on to your hats and stock up on your supplies because you don’t know when the next crisis that leads to another power grab, by this government, will happen. But, my guess is it’ll happen sooner rather than later.

Obama Talks Climate Change While Iraq Implodes – Tea Party Nation

Obama Talks Climate Change While Iraq Implodes – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Caruba

 

weatherIt is depressing beyond words that we will have to endure two and a half more years of an endless stream of lies about climate change from President Obama.

 

On June 14 he gave a commencement speech to graduates of the University of California at Irvine, using it to tell Big Fat Lies, not the least of which was that the Earth’s temperatures were rising when in fact they have been falling for nearly eighteen years.

 

thCAJS1KVWIt is an endless source of wonder to me that no part of the mainstream media disputes him when he says things like this. For years now they have been reporting the evidence of increasingly cold weather worldwide. On the same day the President was lying about warming, eight inches of snow fell in Rize, Turkey. It has fallen as well in South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia while closer to home snow fell on several cities in Idaho with cold freezes extending into Oregon. In June!

 

stop-global-warmingObama used the speech to demand that politicians take steps to acknowledge climate change which used to be called global warming until it became undeniable to everyone except the charlatans lining their pockets with utterly bogus “research” that underwrites the source of the lies, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

 

Not finishedObama continues to listen to his White House advisor, Dr. John Holdren, whose contempt for the human race is such he would happily see large parts of it disappear. In February, Holdren told reporters that all weather is impacted by climate change, but that is what climate change has done for 4.5 billion years. Not mentioned was that climate cycles are measured in centuries while weather is a short-term event. The most recent mini-ice age lasted from 1300 to 1850.

 

Holdren alluded to droughts affecting parts of the nation, claiming they were getting longer and drying. Two leading climate scientists, former NASA scientist Dr. Roy Spencer and University of Colorado climate scientists, Roger Pielke, Jr, called Holdren’s assertions “pseudo-science rambling.” “The idea that any of the weather we are seeing is in any significant way due to humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions verges on irrationality,” said Spencer. Pielke called Holdren’s assertions “zombie science.”

 

While Holdren is warning about droughts that could cause famines, James M. Taylor, the managing editor of the Heartland Institute’s monthly, Environment & Climate News, took aim at the IPCC claims, noting that U.S. and global crop production, especially the most important staple food crops, corn, rice, and wheat, “have more than tripled since 1970. During the past few years, the United States has set crop production records for alfalfa, cotton, beans, sugar beets, sweet potatoes, canola, corn, flaxseed, hops, rice sorghum, soybeans, sunflowers, peanuts and wheat, to name just a few.”

 

endthelieThe worst part of Obama’s lies about the so-called “greenhouse gases” that we’ve been told for decades are warming the Earth is the way those lies are translated into government policies. The Obama administration, via the Environmental Protection Agency, has launched a war on coal-fired plants that produce 40% of the nation’s electricity claiming that their emissions such as carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing a warming that is not happening. What is happening is a deliberate effort to drive up the cost of electricity for everyone.

 

America runs on electricity and 68% of it is generated by fossil fuels, 20% by nuclear, and 7% by hydropower. So called “clean energy”, wind and solar, provides about 4% at far higher costs than the others and exists largely due to government subsidies and mandates.

 

Claims about increased severe storms, heat waves, and hurricanes simply have no basis in fact. In recent years there has been a record low in the numbers of tornadoes, hurricanes, no change in the rise of sea levels, but record gains in Arctic and Antarctic ice. None of this is reported by the mainstream media.

 

ImageYet Obama told graduates that rising temperatures and sea levels, as well as intensifying storm patterns represent “one of the most significant long-term challenges that our country and our planet face.” He said this even though his administration’s recent National Climate Assessment acknowledged that “There has been no universal trend in the overall extent of drought across the continental U.S. since 1900.” The report, however, is being used to justify carbon-related regulations.

 

While the world’s attention is on one of the greatest threats facing it, the takeover of northern Iraq by a barbaric Islamist group—one from which even al Qaeda disassociated itself—Obama is talking about non-existent climate threats to further policies that kill jobs in the U.S. and harm its struggling recovery of our economy.

 

ImageWhile the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) seeks to expand its control of a major portion of the Middle East, Obama thought it was more important to lie about the climate to college graduates.

 

How much more damage Obama can inflict on the economy between now and the end of his second term in office is unknown, but what we do know is that his priorities, based on scare-mongering speeches about the climate will continue until he leaves office.

 

© Alan Caruba, 2014

So, That Everytown Scartistic Map Turned Out To Be A Complete Fabricated Lie: Color Me Shocked! – Tea Party Nation

So, That Everytown Scartistic Map Turned Out To Be A Complete Fabricated Lie: Color Me Shocked! – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by John Wiseman

Charles C. Johnson @ChuckCJohnson

Another fake shooting listed by Everytown gun map was drug related, not on campus.

 

Well, I guess you get the idea, and if you follow this link back to The Blaze, you’ll see that pretty much all of the dots on that hysterical Everytown map have turned out to be misrepresented, grotesquely misrepresented. Charles C. Johnson has taken the trouble to research the map, and detail the circumstances of each shooting, not one of which turned out to be a mass shooting at a school. Most were gang related incidents of violence that occurred somewhere other than at a school. So, to all of you who’ve passed this blatant lie along with the message that, “it’s for the children,” please consider the message you’re sending to those young skulls full of mush when you use blatant fabrication as your argument to destroy America’s Second Amendment Rights.

 

thCAJS1KVWEvery day now, one of my liberal progressive, friends forwards some piece of propaganda advocating for the abrogation of America’s right to keep and bear arms. The latest bit of dishonesty claims that we now have one incident per week of a school getting shot up and kiddies being slaughtered. The trouble with that meme of course is that once even the smallest bit of scrutiny is used to look at their evidence of the great American Abattoir, the story falls apart completely, and what we’re left with are liberals running amok, mostly due to liberal policies having been enacted to keep them from ever facing consequences for previous poor decision making.

 

ImageNow I get that you guys don’t want to see children hurt, and that your entire world view is ruled by your emotions. Your bigger than mine caring heart does you credit. With that being said however, there is a reason why George Mason insisted upon inclusion of the Bill of Rights as a part of the original Constitution before getting on board with ratification of this document as our primary national law, and the founding of our republic. Included within the 8 Amendments authored by Mason was the Second. If some of you wish to see that part of our Constitution wiped away, then I respect your opinion. I think you’re wrong, but have your say so.

 

1141Our Founding Fathers were intelligent enough to know that they weren’t perfect, or that times would change. That is why they’d had the foresight to include two, count them two, methods for changing the Constitution in Article V. Incrementally legislating away this basic right, granted not by government or our fellow man, but as a part of our birthright as human beings, is itself disingenuous and dishonest. Putting aside all other arguments, the Second Amendment is the only device we have that will ultimately protect us from facing our very own tyrannical behemoth. It is not a deer hunting or bird hunting amendment. It is not about feeding a family. It is not even really about protection from home invasion or masked marauders. It is about thwarting a government that has wrestled power from the people, and keeping that government in check by those governed. There is no possible argument in my mind which could possibly trump that consideration, however, please feel free to try. If you wish to take away our guns, do so through the Article V process. That would at least be consistent with how America is supposed to work.

 

One final thought for my progressive friends. Every time we get into it, you and I, I am doused with comments advising me to stop watching Fox News, or listening to Rush Limbaugh. By the way, I really do very little of both, but that’s beside the point. In every instance of this advice, not once has specific example been made as to why either source is not worthy of my attention. I’ve seen the Fox lies claim, but it’s always been a blanket charge. There has not been one single instance, ever, where this charge has been substantiated. Here however, is that substantiation of your argument being not only a lie, but one of epic proportion. What ever grudging emotional support for you position I may have had has now been wiped away for ever. That is the back lash for this fallacious piece of baloney that you’ve seen fit to forward without thinking. Looking back over the years, at the tortured statistics, misapplied economics lessons, mined quotes, quotes taken out of context, distorted historical perspectives, and flat out fabrications, I realize that the political left has not offered one honest argument to support anything they’ve posited. You can single out Fox all you want, but look in the mirror when you wish to point out something not worthy of trust. At least be truthful when discussing your plans for America. Honesty after all is what’s best for the children.

 

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Bombshell: Benghazi Filmmaker CONFIRMED To Be An Agent Of Eric Holder Justice Department : Freedom Outpost

Bombshell: Benghazi Filmmaker CONFIRMED To Be An Agent Of Eric Holder Justice Department : Freedom Outpost.

 

Editor’s Note: Earlier this week, we brought you news about the producer of the film that was at the heart of the Obama administration talking points on Benghazi admitting to being a Muslim, not a Coptic Christian as he had been portrayed to America. Now Walid Shoebat, Ben Barrack and Keith Davies confirm he is an agent of Eric Holder’s Justice Department.

 

The producer of the anti-Muhammad video the Obama administration blamed for the Benghazi attacks is actually a confirmed agent of Eric Holder’s Justice Department.

 

The damning trail of evidence begins when a fictitious narrative was concocted by the FBI to lure the courts that Nakoula (the Filmmaker, aka Yousef) was supposed to help the FBI catch Eiad Salameh, his partner in crimes for many years. Yet, the deal was never fulfilled and Eiad was let go by the Feds in 2011 as Shoebat.com revealed in a firsthand account never before reported, including a recorded conversation between Nakoula and Shoebat.com in which the filmmaker defended Eiad, the very man he was supposed to help the FEDS catch!

 

Bolstering the case (aside from the Feds letting two criminals go) is how the filmmaker became an agent of Eric Holder. After Nakoula’s arrest, there was a very curious development at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, which was handling his case through an Assistant U.S. Attorney who suddenly was pulled off the case and replaced by a full bird –  Chief of the office’s Criminal Division, Robert Dugdale. 

 

Nakoula got high-profile attention.
In an article that appeared in the Washington Times, Kerry Picket wrote:

 

What is curious, though, is the fact that the original Asst. U.S. Atty. Jennifer Williams, who helped prosecute Mr. Yousef’s [Nakoula] bank fraud conviction, is not the attorney Mr. Yousef’s lawyers would eventually deal with. Mr. Yousef’s probation violation case, for no explained reason, was kicked up to Chief Criminal Division prosecutor Asst. U.S. Atty. Robert Dugdale. Dugdale is second in the chain of command below U.S. Atty. Andre Birotte of the Central District of California.

 

Picket was suspicious, she attempted to get answers from the office’s spokesman, Thom Mrozek:

 

When I pointed out that AUSA Dugdale was not part of the team of attorneys who did prosecute Yousef’s case and asked why the case was kicked up the chain to AUSA Dugdale, Mr. Mrozek responded, “I don’t comment on staffing decisions.”

 

The U.S. Attorney over Dugdale – Andre Birotte, Jr. became the local caretaker of a very high profile and high stakes case the Obama administration wanted to control very closely and later was nominated by Obama to be U.S. District Judge for California’s Central District.

 

Eiad Salameh, Nakoula’s partner in crimes – also beholden to the administration – obtained special favors from doing the Justice Department’s bidding. According to a report by The Smoking Gun just days after the Benghazi attacks, charges against Eiad (who has a proven rap sheet) were dropped in the same year that Canadian authorities picked him up:

 

It is unclear whether Salameh, whose whereabouts are unknown, has been charged in connection with the bank fraud. Salameh was named in a 2006 federal criminal complaint charging him with felony fraud. That complaint–filed under one of Salameh’s many aliases–was dismissed last year by federal prosecutors. A court docket shows that no filings were made after the initial complaint, likely indicating that Salameh was never apprehended.

But the last sentence is incorrect; Salameh was apprehended.

 

Jeffrey Mason of the Canadian Peel Police picked Salameh up in January of 2011!

 

At that time, he should have been wanted in connection with both the 2006 and 2009 cases, assuming he was involved in the Nakoula bank fraud case. Yet, the 2006 case was dropped in either the same month Eiad was arrested or in the months that followed.

 

Shoebat.com has learned from one retired FBI agent that this doesn’t just happen unless Eiad was providing the Feds with something in return for such treatment.

 

As Shoebat.com has reported, a timeline provides further evidence that the Obama Administration was in cahoots with these figures in the summer of 2011, during the July-August time frame.

 

1.) Secretary of State Hillary Clinton co-chaired a meeting in Istanbul, Turkey with the head of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). It was to be the first of several meetings that would become known as “The Istanbul Process”. One of the objectives of the OIC has been and remains, to pressure non-Muslim countries to censor speech critical of Islam.

2.) Nakoula began casting for his video.

3.) Eiad Salameh was put on a plane back to Palestine by the Canadians after Eric Holder’s FBI refused to have him extradited and charged.

 

Eiad was clearly on the hook with the U.S. Justice Department if his 2006 case was dismissed.

 

FBI’s Benghazi Investigation
When UN Ambassador Susan Rice blamed Nakoula’s video for the Benghazi attacks during her five Sunday talk show appearances on September 16, 2012, it served to anger the president of Libya, who shortly before Rice, had identified the attack as an act of terrorism. Last year, State Department whistle blower Gregory Hicks, the Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya at the time of the attacks, testified about this and said Rice’s comments prevented the FBI from getting to the site of the attacks for weeks.

 

Here is Hicks giving his testimony while being questioned by the current chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC):

 

 

Based on the FBI’s relationship with Nakoula and Eiad, the longer it took to get to the scene of the Benghazi attacks, the more compromised that scene would become. A compromised crime scene would have served to aid the perpetuation of the video narrative.

 

Hicks also testified that he was not interviewed by the FBI:

 

 

Silencing Skeptics
Is it unusual for the U.S. Government to empower informants to engage in a massive scheme and criminal enterprise for the purpose of creating a political climate to help push an agenda? Hardly. In much the same way that the Obama State Department championed the “Istanbul Process” as a vehicle to assault the first amendment, a gunwalking operation was used to assault the second amendment.

 

In Operation Fast and Furious, multiple federal agencies worked together as part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF). The stated purpose of the operation was to track guns that were being trafficked into Mexico, arrest the bad guys, and confiscate the guns. In reality, as has been clearly demonstrated, the actual purpose was to allow the guns to “walk” into Mexico and make their way into the hands of drug cartels after the ATF – an arm of the Justice Department – mandated U.S. gun store owners sell the guns to bad guys.

 

In 2011, ATF Special Agent in Charge (SAC) William Newell was grilled by House Oversight Committee member, Rep. Patrick Meehan (R-PA) about the operation being an OCDETF case. Newell trapped himself in one of the most compelling moments of Fast and Furious hearings, beginning at the 3:00 mark:

 

<center> </center>

 

The guns would be picked up at crime scenes and American gun store owners would be blamed in a blood libel (sound familiar?). The cover of that operation was blown after the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. An ATF whistle blower named John Dodson came forward and the scandal was exposed.

 

 

 

If blood libel and the collateral damage of innocent human lives in the interest of pushing an agenda like gun control was used to launch an assault on the second amendment, why would it be beyond plausibility to envision the same administration launching an assault on the first amendment using to create the climate for speech control?

 

Ironically – and perhaps not so coincidentally – the man in charge of the Criminal Division involved in both Fast and Furious and the post-Benghazi prosecution of Nakoula was Lanny Breuer.

 

Obama’s Marxist Roots
From Obama’s Marxist Roots we can learn about the term agitprop which describes a tactic that is of Russian origin. It has three definitions one of which is “agitation and propaganda,” promoted  by “agitpropists,” people who are trained or take part in such activities. Fast and Furious was clearly agitprop and it was also an OCDETF case, which meant it spread across an entire administration. Such was the anti-Muhammad video which also involved multiple administration agencies and departments. Barack Obama’s Communist Party USA (CPUSA) mentor was Frank Marshall Davis, a man followed closely by a completely different FBI for 19 years. Davis wasn’t just a CPUSA member; he was a Communist writer and propagandist; he was an… “agitpropist.”

 

In conclusion, cutting a deal with one criminal to help them catch another it didn’t want brings legitimate questions about how Nakoula’s case was handled by Holder’s Criminal Division, where the possible monies obtained for the film, led at the time nationally by a figure whose claim to infamy is that he wound up as a central figure in the Operation Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal – Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer. Along with Holder, Breuer, Dugdale, Birotte should all be deposed by the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

 

So should Nakoula and Eiad.

 

The question should be: Why did the law enforcement bureau Holder led refuse to pick up Eiad when offered on a silver platter by Canadian authorities in 2011. What was the source of the monies spent on the movie? Why was Nakoula given a lesser prison sentence to help the FBI arrest someone it didn’t want, thereby making the plea deal about something else?

 

In the days after the Benghazi attacks, Nakoula was arrested for violating the terms of his probation. Theoptics, coupled with the Obama administration’s attempts to blame the video for the deaths, clearly communicated that he was being punished for producing a “crude and disgusting video” that was critical of Islam. Unfortunately, the outrage Nakoula’s arrest generated in conservative circles actually played to the Obama administration’s advantage creating a distraction from the devastating truth.

 

Based on this explosive development, enough probable cause exists to investigate whether or not Eiad was involved in financing Nakoula’s video production. In this ABC News story filed just two days after the Benghazi attacks, it was revealed that the cost of the video was between $50,000 – $60,000 financed by his family in Egypt.

 

 

Just two weeks after Benghazi, Shoebat.com published a report about the claim by Nakoula that his “family” provided him with the funds to produce the video. As we wrote then, this “family” has not been located:

 

…if an Egyptian by the name of Nakoula Bacile Nakoula is blamed for angering over a billion Muslims, it would not be that difficult to find the entire family in Egypt, to include brothers, cousins, aunts, siblings wife, wives, ex-wives, mistresses, and pets, et. al., especially since the riots that spanned across 30 nations were sparked in Egypt.

In the Middle East, you are known by your clan. Yet, Egypt cannot produce neither this man’s family or his background?

 

Was Eiad the source of the $50,000 – $60,000? The Feds clearly couldn’t have their fingerprints on the money but two informants who were beholden to the Justice Department could. Is this why he wasn’t taken into custody when the Canadians offered him up?

 

Providing even further evidence that Nakoula’s video was about agitprop and blood libel are his initial claims about the source of his funding. According to the ABC News report above, Nakoula attempted to say the video cost $5 Million and was funded by a consortium of wealthy Jewish friends. This was clearly lie.

 

In a Shoebat.com exclusive, we learned that Nakoula recently told one of the actresses in his video – Cindy Lee Garcia – that he is a Muslim after being confronted by Garcia. This claim is bolstered by the mere partnership of Nakoula and Eiad.

 

Eiad Salameh is a Muslim fundamentalist who hates Coptic Christians. If Nakoula was a Copt, why would Salameh partner with him? The answer is that Nakoula is a Muslim who used agitprop and blood libel as an agent of the Obama administration and its Justice Department.

 

Source

 

*Ben Barrack and Keith Davies contributed to this article

No, Obama is Not Above the Law – Tea Party Nation

No, Obama is Not Above the Law – Tea Party Nation.

 

By Alan CarubaObamaDishonestyandIncompetance

 

It was hard enough trying to keep up with the revelations of various scandals that have been the product of the Obama administration, but now into the second year of his second term, the news of its actions—some of which are illegal, some of which ignore Congress’s authority, and some of which seemed determined to destroy our economy and attack our constitutional freedoms–all keep assaulting our comprehension.

 

Like many Americans I have fears of losing our freedoms as set forth in the Bill of Rights. I have doubts about an almost invisible “recovery” of the economy when 92,009,000 are still not in the labor force. I look at the Obama presidency and see one that seems increasingly lawless and witless in so many ways.

 

obama- defending constitution laughingThe latest assault was the exchange of five Taliban detainees, top field commanders, for an American soldier who administration spokeswoman, Susan Rice, said had served with “honor and distinction.” Like her lies about the Benghazi attack, this too was a lie. Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl had, we swiftly learned, walked away from his post in Afghanistan. That makes him a deserter, something the administration must surely have known. Giving up the Taliban leaders, done without the required thirty days’ notice to Congress, looks more like Obama’s intention to empty Guantanamo then the claim of retrieving an alleged POW. Negotiations to achieve this had been ongoing for months.

 

obozoThis comes at a time when a report by the think tank, the Rand Corporation, spells out a 58% increase from 2010 to 2013 of jihadist groups worldwide, from 31 to 49, and a doubling of the number of jihadist fighters to an estimated 100,000. In addition, the report notes the number of attacks by al Qaeda affiliates had increased to roughly 1,000 from 392. As Seth G. Jones, the author of the report, says, “The current trends suggest that the struggle against extremism is likely to be a generational one, much like the Cold War.”

 

Not exactly the “end of a war” that Obama keeps talking about.

 

Obama as StalinAt the same time Obama turned five Taliban commanders loose, his Attorney General, Eric Holder, announced the creation of a special task force within the Justice Department to combat what he characterized as “escalating danger” from “homegrown” terrorists within the U.S. Given the fact that we have a huge Department of Homeland Security, created after 9/11, one wonders why such a task force is necessary, but we are told it will be composed of members of the FBI and the Department’s National Security Division.

 

The Obama administration is the same one in which the Internal Revenue Service targeted Tea Party and patriot groups seeking non-profit status. A pattern of using the government against them reflects an agenda to target any American who disagrees and speaks up against the abuse or neglect of constitutional rights.

 

One of those is the right to own and bear guns, but this is also an administration that has made many efforts to curb the Second Amendment and gun ownership. At the same time, we have read reports of massive purchases of ammunition and weapons by various elements of the federal government. One can understand the need to arm agents of the FBI and Homeland Security, but why did the Postal Service and Social Security agency, as well as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration need to purchase lots of ammunition?

 

Concurrent with this has been the deliberate reduction in the nation’s military strength to a point that rivals what existed prior to World War Two. We have a far smaller navy. Our Air Force has both older and fewer aircraft. Our Army and Marine units have far fewer men and women in active service. There are concerns about the capabilities of our National Guard as well. Meanwhile, police forces around the nation are being given military-level vehicles and weaponry.

 

Largely unknown to most Americans is the National Defense Authorization Act which empowers the U.S. military, under presidential authority, to arrest, kidnap, detain without trial, and hold indefinitely American citizens thought to “represent an enduring security threat to the United States.”

 

treasontoReportedly, a study funded by the Department of Homeland Security characterized Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.” Does that include members of the Tea Party movement? Members of the National Rifle Association and of veterans organizations? Opponents of abortion? All have been described as potential domestic terrorists by elements of the Obama administration

 

A friend-of-the-court brief in a case opposing the Act, stated: “The central question now before the court is whether the federal judiciary will stand idly by while Congress and the president establish the legal framework for the establishment of a police state and the subjugation of the American citizenry through the threat of indefinite military arrest and detention, without the right to counsel, the right to confront one’s accusers, or the right to trial.”

 

atomuchWriting at World Net Daily, Bob Unrah noted that “The new law authorizes the President to use ‘all necessary and appropriate force’ to jail those ‘suspected’ of helping
terrorists.’” Since the law passed,” reported Unrah, “multiple states have passed laws banning its enforcement.”

 

While Obama is releasing declared enemies of the nation to return to the battlefield, he and his Attorney General are expressing concerns about homegrown terrorists and the mere accusation of being sympathetic to terrorism will be enough to get a lot of people detained without any Bill of Rights protections.

 

2012-07-05-alexanderObama has unleashed the Environmental Protection Agency to assert new limits on greenhouse gas emissions by many, if not most, of the nation’s 600 coal-fired plants that generate electricity. Many plants have already closed their doors. Joseph Bast, the president of The Heartland Institute, a free market think tank, responded saying, “President Obama and the Democrats are once again unleashing the Environmental Protection Agency on the American people. This is Obamacare for the environment: guaranteed to raise costs, reduce choices, and destroy an existing industry. By the time the EPA is finished, millions of Americans will be freezing in the dark.”

 

David Rothbard and Craig Rucker of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), another leading think tank, warned that states will be required to impose “cap-and-tax regimes like the ones Congress has wisely and repeatedly refused to enact. Others will be forced to close perfectly good, highly reliable coal-fueled power plants that currently provide affordable electricity for millions of families, factories, hospitals, schools and businesses. The adverse impacts will be enormous.”

 

This is a pattern of activity that will harm the U.S. economy by reducing the production of energy vital to nation’s current and future growth. In a similar fashion, the Obama administration has reduced access to explore and extract vast offshore energy resources and those that exist on federal lands. 

 

myworkTaken together these and other actions put at risk the future and the freedoms Americans have enjoyed since the U.S. Constitution became effective on June 21, 1788. We are watching this 226-year-old republic being put at great risk of survival.

 

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Refuting the Lies of Gun-Control Liberals – Patriot Update

Refuting the Lies of Gun-Control Liberals – Patriot Update.

By

1141When it comes to the gun-control debate, liberals have a problem with cause and effect. They continue to blame gun violence on inanimate objects—guns—rather than the people who consciously choose to use these inanimate objects in malicious, violent, and destructive ways. Every time a mentally disturbed person uses a gun to express his anger and frustration with the world, liberals ramp up their never-ending campaign for new and more restrictive gun laws. To even suggest that the perpetrator’s mental condition might be the cause of the violence in question brings howls of protest from liberals who foolishly believe that laws actually prevent crime. To a gun-control liberal, criminals who use guns are somehow different. They will, according to the illogic of liberals, suddenly become law-abiding citizens who will never again pick up a gun if liberal legislators can just pass new laws.

Government and gunsBut there is a problem with constantly advocating for new and more restrictive gun laws: there are already so many gun laws on the books that existing laws are not being enforced. Why enact new gun-control laws when those on the books are not being enforced? Why not simply enforce the laws that currently exist? These two questions are not popular in liberal circles. In fact, liberals carefully avoid discussions in which these questions come up. Writing in American Rifleman (May 2013), Wayne LaPierre—Executive Vice-President of the National Rifle Association—had this to say about the lack of enforcement of existing gun laws: “Everything real violent criminals do to acquire a firearm is already a serious federal felony. Under federal law, lying to a licensed dealer, lying on the form 4473, and straw sales are all federal felonies that are almost never prosecuted.” Yet these crimes are used by liberals to justify their demand for a national registration system for gun purchases. Again, why not enforce the laws that already exist?

youactuallyLaPierre also cites several additional federal statutes that are already on the books, but are only sporadically enforced. Here is a summary of those statutes, what they proscribe, and the prison sentences associated with them:

  • 18 U.S.C. 922(g): A felon, fugitive, or drug user may be sentenced to 10 years in prison for being in possession of a firearm or ammunition. In other words, the firearms that liberals want to ban are already banned for criminals, fugitives, and drug users. What is needed is better enforcement of this existing law—not new laws that will not be enforced. This reinforces a point often made by those of us who support the Second Amendment: gun laws will take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens but will do nothing to prevent criminals from getting guns.
  • 18 U.S.C. 922(j): An individual may be sentenced to 10 years in prison for possessing a stolen firearm. Since criminals often use stolen firearms in committing the violent crimes liberals are constantly wringing their hands about, simply enforcing this law would cut down on gun violence. This being the case, one can only wonder who liberals are really aiming at with their campaign for new gun-control laws. The answer should be obvious: law-abiding citizens.
  • 18 U.S.C. 924(b): An individual may be sentenced to 10 years in prison for shipping, transporting, or receipt of a firearm across state lines with intent to commit a felony.
  • 18 U.S.C. 924(a): An individual may be sentenced to 5 to 30 years in prison for carrying, using, or possessing a firearm in connection with a violent federal crime or in the act of drug trafficking.
  • 18 U.S.C. 924(j): An individual may be sentenced to death for committing murder while possessing a firearm in connection with a violent crime or in the act of drug trafficking.
  • 18 U.S.C. 924(g): An individual may be sentenced to 10 years in prison for interstate travel to acquire or effect the transfer of a firearm for the purpose of committing a crime.

availabilityThose summarized above are just a sampling of the gun-control laws that are already on the books and are readily available to law enforcement personnel and prosecutors. These laws cover every aspect of acquiring, possessing, transporting, and illegally using firearms. It is hard to see how new laws will do anything to curb gun violence that enforcing these existing laws would not do.

Yes, there is a problem with gun violence in the United States. But problems are solved by identifying the root cause and dealing with it. Guns are not the root cause of gun violence. Guns are just inanimate objects; as such they do nothing of their own accord. Violent acts using guns are perpetrated by people, most of whom are hardened criminals or mentally disturbed individuals. Lock up the criminals and provide for the proper treatment and confinement of the mentally disturbed and gun violence will no longer be a problem in the United States. Accept the illogic and hypocrisy of liberal gun-control advocates and gun violence will just continue.

397024_4268935677955_1569853995_n

THE MILITARY BUILD-UP OF OUR CIVILIAN GOVERNMENT – Tea Party Nation

THE MILITARY BUILD-UP OF OUR CIVILIAN GOVERNMENT – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Walter Cleveland Tune

I just read yesterday that the USDA has ordered submachine guns with 30 round magazines. Now I see they are securing bullet proof vests. Has the cow or hog become a threat to the welfare and safety of the American People? What are to be the targets of those bullets? Are we to assume that the fields of wheat and corn, soybeans and other vegetables require submachine gunfire to avoid an uprising in the fields of Kansas and the rest of our food growing land?

I question the legal need of almost every government agency of assault weapons. Are farmers now a terrorist threat to the Republic? Are citizens of the United States now considered no better than cannon fodder as those who oppose the rabid expansion of the regime?

Once there was a law called the Posse Comitatus, which outlawed the use of the military in enforcing domestic laws. But over the last 5 years or so, we have seen that Obama does not see this as an impediment to forceful enforcement of his agenda. He once said while campaigning in 2008, “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set, We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

So once again, President Obama has circumvented the Constitution, the law of the land, and the intention of Congress. If he can’t crush the People with the military, he will just arm the entire Federal government. And since he ignores the Constitution and all laws which conflict with his agenda, he will use this “civilian national security force” to impose his royal will.

It is essential that we retain our Second Amendment rights. As a tyrant arms our whole government, as strong and well-funded as our military, we must retain our power to to resist. As a veteran, I remember my oath to the Constitution. I will protect it and defend it as I once did as a soldier. My oath will expire only on my demise. And I will protect my Republic, not my government. The Republic is permanent, but the government changes every 4 years.

EMPIRE STATE REBELLION: Hundred of Thousands of New Yorkers Refuse To Register So-Called “Assault Weapons” Ahead Of April 15 Deadline

EMPIRE STATE REBELLION: Hundred of Thousands of New Yorkers Refuse To Register So-Called “Assault Weapons” Ahead Of April 15 Deadline.

Poor Andrew Cuomo.

gov cuomo

Due the the tyrannical actions of Andrew Cuomo and his allies in the state legislature,  New York residents are required to register an estimated 1 million firearms designated as “assault weapons” under the NY SAFE Act by April 15.

1inguncontrolUnfortunately for the Governor and his allies, it appears that the open revolt of most of the state’s law enforcement leaders against NY SAFE—who correctly view the law as a blatantly unconstitutional assault on the state constitution and the Second Amendment—means that noncompliance is overwhelming.

While NY State Police refuse to publicly share the number of firearms that have been registered (citing a provision of the NY SAFE Act itself), leaks purporting to be from within the agency suggest that compliance might be as low as just 3,000-5,000 firearms. There is no way to conclusively verify this paltry figure which suggests that 99.5% of New Yorkers are thumbing their noses at Albany, but it may very well be a credible figure.

Why?

Non-compliance rates of 85%-90% or more are the rule when draconian gun control laws 580554_318859484890936_299381022_ndemanding registration are passed in the United States. Those rates are normal even with relatively popular support from voters and law enforcement. Those dynamics of “popular support” are assuredly not in play in New York.

While gun registration may be exceedingly popular south of the Tappan Zee Bridge, and in a few pockets upstate, many (if not most) law enforcement officers and gun owners in the state have publicly rebelled against the law. Many municipal and county governments have joined them in open defiance. Gun owners in New York are well aware of the fact that their county sheriffs, state police, and local officers don’t intend to enforce the law, a stance that many law enforcement leaders have announced publicly.

1141Knowing that the chief law enforcement officers in most counties have announced that they will not enforce the law, a non-compliance rate exceeding 95% and perhaps exceeding 98% does indeed seem plausible.

As New York Assemblyman Bill Nojay (R-Pittsford) noted previously:

“The rank and file troopers don’t want anything to do with it,” Assemblyman Bill Nojay (R-Pittsford) said Monday. “I don’t know of a single sheriff upstate who is going to enforce it.”

“If you don’t have the troopers and you don’t have the sheriffs, who have you got? You’ve got Andrew Cuomo pounding on the table in Albany,” Nojay said.

9lhvviAndrew Cuomo has demonstrated that he has the political power to ram through unconstitutional laws in Albany. What he’s also unwittingly exposed is his complete inability to enforce them.

More Calls from Western Nations for Civilian Disarmament via the UN : Freedom Outpost

More Calls from Western Nations for Civilian Disarmament via the UN : Freedom Outpost.

 

unfreezoneAmerica, throughout the past fifteen months I have written a great deal on the United Nations Small Arms Treaty. While many have allowed the wool to be pulled over their eyes by believing that civilian disarmament can’t happen here, and that the senate will never ratify this treaty, the truth is that it is already being incrementally implemented. All of the states that are passing draconian gun control laws are testing ground states, and if you haven’t noticed, these state governments really don’t give a hoot about what their constituents have to say about it. While it is true that many states are also passing pro-gun laws that, constitutionally speaking, would protect their citizens’ gun rights from federal over reach, it doesn’t change the fact that the arms treaty represents a global effort to disarm America so they can push forward with their plans to implement global communism.

This push for global communism is best described by pointing to U.N. policy initiatives such as “Agenda 21,” which seeks to limit the development of mankind because supposedly, our technological advancements are contributing to global warming. Never mind that we just experienced one of the worst winters in quite some time, and there’s more polar ice now than in previous years, the planet is warming, we are all doomed, and only global communism can save us according to the U.N. If you are still wondering what the connection is between gun control and global warming is, I am about to explain. The global warming advocates believe there are too many people and that we occupy too much undeveloped land. They intend to herd us off of this land and lock us in the cities where we can be “managed” like a herd of animals.

armedIf you doubt this, then ask yourself why the federal government is purchasing vast quantities of land and sealing it off. As I mentioned in an article I posted yesterday, there are those in this movement who would have “global warming deniers” imprisoned because of their belief that man is not destroying the planet. So it essentially comes down to a simple philosophy my friends. Those with a great deal of wealth, power and influence are seeking to impose their will upon the American people, they are seeking to create a new society in which they will control all the land and resources. They can’t do this if we remain armed. Everyone knows this is about power and not keeping children safe. If they cared so much about children, abortion would not have killed 50,000,000 babies since its legalization.

Please realize this, events like the Sandy Hook shooting were used as an excuse to disarm other countries whose citizens were once armed. Emergency legislation and propaganda were used in much the same way as it was here. The only difference is that these nations never lived with the belief that self-defense and the right arms are natural, unalienable rights. They simply had firearms because the government “allowed” them to. That’s the difference America.

I felt it imperative to discuss the topic this Sunday morning because President Obama, while in Brussels this past week, put his signature on another document reaffirming his commitment to civilian disarmament. This can be read about here. As I said above, this is a global effort being directed by those believing that a global government administered by the U.N. is the only way to save mankind and the planet from man’s “destructive” ways.

wlecomeMany would call me a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist, but I would ask that you look up and read the 45 declared goals of the communist party, something I have also written extensively about, and you will see that promoting the U.N. as man’s only hope is one of these goals.

As further evidence, I would remind you that, as a college student, the class I was in was presented with a video that essentially described the need for the U.N. to control all nations in order to fight poverty, and that in order to do so these nations would have to surrender their sovereignty. Poverty was described as being created by global warming of course. The narrator also claimed that people should not be able to own guns because gun ownership contributed to a dangerous, unstable world; to this, I would add that is true only when they are owned by despotic, tyrannical dictators. Let us never forget that it was the world’s governments, hell bent on obtaining power, which have disarmed and slaughtered more people in peacetime than in all the wars combined.

It should be clear, beyond a reasonable doubt, which they intend to carry this out whether orgun-control not the senate goes along with ratifying the treaty. It should be clear that the global communists intend to teach your children to fear guns, look to governments for safety, doubt your values and question your motivations, ridicule Christianity and view right and wrong as merely subjective constructs created by man’s morality as opposed to God’s. If you doubt this, just simply pick up a common core text book or watch some television programming targeting a teenage audience. Psychological conditioning is one of the back door methods in which these people will accomplish their goals. Our children, through the use of “intruder on campus drills” are being conditioned to respond with fear and look to government officials to make everything all right. Many could argue that this has been going on for years, maybe so, but in my mind it explains a lot, if that is the case.

DTOMThis essentially means that a great deal of our population has been conditioned to view firearms as a threat. They have been conditioned to view gun owners as a threat. The government continually refers to those that will be willing to defend their liberties in the face of tyranny, such as veterans, The Tea Party and other patriotic groups as “terrorists.” The term terrorist goes a long way in granting governments the power to act in the name of safety. In other words, the term terrorist, being applied to American citizens standing for the rights of gun owners, identifies us as the enemy. It’s that simple folks.

Also, The NDAA of 2012 identified the United States as a legitimate battle field in the war on terror. Essentially, the term terrorism will eventually encompass any action that goes against the will of global government, which is claiming to be looking out for, and taking care of the poor and oppressed. In the event that any of this comes to fruition, and there is chaos reigning in the streets, this portion of our population will look to the U.N. and other governments for safety and security. This will be best compared to the Jews in Germany voluntarily getting on the choo choo trains.

Holder F&FThere’s very little that can be said anymore other, than its going to take a great deal more than a few patriots and conservative politicians passing pro gun laws to stop what is coming. The right crisis is all it will take, and a great many of you know this. This is the reason we have been divided folks. Our values and the definitions we place on words like freedom and liberty to hatred and racism have been so altered and redefined for the very purpose of keeping us from being able to unite on any one issue.

I have concluded that, in some ways, these people have taken our greatest attribute of individual liberty and destroyed us with it by making it mean anything we wanted it to mean. Individual liberty and freedom have transpired from personal responsibility to multiculturalism, moral relativism, entitl580554_318859484890936_299381022_nement and moral depravity. We have lost value for humanity and yet we wonder why our nation continues to spiral toward Hell at breakneck speed. A great many of us have forsaken God and the meaning He has attached to existence and then we wonder why God has allowed our nation to fall. The connection between all of this and efforts to disarm us is significant because only a moral population that believes and understands their responsibility to protect truth and fight evil will stand and defend what they hold dear; the self-evident truth that we are all created equal, with unalienable rights to pursue that which makes us happy. I have an unalienable right to exist and to protect the existence of those I love and who depend upon me to keep them safe. This is a right that governments have no right to take from any of us, yet so many of us are willing to surrender it for false promises. It’s a damn shame too, because their ignorance will affect us all.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,082 other followers