‘Will Paris Finally Wakeup America’

Source: ‘Will Paris Finally Wakeup America’


On November 13, 2015, Obama assured America and the world “ISIS was not getting stronger, we have contained them”. His usual pathological lying was evinced hours later when Muslim terrorists, supposedly ISIS but Muslim vermin nonetheless, brutally attacked hundreds of innocent people throughout Paris and summarily slaughtered more than 129. This occurred while Paris was under a ‘high terror alert’.

France Was The Muslim’s Perfect Target: Common sense tells us that these attacks were well planned by professionals over a period of time and perfectly executed. It should be abundantly clear that the Muslim terrorists did not simply waltz into Paris on 11/13/15 and start shooting it up for the sake of terror in the name of Allah. France’s open border policy and warm, eager welcome to all Muslims provided the perfect environment and training ground for these barbarians to go unnoticed while planning, rehearsing, and executing their attacks.

Europe’s Comeuppance For Opening Borders To Muslims: France is one of the European countries that enthusiastically opened its borders to and warmly embraced indigent tribal Muslims. Angela Merkel is leading the charge and inundating Germany with hundreds of thousands of Muslims falsely claiming to be Syrian ‘refugees’ seeking political asylum. Once landed Muslims are fed, clothed, housed, and provided with money. The crude tribal culture inherent in Islam naturally accompanies them to the host country where they eagerly partake in their favorite activities:

  • Violence
• Theft
• Raping women and children
• Establishing Sharia law
• Ingratitude

As a result of Europe’s stupidity in opening its doors to all Muslims, disease infested or not, without the slightest thought of a vetting process their countries are being overrun and ravaged by incalculable hordes of these feral animals with tribal cultures. I wrote extensively on the Muslim invasion of Europe in my 9/27/15 blog which I encourage you to read for additional information at Suthenboy Archives.

Wise European Countries Say Enough: The Muslim situation in Europe with Islam’s inherent tribal culture of violence, disrespect for local laws and citizens, lack of personal hygiene, and indifference towards the environment, is now out of control. The leaders of many countries are facing rebellion by their citizenry and rightly so. It is important to note that 99% of the Muslim invaders are strong young men; not ‘needy’ refugees consisting of the elderly, women, and children as they are deceitfully and intentionally portrayed by their brother Obama and his ilk of amoral liars comprising the MSM.

Europe’s Muslim Invasion Experience: For skeptics and those of you genuinely interested in the truth about the adverse ramifications Europe is sustaining as a direct result of allowing Muslims to invade their countries en-masse, I encourage you to view and ponder this shocking video: https://vimeo.com/145634354 . Pay close attention to the following:

  • Thousands of Muslims marching through Europe like massive invading armies
• Muslims yelling ‘allahu akbar’ while swearing at and otherwise insulting their foolish hosts
• Muslims threatening to annihilate European Whites through mass forced inbreeding
• Unbelievable comments by citizens

Also bear in mind that but for the Atlantic Ocean the same ilk of Muslim barbarians would be marching through and ravaging America, her citizens, traditions, and culture at the open invitation of Obama and Congress.

Muslim Terrorist Cells In America: It would be remiss to think that only a handful of active Muslim terror cells exist in America. These savages easily blend in to our society as they did in Paris and as they did prior to their handiwork on 9/11. Today, however, Muslims have the benefit of political correctness protecting them from being profiled, watched, or otherwise surveilled because such ‘intrusive’ conduct would be ‘offensive’ to Obama’s precious darlings.

This wide umbrella of protection affords Muslim vermin more opportunity, time, and freedom of movement to carefully plan and rehearse their nefarious attacks against America… and they will be forthcoming. In my opinion it would represent the height of naivety to believe such planning has not been in process under the authorities noses for quite some time because America represents the grand prize for Islam and ultimately another caliphate.

Indifference To America’s Security: Meanwhile, notwithstanding the security of America, Obama and his Congressional sycophants are illegally importing indigent tribal Muslims by the hundreds of thousands under the ruse of classifying the Godforsaken animals as political asylees. To further compound the obvious terror threat, the DHS has categorically stated that it is impossible to vet these Muslim aliens. However, that ‘up-beat’ news has not deterred Obama and Congress from accelerating and increasing the number of tribal Muslims they are shoving down America’s throat. Obama’s policy is not unlike politically correct Hollande and his ilk of fools in France who are now paying an extremely high price for their inexcusable gross negligence clearly bordering on if not treason per se.

Hollonde ordered France’s borders closed just a tad late: America’s virtual borders remain open to the world’s non-White indigent tribal filth. They are porous and ineffective thanks to Obama’s lax immigration policy and ordering Borer Patrol Agents to provide requisite first aid to all aliens entering the US illegally before enforcing immigration laws. I’m sure Muslim terrorists are well aware of and have tested the ease of access to American soil.

Obama’s Congressional Sycophants: The majority of Congress aggressively supports Obama’s illegal immigration, illegal amnesty, and open border policy for all indigent, depraved, non-White tribal filth. In my opinion they will express their faux thoughts on Paris, call the slaughter an aberration that will not occur in America, defend Muslims, and then spew the usual political effluvium. Following Obama’s lead, not one of them will have the guts to speak truthfully and call the barbarians murderers in Paris Muslims. Good luck with that!

Your next vote is crucial to the security and greatness of America that has been intentionally eroded over the past 6 ½ years. Remember the people in Congress that supported Obama’s illegal immigration and blanket amnesty for all illegals in our country.

Putin’s Military Intervention in Syria Exposing Obama TREASON – Freedom Outpost

Putin’s Military Intervention in Syria Exposing Obama TREASON

A huge firestorm is brewing for the Obama regime and all those in Washington who supported his decision to arm, send billions of dollars to, train militarily, and help on the battlefield to terrorist organizations in Syria who are now known as ISIS.

Since Russia’s Vladimir Putin decided to help the Bashar Assad government in Syria get rid of the rebels, who are now ISIS, more and more evidence is turning up on a daily basis to prove that the Obama regime has been solely responsible all along for the creation, support, and training of this radical Islamist terrorist group

In the few weeks Russia has been fighting Obama’s army in Syria, we have learned through the Russian military the extent of support the US has been providing this terrorist organization. First of all, the Obama administration supplied ISIS with perhaps hundreds of Toyota Hilux trucks, although the official number is at 43 trucks, an obvious gross under estimate.

Secondly, we have actual US military dropping supplies and weapons to ISIS under the guise of mistaken air drops.

Thirdly, the US has been fighting the Assad government, not ISIS.

Many will remember Obama’s push to bomb the Assad government in Syria in 2012 to help terrorist factions overthrow the legitimate Syrian government. Since he could not garner the support for it, he openly began to support them in every way possible, in doing so the US clandestine agencies formed what is now known as ISIS. Make no mistake, there are absolutely no “moderate” terrorist factions the US is supporting in Syria, they are all what the name implies, terrorists.

To the time of this writing, the Obama Administration continues to openly support terrorist groups in Syria.

With this in mind, we are now fighting a proxy war with Russia because the Obama Administration refuses to stop supporting terrorist organizations around the world. The fact that the US began supporting radical Islam under President Obama should show us that we are now under the power of a rouge government, completely separate from the people, laws, and morals of what the United States is supposed to stand for.

We can see that the Federal government isn’t concerned with any terrorist threat in the fact that we have an open border with Mexico, if they were, this would not be so.

The NSA’s domestic spying program is completely designed to keep tabs on Americans and has nothing to do with monitoring international terrorist organizations. The rouge US government would have to have such a program to keep tabs on Patriotic Americans who will someday get fed up and take matters in their own hands in the form of civil unrest and all-out war.

The relentless push for gun control is also this rouge government’s insurance plan to make sure US citizens are not armed well enough to accomplish such an endeavor.

Realistically, since the Obama Regime is now openly supporting what we were told is our enemy, we should realize such unconstitutional laws as the Patriot Act, NDAA, and the government’s continuous effort to control the internet is designed to scrutinize US citizens, not terrorists.

The Federal government is using TSA and DHS, not for catching terrorists, but for monitoring US citizens. The DHS has and continues to make every effort to destroy all aspects of what made the US great by assisting the invasion of illegals from Mexico and Central America into our country by bus, plane, train, and the coordination of immigrants in these countries for their trip here.

Now we have the prospect of getting hundreds of thousands of so called Syrian refugees brought here over the next year. These people are mostly ISIS terrorists, their associates, and families being brought here under the guise of refugees. Notice, none of these supposed refugees are Christians. What the Rouge Socialist Dictatorship hopes to accomplish is a total transformation of the US society from that of a Christian, constitutional abiding, and Patriotic one to a society where we would be the minority and have to fight our new neighbors as well as the government in a Civil War.

Aiding and abetting the enemy is considered treason, under the current laws in the US any US citizens caught sending money, helping in logistics over the internet, and collaborating with any terrorist or terrorist organization would result in them being arrested and imprisoned. Yet, the President and those supporting his anti-American policies in Washington remain free while openly supporting the enemy.

We know the people in the Senate and House who supported Obama’s push for aid to the enemy in Syria. Topping the list of treasonous support for aiding our enemy is John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Those lawmakers who were front runners in opposing such an anti-American move were Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.

The one thing the military moves in Syria made by Russia’s Vladimir Putin has done is expose the treason committed by the Obama Regime in supporting terrorism.

Are we American citizens ready to go to war with Russia in support of radical terrorists if things deteriorate to that level? I would hope not, if we did, it would mean the US is fighting WWIII on the side of terrorists while the American people live under what amounts to a socialist dictatorship, suppressing their freedom under the guise of protecting them from the very people the Federal government says is our enemy.

The War on Terror has been a ruse for the United States to dominate the world and transform our once free nation into a socialist dictatorship. This has become quite clear since the Obama regime took power and blatantly began to help terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, etc. take over governments in the Mid-East, N. Africa, and various other countries in Indonesia and Asia.

The entire Arab Spring riots were created by US clandestine organizations to take out sovereign governments opposed to any form of radical Islam. Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak was replaced by the Muslim Brotherhood, until the people of Egypt had enough of being ruled by terrorists and replaced them.

The US replaced the Gaddafi government in Libya with Islamic State Militants which are terrorists. 

Throughout Obama’s tenure, he has supported terrorist organizations around the world with billions of dollars in funds, billions of dollars in arms, actual military training, help on the battlefield, and supply drops for them in battle zones under the guise of mistakes. In doing so, Obama has made the US the world’s largest terrorist supporter.

The Benghazi attacks were a big part of the Obama Administration’s plan to run guns and supplies to terrorist groups, both for the upcoming war in Libya at the time and for radical terrorist groups aiming to take down the Assad government in Syria. 

Thanks to Vladimir Putin, the Obama regime may not be able to finish out its last remaining few months.

Prominent Liberal Physicist: GOP on the “Right Side” of Global Warming Debate – The Last Resistance

Freeman Dyson is a 91-year-old physicist who says he likes Obama and is “100% Democrat.” But where he parts ways with the President and the rest of the Democratic party is the subject of global warming. Or climate change. Or whatever it’s called this week.

He said he’s disappointed that not only the Democratic party, but also a whole generation of scientists, deny obvious scientific facts that stare them in the face.

Fox News reported:

It’s very sad that in this country, political opinion parted [people’s views on climate change],” he said, in an interview with The Register. “I’m 100 percent Democrat myself, and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on this issue, and the Republicans took the right side.”

Now retired, Dyson was a professor of physics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton between 1953 and 1994. Famed for his work in quantum electrodynamics and nuclear engineering, Dyson also worked on climate studies during his career.


Climate change, according to Freeman, “is not a scientific mystery but a human mystery. How does it happen that a whole generation of scientific experts is blind to obvious facts?”

20120717humorchokeThe physicist and mathematician argues that pollution caused by fossil fuels has been conflated with climate change. “Coal is very unpleasant stuff, and there are problems with coal quite apart from climate,” he said. “Pollution is quite separate to the climate problem: one can be solved, and the other cannot, and the public doesn’t understand that.”

During his interview with The Register Dyson noted shortcomings in climate models. “What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies between what’s observed and what’s predicted have become much stronger,” he said. “It’s clear now the models are wrong, but it wasn’t so clear 10 years ago. I can’t say if they’ll always be wrong, but the observations are improving and so the models are becoming more verifiable.”

Dyson also wrote a strong foreword to a report published Monday by The Global Warming Policy Foundation, which calls for a reassessment of carbon dioxide. “To any unprejudiced person reading this account, the facts should be obvious: that the non-climatic effects of carbon dioxide as a sustainer of wildlife and crop plants are enormously beneficial, that the possibly harmful climatic effects of carbon dioxide have been greatly exaggerated, and that the benefits clearly outweigh the possible damage,” he wrote.

endthelie Liberal cheerleaders will likely chime in and claim that he’s an old crank who’s not even a climatologist. He’s just a theoretical physicist and mathematician. And besides, he’s retired. What does he know?

In order to be a “legitimate” manmade global warming denier in the eyes of liberals, you have to be an actual climatologist. That has to be your field of expertise, and you have to have been in that field for no less than 20 years. And not only that, but you have to have had many of your papers published in “reputable” scientific journals. Of course, even if you were to meet all those criteria, liberals would claim that if you still deny manmade global warming theory, then you don’t deserve any of your credentials, and therefore, you’re not a legitimate scientist.

The more profitable and easy route to take is to be a believer in manmade global warming. That belief in and of itself becomes a person’s credentials, adequate enough to appear legitimate in the eyes of liberals. This is why someone like Bill Nye is looked on as an authority on the subject, even though his background is little more than a kids’ TV show personality

A prominent physicist does not agree with liberals on the global warming issue.

Source: Prominent Liberal Physicist: GOP on the “Right Side” of Global Warming Debate – The Last Resistance

Social Security Will Not Get Cost of Living Adjustment in 2016 – The Last Resistance

Posted Michael Minkoff

People on Social Security “benefits” will not see a cost-of-living increase in 2016. This is only the third time since 1975 that this has happened, and Social Security recipients are not happy about it for obvious reasons:

The annual cost of living adjustment, or COLA, is based on the government’s measure of inflation. This year’s lack of COLA has Social Security beneficiaries worried. “It’s terrible the way they’re doing old people that have worked all their lives and are barely getting enough to live on,” said 80-year-old Effie Wagers, a Social Security recipient. “Now they wanna take that? No, No. It’s not right,” she concluded.

This brings to the surface many major problems I have with the Social Security system.

First, Social Security payments should not be called benefits. Basically every single person on Social Security has paid money into the system. That’s not a “benefit,” then. That’s a dividend on an investment. But that brings up the second major problem: it’s a terrible investment.

For most workers, especially in recent years, if the same money they had paid in payroll taxes for Social Security had been deposited into the worst, most spartan savings account of all time, the savings account would provide a better return on investment. Forget the savings account. If people merely put cash in their mattress, it would actually be a better “investment” than Social Security. The most recent stats on this anger me greatly, especially since no one has the choice to opt out of Social Security:


People retiring today are part of the first generation of workers who have paid more in Social Security taxes during their careers than they will receive in benefits after they retire. It’s a historic shift that will only get worse for future retirees, according to an analysis by The Associated Press.

Previous generations got a much better bargain, mainly because payroll taxes were very low when Social Security was enacted in the 1930s and remained so for decades.

Do you understand that? You will get less back from Social Security than you put in. That’s not an investment. That’s just burning money. And you don’t have a choice. And if Social Security is your only income in retirement, the civil government has another way of screwing you over. Which brings me to the third major problem with Social Security: inflation.

I guarantee the cost of living adjustment for Social Security only offsets the rate of loss from inflation. I’m sure it doesn’t fully compensate for it. The civil government talks a lot about helping the poor, raising the minimum wage, and protecting the livelihood of the elderly and disabled. Inflation is the worst enemy of the poor. Yet the civil government refuses to fix their monetary policy. To me, that’s the only way to actually benefit the little guy, including those people who rely on Social Security “dividends.”

Source: Social Security Will Not Get Cost of Living Adjustment in 2016 – The Last Resistance

Congress Should Impeach EPA Head Gina McCarthy – And Then a Whole Bunch of Other Bureaucrats – Tea Party Nation

The national Republican Party is currently in the midst of a slow-motion train wreck.  Their presidential primary has amply demonstrated their Base’s profound disaffection.  You can call it anger, you can call it delusion – you can call it a tuna fish sandwich.  But when 70+% of your voters don’t like anyone having anything to do with anything you’ve been doing – you absolutely call it a problem.


And when it’s this big, it’s a problem for the Party – not their voters.  There’s an old banking joke: If someone owes the bank $10,000 – that someone has a problem.  But if someone owes the bank $10 million – the bank has a problem.  70+% is the bank having a problem.  


The Party remains somewhere in Egypt – along the banks of Denial.  It likes to dismiss these people with incredibly flattering terms like “Crazies.”  And elected officials these people actually like with terms of endearment like “Jackass.”  Because you always go far when insulting the majority of your voters. 


Speaker John Boehner is turning in his gavel and leaving Congress – apparently because everyone thinks he’s done a phenomenal job.  And on his way out the door he is denouncing his voters for having “unrealistic expectations.”  He would know – they have them in large part because his Party and their campaign minions set them every election cycle when they’re lying to get votes. 


They last October ran thousands of ads promising to defund ObamaCare and President Barack Obama’s unConstitutional fiat amnesty.  People then ridiculously expected them to defund ObamaCare and Obama’s amnesty.  Talk about “unrealistic expectations.”  Immediately after the election, the GOP funded both.  And are now saying to their voters what Otter said to Flounder in Animal House: “You f***ed up – you trusted us.”


All of this is part of a larger problem.  The GOP appears to be at best utterly indifferent to – at worst complacently complicit with – this President’s all-encompassing, omni-directional unConstitutional overreaches.  He and his many, many political bureaucrats are every second of every day dramatically exceeding their legal bounds to exponentially grow government.  And the GOP has done just about nothing to stop any of it. 


We the People gave the GOP the Congress – and thus the power of the purse.  Yet every time a potential political scrap looms anywhere way out on the distant horizon – the GOP Leadership goes into a preemptive cringe.  And screeches from their crouch that they pinky-swear-promise they absolutely will not use their power of the purse.  One would think that if you from a deep sleep shook awake Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, he would reflexively yell “No shutdown!”


What HAS the GOP done?  Well, they sued ObamaCare.  Which is at best extra-Constitutional – I don’t recall any of our Founders mentioning calling the trial bar as a remedy to tyranny.  But there is a non-shutdown, Constitutional remedy at their disposal – they can impeach bureaucrats. 


A government shutdown (which is really only ever like a 13%-of-the-government shutdown) is inarguably high profile – and thus the merest mention thereof causes Republicans to run for a corner in which to collectively cower.  A Presidential impeachment is also very visible. 


But the American people’s initial response to impeaching a bureaucrat would most likely be “What?  Who?”  The repeal of these faceless cogs in Obama’s Machine would allow the GOP to not just pretend to oppose this President’s agenda – but ACTUALLY oppose this President’s agenda.  In a way that has little prospective political cost – and thus shouldn’t cause their fragile constitutions any discomfort.  And it affords them opportunities to message on the concepts and advantages of legal and less government. 


Arguably no bureaucrat deserves impeachment more than Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) head Gina McCarthy.  Arizona Republican Congressman Paul Gosar rightly thinks it’s time

For far too long, Congress has allowed unelected bureaucrats and executive branch officials to slowly bend and break the laws of this country in order to further their own partisan political agendas. We have reached a breaking point where the American people have no faith in the fundamental checks and balances put in place by our founders to protect  our liberties and freedoms.


On numerous occasions, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy broke the law by lying to Congress in order to force misguided and overreaching regulations, which have no scientific basis, down our throats. Perjury before Congress is perjury to the American people and an affront to the core principles of our Republic and the rule of law…


Lying to Congress is not an unserious thing.  This Administration’s first Attorney General, Eric Holder, was found in Contempt of Congress for withholding information therefrom.  A problem with a Contempt of Congress charge for the Attorney General is – the Attorney General is the one who is supposed to mete out punishment.  When the Executive Branch is supposed to discipline itself,….


Impeachment bypasses this self-dealing.  Congress impeaches – the bureaucrat goes.  Miss McCarthy repeatedly lied about policies that are incredibly damaging to just about every sector of the private economy.  She repeatedly lied so as to protect and advance their anti-capitalism agenda – at the expense of the rule of law and Congressional oversight.  She needs to go.


The GOP should remove her – and use the process as an opportunity to detail the very obvious case for why. And when they see the sky doesn’t come crashing down upon them – they should feel liberated to lather, rinse and repeat with all manner of McCarthy’s out-of-control colleagues.


And as an added bonus – their Base will love it.  It is the very good policy – that is also very good politics.  If the GOP wants to save themselves from a fate worse than Trump – they should get busy doing it. 

Is Arctic Sea Ice Set to Disappear? – The Last Resistance

IcyAlGoreClimate scientists are saying that Arctic Sea ice is on the verge of disappearing in the summers. Irreversibly. But other data indicate otherwise.


You hear it all around from global warming alarmists: Arctic Sea ice is melting at an “irreversible” rate due to global warming, and it won’t be able to recover. But it seems the reports of Arctic Sea ice disappearance have been greatly exaggerated:

In fact, Arctic sea ice extent as a whole seems to be stabilizing despite this year’s record low maximum in February. NSIDC data shows Arctic sea ice extent is currently within the normal range based on the 1981 to 2010 average extent.

“Global sea ice is at a record high, another key indicator that something is working in the opposite direction of what was predicted,” Dr. Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Forum, told the U.K. Express in January.

“Most people think the poles are melting… they’re not,” he said. “This is a huge inconvenience that reality is now catching up with climate alarmists, who were predicting that the poles would be melting fairly soon.”

The Arctic Sea ice trends are actually quite variable. About as variable as glacier melt, actually. Which means that the only way to create a compelling trend is to cherry-pick data. Which seems to be just about exactly what global warming alarmists have been doing.


This continues a much more predictable trend among global warming scientists. You can’t entirely blame them. The fact is that creating predictions for complex and highly variable natural phenomena is a bit of a crap shoot. Things seem to be going a certain direction until they’re not. And even when you are able to accurately graph certain trends, the causation for those trends is not necessarily any easier to ascertain. Even if there has been a warming or a melting trend, that doesn’t necessarily mean that human involvement or greenhouse gases are to blame.

And the vanishing point on these trends continues to fluctuate. Some climate scientists are saying that the Arctic Sea will be free of ice during summers as soon as 2040. They thought it might be earlier than that just a few years ago. But the change of things keeps changing, and coming up with accurate long-term predictions continues to be aiming at a moving target. The only thing that hasn’t changed is the agenda. And that’s what really concerns me.

The failed state of America – Tea Party Nation


The words “failed state” and America are not used too often in the same sentence but perhaps it is time that they were. 

The words “failed state” and Mexico are used frequently in the same sentence and there is a reason for that.  Now something is happening in America that has been happening in Mexico that may make those words applicable here.


What is it?


Recently Republican Presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson toured the Arizona border along with Sheriff Paul Babeu.  The tour was to highlight the issue of illegal immigration for Carson’s campaign.  But the event highlighted something else that the Democrats and the Washington establishment don’t want to talk about.


We have lost control of part of America.


Sheriff Babeu pointed out to Carson that upwards of 70 miles into the United States, drug cartels control the countryside.  Think about that for a second.  Up to 70 miles north of the Mexican border, drug cartels have operational control of the countryside.


The definition of sovereignty for a nation is not only national borders but the ability to control the territory within those borders.


America is losing its national sovereignty to Mexican drug cartels and most of the major candidates for President don’t care. Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush don’t want to do anything about the border.  They do want to give Amnesty to tens of millions of illegal aliens who broke America’s laws to enter this nation.  They don’t have time for the American victims of crimes committed by illegal aliens.


A few years ago, I was on the Arizona border and I spoke with ranchers who lived there.  They were prisoners on their own property.  The could not leave their ranches for more than a few hours. If they did, their homes would be looted and their property destroyed. 


The destruction of American sovereignty is being aided and abetted by the usual left wing suspects.  Left wing lawyers are suing the Border Patrol over the death of an illegal alien. This illegal alien was a passenger on a boat trying to smuggle illegal aliens into the United States.  The driver of the boat refused to stop and eventually the Border Patrol boat and the smuggler’s boat collided.  The illegal alien was thrown into the ocean and died.


A criminal is killed while committing a crime and the left wants to sue America for it.


In Texas, ranchers live in fear of illegal aliens being injured while trespassing on their property.  Again, they are worried about being sued by leftwing lawyers.


There is a simple solution. Congress can pass a law that states anyone in this nation illegally lacks the standing to sue.  But Congress won’t do that because a majority of them support illegal aliens more than they support real Americans.


There is a reason why Donald Trump is surging in the polls.  He is speaking about this issue when the Democrats and most Republicans wish this issue would just go away. 


America is losing her sovereignty to a failed state.  The tragedy is neither the Republicans nor the Democrats give a damn as long as they can pander to a group they think will extend their grip on power. 


The sad truth is there isn’t any difference between Democrats and the Establishment Republicans.  

Here Comes the Small Arms Treaty Again – Freedom Outpost

Here Comes the Small Arms Treaty Again – Freedom Outpost.

Recently, we witnessed the circus that is the United States Senate completely surrender its constitutional powers to the executive branch. Last November, we went to the polls and handed the Republican establishment the largest majority it has had in decades, only to watch them capitulate to the Obama regime on every single issue. From failing to defund Obamacare, reign in spending, and, most recently, stop the Iran deal, the Republicans have shown themselves to be the traitorous, communist infiltrators they are. What people need to see is that there is a conditioning process taking place, and the events revolving around the Iran nuclear deal are the most recent example. Here, little by little, Mitch McConnell, along with Bob Corker, virtually reworked the treaty provisions in the Constitution. The U.S. Senate is the only congressional body that has treaty-making powers, and they completely reworked the entire process, giving the president nearly all of the advantage. Treaties, under the U.S. constitution, need a two thirds vote from senators for ratification. Under the Corker bill, in order to stop the Iran deal, there would need to be a two thirds vote to stop it from being implemented by the White House. Why would the U.S. Senate surrender such an important aspect of their constitutional authority? Is there another agenda at work? Sadly, the answer to that question is yes. Many argue that the Iran deal is not a treaty but an agreement. The Senate had the authority to make it a treaty. Why didn’t they? It all revolves around a conditioning process designed to get the masses to accept the next big agenda item–The U.N. Small Arms Treaty. Many U.S. Senators have openly stated that they refuse to ratify this traitorous treaty; however, the new process established by the Corker bill may very well have changed the way treaties are passed from here on out.

There has been a lot of controversy surrounding the Small Arms Treaty. Many insist that it is international in scope and in no way would affect your right as an American to keep and bear arms. This a foolish assumption motivated by a fear of taking the time to do some research. The text of the treaty is quite clear in its intentions to disarm civilian populations, or people deemed to be “unauthorized recipients” of firearms and ammunition. The language of the treaty can be very misleading, as there are paragraphs that seem to support an individual’s right to own firearms based on the nation state’s own laws and constitutional systems. Take this paragraph from the Annex, concerning the pretext of the treaty, for example:

Mindful of the legitimate trade and lawful ownership, and use of certain conventional arms for recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities, where such trade, ownership and use are permitted or protected by law,

Many people would read that and assume that, because our constitution protects our rights to keep and bear arms, this treaty would not affect us in anyway. The only problem with this assumption is that law makers from many states have changed their gun laws. Semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines are no longer legal to own, in several parts of the country. This changes the term “permitted or protected by law” drastically. States like New York, Oregon and Connecticut have already passed new gun registration laws that have yielded a low success rate of compliance. Situations like this are where the next part of the treaty would be helpful.

Article 16 International Assistance

1. In implementing this Treaty, each State Party may seek assistance including legal or legislative assistance, institutional capacity-building, and technical, material or financial assistance. Such assistance may include stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programs, model legislation, and effective practices for implementation. Each State Party in a position to do so shall provide such assistance, upon request.

2. Each State Party may request, offer or receive assistance through, inter alia, the United Nations, international, regional, sub regional or national organizations, non-governmental organizations, or on a bilateral basis.

3. A voluntary trust fund shall be established by States Parties to assist requesting States Parties requiring international assistance to implement this Treaty. Each State Party is encouraged to contribute resources to the fund.

President Obama would very much like to get Australian-type gun control laws passed, in which case, there would be very little that is “protected by law” that this treaty could not affect. In the event that people fail to comply with such laws, as they have in New York and other states, the U.N. would have legal authority to come in and assist local governments in disarming efforts. In fact, it is highly likely that the recent racial strife we have witnessed was intentionally fomented in order to push us into conflict; in which case, U.N. peace keepers would also have the authority to disarm conflicting parties under this treaty. The U.N. Program of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects states the following:

21. To develop and implement, where possible, effective disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programs, including the effective collection, control, storage and destruction of small arms and light weapons, particularly in post-conflict situations, unless another form of disposition or use has been duly authorized and such weapons have been marked and the alternate form of disposition or use has been recorded, and to include, where applicable, specific provisions for these programs in peace agreements.

Many people believe that ratification of this treaty would be an act of treason against the United States constitution that our politicians have sworn to uphold and defend, and, truthfully, it would be. Unfortunately, plans to disarm the United States have been in place for nearly six decades. State Department Publication 7277 describes the objectives of the United States as seeking a world free from war, where all nation states have been disarmed and merged into a system of international control in line with standards set by the United Nations.


The over-all goal of the United States is a free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world which has achieved general and complete disarmament under effective international control; and a world in which adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.

In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts:

  • The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;
  • The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;
  • The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations;
  • The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to insure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.

The U.N. Small Arms Treaty is the culmination of this plan. It is hard to argue that our military is not what it once was. Not only have our forces been reduced to almost nothing, but they have also been psychologically disarmed, as they have become a breeding ground of political correctness and social experiments. Our police forces are also being psychologically disarmed, as they are afraid to do their job, due to the intentional fomenting of racial strife. The disarming of military forces is the first stage of this plan. Stage two would include the establishment of a permanent peacekeeping force within the framework of the United Nations; and stage three would be the destruction of all remaining arms, in order to maintain international order. If you believe, at this point, that our second amendment will mean anything, you are foolish. If they are successful in disarming our military, there is no chance they will allow the civilian population to be armed.

This is high treason on a grand scale. The Obama administration has been involved in numerous scandals which involved gun running operations: Fast and Furious, which was used as a pretext to discredit the second amendment; and Benghazi, which was a gun smuggling operation arming Islamic terrorists for the purpose of taking out Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad. President Obama has no right to move forward with this treaty, and doing so is, in fact, an act of treason against the American people. Only a mass movement of noncompliance can stop this.

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/08/here-comes-the-small-arms-treaty-again/#PK5acTReXWxsWUwo.99

The Plot to Impose a National Sales Tax or Value Added Tax – Freedom Outpost

The Plot to Impose a National Sales Tax or Value Added Tax – Freedom Outpost.

Posted by

A devilish plot is afoot to impose new national taxes on the American People. It is a masterful piece of trickery because the authorization for the new national taxes is buried within Compact for America’s version of a balanced budget amendment to the US Constitution.

Furthermore, the balanced budget amendment does nothing to control federal spending; and transforms our Constitution from one of limited and defined powers to one of general and unlimited powers. 1

Yet this monstrosity is pending in Michigan as SB 306 2 and in North Carolina as HB 366.
3 Legislators in four States, Alaska, Georgia, Mississippi and North Dakota, have already passed it.

Let’s look at Sections 1-6 of Compact for America’s balanced budget amendment:

It does Nothing to Control Federal Spending

Section 1 allows Congress to spend as much as they take from us in taxes and add to the national debt.
That’s a good idea?

Sections 2 and 3 permit Congress to raise the debt whenever 26 States agree.  States are addicted to federal funds. Will 25 States agree not to take more federal funds?

Section 4 is a joke:  Who believes Congress will impeach a President for refusing to “impound” an appropriation made by Congress? Congress won’t even impeach a President for Treason.

How Authorization for the New Taxes is Hidden

Section 5 says:

“No bill that provides for a new or increased general revenue tax shall become law unless approved by a two-thirds roll call vote of the whole number of each House of Congress….” [italics mine]

What is a “general revenue tax“? Section 6 defines it:

“…’general revenue tax’ means any income tax, sales tax, or value-added tax levied by the government of the United States…” [italics mine]

Now go back to Section 5 and substitute the definition of “general revenue tax” for that term:

“No bill that provides for a new or increased income tax, sales tax, or value-added tax levied by the government of the United States shall become law unless approved by a two-thirds roll call vote of the whole number of each House of Congress….”

There it is: All that’s needed is approval of two-thirds of the members of each House and a new national sales tax and/or value added tax is imposed on us. And they can increase it, along with increasing the income tax, whenever they get two-thirds of the members to vote for it.

Section 5 also permits Congress to make laws to impose a new “end user sales tax” 4 which would replace the income tax – this “end user sales tax” is passed by a simple majority of both houses.

So! Compact for America’s balanced budget amendment provides two options to Congress:

  • Two-thirds of the members of both Houses can impose a new sales tax and/or value-added tax in addition to the income tax; or
  • A simple majority of both Houses can impose “a new end user sales tax” which replaces the income tax.

Which option will Congress choose?

Our Constitution Doesn’t Now Authorize a National Sales Tax or Value-added Tax

Article I, §8, clause 1 says:

“The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises…”

Principles of Compact for America say this clause already authorizes a national sales tax or value added tax. Board Vice-President Chip DeMoss said on Feb. 12, 2014:

“a national sales tax would be an “impost” (defined as a tax or similar compulsory payment) that is authorized under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1…” [see comment 19].

We may not properly use DeMoss’ redefinition of “impost”!

We must use the definition of “impost” our Framers used: The Federalist Papers say an “impost” is a tax or duty on imports. Type imposts in the search box [at the link] and the Papers discussing imposts will come up. See for yourself that an “impost” is a tax or duty on imports.

Webster’s 1828 Dictionary defines “impost” as:

“…Any tax or tribute imposed by authority; particularly, a duty or tax laid by government on goods imported, and paid or secured by the importer at the time of importation. Imposts are also called customs.”

Do you see?

National sales taxes and value-added taxes are also not “excise” taxes. Excise taxes are a tax on a unit of goods – such as the infamous whiskey excise tax of 1791 which led to the Whiskey Rebellion. 5 It imposed a flat tax per gallon. The tax was payable for domestic whiskey at the distillery (§17 of the Act) and the casks were numbered and marked to show the tax had been paid (§19 of the Act).

“Taxes” at Art. I, §8, clause 1 refers to the apportioned direct tax provided for at Art. I, §2, clause 3 of our Constitution.

Our Framers were specific about the kinds of taxes Congress is permitted to impose. Congress does not have the power to impose any kind of tax it wants. Our Framers limited Congress’ taxing power to:

  • the apportioned direct taxes at Art. I, §2, clause 3;
  • the duties or imposts on imports at Art. I, §8, clause 1; and
  • the excises at Art. I, §8, clause 1.

A sales tax is none of the above. A sales tax is a percentage of the retail price of goods. A value-added tax is a “turbo-charged national sales tax on goods and services that is applied at each stage of production, not merely on retail transactions” and raises a “gusher of revenue for spendthrift governments worldwide”.

We have never had a national sales tax or value added tax in this Country. Why? Because they are not authorized by the Constitution.

We were manipulated into supporting the 16th Amendment. We were told the income tax would “soak the rich” – and the envious drooled at the prospect.

And so again today, statists are seeking to trick us into supporting a national sales tax or a value added tax: first, by concealing it within the verbiage of the bill; 6 and then, once the trickery was exposed, by claiming the Constitution already authorizes these new types of taxes.

There is a Better Way: Downsize the Federal Government!

Our Constitution limits federal spending to the enumerated powers. The list of objects on which Congress may lawfully spend money is a short list.
See the list HERE.

Most of what the federal government does today is unconstitutional as outside the scope of the powers delegated by the Constitution. Let’s cut federal spending by downsizing the federal government to its enumerated powers and constitutional limits.


1 Congress’ spending is limited by the enumerated powers: If an object is on the list of enumerated powers (e.g., the patent & copyright office authorized by Art. I, §8, cl. 8), Congress may lawfully spend money on it. That’s how our Constitution already controls federal spending.

All versions of a balanced budget amendment change the constitutional standard for spending FROM whether an object is on the list of enumerated powers TO a limit on total spending where Congress may spend money on whatever they or the President put in the budget. This is what transforms our Constitution FROM one of enumerated powers only TO one of general and unlimited powers. And that is the true purpose of a balanced budget amendment. It has nothing to do with limiting federal spending – the pretended spending limits are fictitious since they may be waived whenever the feds [and 26 of the States] want to waive them.

2 Leon Drolet’s article of July 10, 2015, and Sam Easter’s article of July 8, 2015, about SB 306 pending in Michigan don’t mention the new national taxes.

3 Matthew Burns’ article about the hearing on HB 366 before N. Carolina’s House Judiciary Committee (which passed HB 366) doesn’t mention the new national taxes. Burns quotes the Bill’s sponsor, Rep. Chris Millis, as saying the problem is “Washington is unwilling or unable to limit itself.” So the solution is to massively increase Congress’ taxing powers?

4 “End user sales tax” is not defined in the balanced budget amendment.

5 Apparently, the practice of tarring & feathering “revenuers” began with the Whiskey Excise Tax.

6 The trickery was exposed over a year ago HERE. Since then, they have claimed the Constitution already authorizes the new taxes. Are we too gullible to be free? PH

Limiting the Federal Government by Restoring Freedom and Power to the States – Eagle Rising

Limiting the Federal Government by Restoring Freedom and Power to the States – Eagle Rising.

By / 17 August 2015

“Hi!  I’m from the government, and I’m here to help!”  —Ronald Reagan, citing what he thought were the Ten Most Dangerous Words in the English Language


A Big-Government Scandal

It looks like an Environment Protection Agency bureaucrat, to make the EPA more important in the minds of Americans, recently created an ecological catastrophe in New Mexico.  A New Mexico resident with 47 years of relevant experience warned the EPA what would happen if they did not change what they were doing, but the decision was made to do it anyway.  So the EPA’s shenanigans were on purpose!

Had there been no EPA, and local authorities had had oversight, this disaster would never have occurred.  It is far-away central planners—disconnected from local communities—who so often choose to be negligent, since they are free from any local accountability.  (Read about the latest EPA scandal here.)


Creating a Monster

The US government was created by the sovereign states, not the other way around.  Therefore, the federal government is there to do the bidding of the states, and of the people, rather than dictating to them.  There were three co-equal branches upon the nation’s founding, but there are, today, so many executive-branch departments—all of them massive in size and in the scope of their powers—that an imperial executive has been allowed to evolve.  America has, indeed, created a Leviathan.


The Road to Hell . . .

image: http://cdn1.eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/constitution-300×300.jpg

purpose of constitutionThe original intent of creating an executive department is to help our chief executive—the president—to enforce the laws passed by Congress.  But each department has ended up hiring its own army of bureaucrats to “help.”  And the result has been that each one has created rules that carry the force of law.  And none of these rules has ever been given the consent of the governed.  Many rules have even been scandalously written by lobbyists from the very organizations the departments were created to regulate.  Hundreds of thousands of rules—known collectively as “administrative law”—have been instituted, regardless of the fact that there is no provision in the Constitution that lends legitimacy to most of these.  So, good intentions are never enough; the proverbial road to hell is paved with good intentions.  

Cutting the Executive Down to Size

The best alternative to reform the problem of tempting a potentially scofflaw executive—who might make end-runs around the Congress simply by having department heads make new rules—is to rid the government of its tyrannical departments.  Rather than having so many executive departments, the enforcement mechanism for these laws should be the sovereign states themselves.  If a state is not complying with a legitimate federal law—one falling within the scope of the Enumerated Powers Clause (see here) the Department of Justice could always sue the state to force compliance.


Washington’s Original Concept of a Cabinet of Advisors

When George Washington took office, he created four governmental departments: the Department of Justice, the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of War (now the Department of Defense).  Any other departments should be eliminated.  Some of them have functions that could be taken over by the four departments that remain.  Others should have their functions subsumed by the states.  The states should run all departments and programs not authorized in the Enumerated Powers Clause.


Nullification of Un-Constitutional Laws

image: http://cdn1.eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Jefferson-and-nullification-e1439761226280.jpg

Jefferson and nullificationThe other thing that the sovereign states should do is to refuse to follow any federal law or mandate not within the federal government’s constitutional power to create.  (And, it goes without saying, unconstitutional executive orders, executive memos, and other such executive creations should be treated the same way.)  A federal law creating a welfare program should be nullified by the states, since such programs find no support in the Constitution.  (The General Welfare Clause is a reference to public goods that are created for the protection or use of all the people equally, such as the US military or a public road.)  Of course, a state could create welfare programs on its own, if it chose to do so.  

Nullification of Un-Constitutional Court Rulings

The Supreme Court has made rulings that are unconstitutional.  It is not the Court’s job to rewrite the Constitution.  The power of judicial review does not render the Supreme Court capable of writing law, on its own, independent of the means that are constitutionally mandated for amending the Constitution or passing laws in the Congress.  The Court’s only legitimate role is to rule on the laws as written.

States should ignore—and, therefore, nullify—decisions that are clearly not within the bounds of the Constitution.  If states were to do this, the jurists on the Court would take great pains, in their opinions, to reference what parts of the Constitution authorize them to rule the way they do.  This would mean the Court never could have ruled the way it did in Kelo v. City of New London.  (Read about Kelo here.)


Falling in Love with the Constitution Again

In addition to implementing a policy reducing the executive branch and nullifying unconstitutional decisions by the Supreme Court—or any federal court, for that matter—the states should make sure that they themselves are not infringing the rights of Americans under the Constitution.  Of course, the federal check on this kind of behavior would be a suit brought against a state by the Department of Justice.

Americans have lived under the Incorporation Doctrine for so long that it has become, without much ado, standard practice for each state to apply the federal Constitution locally.  (Before the Incorporation Doctrine, the federal Constitution used to be applied only to areas of federal jurisdiction.)  There needs to be a level playing field, to ensure that everyone is applying the rules fairly.  And for this to happen, the people and their elected officials—if they have not done so already—need to take care to fall in love with the Constitution once again.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,524 other followers