Home

BARACK OBAMA: AMERICA’S FIRST ANTI-AMERICAN PRESIDENT

14 Comments

new-logo25By John Wallace - New York Oath Keepers
www.OathKeepersNY.org
www.LibertyNewsOnLine.com

__________________________________________________

When former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said, “I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that that President Obama loves America. He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.” It took a lot of guts for Rudy to say it, because almost immediately he was attacked by Democrats, the national liberal media and even a few “deflated” Republicans. The attack on Giuliani was almost instantaneous. Anyone who even hinted that they might support Giuliani or had doubts about Mr. Obama’s love for America had to be attacked as mean spirited, cruel, unpatriotic and if those words didn’t work, they had to be called racists.

It was not that Rudy Giuliani wasn’t telling the truth because he was. It was because it was politically incorrect to say such a thing about a sitting president, even though Barack Obama pretty much said the same thing about President George W. Bush while Bush was still the president and Obama was a U.S. Senator. Although I agree with Mr. Giuliani that Barack Obama does not love America, I will go a step further and say it is more serious than our current president not loving this country.

If you remember, before and right after Barack Obama was elected President, he said that he was going to fundamentally transform or change America. If he did really love America, why is he trying so hard to fundamentally change it into a socialist country where the federal government has absolute power over the people? The answer is simple. He wants to change it, not because he loves America, but because he doesn’t even like it. As you shall see in the information outlined later in this article, Barack Obama, from a young age, was indoctrinated by American-hating communists and Marxists into believing that America is an evil capitalist country that must be brought to its knees and punished for being an Anglo-Imperialist country that became rich on the backs of the people of third world countries. More

The DoJ Dodges a Bullet on Wilson/Brown Decision

5 Comments

strip bannernew-logo25Marti Oakley

______________________________________________

A recent article made the statement that ” When officers are on untitledvvvduty, they don’t know if at the end of the day, they are going home, to the hospital or to the morgue”.  Strange, that is just how the public feels when they are confronted by them.

__________________________________________

The Department of Justice (an oxymoron if there ever was one) just issued its decision regarding the death of Michael Brown at the hands of Ferguson, Missouri police officer Wilson that occurred in November 2014. Like millions of other people, I was not there. I have no idea what did or did not happen other than what was related on the MSM, and you already know 99% of what comes from them is pure BS.

The DoJ determined that Michael Brown’s civil rights had not been violated. So, let me get this straight…… according to grand jury testimony, an officer confronts a man in the street and tells him to get on the sidewalk, they argue, scuffle, then he fires a total of 16 shots at him, two from inside his vehicle, one directly through the top of his head within 6-8 inches…..and the DoJ was concerned with whether his civil rights were violated? That’s what they were investigating?

As an aside:   Thanks to what had to have been careful questioning and very rehearsed answers, Wilson swore under oath that he stopped the men because he recognized their clothing from the description given for the robbery……. a robbery he could not and did not know about at the time he confronted Brown.  Did  Wilson knowingly commit perjury and intentionally lie to the grand jury about what really happened that day?

More

THE KINGDOM

1 Comment

strip banner
new-logo25Author, Chuck Frank
lightofthenation.us

________________________________________________

“Americans have reestablished the very sort of power that the Constitution most centrally forbade. Administrative law is extra-legal in that it binds Americans not through law but through other mechanisms—not through statutes but through regulations—and not through the decisions of courts but through other adjudications.” __________________________________________

Twas the day before Christmas and all through the castle not a
creature was stirring not even a vassal. More

I’M TERRIFIED OF MY NEW TV: WHY I’M SCARED TO TURN THIS THING ON — AND YOU’D BE, TOO

8 Comments

By Michael Price –
Brennan Center for Justice

_______________________________________________________

“Don’t say personal or do sensitive stuff in front of the TV.

You may not be watching, but the telescreen is listening.”

_____________________________________________

November 8, 2014

I just bought a new TV. The old one had a good run, but after the volume got stuck on 63, I decided it was time to replace it. I am now the owner of a new “smart” TV, which promises to deliver streaming multimedia content, games, apps, social media, and Internet browsing. Oh, and TV too.

The only problem is that I’m now afraid to use it. You would be too — if you read through the 46-page privacy policy.

The amount of data this thing collects is staggering. It logs where, when, how, and for how long you use the TV. It sets tracking cookies and beacons designed to detect “when you have viewed particular content or a particular email message.” It records “the apps you use, the websites you visit, and how you interact with content.”

It ignores “do-not-track” requests as a considered matter of policy.

It also has a built-in camera — with facial recognition. The purpose is to provide “gesture control” for the TV and enable you to log in to a personalized account using your face. On the upside, the images are saved on the TV instead of uploaded to a corporate server. On the downside, the Internet connection makes the whole TV vulnerable to hackers who have demonstrated the ability to take complete control of the machine.

More troubling is the microphone. The TV boasts a “voice recognition” feature that allows viewers to control the screen with voice commands. But the service comes with a rather ominous warning:

“Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party.” Got that?

Don’t say personal or do sensitive stuff in front of the TV.

You may not be watching, but the telescreen is listening. More

The History and Danger of Administrative Law

2 Comments

strip banner

A Nation Beguiled

__________________________________________________________

“But there are problems with this conventional history of administrative law. Rather than being a modern, post-constitutional American development, I argue that the rise of administrative law is essentially a re-emergence of the absolute power practiced by pre-modern kings. Rather than a modern necessity, it is a latter-day version of a recurring threat—a threat inherent in human nature and in the temptations of power.”

________________________________________________

Philip Hamburger

Columbia Law School

“Reprinted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PHILIP HAMBURGER is the Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. He received his B.A. from Princeton University and his J.D. from Yale Law School. He has also taught at the University of Chicago Law School, the George Washington University Law School, the University of Virginia Law School, and Northwestern Law School. A contributor to National Review Online, he has written for several law reviews and journals, including the American Journal of Legal History, the Supreme Court Review, the Notre Dame Law Review, and the Journal of Law and Politics. He is the author of Separation of Church and State, Law and Judicial Duty, and, most recently, Is Administrative Law Unlawful?

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on May 6, 2014, at Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C., as part of the AWC Family Foundation Lecture Series.

There are many complaints about administrative law—including that it is arbitrary, that it is a burden on the economy, and that it is an intrusion on freedom. The question I will address here is whether administrative law is unlawful, and I will focus on constitutional history. Those who forget history, it is often said, are doomed to repeat it. And this is what has happened in the United States with the rise of administrative law—or, more accurately, administrative power. More

THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER is OUT of CONTROL

2 Comments

VaRightLogoSmall11http://www.varight.com/news/the-southern-poverty-law-center-is-out-of-control/

But something went wrong. Today the SPLC is no longer a poverty law center. They are trying to smear and silence dissidents who dare to stand for the Constitution, question the hero worship of Lincoln, and who support national sovereignty against the UN. They have turned into something not unlike the Klan they sought so brilliantly to stop except without overt violence. Tom DeWeese is doing a great job fighitng Agenda 21 and ICLEI. He does not deserve this kind of treatment:

Click here to demand a congressional investigation of the SPLC

_____________________________________________________________________

I need your help by signing the “Citizen’s Demand for Congressional Investigation of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).”

Let me explain.

The American Policy Center (APC) and I have been openly attacked by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

To date, there have been FOUR separate “special reports” released by SPLC against me personally – painting me as a hate-driven domestic terrorist!

Of course, SPLC has a long history of attacking organizations and individuals who defend the Constitution and oppose big government programs.

They regularly accuse us of racism and hate because we want to stop the massive growth of government and the wasteful spending programs that are bankrupting our country.

I get used to such attacks. It’s what they do to try to discredit us.

But this time the attack is different. It truly frightens me because the outcome of this new SPLC attack against APC and me could result in government investigations, the banning of my ability to travel, or even the destruction of APC.

Here’s why I’m concerned.

The Southern Poverty Law Center issued a new report titled “Agenda 21, The UN, Sustainability and Right-Wing Conspiracy Theory.” That report targeted me personally as a leader in the “anti-government Patriot movement.” And the SPLC report said I am part of a network of radicals peddling hysterical conspiracy theories against our Government.

Worse than just the SPLC report – is the fact that it was used as the bases of even more attacks from two national magazines – Fortune Magazine and Newsweek Magazine.

Newsweek’s attack was a cover story called “The Plots To Destroy America.” The article quoted SPLC’s Mark Potok, saying, “These kinds of theories…(are) completely distorting any rational discussion we can have in this country.” More

Militarization of our police

Leave a comment

strip banner
new-logo25Michael Webster
Laguna Journal

_______________________________________________________

“In other words, the twenty-first-century war on terror has melded thoroughly with the twentieth-century war on drugs, and the result couldn’t be anymore disturbing: police forces that increasingly look and act like occupying armies…”

________________________________________________

The direction being achieved by militarizing our cops is to train them to be an occupying force under the control of the Federal government and its minions instead of being

untitledvvv our friendly public servant  whose job was once to “serve and protect”.

As most Americans firmly oppose the current morphing of local police from protects and serves and community policing to federally militarized and federally subsidized occupying force.

In the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, Mo., an unarmed 18-year-old black man was killed by police in broad daylight.
By now, what’s happening in Ferguson is about so many second-order issues— the militarization of police with systemic racism, and how citizens can redress grievances, among other things—that it’s worth remembering what actually happened…

Last week Ferguson was sending shock waves across America and around the world. Many viewers first tuning into the national news thought they were observing a 3rd world riot that we so often see coming from places like the Middle East, Russia, China or some out of control banana republic. No these pictures were coming from Ferguson Missouri in the heartland of America. We as Americans need to examine the problem of the militarization of our police.

Dr, Edwin Vieira, Jr. writes in his new book that we now have a choice to make – do we want to continue to live in a police state, or do we do something about it.
As Karl Bickel, a senior policy analyst with the Justice Department’s Community Policing Services office, observes, police across America are being trained in a way that emphasizes force and aggression. He notes that recruit training favors a stress-based regimen that’s modeled on military boot camp rather than on the more relaxed academic setting a minority of police departments still employ. The result, he suggests, is young officers who believe policing is about kicking ass rather than working with the community to make neighborhoods safer. Or as comedian Bill Maher reminded officers recently:

“The words on your car, ‘protect and serve,’ refer to us, not you.”
More

Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,573 other followers

%d bloggers like this: