- OUR TAX DOLLARS [American Spectator]: The federal government, through the CIA intends to investigate the effects of human engineering on Earth’s environment …the study will be run by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and will take 21 months to complete. Edward Price: It’s natural that on a subject like climate change the Agency would work with scientists to better understand the phenomenon and its implications on national security.
This study by the federal “intelligence” committee was first proposed in 2008 – all during the Obama administration.
Meanwhile: Mexican invaders continue to pour over our borders and those who came to US uninvited [filling our jails and prisons from violent crimes] continues unabated, subversive Reconquista and Islamic subversive organizations [Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic training camps] continue to operate as well as increase of insertion of Mexican drug cartel operatives continue. What was that about national security? Climate change is a national security priority over “phenomenon” just described? So-called climate change is a theory, subversion activity is fact – at last count there are 35 Jihad-Islamic training camps in United States. The worst enemy in US is ourselves headed by the federal government ignoring true threats. Madness continues with those “serving” in the federal government in the forefront.
An anonymous commentator wrote:
Calling an illegal alien an ‘undocumented immigrant’ is like calling a drug dealer an ‘unlicensed pharmacist’.
The latest government screw up in the Obama administration, who has done more to screw things up than any of the last three presidents, has allowed the ICE [Immigrations and Customs Enforcement] to not only NOT enforce immigration laws [as at least three presidents before him], but has directed ICE to go to prisons, find illegal aliens and ask them” Do you qualify for President Obama’s DREAM Act?
The last time I looked, that DREAM Act did NOT pass congressional approval. You guessed it – inmates are released if they answer “Yes” to the question.
National ICE Council President Chris Crane stated
Those people in prison are not there because they crossed our border illegally, but are criminals who broke other laws, some violent.
I just received an email from the White House Director of Domestic Policy Council, Cecilia Muñoz [coincidentally she is Hispanic in favor of giving lawbreakers a free ride] that pushes immigration reform presented by the Senate [unconstitutional because it must originate in the House] and explaining how giving amnesty to immigration law breakers will benefit the nation – as if we do not know the results because it happened in the 1980s. Here are excerpts of that email message. “Immigration Reform” is just another word for amnesty, and the bill presented by the Senate does not first provide solid protection of our borders from any further invasion or stop the executive office from continuing their program of not enforcing immigration laws. What needs reformation is the federal government from top to bottom …
Sometimes important facts like this get lost in the hubbub of the debate. So, to make sure folks understand just why immigration reform will make our economy stronger … how fixing our broken system will create jobs, boost wages, and foster innovation. … Not enough people are talking about the economic benefits of immigration reform …
When Marco Rubio campaigned for a seat in the US Senate, he promised he was against amnesty. He never kept that promise. He also stated that ObamaCare should be repealed, the people are still awaiting the bill to be entered that begins that. Senators like him is the reason why we have dysfunctional and anti-constitutional justices in the US Supreme Court – because it is the Senate that confirms their appointments. Apparently there isn’t any real guideline or litmus test for choosing justices and judges. He lost support of Hannity and Beck, and people who interviewed his father described his long road to becoming a legal American and his successful attempt to get away from Castro’s power. It was a way to show that Americans welcome legal immigrants, because most citizens’ ancestry came here from somewhere else; and those that did not are the First Americans. Bill Whittle – discusses the wrongful allegations against the Tea Party movement ….
La Raza, a subversive organization established in the United States [Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor is/was affiliated with them], along with other “Hispanic” organizations claim that a portion of the United States belongs to them “legally” and therefore their people can cross the Mexican-US border anytime they want to, and it is the Europeans that should leave, et cetera, et cetera. Because we are talking to a people who arrive here, for the majority, uneducated except what tripe is filled in their heads from their Mexican educations system and who has more strict immigration laws than the US, let us examine the following map and see what part of the United States is deemed real estate of Mexico:
– Connecticut, Yahoo News/AP … Following the state of New York in wrongful thinking that criminals will be stopped by harassing and banning firearms from the hands of lawful citizens, circumventing the Second Amendment, the state of Connecticut where the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre took place is going against what statistics from 1990 to 2012 clearly indicate – more firearms in the hands of the People equals less violent crimes, not more. The state of Connecticut already has draconian firearm laws that did not prevent Adam Lanza from killing his mother and then using her car to transport her stolen firearms to commit horrific crimes. Of course, leftist Politico recently posted an article that identified Adam Lanza with the NRA in a corporate media intention of making the respected firearm sport association appear to be part of the problem like video games and other social inanimate objects, just like blaming firearms for bad behavior of people. A situation or resolve involves more than just one issue, and because there will always be deranged and evil people amongst us, their violent and criminal acts will never be stopped no matter how much freedom is taken away from citizens. Indeed, the data proves otherwise. However, this means nothing to politicians who use the emotion of fear and sorrow of those families of the victims to further their long-term agenda of dismantling the US Constitution and further establishing their power cancelling out what was once the government For the People and By the People.
It was Reuters [“UnionLeader”] who initially reported that documents were found that Adam Lanza had NRA certificates in the name of himself and his mother, Nancy Lanza.
The Wall Street Journal:
And when the Republicans opened the seventh seal of the sequester, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black and the stars fell unto the Earth; and our nation’s ability to forecast severe weather, such as drought events, hurricanes and tornados, was seriously undermined. Lo, and the children were not vaccinated, and all the beasts starved in the zoos, and the planes were grounded. Or so President Obama and his Cabinet prophets have been preaching ahead of the automatic budget cuts due to begin Friday. The bit about the weather is a real quote from the White House budget director. … The truth is that the sequester already gives the White House the legal flexibility to avoid doom, if a 5% cut to programs that have increased more than 17% on average over the Obama Presidency counts as doom. According to Mr. Obama and his budget office, the sequester cuts are indiscriminate and spell out specific percentages that will be subtracted from federal ‘projects, programs and activities,’ or PPAs. … Not so fast. Programs, projects and activities are a technical category of the federal budget, but the sequester actually occurs at the roughly 1,200 broader units known as budget accounts. Some accounts are small, but others contain hundreds of PPAs and the larger accounts run to billions of dollars. For the Pentagon in particular, the distinction between PPAs and accounts is huge. This means in most cases the President has the room to protect his ‘investments’ while managing the fiscal transition over time. … This White House has never been fussy when a statutory text or even the Constitution interferes with its political ambitions. … Could it be that Mr. Obama is exaggerating the legal stringency of the sequester in a gambit to force Congress to shut it off? … Neither the legal details of the sequester nor the practical work of reforming government are as interesting to the media as Mr. Obama’s invocations of plagues and pestilence. The real revelation is that if the world does end, it will be Mr. Obama’s choice.
Legal immigrants have been welcomed to the United States for centuries. At the sametime a high rate of illegal immigration from Mexico has been tolerated for many years. After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 however, the number and countries of origin for illegal immigrants coming to America from Mexico has raised concern for our national security and the safety of our citizens. The question being debated in Congress is how to gain better control of U.S. borders and stop the flow of illegal immigrants. There are basically two sides of the debate: those favoring closed borders and absolute control of all immigration as more important than the economy; and those favoring controlled access, but more open borders to allow foreign workers into the U.S. economy to provide for a perceived labor shortage.
Muslim immigrants with more than one wife will see an increase in their social welfare benefits beginning in 2013, when reforms to the British welfare system come into effect. Although polygamy is illegal in Britain, the state effectively recognizes the practice for Muslim men, who often have up to four wives (and in some instances five or more) in a harem.
Something else to consider that is only understandable because Americans must pay for illegal immigrant welfare – why should British pay for people who come to United Kingdom not to assimilate, but to subjugate?
Currently the state pays extra wives in polygamous households reduced amounts of individual income support, in addition to the normal amount received by the husband and his first spouse. Under the new rules, however, the extra wives will be eligible to claim a full single person’s allowance (despite being married), while the original married couple will still receive the standard married person’s allowance. The changes are part of wide-ranging reforms to the welfare system that are being implemented by Prime Minister David Cameron’s coalition government, which admits that it wants to treat extra wives as single so that the state will not officially be recognizing polygamy as it is under the current system.
Details of the changes were revealed in a 13-page legal briefdated July 19, and published by the library of the House of Commons. The document states: “Treating second and subsequent partners in polygamous relationships as separate claimants could mean that polygamous households receive more under Universal Credit than under the current rules for means-tested benefits and tax credits.” . . . In September 2011, a British newspaper exposé on the subject found that the phenomenon of bigamy and polygamy — permitted by Islamic Sharia law — is far more widespread in Britain than previously believed. The rapid growth in multiple marriages is being fuelled by multicultural policies that grant special rights to Muslim immigrants, who demand that Sharia law be reflected in British law and the social welfare benefits system. . . . The exposé shows how Muslim men can take a new spouse from anywhere in the world, father any number of children with her, and have British taxpayers assume responsibility for this family’s upkeep and care. . . . Muslim men also cheat the system by bringing brides from abroad as nannies for their children, or as nurses for a sick relative. After the bride’s one year visitors’ visa expires, she then disappears into a tight-knit local Muslim community and is then entitled to receive welfare handouts. . . . The United Kingdom also recognizes polygamous marriages in which both parties, before they moved to Britain, were resident in a country where the practice is legal. Since the 2008 change the former Labour government made to British law, a Muslim man with four wives is entitled to receive £10,000 ($15,000) a year in income support alone. He could also be entitled to more generous housing and council tax benefits to reflect the fact that his household needs a bigger property. . . . A separate investigative report describes how Muslim women suffer as a result of polygamy. It quotes a government social worker who is active in Muslim neighborhoods as saying: “The first wives get depressed because they are so ashamed of their husband taking a second or third wife. Many wives have been here for years, but have never been allowed to learn English or even go out of the house alone. They have no one to turn to for help.” … Baroness Flather wrote: “Under Islamic Sharia law, polygamy is permissible. So a man can return to Pakistan, take another bride and then, in a repetition of the process, bring her to England where they also have children together — obtaining yet more money from the state. We cannot continue like this.” More recently she said: “Why are they allowed to have more than one wife? We should prosecute one or two people for bigamy…that would sort it out.”
Islamic groups want laws passed against criticizing Islam – yet their doctrine dictates violence and other means against “non-believers” of Islamic faith. So, what they want is no one to contest their agenda to dominate the world, in which Islamic leadership has proclaimed publicly over and over again, and they can use hate speech and actions against any religion other than Islam. As a website clearly shows, the UN have attempted to make such international laws and at the same time, Islamic infiltration into judiciary and legislative branches of governments have pointed toward Sharia Law or some form of it, which would further advance the aforementioned agenda. Meanwhile, Christians and Jews are being persecuted and purged from even places like Iraq, where GW Bush told us was to be a model nation of his “nation building” program – that has obviously failed; along with other Middle East nations like Egypt and Syria clearly point out.
Media has blacked out documentaries that show the truth concerning doctrine and policies of Islamic fundamentalism, such as PBS – which should no longer receive taxpayer funding because of their bias nature in programming.
|Sheriff Joe Arpaio fights Federal Tyranny|
President Obama’s Justice Department, led by Attorney General Eric Holder, is attacking Arizona again. This time, they’re going after popular and duly elected Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who is known as one of the only sheriffs in the country to enforce all illegal immigration laws. What is DOJ planning to sue Arpaio over? They are accusing him of racial profiling, of course. The DOJ has also requested officials be sent to oversee actions taken by Arpaio’s deputies during traffic stops to ensure profiling doesn’t take place and that civil rightsaren’t violated. Arpaio isn’t buying it.
For many, the term sheriff conjures up images of the Old West. A few may consider a sheriff some form of outdated and obsolete political office. But for me and countless other patriots across our nation, a sheriff is the epitome of good and necessary county law enforcement. As documented on the Durham County website, the position of a sheriff originated in England 1,000 years ago, known then as a shire reeve, who was “the steward of the king’s estates, guardian of the peace, judge and jury of the Shire County (county court) and was the local agent of the king in military affairs. The king also appointed him as the chief police magistrate.” In the U.S., the office of sheriff was first established in Virginia in 1634. On Oct. 9, 1662, the General Court of Virginia called Capt. Samuel Stephen “to be a commander of the southern plantation” … Despite how you feel about Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s personal conduct, government suspicions or severity of criminal discipline, there is no doubt that the feds entanglements into his affairs are a massive overreach of local and state laws and jurisdictions. It is pathetic that President Obama himself as well the entire left-wing progressive establishment is in a multi-million dollar smear campaign to discredit and take down Sheriff Joe, as his own re-election website proclaims, “because I have led the fight in Arizona against illegal immigration.”
George Soros, funding supporter ofBarack H. Obama and corresponding leftist organizations has become a part of this campaign against Sheriff Arpaio. At Truth Alliance, it was revealed that Soros pledged $10 million to defeat Sheriff Arpaio. keep in mind that it is the democratic-socialists who are constantly harping about the “evil” wealthy individuals and business entities – a class envy political tool right out of the “divide and conquer” chapter of Marxism.
In Jan. 2010, 60 influential black leaders condemned Sheriff Arpaio in an ad sponsored by Center for Community Change (an organization supported by $1,715,000 from Soros in 2010 alone).
In December 2011, the U.S. Department of Justice accused Sheriff Arpaio of civil rights violations, discrimination and racial profiling against Latinos.
In January 2012, President Obama appointed another new czar as the director of his Domestic Policy Council, Cecilia Munoz, who previously served on three heavily funded George Soros organizations’ boards: his Open Society Institute, the Center for Community Change (mentioned above) and most recently worked for the open-border lobbyist group who fights for mass immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens, the National Council of La Raza (an organization supported by at least $362,000 from Soros in 2010 alone).
In February 2012, Janet Murguía, the National Council of La Raza’s president and CEO, officially “demand[ed] that Arpaio step down immediately” and “resign as sheriff of Maricopa County.”
It is all over the fact that the Democratic Party doesn’t want to enforce immigration laws and ignore the thousands of illegal aliens that stream across our southern border.
Let us remember that if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it.
|Hispanic Texans fought at the Alamo|
We are a nation of immigrants and native Americans, but we are unified under one flag, one language, and a sovereign nation of people who should stand together. If anyone else complains about us, let them return back from whence they came. Immigration doesn’t mean We the People must change our traditions, way of life, or constitutional republic for anyone.
If you can, please donate towards Sheriff Joe Arpaio campaign HERE.