AMERICA 6

THE GAYS AND LESBIANS WORKING FOR OBAMA

Help President Obama lead the nation.

The Gay & Lesbian Leadership Institute is leading a community-wide effort to identify strong LGBT candidates to serve in the Obama administration. The Presidential Appointments Project serves as the talent bank for openly LGBT professionals seeking appointed positions in the next presidential administration. If you’ve ever considered working for the federal government, now is the time to start thinking about whether you have what it takes to work for the president to help change our country. While Barack Obama lays out a broad agenda to move the country forward, his staff is actually undertaking the hard work of implementation. Appointed officials have the power to set or influence the policies of the many federal departments and administrative agencies that make up the executive branch of government.

The Project will ensure that qualified, committed and talented members of the LGBT community have a fair shot at being appointed to important federal positions. For more answers to common questions about the Presidential Appointments Project, read our FAQ.

As of now, the following LGBT leaders have secured spots in the Obama administration:

* Mark Agrast- Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legislative Affairs at the Department of Justice
* Raul Alvillar- Congressional Relations Officer, Housing and Urban Development
* Judy Applebaum- Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legislative Affairs at the Department of Justice
* Cynthia Attwood- Member, Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
* Vic Basile- Senior Counselor to the Director, Office of Personnel Management
* Anthony Bernal- Scheduler, Office of Dr. Jill Biden
* Jeremy Bernard- Director of White House and Congressional Affairs, National Endowment for the Humanities
* John Berry- Director, Office of Personnel Management
* Jeremy Bishop- Special Assistant to the Secretary, Office of Public Engagement at the Department of Labor
* Brian Bond- Deputy Director, White House Office of Public Engagement
* Raphael Bostic- Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research, Housing and Urban Development
* Ebs Burnough- Deputy Social Secretary, Office of the First Lady
* Michael Camunez- Assistant Secretary for Market Access and Compliance, Department of Commerce
* Lyle Canceko- Deputy Director, Center for Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, Department of Commerce
* Jamison Citron- Confidential Assistant, Office of White House Liaison, Department of Health and Human Services
* Brook Colangelo- Chief Information Officer, White House Office of Administration
* John Connor- Director, Office of White House Liaison at the Department of Commerce
* John Coppola- Member of the National Museum and Library Services Board
* Jeffrey Crowley- Director, Office of National AIDS Policy
* Fred Davie- Member, President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
* Justin DeJong- Deputy Press Secretary, Department of Agriculture
* Marisa Demeo- Associate Judge, DC Superior Court
* Jenny Durkan- U.S. Attorney, Western District of Washington
* John Easton- Director, Institute of Education Sciences
* Eric Fanning- Deputy Under Secretary of the Navy
* Chai Feldblum- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
* Carl Fillichio- Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Labor for Public Affairs and Communications
* Daniel Gordon- Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy, OMB
* Kathy Greenlee- Assistant Secretary, Administration on Aging, Department of Health and Human Services
* Steve Gunderson- Member, President’s Commission on White House Fellows
* David Hansell- Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Children and Families, Administration for Children and Families
* Emily Hewitt- Chief Justice, U.S. Court of Federal Claims
* Jennifer Ho- Deputy Director, Accountability Management at the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness
* Fred Hochberg- Chairman, U.S. Export-Import Bank
* David Huebner- U.S. Ambassador to New Zealand
* Glenda Humiston- State Director for Rural Development in California
* Shin Inouye- Director, Specialty Media
* John Isa- Deputy Executive Director, Federal Office of Compliance
* Karine Jean-Pierre- Regional Director, Office of Political Affairs
* Kevin Jennings- Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools
* Kristina Johnson- Under Secretary, Department of Energy
* Jenn Jones- Special Assistant, Department of Housing and Urban Development
* Elaine Kaplan- General Counsel, Office of Personnel Management
* Brad Kiley- Director, White House Office of Management and Administration
* Harry Knox- Member, President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
* Kei Koizumi- Assistant Director for Federal Research and Development, Office of Science and Technology Policy
* Andy Lee- Chief of Staff, Office of Innovation and Improvement at the Department of Education
* Jeffrey Lerner- Regional Director, Office of Political Affairs
* Sara Lipscomb- General Counsel, Small Business Administration
* Zach Liscow- Staff Economist, Council of Economic Advisers
* Thomas Lopach- Senior Vice President, Congressional Affairs, U.S. Export-Import Bank
* Sharon Lubinski- U.S. Marshall
* John Marble- Public Affairs Specialist, Office of Personnel Management
* Jeffrey Marburg-Goodman- Special Counsel to the USAID Administrator
* Mercedes Marquez- Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development
* Kathy Martinez- Assistant Secretary for Disability Employment Policy, Department of Labor
* Michael Martinez- Special Assistant, National Resources Conservation Division, USDA
* Mary Beth Maxwell- Senior Advisor, Department of Labor
* Philip McNamara- Executive Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
* David Medina- Deputy Chief of Staff, Office of the First Lady
* David Mills- Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement, Department of Commerce
* Alison Nathan- Associate Counsel to the President, White House Counsels Office
* Jeffrey Neal- Chief Human Capital Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
* Ven Neralla- Director of Priority Placement, Presidential Personnel
* Dave Noble- White House Liaison, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
* Matt Nosanchuk- Senior Counselor to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Department of Justice
* Dylan Orr- Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Labor, Office of Disability Employment Policy
* Joseph Palacios- Board of Visitors for WHINSEC
* Paolo Palugod- Special Assistant to the Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division, DOJ
* Peter Pappas- Chief Communications Officer for the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of Commerce
* Raul Perea-Henze- Assistant Secretary of Policy and Planning, Department of Veterans Affairs
* Drew Perraut- Policy Analyst, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB
* Mark Perriello- Director of Priority Placement, Presidential Personnel
* Gautam Raghavan- Deputy White House Liaison at the Department of Defense
* Peter Roehrig- Special Assistant, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
* Constance L. Rogers- Deputy Solicitor for Energy and Mineral Resources at Interior
* Donna Ryu- U.S. Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
* Ellie Sue Schafer- Director, White House Visitors Office
* Tarak Shah- White House Council on Environmental Quality
* Amanda Simpson- Senior Technical Advisor to the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security
* Richard Sorian- Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, HHS
* Campbell Spencer- Regional Director, Office of Political Affairs
* Everette Stubbs- Deputy Director, White House Visitors Center
* Nancy Sutley- Chair, White House Council on Environmental Quality
* Jonathan Swain- Assistant Administrator, Small Business Administration
* Kenneth Tolson- Member, President’s Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities
* Moe Vela- Director of Operations, Office of the Vice President
* Alex Wagner- Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Global Strategic Affairs
* Douglas B. Wilson- Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, Department of Defense
* William Woolston- Staff Economist, Council of Economic Advisers

SOURCE

NEIL ARMSTRONG CONDEMNS OBAMA'S NASA POLICY IN RARE PUBLIC APPEARANCE VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

SCHWARZENEGGER AFRAID TO TRAVEL TO ARIZONA VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

FIRST UNDERSEA CLIPS OF MEXICO OIL SPILL VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

AMATEUR FILM OF GULF OIL SLICK FAR WORSE THAN BP ADMITS VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

TERRORIST? VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

SECRET RECORDINGS OF UNDISCLOSED BLACKWATER OPERATIONS VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

ANTI-GOVERNMENT MILITIA MOVEMENT GROWING IN AMERICA VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

EXPLOSION IN TIMES SQUARE AFTER BIKER THROWS DEVICE VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

Failed NYC car bomber may be white male in his 40s, allegedly caught on tape

Eyewitness Video - Times Square Car Bomb(VIDEO)

Surveillance Video Of Times Square SUV Bomb Suspect Changing Shirts In Alley(VIDEO)

NEW YORK COPS MISTAKENLY TELL FAMILY THEIR SON DIED IN CAR CRASH VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

JUDGE WON'T SUBPOENA OBAMA FOR BLAGOJEVICH CORRUPTION TRIAL

CHICAGO (AP) -- A federal judge refused on Friday to approve a subpoena calling for President Barack Obama to testify at the political corruption trial of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

The request from Blagojevich's attorneys fell "very short of authorizing a subpoena for the president," U.S. District Judge James B. Zagel said. But Zagel said he might revisit the issue, perhaps during the trial, if any evidence suggests Obama might have something relevant to tell the jury. Blagojevich is due to go on trial, starting with jury selection June 3. He is charged with scheming to use his power as governor to fill U.S. Senate vacancies in order to sell or trade the Senate seat that Obama vacated after he was elected president in November 2008.

The former governor is also charged with trying to use his power to bring illegal pressure for money on potential campaign contributors. His brother, businessman Robert Blagojevich, is charged with helping him. Both have pleaded not guilty. Defense attorneys asked for the subpoena last week, saying Obama could shed light on the charges that Blagojevich attempted to trade or sell the president's former Senate seat. Obama has not been accused of any wrongdoing in the case. And it would be very unusual for a sitting president to take the witness stand in a Chicago corruption trial or any other trial. But Bill Clinton did give a videotaped deposition in July l996 while president and it was later played at the trial of two bankers were acquitted of corruption charges. Blagojevich was not on hand for the hearing. His attorney Sheldon Sorosky told reporters after court that he was encouraged because "the judge did say that he still might allow the president to testify later on should it become necessary, and I'm sure it will be revisited."

Zagel dismissed several other defense motions, including a request for a rule barring anyone who had been convicted of a felony and is awaiting sentence from the witness stand. Defense attorneys said in court papers that practice, which is common throughout U.S. courts, creates temptation on the part of witnesses to curry favor with prosecutors. But Zagel said appeals courts have upheld the practice of swapping lenient sentences for prosecution testimony. Zagel also turned down a defense request for an advance look at jury instructions to help lawyers frame their opening statements.

SOURCE

NATIONAL ENQUIRER WEBSITE DOWN AFTER OBAMA EXPOSURES

National Enquirer’s Obama Scandal: Claims Surveillance Proves Affair

The National Enquirer published a story last night claiming that President Barack Obama was caught having an affair with a former campaign staffer at a Washington hotel, and they might have the tape to prove it.

The Enquirer claims insiders have known about the scandal and are willing to pay some serious cash for the story, and they’re so sure of it that they’ve brought out the animated .gifs: A confidential investigation has learned that Obama first became close to gorgeous 35 year-old Vera Baker in 2004 when she worked tirelessly to get him elected to the US Senate, raising millions in campaign contributions. While Baker has insisted in the past that “nothing happened” between them, the Enquirer has learned that top anti-Obama operatives are offering more than $1 million to witnesses to reveal what they know about the alleged hush-hush affair.

The Enquirer is also promising hotel surveillance footage that could prove that Obama and Baker entered and left the hotel at the same time. “Investigators are attempting to obtain a tape from the hotel (that) shows Vera and Barack together… If the tape surfaces, it will explode the scandal.” The Enquirer does not specify the dates of the surveillance footage, which could mean they are merely touting a 6-year-old affair the Obamas and everyone around them have moved beyond it, but they could also be breaking something new. Or they are totally wrong or taking some bit of information completely out of context, which would hardly be shocking.

So that’s the kicker– whether the video evidence truly exists, and how old it really is. Yes, the fact that it is the National Enquirer reporting it makes the matter highly questionable, especially in light of their previous attempt at launching an Obama sex scandal. However, the last time the Enquirer broke a high-profile political sex scandal, many in the media were upset it didn’t win a Pulitzer Prize, which makes their claim at least worth reading over. Plus, the claim is simply too damaging for the publicity rewards to outweigh the risk of publishing such a falsehood– this isn’t exactly an Anderson Cooper adoption story– especially after the tabloid worked so hard to establish credibility over the past couple of years on this precise type of case. Somewhat adding to its credibility significance and impact is the fact that the Drudge Report, whose success is directly attributed to breaking the Monica Lewinsky story in 1998, felt confident enough in its accuracy to give it prime real estate on the site.

As Rod Blagojevich would say, let’s not jump to conclusions until we’ve had a chance to review all the tapes– after all, without them, this wouldn’t be any more credible than the latest Brangelina rumor (which, if you’re interested, is that the twins have Down Syndrome). That said, a story of this category is no longer the joke it once was in the post-Rielle Hunter world, and if this is something more than a publicity campaign on behalf of the tabloid, could prove to be problematic.

UPDATE (2:04 PM): The Enquirer has updated their story to exclude the part about the hotel surveillance tape, so it seems this story is unraveling rather quickly. The latest from the paper is that “An Enquirer reporter has confirmed the limo driver’s account of the secret 2004 rendezvous.” This clarifies that they are trying to uncover a 6-year-old maybe-affair, and that, rather than having footage, they just have one first-hand account of someone driving Baker to a hotel, where the President may or may not have been. This also shifts the weight of the article from the story of the affair itself to the fact that, apparently, someone out there is “offering more than $1 million to witnesses to reveal what they know about the alleged hush-hush affair.” Why? If it indeed happened six years ago, and no one brought it up during Obama’s presidential campaign, what use is it now, halfway into his first term? The obvious go-to answer is that this could energize the far-right in time for the 2010 elections, but once it is revealed who perpetuated the rumors, true or not, about a story so aged, the tactic could easily backfire.

*Note: this piece has been updated since publishing

SOURCE

TENNESSEE FLOODS WASH AWAY CARS VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

TWO TIER SYSTEM OF PARKING TICKETS IN AMERICA PROTECTING THE RICH VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

AMERICA THE SILENCE OF A NATION VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

AMERICAN COP AND DRUNK DRIVER IN DEADLY SHOOT OUT VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

MISSISSIPPI WHITE SUPREMIST LAWYER FOUND STABBED, BEATEN AND BURNED VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

BUSH COMMEMORATIVE COIN SET VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

TORNADO AFTERMATH YAZOO MISSISSIPPI VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

ARIZONA EMBRACES RACIAL PROFILING VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

Arizona's widespread racial profiling

OBAMA SUBPOENA'D TO APPEAR AT BLAGOJEVICH CORRUPTION TRIAL

Disgraced Democratic former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich filed a legal motion Thursday asking for President Obama to testify at the former governor’s corruption trial, and as befitting so much of the world of Blago, the legal papers had a glitch -- though parts were redacted, the simple act of cutting and pasting the brief un-redacted the blacked-out portions.

White House officials declined to comment on the motion to subpoena the president -- redacted or un-redacted -- saying it's policy to not comment on a pending criminal proceeding. Blagojevich’s trial is scheduled to begin on June 3.

In the un-redacted portion, Blagojevich’s attorneys assert that “President Obama has direct knowledge to allegations made in the indictment. In addition, President Obama’s public statements contradict other witness statements..."

The redacted portion fleshes out these charges.

One should of course keep in mind that Blagojevich is of, shall we say, disputable credibility and of course is a defendant in a criminal case, having been indicted last year on 16 felony counts, including racketeering and extortion conspiracy. Blagojevich alleges no criminal wrongdoing by the president or his team, though he does raise questions about what he says are conflicting stories.

Blago’s lawyers allege that "despite President Obama stating that no representatives of his had any part of any deals, labor union president told the FBI and the United States Attorneys that he spoke to labor union official on November 3, 2008, who received a phone message from Obama that evening. After labor union official listened to the message labor union official told labor union president 'I’m the one'. Labor union president took that to mean that labor union official was to be the one to deliver the message on behalf of Obama that Senate Candidate B was his pick."

Senate Candidate B is believed to be White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett. The head of the Illinois chapter of the Service Employees International Union Tom Balanoff has been cooperating with the FBI.

That labor union official, Blago's lawyers say, told the FBI and the United States Attorneys that President Obama "expressed his belief” that Jarrett “would be a good Senator for the people of Illinois and would be a candidate who could win re-election. [Labor union official] advised Obama that [labor union official] would reach out to Governor Blagojevich and advocate” for Jarrett. The labor union official called the union president and told him “that Obama was aware that he would be reaching out to Blagojevich.”

In December 2008, Obama then-aide Greg Craig filed a report for the president-elect detailing the contacts made between the just-arrested Blagojevich and the Obama Transition Team. Craig wrote that “The president-elect expressed his preference that Valerie Jarrett work with him in the White House. He also stated that he would neither stand in her way if she wanted to pursue the Senate seat nor actively seek to have her or any other particular candidate appointed to the vacancy.”

The Obama Transition Team report acknowledges that then-President-elect Obama relayed through Rahm Emanuel some possible candidates to serve as the Senator from Illinois, including Reps. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., and Jesse Jackson, Jr.

Blago’s lawyers say that November, 4 2008, Jarrett "spoke with labor union official about the Senate seat. Labor union official said he spoke to Obama. Labor union official said he was going to meet with Blagojevich and said “he was going to push Blagojevich hard on this. According to Senate Candidate B, labor union official’s language could have been stronger than the language that she was reporting to the government.”

Jarrett has previously disclosed that she spoke to Balanoff about the Senate seat on Nov. 7. On Nov. 9, she removed her name from consideration, according to the Obama Transition Team internal document.

"On November 5, 2008, Blagojevich told (his chief of staff) John Harris that labor union official ‘talked to Barack Obama, wants to come and see me.’ Blagojevich then told Harris that the labor union official “was very explicit with me, ‘I talked to Barack about the Senate seat. Can I come and see ya? Can I do it tomorrow?’ I said, sure.”

Additionally, Blago's lawyers say, an Obama supporter "suggested that she talk to the wife of Governor Blagojevich about Senate Candidate B for Senator." That supporter is "mentioned in a phone call on November 3, 2008, having offered 'fundraising' in exchange for Senate Candidate B for Senator." President Obama has said that he never discussed the Senate seat with Blagojevich, but Blago says "President-elect Obama also suggested Senate Candidate A to Governor Blagojevich. John Harris told the FBI and the United States Attorneys that he spoke to President’s Chief of Staff on November 12, 2008. Harris took notes of the conversation and wrote that President’s Chief had previously worked as Blagojevich's press secretary. Obama agreed of Staff told Harris that Senate Candidate A was acceptable to Obama as a senate pick...President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI that 'he could not say where but somewhere it was communicated to him that' Senate Candidate A was a suggested candidate viewed as one of the four 'right' candidates 'by the Obama transition team.'"

Senate Candidate A is said to be Jackson.

"President-elect Obama was also involved in other senate candidate choices. On December 8, 2008, John Harris’ secretary’s call log noted President’s Chief of Staff called at 10:47 am and wrote 'needs to talk to you asap' … President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI that he had a conversation discussing the Senate seat with Obama on December 7, 2008 in Obama’s car. President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI ‘Obama expressed concern about Senate Candidate D being appointed as Senator. [President’s Chief of Staff] suggested they might need an expanded list to possibly include names of African Americans that came out of the business world. President’s Chief of Staff] thought he suggested Senate Candidate E who was the head of the Urban League and with President’s Chief of Staff’s suggestion.’”

Senate Candidate D is said to be former Illinois state senate president and onetime Obama mentor Emil Jones. Senate Candidate E is said to be Cheryle Jackson.

At another point Blago's lawyers mention that President Obama’s "former friend, fund-raiser, and neighbor" Tony Rezko -- convicted of sixteen counts of fraud and corruption -- told the FBI and the United States Attorneys "that he engaged in election law violations by personally contributing a large sum of cash to the campaign of a public official who is not Rod Blagojevich. … Further, the public official denies being aware of cash contributions to his campaign by Rezko or others and denies having conversations with Rezko related to cash contributions. … Rezko has also stated in interviews with the government that he believed he transmitted a quid pro quo offer from a lobbyist to the public official, whereby the lobbyist would hold a fundraiser for the official in exchange for favorable official action, but that the public official rejected the offer. The public official denies any such conversation. In addition, Rezko has stated to the government that he and the public official had certain conversations about gaming legislation and administration, which the public official denies having had.”

In a footnote Blago's lawyers say: "The defense has a good faith belief that this public official is Barack Obama." President Obama has denied any conversations along these lines, the “good faith belief” of Blago’s attorneys notwithstanding.

SOURCE

What are the odds Obama testifies in Blagojevich corruption case?

COURT SUBPOENA ON OBAMA APPEARANCE

EX-ILLINOIS GOVERNOR BLAGOJEVICH SAYS TAPES PROVE HE'S INNOCENT VIDEO

Former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich issued a dare to U.S. Attorney General 'See you in court'

JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO ON NATURAL RIGHTS AND PATRIOT ACT VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

PART 2

PART 3

AMERICA IS ISRAEL'S FAVOURITE WHORE

The Radioactive Nature of Jewish Thinking–Transforming the Garden Of Eden into the Little Shop Of Horrors

Those of us still registered as guests in the Hotel Reality note with a certain amount of amusement the growing number of people–including pretty important folks no less in stature than El Presidente Obama himself–who have figured out that there is a problem, and specifically with this creature known as Israel. More importantly, they realize that this “problem” is not some trivial, localized issue affecting only a few unimportant po’ folk thousands of miles away in places such as Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, etc, but rather that the whole Israeli situation is like an inflamed appendix–tiny in its size, but deadly enough to destroy the entire body politic if not removed or dealt with rationally.

The obvious evidence that they see this problem is the fact that America–despite the tsunami of shrieking and screeching from organized Jewish interests in the last few years–is dragging her feet in getting the next war against Iran started, to say nothing of the whole drama between the US and Israel regarding the settlements in the West Bank. Having realized that the chickens of hell have indeed come home to roost in the form of a barely-alive US economy as well as the fact the rest of the world looks at America (rightly) as Israel’s favorite whore, these same characters have suddenly begun to take the business of national survival seriously. Only now are they are beginning to realize that the same kind of havoc the West has assisted in creating in places such as Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and elsewhere is like nuclear fallout that spreads everywhere, and as such, having decided that “it’s personal this time,” something’s got to be done about it.

Unfortunately, that’s how it is with moneyed, powerful people living a life of privilege. They’re as inclined to take an interest in the terrible goings-on outside their gated communities as it is for the proverbial camel to pass through the eye of a needle or a leopard to change its spots. As a rule (and matter of principle) people with money don’t give a good Goddamn about whatever terrible dramas are taking place in the lives of others a mere few blocks over. As long as things are hunky dory in their little corner of paradise, than the rest of the world can go to hell in a hand basket, literally, while they themselves sleep soundly at night like babies. This was exactly the mindset in operation when all this present madness was in its embryonic stages, when the guy from the synagogue with mad, darting eyes showed up with a box of matches on that hot summer day and proposed lighting one and dropping it on the bone-dry forest floor.

What we are referring to here of course were those early days of the 20th century when a bearded lunatic named Herzl was making the rounds, palm-pressing with Europe’s elite and pushing for the creation of this thing known as the “Jewish state”, coaxing his would-be suckers along with the song and dance that if they emptied their ghettos onto the shores of Palestine that all Europe’s ‘Jewish problems’ would be solved. Understandably this certainly must have seemed inviting to the bourgeoisie of Europe, given the predominant role these same Jewish creatures played in all sorts of recent upheavals, beginning with the French Revolution and then followed by the myriad of Marxist uprisings and various attempted (and sometimes successful) assassinations of several European leaders. Obviously, judging by events today however, these folks, the ‘smarter, better’ people of the West’s intelligentsia never stopped to consider what might unavoidably come from dropping the lit match of Jewish thinking (and its accompanying destructive behavior) on the floor of a drought-besieged forest known as the Middle East. When we today as rational individuals in the 21st century consider the prospect of sending a sub-culture of people whose entire identity is rooted in a backwards, regressive world view created by patriarchs whose claim to leadership was the fact they heard voices in their heads commanding them to dispossess, slay and enslave the peoples of the very same region, what else could be the result? People today wonder why–from a community of people addicted to a religio-pathology such as this–there is scant noise concerning the 2006 bombardment of Lebanon, Operation Cast Lead, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and upcoming wars against Iran and Syria?–Read the newspapers coming out of Israel sometime and see for yourselves–“God told us to do it, and who are we to refuse?”

The other possibility of course is that they–the “better” and smarter people of the 20th century West DID consider all this, but rather than weigh the long-term liabilities instead looked only at the short term benefits. This of course could only be achieved by ignoring the laws of Mother Nature, in this case the fact that fire by its very nature spreads, meaning that eventually the same inferno created by the West would grow and eventually find its way into the “better” neighborhoods of Europe and America. What did they think, that by virtue of their “betterness” that somehow some higher power was going to step in and intervene, bringing about some smaller variation of the great flood that would keep all hell from breaking loose? The problem with what we see taking place today within Western circles wanting to reign in the Jewish state however is that it is way past late in terms of dealing with this problem. Deciding in 2010 to start dealing rationally with an organically-irrational state such as Israel is like someone finding out he or she is riddled with cancer after a lifetime of chain-smoking 4 packs a day and then deciding to quit cold-turkey in the hopes that by removing the cause of the disease that the disease itself will go away and the body will be back to its old self. As we hate to be the bringers of bad news, the ugly truth is that they are a day late and a dollar short, as the old saying goes. Enjoying first class accommodations on the Titanic, nevertheless what’s done is done and there is no going back now. The waters are rising and all the crying and praying in the world is not going to change anything. Mother Nature has spoken. As Obama and various leaders in Europe wring their hands in worry over the fact that the world is now held hostage by this tiny, inflamed appendix known as the Jewish state, ready to burst and who has made it clear that if she goes down then the world goes down with her, all they can do is deal gingerly with the patient as if it were a canister of highly-volatile and unstable TNT.

The reality is this–they, meaning the Jewish interests sitting at the helm– own our countries, through control of our governments, media, financial systems, churches, etc, etc, etc. The radioactive nature of Jewish/Zionist influence is so prevalent that tests come back positive in every case, whether it is the air, water or even our toothpaste. There is no getting away from it. It is everywhere. The uglier truth than this however is the fact that being smarter, better people, they–the intelligentsia of the West–should have been smarter and known better. Whether it be the secular governments of the West or religious institutions such as the Vatican, nothing substatively was done to prevent this monster being loosed on humanity. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what happens when you empty a mental asylum of its inhabitants, release them on civilized society and give them access to every weapon they demand. At the time, all they–the ‘better, smarter’ people of the West could envision was getting these perennial pains in the ass out of their countries so they could enjoy a little peace and quiet, but now as a result of their decisions Cain has been raised up from the depths of hell and, as one person once predicted, “…Men cry peace, peace, but there is no peace”.

Readers will recall a movie from the 1980’s entitled “Little Shop Of Horrors”, where this tiny, odd-looking plant in a small store suddenly gets its first taste of human blood and grows, and grows and grows until it becomes a monstrosity of sorts. The passersby are so intrigued they come in and as a result business is booming. The owner of the plant shop, enjoying the business this is all generating must provide his monstrosity with new victims everyday while not considering the possibility that eventually he would be next. Thus has it been with the West and Israel. We willingly feed her the human sacrifices she demands, whether they be Palestinians, Lebanese, Iraqis, or whoever, and now, she has become an uncontrollable monstrosity and now, realizing who may be next, we in the West are frantically trying to put the beast back in its cage without getting bit, but this is not possible. Indeed, she will continue to raise hell and tear this one-time Garden of Eden apart, and particularly when she needs her “fix” of innocent blood, and the only question remaining to be answered is whether we in the West, in reaping what we have sown on the rest of the world, will go out with a bang or a whimper.

SOURCE

FORT WAYNE MAN ALLEGES IRS RAID CAUSED WIFE'S SUICIDE

The federal government responded Tuesday to a wrongful-death lawsuit filed this year by a Fort Wayne man, alleging that an IRS raid caused his wife to commit suicide.

In their response filed in U.S. District Court in Fort Wayne, attorneys for the U.S. government deny any role or responsibility in the 2007 suicide of Denise Simon. Denise Simon’s husband, James, sued the U.S. government this year, alleging the United States intentionally and negligently inflicted emotional distress, negligently obtained and executed a search warrant, trespassed on the family’s residence, invaded their privacy and caused a wrongful death.

The lawsuit follows another Simon filed in 2009 against a handful of IRS agents individually as well as the agency. Simon has been involved in telecommunications and satellite companies over the past 15 years, notably with a company known as Rimsat that was forced into bankruptcy in the mid-1990s after infighting and a conflict with the Russian Federal Space Agency over some satellites. According to court documents, Simon has been involved with other businesses including JS Elekta Limited and Fort Wayne Telsat. And in 2007, he found himself at the center of an IRS investigation.

An agent wanted to search the home rented by the Simons, and he obtained a warrant from U.S. District Judge Theresa Springmann. IRS Special Agent Paul Muschell and a number of armed agents showed up to execute the search warrant shortly after 7 a.m. on Nov. 6, 2007, while Denise Simon was getting the couple’s youngest child, 11, ready for school. James Simon was out of the country on business, according to court documents. Days after the warrant was executed, Simon’s wife, Denise, committed suicide. A former board member of Stop Child Abuse and Neglect and president of the Fort Wayne chapter of the American Red Cross, Denise Simon left a typed suicide note. She wrote, “I am truly innocent of any attempt to evade taxes, launder money, commit fraud or the other things I am being accused of. ... I also have no faith in the legal system or the ability of the government to seek the truth.”

Written in ink under the typed portion of the note, Denise Simon wrote, “with my dying breath I swear Jim and I are innocent,” according to court documents. In response to the earlier lawsuit, the IRS said it can’t defend its actions because of an ongoing investigation. And in the response to the newer lawsuit, the government argues that the Simon family’s claims are barred “by their own unlawful, wrongful, or negligent conduct.”

The government denied providing any false information to Springmann for the search warrant and denied being the cause of Denise Simon’s death.

SOURCE

AMERICA'S FED TO SPY ON EVERY SINGLE FINANCIAL TRANSACTION VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

POOR PEOPLE VS. RICH PEOPLE IN USA VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

BUSH INSIDER REVEALS GUANTANAMO DECEPTION: HUNDREDS OF INNOCENTS JAILED

Colonel Lawrence B. Wilkerson, Chief of Staff to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, provided shocking new testimony from inside the Bush Administration that hundreds of the men jailed at Guantanamo were innocent, the top people in the Bush Administration knew full well they were innocent, and that information was kept from the public.

Wilkerson said President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld “indefinitely detained the innocent for political reasons” and many in the administration knew it. The wrongfully held prisoners were not released because of political maneuverings aimed in part to cover up the mistakes of the administration. Colonel Wilkerson, who served in the U.S. Army for over thirty years, signed a sworn declaration for an Oregon federal court case stating that he found out in August 2002 that the US knew that many of the prisoners at Guantanamo were not enemy combatants.

Wilkerson also discussed this in a revealing and critical article on Guantanamo for the Washington Note. How did Colonel Wilkerson first learn about the innocents in Guantanamo? In August 2002, Wilkerson, who had been working closely with Colin Powell for years, was appointed Chief of Staff to the Secretary of State. In that position, Wilkerson started attending daily classified briefings involving 50 or more senior State Department officials where Guantanamo was often discussed. It soon became clear to him and other State Department personnel “that many of the prisoners detained at Guantanamo had been taken into custody without regard to whether they were truly enemy combatants, or in fact whether many of them were enemies at all.”

How was it possible that hundreds of Guantanamo prisoners were innocent? Wilkerson said it all started at the beginning, mostly because U.S. forces did not capture most of the people who were sent to Guantanamo. The people who ended up in Guantanamo, said Wilkerson, were mostly turned over to the US by Afghan warlords and others who received bounties of up to $5000 per head for each person they turned in. The majority of the 742 detainees “had never seen a U.S. soldier in the process of their initial detention.” Military officers told Wilkerson that “many detainees were turned over for the wrong reasons, particularly for bounties and other incentives.” The U.S. knew “that the likelihood was high that some of the Guantanamo detainees had been turned in to U.S. forces in order to settle local scores, for tribal reasons, or just as a method of making money.” As a consequence, said Wilkerson “there was no real method of knowing why the prisoner had been detained in the first place.” Wilkerson wrote that the American people have no idea of the “utter incompetence of the battlefield vetting in Afghanistan during the initial stages… Simply stated, no meaningful attempt at discrimination was made in-country by competent officials, civilian or military, as to who we were transporting to Cuba for detention and interrogation.”

Why was there utter incompetence in the battlefield vetting? “This was a factor of having too few troops in the combat zone, the troops and civilians who were there having too few people trained and skilled in such vetting, and the incredible pressure coming down from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and others to ‘just get the bastards to the interrogators.’” As a result, Wilkerson’s statement continues, “there was no meaningful way to determine whether they were terrorists, Taliban, or simply innocent civilians picked up on a very confused battlefield or in the territory of another state such as Pakistan.” In addition, the statement points out “a separate but related problem was that often absolutely no evidence relating to the detainee was turned over, so there was no real method of knowing why the prisoner had been detained in the first place.” “The initial group of 742 detainees had not been detained under the processes I was used to as a military officer,” Wilkerson said. “It was becoming more and more clear that many of the men were innocent, or at a minimum their guilt was impossible to determine let alone prove in any court of law, civilian or military. If there was any evidence, the chain of protecting it had been completely ignored.”

Several in the U.S. leadership became aware of this early on and knew “of the reality that many of the detainees were innocent of any substantial wrongdoing, had little intelligence value, and should be immediately released,” wrote Wilkerson. So why did the Bush Administration not release the men from prison once it was discovered that they were not guilty? Why continue to keep innocent men in prison? “To have admitted this reality would have been a black mark on their leadership from virtually day one of the so-called War on Terror and these leaders already had black marks enough: the dead in a field in Pennsylvania, in the ashes of the Pentagon, and in the ruins of the World Trade Towers,” wrote Wilkerson. “They were not about to admit to their further errors at Guantanamo Bay. Better to claim everyone there was a hardcore terrorist, was of enduring intelligence value, and would return to jihad if released,” according to Wilkerson. “I am very sorry to say that I believe there were uniformed military who aided and abetted these falsehoods, even at the highest levels of our armed forces.”

The refusal to let the detainees go, even those who were likely innocent, was based on several political factors. If the US released them to another country and that country found them innocent, it would make the US look bad, said Wilkerson. “Another concern was that the detention efforts at Guantanamo would be revealed as the incredibly confused operation that they were. Such results were not acceptable to the Administration and would have been severely detrimental to the leadership at the Department of Defense.” At the Department of Defense, Secretary Rumsfeld, “just refused to let detainees go” said Wilkerson. “Another part of the political dilemma originated in the Office of Vice President Richard B. Cheney,” according to Wilkerson, “whose position could be summed up as ‘the end justifies the means’, and who had absolutely no concern that the vast majority of Guantanamo detainees were innocent, or that there was a lack of usable evidence for the great majority of them. If hundreds of innocent individuals had to suffer in order to detain a handful of hardcore terrorists, so be it.” President Bush was involved in all of the decisions about the men in Guantanamo according to reports from Secretary Powell to Wilkerson. “My own view,” said Wilkerson “is that it was easy for Vice President Cheney to run circles around President Bush bureaucratically because Cheney had the network within the government to do so. Moreover, by exploiting what Secretary Powell called the President’s ‘cowboy instincts,’ Vice President Cheney could more often than not gain the President’s acquiescence.”

Despite the widespread knowledge inside the Bush administration that the US continued to indefinitely detain the innocent at Guantanamo, for years the US government continued to publicly say the opposite — that people at Guantanamo were terrorists. After these disclosures from deep within the Bush Administration, the newest issue now before the people of the U.S. is not just whether the Bush Administration was wrong about Guantanamo but whether it was also consistently deceitful in holding hundreds of innocent men in prison to cover up their own mistakes. Why is Colonel Wilkerson disclosing this now? He provided a sworn statement to assist the International Human Rights Clinic at Willamette University College of Law in Oregon and the Federal Public Defender who are suing US officials for the wrongful detention and torture of Adel Hassan Hamad. Hamad was a humanitarian aid worker from Sudan working in Pakistan when he was kidnapped from his apartment, tortured and shipped to Guantanamo where he was held for five years before being released. At the end of his nine page sworn statement, Wilkerson explains his personal reasons for disclosing this damning information. “I have made a personal choice to come forward and discuss the abuses that occurred because knowledge that I served an Administration that tortured and abused those it detained at the facilities at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere and indefinitely detained the innocent for political reasons has marked a low point in my professional career and I wish to make the record clear on what occurred. I am also extremely concerned that the Armed Forces of the United States, where I spent 31 years of my professional life, were deeply involved in these tragic mistakes.”

Wilkerson concluded his article on Guantanamo by issuing a challenge. “When — and if — the truths about the detainees at Guantanamo Bay will be revealed in the way they should be, or Congress will step up and shoulder some of the blame, or the new Obama administration will have the courage to follow through substantially on its campaign promises with respect to GITMO, torture and the like, remains indeed to be seen.” The U.S. rightly criticizes Iran and China for wrongfully imprisoning people. So what are we as a nation going to do now that an insider from the Bush Administration has courageously revealed the truth and the cover up about U.S. politicians wrongfully imprisoning hundreds and not releasing them even when they knew they were innocent? Our response will tell much about our national commitment to justice for all.

SOURCE

EX-ILLINOIS GOVERNOR BLAGOJEVICH SAYS TAPES PROVE HE'S INNOCENT VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

Former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich issued a dare to U.S. Attorney General 'See you in court'

BRUTAL ATTACK ON DODGERS FAN BY SECURITY GUARDS VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

AMERICAN CITIZENS URGED TO ARM THEMSELVES AFTER POLICE BUDGET CUTS

Judge urges citizens to ‘arm themselves’ after police budget cuts

Local official: Use shotguns so you kill, rather than hurt, criminals

A county judge in rural northeast Ohio has renewed his call for citizens to arm themselves in the wake of police budget cuts that have left one cruiser patrolling an entire county. Judge Alfred Mackey of the Ashtabula County Court told residents in an interview with Cleveland's WKYC-TV two weeks ago that the budget cuts the county implemented in recent years meant the population could no longer count on police responding in time to emergency situations. "We are living in a large county, and you cannot count on the availability of your sheriff to come to your home if you are in danger in a prompt manner," Mackey told the Cleveland Plain Dealer, in an interview in which he reiterated his call.

County auditor Roger Corlett says he's seen revenue drop from $23 million three years ago to just under $18 million today. Last month, the county slashed the number of deputies from 112 to 49, and left the force with one patrol car with which deputies have to monitor a 720-square-mile area. The towns and villages in Ashtabula County have their own police forces, but that still leaves about 680 square miles to cover. The budget problems have hit the county's jail as well, with 700 people on a "waiting list" to serve time still in the community at large. And the reduced policing has taken its toll. The Plain Dealer reports:

Incident reports show how stretched deputies have been as they try to deal with overlapping emergencies separated by miles and miles of country roads. One night they were delayed getting to a woman who claimed her knife-wielding husband had threatened to kill her because they were handling an arrest in another case of domestic violence. Another night they couldn't get to a burglary at a community center for about 1¾ hours because they were arresting a man accused of beating up his girlfriend. And the list goes on. The situation is "absolutely terrible," said Johnson. "We're just keeping the peace as best we can."

LOCAL OFFICIAL: USE SHOTGUN

For at least one local official, Judge Mackey's call doesn't go far enough. Monroe Township Trustee Charles Riley says people should not only arm themselves, but should arm themselves with shotguns to ensure that they kill the criminals they come into contact with. "They should use shotguns not handguns and that way we don't have to send [criminals] to court or to jail because they'll be dead," he said, as quoted at the Plain Dealer. Not everyone agrees with Riley's line of reasoning. Law professor Peter Moskos of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice says that an armed citizenry may be a workable alternative to a functioning police force, but it sends a bad signal. "It does strike me as a terrible step backward for civilization to go back to individual armed citizens," Moskos said, as quoted at the Plain Dealer. "That's what we have government for."

For the pro-gun group Ohioans for Concealed Carry, Judge Mackey's declaration is a step in the right direction, but the group argues there's no need to wait for a budget crisis to hand over policing responsibilities to the public. "The need and the right to defend yourself doesn't come with budget cuts and reduced law enforcement staffing," Jeff Garvas writes at the group's Web site. "Carrying a firearm for self-defense, and any other methods of situational awareness, were just as valid before these budget cuts as they are today."

SOURCE

ONE IN THREE AMERICANS SEE GOVERNMENT A MAJOR THREAT TO FREEDOMS

Nearly one out of three Americans view the US government as a "major threat" to their freedoms, and four out of five say they don't trust Washington to solve their problems, according to a new poll out Monday. Just 19 percent say they are "basically content" with the federal government, against 56 percent who say they are "frustrated" and 21 percent who describe themselves as "angry," the Pew Research Center survey found.

Only 22 percent say they trust Washington to do what is right almost always or most of the time, according to the survey, which had an error margin of plus or minus four percentage points. The first time Pew asked the question, in 1958, 73 percent of Americans said they trusted the government. In mid-1994, just 17 percent said the same. The US public has historically expressed distrust in Washington, but a sour economy, epic frustration with the US Congress, and an increasingly polarized electorate have fanned the flames, Pew said. The findings could spell trouble for President Barack Obama's Democrats in November mid-term elections, with 53 percent saying the federal government needs "very major reform," though Republicans do not get high marks either. When Obama took office in January 2009, 62 percent of Americans said they viewed Democrats favorably, against just 40 percent for Republicans -- and the president's party now only has a 38 percent-37 percent edge over his critics.

Just 25 percent said they had a favorable view of the Congress, just half of what it was one year ago and the lowest in a quarter century of Pew surveys. But while 58 percent say the government has gone too far in regulating the economy, 61 percent say they want tougher government rules for Wall Street -- a boon to Obama and Democrats who have made that their top domestic goal now that the president has signed his historic health care overhaul into law.

SOURCE

American citizens urged to ‘arm themselves’ after police budget cuts

Arizona governor signs bill to protect the constitution

TEN FACTS ALL AMERICAN'S MUST KNOW NOW

The political goons in the UK also dance to the Rothschild tyranny

1. The United States individual (personal) income taxes go directly to the Bank of England, City of London, which is wholly owned and controlled by the family Rothschild.

2. The United States Federal Reserve Bank is NOT a U.S. government institution.

3. The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE bank, which is wholly owned and controlled by the family Rothschild.

4. The Federal Reserve was established in 1913 illegally, when the Rothschild’s lieutenant, U.S. Senator Nelson Aldrich, forced through a Congressional bill that mandated it.

5. The family Rothschild is directly responsible for starting all major, and many minor, wars over the past 230 years.

6. The family Rothschild is directly responsible for every recession and depression in the United States over the past 210 years.

7. The family Rothschild (The First Sphere of Influence) controls all major banking throughout the entire world, and has the power to bankrupt entire countries.

8. Thomas Jefferson fought vehemently against Alexander Hamilton to ensure that the newly created United States would NOT fall under the control of the Rothschilds. Jefferson said that the Rothschilds were a greater threat to our country than any standing army.

9. Andrew Jackson also fought to thwart all the efforts of the Rothschilds, and was able to do so during his term. When his term was up, the Rothschilds installed their own U.S. president and then, in a retaliatory measure, plunged America into its first depression.

10. The Rothschilds have assassinated four U.S. presidents, who refused to toe the Rothschild line, and are thought to have murdered others, although the evidence for the latter is as yet inconclusive.

11. The Internal Revenue Service is a private corporation, licensed by the Fed as a collection agency.

12. BONUS FACT #1: the Rothschilds are wholly responsible for the deaths and murders and assassinations of tens of millions of human beings worldwide.

13. BONUS FACT #2: The Rothschild henchmen are Zbigniew Brzezinski and his sons. Forget Kissinger; he’s an idiot.

SOURCE

ARCHITECT RICHARD GAGE STATES 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

NUCLEAR SUMMIT LOGO FAMILIAR?

OBAMA SIGNS $18 BILLION EXTENSION OF JOBLESS BENEFITS

Congress has passed a bill to restore unemployment benefits for people who have been out of work for months.

WASHINGTON -- Just hours after Congress passed an $18 billion bill to restore unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed, President Barack Obama made it the law of the land. The measure comes as welcome relief to hundreds of thousands of people who lost out on the additional weeks of compensation after exhausting their state-paid benefits. They now will be able to reapply for long-term unemployment benefits and receive those checks retroactively under the legislation. The bill also restores full Medicaid payments to doctors who were threatened by a 21 percent cut and refloats the flood insurance program.

Obama signed the bill when he returned to the White House on Thursday night from fundraisers in Miami and a speech earlier in the day at Cape Canaveral, presidential spokesman Bill Burton said. Obama thanked Congress for passing the temporary extension, saying it was critical to help struggling families make ends meet. "Millions of Americans who lost their jobs in this economic crisis depend on unemployment and health insurance benefits to get by as they look for work and get themselves back on their feet," Obama said in a statement. "But as I requested in my budget, I urge Congress to move quickly to extend these benefits through the end of this year." The legislation cleared both houses of Congress on Thursday night. The House passed the bill 289-112 just two hours after it emerged from the Senate on a 59-38 vote that capped an unusually partisan debate. Republicans largely chose to take a stand against the legislation for adding to the $12.8 trillion national despite backing it by wide margins in December and again recently.

"It increases the deficit by $18 billion, a cost to be paid for by future generations," said Rep. Jerry Moran, R-Kan. "This legislation is yet another unfortunate example of business as usual in our nation's capital." Several other popular programs had also expired, including federal flood insurance, higher Medicare payment rates for doctors and generous health insurance subsidies for people who have lost their jobs. The situation became more urgent Thursday afternoon when Medicare announced that it would start paying doctors' claims at a 21 percent lower rate. That won't be necessary now. Thursday's measure provides up to 99 weekly unemployment checks averaging $335 to people whose 26 weeks of state-paid benefits have run out. It's a temporary extension through June 2 that gives House and Senate Democrats time to iron out a measure to fund the program through the end of the year.

Fewer than 1 in 3 House Republicans voted for the measure. Just three Senate Republicans did. The sole Democrat to oppose it was longtime budget hawk Rep. Jim Cooper of Tennessee. The bill also extends a program created under last year's economic stimulus bill that gives unemployed people a 65 percent subsidy on health care premiums under the so-called COBRA program. On successive votes earlier in the day, Democrats narrowly turned back two amendments by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., that would have paid for the measure over time by cutting spending and raising almost $10 billion in revenues with a variety of Democratic-backed ideas to tighten the tax code. One of Coburn's amendments was killed by a 50-48 vote. The topic of providing additional weeks of jobless benefits in the midst of bad times had been regarded as routine. But with conservative voters and tea party activists up in arms about the deficit, conservative Senate Republicans upset about the deficit have twice caused interruptions of jobless benefits and other programs.

In February, Jim Bunning, R-Ky., single-handedly blocked an extension of unemployment benefits in an unsuccessful bid to force Democrats to pay for them. The measure passed on a 78-19 vote after Republicans were smacked by a public relations backlash. But many Republicans believe it was a stand worth taking, including Coburn, who blocked a vote last month on another short-term extension. By the time Senators returned from a two-week recess on Monday, only four Republicans -- Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Scott Brown of Massachusetts and George Voinovich of Ohio -- voted with Democrats to defeat a GOP filibuster of the bill. Only Voinovich, Collins and Snowe voted for the bill on Thursday. Democrats said it was the wrong topic for Republicans to take a stand on the deficit after voting for tax cuts, wars and a new Medicare drug benefit without paying for them.

"They seem to have discovered fiscal responsibility when it comes time to extend unemployment benefits but not when it came to paying for tax cuts for the rich and the Iraq war," said Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich. Twenty-one Senate Republicans voted for the earlier extension last month and House GOP leaders opted against even forcing a vote. But Thursday's vote came after senators spent two weeks among their constituents -- and as thousands of tea party activists came to Washington to protest on deadline day for filing taxes. "I think people spent two weeks out listening to people about spending and debt," Coburn said. The House has twice this year approved short-term extensions of jobless benefits and other expired programs.

The various programs in the longer-term legislation represent much of the Democrats' remaining agenda on job creation. One of the reasons the short-term legislation was needed is that House and Senate Democrats are having difficulty resolving their differences on how to pay for a package of expired tax breaks for individuals and businesses. Other elements of the jobs agenda such as cash to build roads and schools and help local governments keep teachers on the payroll, remain on the shelf for a lack of money to pay for them. Democrats said deficit-financed jobless benefits not only needed to help people unable to find work but that they are one of the most effective ways to pump up the still-struggling economy.

SOURCE

HUTAREE MILITIA DISCUSS THE NEW WORLD ORDER(SECRETLY RECORDED) VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

WHY THEY CARRY GUNS IN ALASKA VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

This guy lives just outside of Soldotna , Alaska .

King season is over, and since I had a day off before silvers start, I thought I would go for a walk! This occurred at 11:16 AM Sunday morning 1/3/2010, just 2/10 of a mile from my house. On our road while walking my dogs (ironically trying to get in shape for hunting season). For the record, this is in a residential area; not back in the woods. . . No bow hunting. . .. No stealth occurring. I heard a twig snap..... And looked back. . . Full on charge was a huge brownie, ears back, head low and motorin' full speed! Came with zero warning; no Woof, no popping of the teeth, no standing up, nothing like what you think or see on TV! It charged from less than 20 yards and was on me in about one-second!

Totally surreal. I just started shooting in the general direction. And praise God that my second shot (or was it my third?) rolled him at 5 feet and he skidded to a stop 10 feet BEYOND where I was shooting from. I actually sidestepped him and fell over backwards on the last shot. And his momentum carried him to a stop past where I fired my first shot!

It was a prehistoric old bear. No teeth. No fat. Weighed between 900-1000 Lbs and it took five men to DRAG it onto a tilt-bed trailer! Big bear. Its Paw measured out at about a 9-1/2 footer! Never-ever-thought 'it' would happen to me! It's always some other smuck..... Right?

Well, no bull...... I am still high on adrenaline . . . With my gut in a Knot (felt like I did 10,000 crunches without stopping)! Almost puked for an hour after. Had the burps and couldn't even stand up as the troopers conducted their investigation! Totally wiped me out. Can't even put that feeling into words. By far the most emotion I have ever felt at once! No doubt that God was with me, as I brought my Ruger .454 Casull (and some "hot" 350 grain solids) just for the heck of it. And managed to draw and snap shoot (pointed, never even aimed!) from the hip! Total lucky shot!

All I can say is Praise God for my safety and for choosing to leave the wife and kids at home on this walk! Now, if either Hillary, or Barry Hussein or anyone else in this administration starts making noises about taking away your right to protect yourself with a gun, we need to let them know where we stand. Very Quickly!!!

SPECIAL ARMY UNIT TO BE DEPLOYED ON AMERICAN SOIL PRIOR TO NOVEMBER ELECTIONS

In October of this year, one month prior to the November midterm elections, a special army unit known as 'Consequence Management Response Force' will be ready for deployment on American soil if so ordered by the President. The special force, which is the new name being given to the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, has been training at Fort Stewart, Georgia and is composed of 80,000 troops.
According to the Army Times, They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.

The key phrase is 'may be called upon to help with civil unrest.'

This afternoon a local radio talk show host reported that he had been in contact with a member of the military. This military source stated that the armed forces have been alerted to the strong possibility that civil unrest may occur in the United States this summer, prior to the midterm elections of 2010. The source described this as 'our long, hot summer of discontent' that could be eerily reminiscent of the summer of 1968 when riots broke out in many of our largest cities. However, the summer of 2010 could well be much worse due to the players involved. In 1968 the major players were war protesters. This time, the outrage simmering beneath the surface of American society involves a broad cross-section of the heartland, and most of them are heavily armed.

It is highly unlikely that these citizens would ever initiate armed conflict of any kind. In their view, gun rights are for self-defense--and for defense against tyrannical government, which our Founders regarded as the most dangerous force on earth. However, it has become clear that other groups may well initiate violence in order to start an 'incident' that would give Obama and a rogue Congress a reason to implement martial law, confiscate the citizens' guns, enforce curfews, and suspend all future elections until such time as it is deemed 'safe' to proceed with human liberty as encapsulated in the right to vote. Tea Party members, for example, have been warned in recent days that members of Andy Stern's SEIU union and members of the organization formerly known as ACORN plan to infiltrate Tea Party gatherings in order to incite some sort of incident that could result in armed conflict. In addition, all indications point to a humiliating defeat for the Democrats and Obama in November. Not only will the House in all likelihood transfer to Republican control, but it is increasingly possible for the Democrats to lose the Senate as well.

And there are Leftwing groups in this country that would use whatever means necessary to prevent that from happening. ACORN has already gone underground, changing its name so as to fly beneath the radar screen. How many people will the group register to vote illegally? And with Obama's plan to naturalize between 10 and 20 million illegal aliens, a brand new voter base for the Democrats will be in place prior to November.

Add to this the growing unrest over continued high unemployment, the coming spike in interest rates and inflation, and the still-boiling outrage over the manner in which Obama and the Democrats shoved ObamaCare down the throats of the citizens, and all of the ingredients are present for a major F-5 tornado to sweep across the heartland. To what extent would soldiers use deadly force during such 'civil unrest' should the Consequence Management Response Team be utilized? During the anti-war riots of the 1960s they killed student protesters. What about now? The military source cited by the radio host today was asked this very question. He would merely say that the culture of the U.S. military is changing--half support Obama and the other half are dead-set against him.

His conclusion? There is no way to know for sure if they would obey an order to open fire on ordinary citizens.
Update: The Cato Institute published this warning when the program was launched in its first phase in 2008 (the program has been updated and expanded since 2008). The Founders insisted that standing armies were never to be used against American citizens on our own soil, no matter what violations of this principle have occurred in the years following. In the spirit of the Patriots and of real journalists government must be questioned constantly and held to intense scrutiny in order to preserve liberty.

SOURCE

OKLAHOMA MILITIA ISSUE WARNING TO US GOVERNMENT VIDEO

FULL SCREEN VERSION HERE

THE AMERICAN JOBS PICTURE STILL LOOKS BLEAK

Many outsourced jobs will never return, and median income will likely continue to fall just like it did during the last so-called recovery.

The U.S. economy added 162,000 jobs in March. That sounds impressive until you look more closely. At least a third of them were temporary government hires to take the census—better than no job but hardly worth writing home about. The 112,000 real new jobs were fewer than the 150,000 needed to keep up with the growth of the U.S. population. It's far better than it was—we're not hemorrhaging jobs as we did in 2008 and 2009—but the bleeding hasn't stopped.

Since the start of the Great Recession in December 2007, the economy has shed 8.4 million jobs and failed to create another 2.7 million required by an ever-larger pool of potential workers. That leaves us more than 11 million jobs behind. (The number is worse if you include everyone working part-time who'd rather it be full-time, those working full-time at fewer hours, and people who are overqualified for the jobs they're in.) This means even if we enjoy a vigorous recovery that produces, say, 300,000 net new jobs a month, we could be looking at five to eight years before catching up to where we were before the recession began.

Given how many Americans are unemployed or underemployed, it's hard to see where we get sufficient demand to support a vigorous recovery. Outlays from the federal stimulus have already passed their peak, and the Federal Reserve won't keep interest rates near zero for very long. Although consumers are beginning to come out of their holes, it will be many years before they can return to their pre-recession levels of spending. Most households rely on two wage earners, of whom at least one is now likely to be unemployed, underemployed or in danger of losing a job. And even households whose incomes have returned are likely to be residing in houses whose values haven't—which means they can't turn their homes into cash machines as they did before the recession. While consumers have been shedding their debts like mad—often simply by defaulting on loans—their remaining burdens are still heavy. At the end of last year, debt averaged $43,874 per American, or about 122% of annual disposable income. Most analysts believe a sustainable debt load is around 100% of disposable income, assuming a normal level of employment and normal access to credit—neither of which we are likely to have for some time.

Some economic cheerleaders say rising stock prices are making consumers feel wealthier and therefore readier to spend. But most Americans' biggest asset is their homes. The "wealth effect" is felt mainly by the richest 10%, whose net worth is largely stocks and bonds. The top 10% accounted for about half of total national income in 2007. But they were only about 40% of total spending. A vigorous jobs recovery can't be based on 40% of what was spent before the economy collapsed. What's likely to slow the jobs recovery most, however, is the indubitable reality that many of the jobs that have been lost will never return. The Great Recession has accelerated a structural shift in the economy that had been slowly building for years. Companies have used the downturn to aggressively trim payrolls, making cuts they've been reluctant to make before. Outsourcing abroad has increased dramatically. Companies have discovered that new software and computer technologies have made many workers in Asia and Latin America almost as productive as Americans, and that the Internet allows far more work to be efficiently moved to another country without loss of control. Companies have also cut costs by substituting more computerized equipment for labor. They've made greater use of numerically controlled machine tools, robotics and a wide range of office software.

These cost-cutting moves have allowed many companies to show profits notwithstanding relatively poor sales. Alcoa, for example, had $1.5 billion in cash at the end of last year, double what it had on hand at the end of 2008. It managed this largely by cutting 28,000 jobs, 32% of its work force. But for workers, there's no return. Those who have lost their jobs to foreign outsourcing or labor-replacing technologies are unlikely ever to get them back. And they have little hope of finding new jobs that pay as well. More than 40% of today's unemployed have been without work for over six months, a higher proportion than at any time in 60 years. The only way many of today's jobless are likely to retain their jobs or get new ones is by settling for much lower wages and benefits. The official unemployment numbers hide the extent to which American workers are already on this downward path. But if you look at income data you'll see the drop. Among those with jobs, more and more have accepted lower pay and benefits as a condition for keeping them. Or they have lost higher-paying jobs and are now in new ones that pay less. Or new hires are paid far lower wages than the old. (In January, Ford Motor Co. announced that it would add 1,200 jobs at its Chicago assembly plant but didn't trumpet that the new workers will be paid half of what current workers were paid when they began.) Or they have become consultants or temporary workers whose pay is unsteady and benefits nonexistent.

This shift also helps explain why the unemployment rate for Americans with college degrees is now only 5%, while it is 10.5% for those with only a high-school degree, and 15.6% for Americans with less than a high-school diploma. The jobs of well-educated Americans, although hardly immune to foreign outsourcing and technological displacement, have been less vulnerable to these trends than the jobs of Americans with fewer years of education. The likelihood, therefore, is that as the economy struggles to recover and today's jobless begin to find work, the median wage will continue to fall—as it did between 2001 and 2007, during the last so-called recovery. More Americans will be working, but for pay they consider inadequate. The approaching recovery will be tepid because so many people will lack the money needed to buy all the goods and services the economy can produce. Americans will once again be employed, but they will also be back on the downward escalator of declining pay they rode before the Great Recession.

SOURCE