Liberals To Veterans: ‘You’ve Served Us Well, Troops. But Unfortunately Now We’ll Have To Euthanize You Because You’re Dangerous.’

I just want to point out that if I were a parakeet and my humans lined my birdcage with the New York Slimes, I would call the ASPCA and file a cruelty to animals lawsuit.

This worthless load of equine manure is the latest example of the true moral disease of the soul that is liberalism (my comment on this filth is below):

Veterans and White Supremacy
By KATHLEEN BELEW APRIL 15, 2014

EVANSTON, Ill. — WHEN Frazier Glenn Miller shot and killed three people in Overland Park, Kan., on Sunday, he did so as a soldier of the white power movement: a groundswell that united Klansmen, neo-Nazis and other fringe elements after the Vietnam War, crested with the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building in 1995, and remains a diminished but potent threat today.

Mr. Miller, the 73-year-old man charged in the killings, had been outspoken about his hatred of Jews, blacks, Communists and immigrants, but it would be a mistake to dismiss him as a crazed outlier. The shootings were consistent with his three decades of participation in organized hate groups. His violence was framed by a clear worldview.

You can’t predict whether any one person will commit violence, but it would be hard to think of someone more befitting of law enforcement scrutiny than Mr. Miller (who also goes by the name Frazier Glenn Cross). I’ve been studying the white radical right since 2006. In my review of tens of thousands of pages of once classified federal records, as well as newly available archives of Klan and neo-Nazi publications, Mr. Miller appears as a central figure of the white power movement.

The number of Vietnam veterans in that movement was small — a tiny proportion of those who served — but Vietnam veterans forged the first links between Klansmen and Nazis since World War II. They were central in leading Klan and neo-Nazi groups past the anti-civil rights backlash of the 1960s and toward paramilitary violence. The white power movement they forged had strongholds not only in the South, but also in the Pacific Northwest, Colorado, California and Pennsylvania. Its members carried weapons like those they had used in Vietnam, and used boot-camp rhetoric to frame their pursuit of domestic enemies. They condoned violence against innocent people and, eventually, the state itself.

Before his 1979 discharge for distributing racist literature, Mr. Miller served for 20 years in the Army, including two tours in Vietnam and service as a Green Beret. Later that year he took part (but was not charged) in a deadly shooting of Communist protesters in Greensboro, N.C.

In 1980, Mr. Miller formed a Klan-affiliated organization in North Carolina that eventually was known as the White Patriot Party. He outfitted members in camouflage fatigues. He paraded his neo-Nazis, in uniform and bearing arms, up and down streets. They patrolled schools and polling places, supposedly to protect whites from harassment. F.B.I. documents show that they also burned crosses. By 1986, Mr. Miller’s group claimed 2,500 members in five southern states.

The archives also show that Mr. Miller received large sums of money from The Order, a white power group in the Pacific Northwest, to buy land and weapons to put his followers through paramilitary training. Mr. Miller’s group paid $50,000 for weapons and matériel stolen from the armory at Fort Bragg, N.C., including anti-tank rockets, mines and plastic explosives. He targeted active-duty troops for recruitment and hired them to conduct training exercises.

Mr. Miller’s downfall came after the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a lawsuit on behalf of black North Carolinians; as part of a settlement in 1985, he agreed to stop operating a paramilitary organization. In 1987, a federal judge found that Mr. Miller had violated the agreement, and barred him from contacting others in the white power movement. Outraged, and anticipating criminal charges regarding the stolen military weapons, Mr. Miller briefly went underground. He would write in a self-published autobiography, “Since they wouldn’t allow me to fight them legally above ground, then I’d resort to the only means left, armed revolution.” He was later caught with a small arsenal, but he began cooperating with prosecutors, testifying against other white supremacists in exchange for a reduced sentence. He was released in 1990, after serving three years.

In 2009, the Department of Homeland Security issued a nine-page report detailing the threat of domestic terrorism by the white power movement. This short document outlined no specific threats, but rather a set of historical factors that had predicted white-supremacist activity in the past — like economic pressure, opposition to immigration and gun-control legislation — and a new factor, the election of a black president.

The report singled out one factor that has fueled every surge in Ku Klux Klan membership in American history, from the 1860s to the present: war. The return of veterans from combat appears to correlate more closely with Klan membership than any other historical factor. “Military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists carrying out violent attacks,” the report warned. The agency was “concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.”

The report raised intense blowback from the American Legion, Fox News and conservative members of Congress. They demanded an apology and denounced the idea that any veteran could commit an act of domestic terrorism. The department shelved the report, removing it from its website. The threat, however, proved real.

Continue reading the main story Write A Comment

Mr. Miller obviously represents an extreme, both in his politics and in his violence. A vast majority of veterans are neither violent nor mentally ill. When they turn violent, they often harm themselves, by committing suicide. But it would be irresponsible to overlook the high rates of combat trauma among the 2.4 million Americans who have served in our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the full impact of which has not yet materialized. Veterans of those conflicts represent just 10 percent of those getting mental health services through the Department of Veterans Affairs, where the overwhelming majority of those in treatment are still Vietnam veterans.

During Mr. Miller’s long membership in the white power movement, its leaders have robbed armored cars, engaged in counterfeiting and the large-scale theft of military weapons, and carried out or planned killings. The bombing by Timothy J. McVeigh, an Army veteran, of the federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995, which killed 168 people, was only the most dramatic of these crimes. When we interpret shootings like the one on Sunday as acts of mad, lone-wolf gunmen, we fail to see white power as an organized — and deadly — social movement.

That Mr. Miller was able to carry out an act of domestic terror at two locations despite his history of violent behavior should alarm anyone concerned about public safety. Would he have received greater scrutiny had he been a Muslim, a foreigner, not white, not a veteran? The answer is clear, and alarming.

Kathleen Belew, a postdoctoral fellow in history at Northwestern University, is at work on a book on Vietnam veterans and the radical right.

A version of this op-ed appears in print on April 16, 2014, on page A25 of the New York edition with the headline: Veterans and White Supremacy. Order Reprints|Today’s Paper|Subscribe

First of all, the FACT of the matter is that the Ku Klux Klan was the product of the DEMOCRAT PARTY:

As a secret vigilante group, the Klan targeted freedmen and their allies; it sought to restore white supremacy by threats and violence, including murder, against black and white Republicans. In 1870 and 1871, the federal government passed the Force Acts, which were used to prosecute Klan crimes.^[20] Prosecution of Klan crimes and enforcement of the Force Acts suppressed Klan activity. In 1874 and later, however, newly organized and openly active paramilitary organizations, such as the White League and the Red Shirts, started a fresh round of violence aimed at suppressing blacks’ voting and running Republicans out of office. These contributed to segregationist white Democrats regaining political power in all the Southern states by 1877.

So if this liberal pseudo-intellectual fraud had a shred of integrity or honesty, she would be pointing out that there is a FAR higher percentage of DEMOCRATS who are Klan members than the 22-plus million VETERANS who served their country rather than parasitically leaching off of it as have Democrats.

We’ve got over twenty-two million veterans in America.  And how many of them are guilty of this kind of viciousness?  Belew lists two out of twenty-plus million?  It’s hard to decide if this woman is more insane than evil or more evil than insane (that’s always my problem when I’m trying to understand liberals).

I see, furthermore, that Kathleen Belew conveniently forgot to mention that black leaders have long lamented the over-representation of blacks drafted for the Vietnam War – and therefore (according to this harebrained theory of Belew’s) the vicious racist hate of black service members that are clearly threatening America.  Basically, she doesn’t have to explain why this military veteran = violence crap theory doesn’t apply to blacks because she is a mindless hypocrite lacking a shred of honor or credibility.

I mean, I remember an example that Belew conveniently forgot: John Allen Muhammad.  Here’s a black guy who served in the military.  And here’s a black guy that turned into a sniper hunting humans.  In fact:

“Muhammad’s goal in Phase One was to kill six white people a day for 30 days.”

Military veteran, check.  Racist, check, murderer, check.  Only the veteran was the wrong skin color for Belew.

Given the sheer number of white veterans relative to the number of black veterans in the United States military (about 80 percent of all U.S. veterans are white), and given the fact that I just (off the top of my head) produced half as many examples – we should be writing the story “Veterans and Black Supremacy” if we were going to deal with the facts.

How many black Vietnam veterans joined the racist Black Panthers or some other black race-based group???

The old Black Panthers as well as numerous other racist black groups tried to initiate a race war.  The NEW Black Panthers are trying to initiate a race war.  And I don’t even think these turds are veterans, which is another way of saying that being a veteran has NOTHING to do with the vile crap that this vile pseudo-intellectual attributes to them.

If we talk about “minority veterans” the last TWO mass shootings by veterans at Fort Hood were BOTH “minorities” and therefore it seems that we ought to be looking at the minority veterans with “Are you about to go postal?” suspicions, shouldn’t we?  And that actually has me providing MORE minority examples of dangerous psycho veterans than Belew does white veterans.

But who the hell needs to think or reflect on actual facts when you’re a liberal?

When you are a liberal you are immune to reality.  It’s almost like it’s a sci-fi-movie extra dimension that liberals cannot see or experience or have any contact with.

Then there’s the Homeland Security Report that Belew cites: she fails to mention that the stuff she recites was WITHDRAWN when it was shown that it had no basis in fact but was basically The Democrats exercising their “loathing the military” demons.  In fact, it was so baseless and so utterly without merit that it was withdrawn within a matter of HOURS after it was issued.

This is “scholarship” with rabies.  It is diseased, frothing-at-the-mouth madness masquerading as “academia.”

But that said, let’s assume her point is valid and there is something about serving in the armed forces – especially in combat – that makes one go psycho racist.

What do we do about it?

Perhaps liberals want us to simply disband our military and preemptively surrender right now to Russia.  Just surrender.  Tell Putin that we will gladly be his slaves and work to death in his forced labor camps in Siberia scraping coal out of the ground with our bare hands.  Hell, that would make America even better at liberalism than France and France is pretty damn good at being gutless coward liberals.

The only other alternative is to just treat our veterans the way we used to treat war dogs.  The idea was that war dogs – having been turned vicious by combat – could never be reintegrated into society.  So they had to be euthanized when they came home.  You know, “Good job, Fido!  Attaboy!  But now we’ve got to put you down.”

The truly evil, violent and diseased people in America are liberals and members of liberal groups.  If anyone needs to be “put down,” it’s Kathleen Belew and her ilk.

If you agree with Kathleen Belew, then have the decency to give up your freedom and become the slave you ought to be.  Because without our veterans a slave is precisely what the hell you would BE.  Otherwise realize that it is LIBERALS who are a true danger to both sanity and freedom.

For liberal Democrats to cast this kind of hate on the people who defend our freedom is so sickening and so beneath contempt I just want to vomit.

 

 

Obama Released 68,000 Convicted Criminal Illegal Immigrants Last Year (To Attack/Udermine Americans AGAIN)

Our Statue of Liberty says:

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free

Obama says:

Give me your predators, your parasites,
Your violent masses yearning to undermine freedom

Illegal immigrants are now free indeed: free to pour across the border in giant numbers restricted only by Obama’s failed American economy, knowing that America will not enforce its own laws when those laws come to protecting the American people.

And in the flying face of his false rhetoric, it shows:

DHS document: 68,000 illegal immigrants with criminal convictions released in 2013
By Alexander Bolton – 03/31/14 05:45 AM EDT

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials last year released 68,000 illegal immigrants with criminal convictions, undercutting Democratic claims that President Obama has strictly enforced immigration laws.

An internal Department of Homeland Security document compiling statistics on arrests and deportations in 2013 showed that ICE agents encountered 193,357 illegal immigrants with criminal convictions but issued charging documents for only 125,478. More than 67,800 were released.

The data came from an end-of-year “Weekly Departures and Detention Report.”

The Center for Immigration Studies, a research group that favors stricter enforcement of immigration laws, estimates ICE agents released more than a third of illegal immigrants with criminal records they detained.

“ICE released 68,000 criminal aliens in 2013, or 35 percent of the criminal aliens encountered by officers. The vast majority of these releases occurred because of the Obama administration’s prosecutorial discretion policies,” Jessica Vaughn, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, wrote in a memo summarizing the DHS document.

ICE classifies illegal immigrants as criminal if they have been convicted of a crime, not including traffic offense, Vaughn noted.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (Ala.), the ranking Republican on the Budget Committee, blasted the administration’s record.

“The preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that immigration enforcement in America has collapsed. Even those with criminal convictions are being released. DHS is a department in crisis,” he said in a statement Sunday.

“Secretary Johnson must reject the president’s demands to weaken enforcement further and tell him that his duty, and his officers’ duty, is to enforce the law — not break it,” he added in reference to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson.

A spokeswoman for ICE did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advocacy groups on both sides of the immigration debate have fired salvos back and forth over Obama’s track record enforcing the law.

Republicans say they cannot trust Obama to enforce the law, and Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) cited that as an obstacle to passing immigration reform through the House.

Pro-immigrant groups argue Obama has enforced the law too zealously.

Janet Murguía, the president of the National Council of La Raza, called Obama the “deporter in chief” earlier this month.

Senate Democrats like Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) have called on Obama to halt the deportations of illegal immigrants who are immediate family members of U.S. citizens.

The Center for Immigration Studies reports that ICE officials moved to deport 28 percent fewer illegal immigrants from the interior of the country in 2013 than in 2012.

The group obtained the law enforcement records through a lawsuit.

Get that?  It turns out that Obama is not only not bothering to enforce American immigration law when it comes to illegal – and note they are ALL “illegal” by definition because they have ALL broken the law – but he’s not even bothering to keep the ILLEGAL immigrants who have been CONVICTED OF CRIMES TO THE TUNE OF 35% OF THE DAMN TIME.

I wonder what Democrats will think when they encounter a Republican president who ONLY enforces the laws he likes and refuses to enforce the ones he doesn’t and cites Barack Obama as his case law???

Obama says he’s “deported” more than the above figures.  But that’s because he’s a liar without shame.  It turns out that Obama has been counting all of the self-deported immigrants who simply went back home on their own as well as all the immigrants who were turned back by the Border Patrol at the border as “deported.”  Which is interesting because NO AMERICAN PRESIDENT HAS EVER COUNTED THOSE BEFORE.

And so THAT’S why Obama has “deported” so many damn illegal immigrants.

So as usual with dishonest Democrats, it ALWAYS depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.

Think about the states like Arizona who tried to enforce the immigration law because Obama refused to.  And Obama sicked his law dog Eric Holder on Arizona.  So here border states are, forbidden to enforce the immigration law while the wicked president refuses to enforce the immigration law.  Because that’s the way “God damn America” works (or, more precisely, DOESN’T work).

Our immigration system is broken.  There’s no question about that.  It was broken by cynical Democrats like Ted Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson in the early 1960s.  Prior to that point, America had a system that allowed skilled, qualified workers who were allowed to enter and strengthen America based on our needs for hard workers who would help us build this nation as they became Americans.  Thanks to Ted Kennedy and LBJ, that system was “fundamentally transformed” to allow the entire families of immigrants to come flooding in (so they would vote Democrat and “fundamentally transform” our republic).  No longer was the immigration system based on the needs of the nation, whereby immigrants left their old lives behind and embraced the American Way; but now they brought in their whole family – including millions who had no useful skills – and brought their failed Old Way with them.

Which is why so many million immigrants today have no need to EVER become American or to learn to speak our language (which used to be “English”, btw).

Democrats are always liars who tell lies.  And one of their lies is the lie that if people like me don’t want open borders and the “right” of illegal immigrants to flood into my country, I’m some kind of “racist.”

I can only point out that every time we allow an illegal immigrant from Mexico to walk across our border, that is one more African, or Asian, or one more would-be immigrant from anywhere else, patiently waiting to play the game fairly, who is denied and denied and denied again the opportunity to become an American.

Not that they should even want it any more – because under this failed messiah citizenship aint worth squat.

Why am I a “racist” for saying that qualified Africans ought to be allowed to legal come into America and follow the law rather than unqualified illegal immigrants – especially like these 68,000 convicted criminal illegal immigrants Obama freed???

What does it even MEAN to be “an American citizen” now?

Just a couple of days ago, Obama sent his dog Joe Biden out to say this piece of rubbish:

On Thursday, Vice President Joe Biden said he believes all of the country’s illegal immigrants are “already American citizens.”

“You know, eleven million people live in the shadows. I believe they’re already American citizens,” Biden, who may run for president in 2016, said while addressing the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. “These people are just waiting, waiting for a chance to contribute fully. And by that standard, eleven million undocumented aliens are already Americans, in my view.”

According to The Hill, Biden also ignored a Congressional Budget Office report that determined that amnesty legislation would lower the wages of American workers and mocked those who have expressed concerns regarding amnesty and an increase in guest workers and high-tech visas.

“So much for the horror stories,” Biden reportedly said after citing studies that said more immigration would lead to economic growth.

Tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free, you’re very likely better off wherever you are.  Because no matter how bad it is for you wherever you are, Obama is going to make it worse for ALL Americans soon.

 

‘A Vast Hypocrite Conspiracy’ Alert: Obama Demonized Waterboarding – But He Is Murdering Americans With Predator Death Lists

Just to make sure you all get the “vast conspiracy” part: yes, there’s a vast, right wing conspiracy going on here.  We’d better blame Bush.

Only the real crisis is being caused by a conspiracy of abject hypocrisy.  And that one’s got Democrats all over it (and for the record, Hillary Clinton’s “vast, rightwing conspiracy” turned out to be a predatory lizard that was living in Bill Clinton’s pants).

I’ll make you a deal, liberal: you can waterboard me the way the CIA waterboarded those terrorists who ended up singing like birds.  The exact number of pours will be rigorously monitored, a doctor will be present to verify that my medical condition is never threatened at any time during the procedure, etc.

Then I get to smash you into so many pieces they won’t be able to fill a little girl’s shoe box with your remains.

Is that a deal?  Obama – being incredibly stingy with his toys – probably won’t let me have a Predator drone, so I’ll be using a big giant axe for my part of this test as to whether waterboarding or killing is worse.  And I’ll get 183 whacks at you to correspond with the 183 pours ultimately used by one of the three terrorists during waterboarding.

That’s right: Obama tried to criminalize the Bush administration and literally prosecute top Bush officials for their role in trying to protect the American people by using enhanced interrogation measures in order to get people who were willing to die to kill as many of us as possible to tell us what we needed to know to stop the next murderous attack.

It’s wrong to waterboard terrorists.

But it is perfectly okay in our “good is evil and evil is good” administration to order the killing of American citizens without any kind of due process.  And without even having to have any actual “evidence.”

I have a theory for why liberals believe it’s wrong to waterboard but perfectly okay to kill without any kind of due process.  You see, liberals are evolved cockroaches on their own theology of Darwinian evolution.  They just randomly mutated and evolved; there’s no meaning, or value or purpose to their evolved insect lives, so why not treat human beings like herd animals and kill them?  At the same time, they are very squeemish, indeed, about aforementioned herd animals being maltreated prior to their slaughter.  So kill them without due processs, yes, but waterboard them, no.

I just want to point out for the official record that every single Democrat on earth who is not loudly crying out for Barack Obama, Joe Biden and top Democrat officials to resign and be criminally prosecuted is a demon-possessed hypocrite – every single one of you weasels:

EXCLUSIVE: Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans
By Michael Isikoff, National Investigative Correspondent, NBC News

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” — even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.

The 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects abroad, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the  September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes.

The secrecy surrounding such strikes is fast emerging as a central issue in this week’s hearing of White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, a key architect of the drone campaign, to be CIA director.  Brennan was the first administration official to publicly acknowledge drone strikes in a speech last year, calling them “consistent with the inherent right of self-defense.” In a separate talk at the Northwestern University Law School in March, Attorney General Eric Holder specifically endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans, saying they could be justified if government officials determine the target poses  “an imminent threat of violent attack.”

But the confidential Justice Department “white paper” introduces a more expansive definition of self-defense or imminent attack than described  by Brennan or Holder in their public speeches.  It refers, for example, to what it calls a “broader concept of imminence” than actual intelligence about any ongoing plot against the U.S. homeland.

“The condition that an operational  leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states.

Instead, it says,  an “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government may determine that the targeted American  has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is  no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.” The memo does not define “recently” or “activities.”

As in Holder’s speech, the confidential memo lays out a three-part test that would make targeted killings of American lawful:  In addition to the suspect being an imminent threat, capture of the target must be “infeasible, and the strike must be conducted according to “law of war principles.” But the memo elaborates on some of these factors in ways that go beyond what the attorney general said publicly. For example, it states that U.S. officials may consider whether an attempted capture of a suspect  would pose an “undue risk” to U.S. personnel involved in such an operation. If so, U.S. officials could determine that the capture operation of the targeted American would not be feasible, making it lawful for the U.S. government to order a killing instead, the memo concludes.

The undated memo is entitled “Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al Qa’ida or An Associated Force.”  It was provided to members of the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees in June by administration officials on the condition that it be kept confidential and  not discussed publicly.

Although not an official legal memo, the white paper was represented by administration  officials as a policy document that closely mirrors the arguments of classified memos on targeted killings by the Justice Department’s  Office of Legal Counsel, which provides authoritative legal advice to the president and all executive branch agencies. The administration has refused to turn over to Congress or release those memos publicly — or even publicly confirm their existence. A source with access to the white paper, which is not classified, provided a copy to NBC News.

“This is a chilling document,” said Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU, which is suing to obtain administration memos about the targeted killing of Americans.  “Basically, it argues that the government has the right to carry out the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen. … It recognizes some limits on the authority it sets out, but the limits are elastic and vaguely defined, and it’s easy to see how they could be manipulated.”

In particular, Jaffer said, the memo “redefines the word imminence in a way that deprives the word of its ordinary meaning.”

A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the white paper. The spokeswoman, Tracy Schmaler, instead pointed to public speeches by what she called a “parade” of administration officials, including Brennan, Holder, former State Department Legal Adviser Harold Koh and former Defense Department General Counsel Jeh Johnson that she said outlined the “legal framework” for such operations.

Pressure for turning over the Justice Department memos on targeted killings of Americans appears to be building on Capitol Hill amid signs that Brennan will be grilled on the subject at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday.

On Monday, a bipartisan group of 11 senators — led by Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon — wrote  a letter to President Barack Obama asking him to release all Justice Department memos on the subject. While accepting that “there will clearly be circumstances in which the president has the authority to use lethal force” against Americans who take up arms against the country,  it said, “It is vitally important … for Congress and the American public to have a full understanding of how  the executive branch interprets the limits and boundaries of this authority.”

The completeness of the administration’s public accounts of its legal arguments was also sharply criticized last month by U.S. Judge Colleen McMahon in response to a  lawsuit brought by the New York Times and the ACLU seeking access to the Justice Department memos on drone strikes targeting Americans under the Freedom of Information Act.  McMahon, describing herself as being caught in a “veritable Catch-22,”  said she was unable to order the release of the documents given “the thicket of laws and precedents that effectively allow the executive branch of our government to proclaim as perfectly lawful certain actions that seem on their face incompatible with our Constitution and laws while keeping the reasons for the conclusion a secret.”

In her ruling, McMahon noted that administration officials “had engaged in public discussion of the legality of targeted killing, even of citizens.” But, she wrote, they have done so “in cryptic and imprecise ways, generally without citing … any statute or court decision that justifies its conclusions.”

In one passage in Holder’s speech at Northwestern in March,  he alluded – without spelling out—that there might be circumstances where the president might order attacks against American citizens without specific knowledge of when or where an attack against the U.S. might take place.

“The Constitution does not  require the president to delay action until some theoretical end-stage of planning, when the precise time, place and manner of an attack become clear,”  he said.

But his speech did not contain the additional language in the white paper suggesting that no active intelligence about a specific attack is needed to justify a targeted strike. Similarly, Holder said in his speech that targeted killings of Americans can be justified  if “capture is not feasible.” But he did not include language in the white paper saying that an operation might not be feasible “if it could not be physically effectuated during the relevant window of opportunity or if the relevant country (where the target is located) were to decline to consent to a capture operation.” The speech also made no reference to the risk that might be posed to U.S. forces seeking to capture a target, as was  mentioned in the white paper.

The white paper also includes a more extensive discussion of why targeted strikes against Americans does not violate constitutional protections afforded American citizens as well as   a U.S. law that criminalizes the killing of U.S. nationals overseas.

It  also discusses why such targeted killings would not be a war crime or violate a U.S. executive order banning assassinations.

“A lawful killing in self-defense is not an assassination,” the white paper reads. “In the Department’s view, a lethal operation conducted against a U.S. citizen whose conduct poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States would be a legitimate act of national self-defense that would not violate the assassination ban. Similarly,  the use of lethal force, consistent with the laws of war, against an individual who is a legitimate military target would be lawful and would not violate the assassination ban.”

Obama’s policy would literally allow him to order a lethal predator drone strike on an American citizen in the United States, according to Judge Andrew Napolitano, who read the White House memo.

And Obama has already defined pretty much everybody who disagrees with his socialist agenda as “a terrorist.”  You know, while using actual terrorists who murdered American servicemen to help him do so.  It is amazing that Obama has STILL refused to call Major Nidal Hasan’s attack “terrorist” even though the man carried business cards stamped “Soldier of Allah” and even though he was screaming “Allahu Akbar!” while gunning down his victims.  But he HAS called pro-life Christians, soldiers returning from Obama’s wars and pretty much everybody else who disagrees with Obama a “terrorist.”

Why is there not more outrage in the media and in the Democrat Party?  Because liberalism is quintessential hypocrisy.  And the more liberal you are, the more of a hypocrite you are.  And because to be a Democrat is to be an abject moral idiot.

That’s why the left demonized and slandered Gitmo while Bush was running it, but hasn’t said a damn word going on five years after Obama – after personally demonizing and slandering Bush over Gitmo himself – promised to shut down the place that is still very much open as he begins his second term.

Here’s the rock that Republicans constantly find themselves under: vile, slanderous, dishonest liberal hypocrites demonize Republicans for their very reasonable methods to deal with evil.  They attack us every single day as some kind of fascist Nazis for doing what needs to be done.  Then when they get elected, they do the very damn things – and far WORSE – than the stuff they poured liquid hate on us for doing.  Obama is literally killing Americans with no due process and claiming that he is above the Constitution.  But when the Democrats do this, the fact that they are demon-possessed hypocrites and slandering liars somehow gets conveniently overlooked.

Obama gets to benefit by demonizing and slandering his political enemies.  Then he gets to benefit again by justifying his policies with comparisons to the very people he demonized and slandered.  And it doesn’t matter that he’s a criminal who ought to be lined up against a damn wall and shot for his own words about the people he is now using to justify his actions.

To be a Democrat is to be somebody who doesn’t give one flying damn about human rights unless it helps them politically.

This is why the beast is gong to come and why America won’t be much more than a banana republic when he takes over the world: because one party is fundamentally hypocritical and profoundly dishonest, and the other party is the constant victim of an endless stream of propaganda smears from that wicked party.  Everything the Republicans do is slandered and demonized by propoganda even when the ideology doing that slandering and demonization does far worse.

One day you people are going to burn in hell for what you’ve done.  Every single one of you voted for more than fifty-five million innocent babies to be murdered in the abortion mills.  Every single one of you voted for Obama to write kill lists that target Americans without due process.  And the day is coming when the fire of hell is going to consume you forever and ever and ever.

Laugh now, Democrat.  You’ll be screaming in eternal agony later.

Obama DHS: You Have A Right To Defend Yourselves From Armed Workplace Crazies With Scissors (But Not Guns)

Does this mean that Obama’s Secret Service detail has handed in their Uzis for pairs of scissors?  I sure hope they’re those safety scissors with the dull tips.  You sure wouldn’t want anybody accidentally putting an eye out while fighting to save Obama’s life, would you?

Under Obama, you have the right to perish miserably in the wake of workplace violence.  The story you are about to read is silent testimony to the fact that a crazed killer is out to murder you and your co-workers, you can’t have an actual weapon to protect yourself with – and there won’t be any cops coming anywhere NEAR in time to help you.  So grab your scissors.

And maybe you could grab a rock and a piece of paper and play with the murdering psycho for your life?

I know, I know.  That’s racist.  Thank you, President Hussein.  Praise you, messiah!  I feel so empowered with my scissors now.  While I’m waiting for my turn to be slaughtered I’ll be able to make arts and crafts!  Origami always did make me forget all about being gunned down by, you know, the only guy allowed to have a gun in your building.

Oh, origami doesn’t use scissors?  That’s okay; NEITHER DO I WHEN I’M CONFRONTING A MAN WITH A GUN.

I actually think it would have been a better idea to teach people to just give in to their terror and wet themselves.  Maybe the gunman would slip or something.

DHS Says: Confront Mass Killers With Scissors

From the New York Post:

Homeland Security has advice for confronting mass murders: scissors

By S.A. MILLER | January 31, 2013

WASHINGTON — Is your workplace getting shot up by a crazed gunman? No problem — just grab a pair of scissors and fight back!

That’s some of the helpful advice in a new instructional video from the Department of Homeland Security that was posted on the agency’s Web site just a month after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

“If you are caught out in the open and cannot conceal yourself or take cover, you might consider trying to overpower the shooter with whatever means are available,” says the narrator in the video, which shows an office worker pulling scissors out of a desk drawer.

The video, titled “Options for Consideration,” also advises that people who get caught in an “active shooter” situation should run away, hide under a desk or take cover out of the line of fire.

Thank goodness we have highly paid professionally trained bureaucrats available to give us great advice like that. This is right up their with the DHS’ advice about stretching before shoveling snow, and remembering to take off cold wet clothes.

The nearly four-minute-long video opens with chilling scenes from the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre, the 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood in Texas, and the 2011 attempted assassination of Gabrielle Giffords.

But the video quickly shifts to hokey footage of office workers scampering under desks, crouching in corners and racing into closets to hide from a rampaging gunman on the loose.

“To protect your hiding place, lock the door if you can. Block the door with heavy furniture,” recommends the male narrator, speaking in measured, authoritative tones.

Other survival strategies promoted in the video include hiding “behind large items such as cabinets or desks. Remain quiet. Silence your cellphone or pager. Even the vibration setting can give away a hiding position.”

They might also recommend taking down any ‘gun free zone’ signs.

Richard Feldman, president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association, said he has a better option for consideration than a pair of scissors when confronting an armed mass murderer — a legal firearm.

“That’s why I prefer a gun, and I usually do carry a gun when it is lawful to do so,” said Feldman. “Clearly, you use whatever you can” to fight for your life, he said…

What kind of crazy talk is that? We hold Mr. Feldman’s doctor contacts the authorities so that he can be put away.

The video is part of the Obama administration’s ongoing campaign to reduce firearm violence in the wake of the horrific mass murder last month of 20 children and six teachers in Newtown, Conn., said a Homeland Security official…

The video was released to coincide with President Obama’s sweeping proposals to curb gun violence in America, said the official…

The only trouble is, all the scissors in that Sandy Hook school would have been ‘safety scissors.’

Besides, once people starting hurting each other with scissors, they will have to be banned as well.

Nobody with one of the 400 million guns already in America will ever dare to attack my workplace now.  I’m armed with scissors.

Now, I guess all I need is to figure out how to do this:

Mind you, I’d kind of rather have a gun.  For one thing, judging by all the scars on poor Edward’s face, it would be quite a bit safer than the alternative pair of scissors that Obama says I can fight back with.  But because I live in the Obama States of America, I am now a farm animal.  And if the slaughterer comes, it is my duty to meekly comply with my turn to be slaughtered.

Wait a minute, what’s that, Obama?  I can’t have these scissors?  Because they’ve been classified as “assault scissors”?  Well, dang.  That just figures.

Obama DHS Demands No Documentation Be Required To Prove Already Treasonous-To-Begin-With DREAM Act, Say ICE And Border Patrol Unions

This is flat-out insane. 

You need to understand that Barack Obama abrogated the Constitution and abrogated the law to impose this DREAM garbage as it was.  The bill had been rejected by Congress.  Congress has the authority to pass laws; NOT Obama.  But he merely – like the fascist he is – imposed his own law by executive tyranny.

Obama had once said:

“The idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you, not just on immigration reform. But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.”

But Obama looked at the polls and said, “I don’t care how our system works.  I don’t care how our democracy functions.  I don’t give a damn how our Constitution is written.”  And then acted like the fascist he is to impose the DREAM act by tyranny rather than by the Constitution.

But it gets worse.  Because Obama isn’t even following the DREAM act as he imposed it.  He’s too dishonest to even follow the dishonest rules he imposed.

Two articles (the first with video of the ICE and Border Patrol revelation of Obama being a treasonous cockroach):

Thu, 07/26/2012
ICE rep: DHS is just letting illegal aliens go (Obama’s DREAM Act)

The video below shows Chris Crane of the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council – a union representing 7200 ICE officers and employees – claiming that the orders from the Department of Homeland Security are to just release those who claim to be covered by Obama’s DREAM Act amnesty [1].

In the following, “DREAMer” refers to those who would be covered by that amnesty:

Prosecutorial discretion for “DREAMers” is solely based on the individual’s claims. Our orders are, if an alien says they went to high school, then let them go. If they say they have a GED, then let them go. Officers have been told that there is no burden for the alien to prove anything. Even with the greatly relaxed policies, the alien is not even required to prove that they meet any of the new criteria.

At this point, we don’t understand why DHS has criteria at all, as there is no requirement or burden to prove anything on the part of the alien. We believe that significant numbers of people who are not DREAMers are taking advantage of this practice to avoid arrest.

As another example, the incident in El Paso that we released publicly last week, ICE managers were provided the following details: 1. an alien was arrested by local police and placed in jail on two charges. Charge 1: assault with bodily injury to a family member, and Charge 2: interfering with that person’s attempts to call for emergency assistance. When ICE later arrest the individual for immigration violations, he attempted to escape – another criminal offense. One agent was injured during the incident, claiming the injuries were intentionally inflicted by the escapee, another criminal offense – of course, assault of a federal agent. In this case we have four possible criminal charges, two involving violence, one injured family member, and one injured officer.

Without any questioning, without any investigation, the alien was released as a DREAMer. No criminal charges, to immigration charges, no nothing. He’s a DREAMer, release him. Incidents like this around the nation lead us to believe that the new policies will be ineffective in terms of providing for public safety.

———
[1] This was at a press conference hosted by Sen. Jeff Sessions. On the video, George McCubben from the National Border Patrol Council says that, despite Janet Napolitano‘s claims, the border is not secure.

 

And more:

Immigrants don’t have to prove they meet DREAM Act criteria to avoid charges, ICE union chief says
12:43 AM 07/27/2012

A top union official for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers said Thursday that President Barack Obama’s administration has ordered ICE agents to blindly — and without any evidence — believe illegal immigrants if they claim they qualify for Obama’s administrative DREAM Act.

Chris Crane, president of the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council, explained at a press conference on Capitol Hill Thursday afternoon how the new selective immigration law enforcement policy Obama announced during a White House Rose Garden speech in June is affecting the officers he represents.

“As we still wait on detailed guidance from the administration, it’s impossible to understand the full scope of the administration’s changes, but what we’ve seen so far concerns us greatly,” Crane, said. “As one example, prosecutorial discretion for DREAMers is solely based on the individual’s claims. Our orders are: If an alien says they went to high school, then let them go. If they say they have a GED, then let them go.”

“Officers have been told that there is no burden for the alien to prove anything,” he continued. “Even with the greatly relaxed policies, the alien is not required to prove that they meet any of the new criteria.”

ICE officers are often called in after local and state law enforcement officials arrest a person and find that he or she is an illegal immigrant. ICE officers also conduct their own investigations and detain suspected illegal immigrants independent of other law enforcement. Normally, if the immigrant is found to be in the country illegally, ICE would bring federal charges against him, possibly leading to deportation.

Under the new orders, however, illegals can escape federal charges simply by claiming — whether it’s the truth or not — that they meet the DREAM Act rule’s requirements issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Crane did not specify who has given his officers these new orders.

The new directive would contradict Homeland Security’s own words in announcing the policy, which said that “only those individuals who can prove through verifiable documentation that they meet these criteria will be eligible for deferred action.

Homeland Security announced in June that it will not go after illegals who came to the U.S. under the age of 16 and are not more than 30 years old; have lived in the U.S. for five straight years; are currently in school or have graduated high school, obtained a GED or been honorably discharged from the military; have not been convicted of a felony or significant misdemeanor and are not a threat to public safety.

“At this point, we don’t understand why DHS even has criteria at all as there is no requirement or burden to prove anything on the part of the alien,” Crane added. “We believe significant numbers of aliens who are not DREAMers are taking advantage of this practice to avoid arrest.”

“The lawlessness must end,” Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, whose office organized the presser, said.

“They’ve handcuffed and muffled those charged with protecting the public safety and the integrity of our borders,” Sessions said. “Such action has not only weakened our security but our democracy. All Americans, immigrant and native born, will have a better future if our nation remains unique in the world for its special reverence for the rule of law and fairness in our immigration system.”

George McCubbin, the president of the AFL-CIO-backed National Border Patrol Council, said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s claim that the border is more secure than ever are downright untrue.

“She conveniently forgot to ask the men and women on the front line if indeed that were true, but rather she relied on the information and statistic provided to her by those in positions of interest of having her reflect whatever position the administration wants her to reflect — in this case, that’s a safe and secure border,” McCubbin said. “When you surround yourself with people who always say ‘yes,’ you will get the answer you are seeking.”

McCubben hasn’t yet gone to Department of Homeland Security leadership with his concerns about Obama’s new administrative DREAM Act program yet because he and the 17,000 agents he represents still have no clue what they’re supposed to do and what they’re not supposed to do. “I’m still waiting to get instructions from our own agency,” he said in response to a question from The Daily Caller. “Actually, our own agency was caught off guard when this came out.”

Crane said efforts to get a fair hearing with Napolitano, ICE Director John Morton or other administration officials have been futile.

“We’ve spent the last three-and-a-half years trying to work with this administration from Director Morton to Secretary Napolitano, who won’t meet with us,” Crane said. “We’ve actually been to the White House and tried to talk to those folks — and, basically, they don’t want to hear our concerns. They don’t want to work with us at all.”

“The only groups that they will work with are the NGOs, the immigrant advocacy groups,” Crane said. “Whether it’s the security protocols for our detention centers or our law enforcement practices out in the field, those are being driven by wish lists from immigrant advocacy groups with no input from law enforcement officers in the field.”

Grassley, the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the policy is nothing more than a political stunt by Obama to deliver on a campaign promise he has thus far failed to fulfill.

“The president campaigns in 2008 that, in the first year, he’s going to have immigration issues solved,” Grassley said. “At this point, after three-and-a-half years, we have not seen any bill whatsoever. So, then as is a core pattern in this administration, you got to blame somebody else, so it [the administration] comes up with this statement: ‘if Congress won’t, I will.’”

In God damn America, a tyrant who is un-American, un-democratic and unconstitutional by his very own rhetoric is undermining American national security and the US economy left and right merely in order to cynically win votes.

A nation that allows this is not a nation that is fit to survive and it won’t survive for much longer under this fascist fool.  That’s the essence of God damn America.

Update, August 3, 2012: It is now a punishale offense to arrest an illegal immigrant in Obama’s God Damn America because Obama’s God damn re-election trumps the Constitution and everything else:

Sen. Sessions wants answers as ICE agent faces suspension for illegal immigrant arrest
By Todd Starnes
Published August 03, 2012
Fox News Radio

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., is demanding answers after a report surfaced that a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent is facing punishment for arresting an illegal immigrant.

The unidentified agent could face a three-day suspension after he arrested a 35-year-old illegal immigrant from Mexico who had as many as 10 traffic violations.

The agent was ordered by supervisors to release the individual because he was not a “priority target.” When the officer balked, he was threatened with a three-day suspension and the illegal alien was let go.

“The actions that it appears were taken by your agency send a message to agents in the field that they will be punished for doing their duty and enforcing the law,” Sessions wrote in an letter to ICE Director John Morton and obtained exclusively by Fox News.

.

Things You Can Thank Liberals For: Millionaire On Food Stamps, 30 Year-Old ‘Baby’ On Social Security And Total Fiscal Implosion

Exhibit 1:

$2M Michigan lottery winner defends use of food stamps
Detroit News detroit News – Wed May 18, 1:27 pm ET
Ron French, Detroit News staff writer

A Michigan man who won $2 million in a state lottery game continues to collect food stamps 11 months after striking it rich.

And there’s nothing the state can do about it, at least for now.

Leroy Fick, 59, of Auburn won $2 million in the state lottery TV show “Make Me Rich!” last June. But the state’s Department of Human Services determined he was still eligible for food stamps, Fick’s attorney, John Wilson of Midland, said Tuesday.

Eligibility for food stamps is based on gross income and follows federal guidelines; lottery winnings are considered liquid assets and don’t count as income. As long as Fick’s gross income stays below the eligibility requirement for food stamps, he can receive them, even if he has a million dollars in the bank.

Food stamps are paid for through tax dollars and are meant to help support low-income families.

“If you’re going to try to make me feel bad, you’re not going to do it,” Fick told WNEM-TV in Saginaw on Monday.

Wilson said Fick told the DHS officials he’d won $2 million but was told he could keep using the Bridge Card issued to him to buy groceries.

Fick could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

[…]

Exhibit 2:

Only in America: The ‘adult baby’ who collects Social Security
At age 30, Stanley Thornton Jr. sleeps in a crib and lives off the government — though some say he’s perfectly capable of holding down a job
posted on May 19, 2011, at 11:07 AM

Best Opinion:  Pajamas Media, Hot Air, New York

The story: Stanley Thornton Jr., 30, is a self-described “adult baby,” who sleeps in a huge crib, drinks from a bottle, wears diapers, lives with a former nurse who acts as his “mom”… and subsists on Social Security disability benefits. This last part caught the attention of Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who requested that the Social Security inspector general review Thornton’s disability classification — especially since Thornton appears to be running a design business specializing in “adult baby” furniture. Thornton, who was featured on the National Geographic TV show Taboo (see video below), says he has mental problems that prevent him from holding a job, and threatened to kill himself if his Social Security check is taken away.

The reaction: The only thing standing between Thornton and a job is his fantasies, so kick this 350-pound “diaper wearing freeloader” off the dole, says Christian Adams in Pajamas Media. Seriously, could there be “a better symbol of what a fiscal mess we are in”? Well, yes and no, says Allahpundit in Hot Air. I mean, watch the video. “If this guy’s not ‘disabled,’ who is?” And it’s not like he’s the only American putting his needs before our “crushing debt burden.” The saddest thing about this story, says Dan Amira in New York, is who would’ve thought “a fight between a United States Senator and a 30-year-old adult baby could be unfunny”?

Question: Did someone just make a doody in their diaper???

Conclusion: how DARE you question these noble liberal programs!?!?!?  You must be totally heartless!!!!!

Democrats have made it as impossible to stop fraud in these programs as they have made it impossible to deal with voter fraud or illegal immigration.

Republicans could try to investigate how these programs are godawfully abused, but of course liberals and Democrats would start running ads like this one.

All scaremongering and demonizing aside, let me tell you the truth.  Democrats don’t want to push “gramma” off the cliff.  They’re FAR too hateful and depraved for something so small in scale.  Rather, Democrats want to push the entire United States of America off a cliff.  They want every single American to perish in the horror of a Great Depression that will make the last one seem like a pleasant afternoon at the beach.  They want to attack everyone who proposes any kind of solution to our impending 100%-guaranteed-to-happen financial implosion so that our nation and every single person living in it has the choice between communism or death.

Obama Lies Better Than Fox News Reports The Truth

You know what they say: “With friends like these, who needs enemies?”

Unfortunately, we’ve got Barack Obama anyway, whether we need him or not.

There’s another saying that is appropriate here: “A lie can get halfway around the world before the truth can even get its boots on.”  And that’s particularly true when “the truth” – in this case Fox News – is more like the Keystone Cops.

In this case, Fox News seems to have tied its left bootlace to its right bootlace and fallen flat on its face.  In fact, they fell so hard, with their noses in some cow pie, that they could possibly even see the ratings of CNN and MSNBC.

There are too many people who just can’t understand that Barack Obama is a shameless, cynical liar.  They think, “Well, if the government says it, it must be true.”  When they really should be thinking just the opposite.

Case in point:

Obama Officials Use Fox News to Smear Conservative Group in Shootings
Sunday, 09 January 2011 22:26 Cliff Kincaid

The only certain fact about the motivation of Arizona killer Jared Loughner is that, like the lunatic who opened fire on the Pentagon last March, he is a pothead. Several people who knew Loughner say that he was a serious abuser of the drug and “liked to smoke pot.” What’s more, Loughner had been arrested in 2007 for possessing drug paraphernalia.

The use of marijuana has been linked to mental illness, including psychosis, and increases the kind of paranoia exhibited by Loughner in his writings.

However, Jennifer Griffin of Fox News recklessly and irresponsibly claimed on Sunday morning that the killer was a political conservative. Using Obama officials as her sources, she reported that “intelligence gathered by the Department of Homeland Security and shared with state officials across the United States” had revealed “a strong suspicion” that the shooter was influenced by a conservative publication called American Renaissance (AR).

This publication is on the right side of the political spectrum and is politically incorrect because of its criticism of racial preference and “diversity” programs and immigration policies that weaken the strength of a country. It has scheduled a Feb. 4–Feb. 6, 2011, conference in Charlotte, North Carolina.

One would have expected that a “conservative” news channel dedicated to fairness and balance would not be so quick to publicize the charges or “suspicions” of some anonymous federal officials in the Obama Administration who seem anxious and eager to smear conservative groups.

But without bothering to get a response, Griffin claimed, “This is based on some of the videos he posted on YouTube. This group’s ideology is anti-government, anti-immigration, and anti-Semitic.”

But a review of Loughner’s YouTube videos finds nothing about American Renaissance.

To make matters worse, it turns out that Griffin not only did not contact AR for a response but badly mischaracterized the nature of the publication.

Jared Taylor of American Renaissance told AIM that he first heard about the charge from CNN, not Fox News. He said that when he found out about the story on the Fox News website, he emailed several Fox News correspondents denouncing the allegations. “I got no response,” he said.

Eventually, he was contacted by James Rosen of Fox News. But that was after Fox News analyst Juan Williams, recently fired by National Public Radio, cited the charges as if they were true on Fox News Sunday.

Apparently using the questionable Griffin story as his source, Williams was quick to claim “there are connections between him [the shooter] and this group, American Renaissance, I think they’re called, and they are strongly anti-immigrant, they’re anti-Semitic and they’re anti-government.”

Nothing Williams said was backed up by the facts and he did not cite any.

Taylor told Rosen that the charges are “scurrilous” and that he took issue with the reference to his group being “anti-ZOG” (Zionist Occupational Government).

“That is complete nonsense,” Taylor said. “I have absolutely no idea what DHS [Department of Homeland Security] is talking about. We have never used the term ‘ZOG.’ We have never thought in those terms. If this is the level of research we are getting from DHS, then Heaven help us.”

In a statement on the publication’s website, Jared Taylor went into more detail and countered: “No one by the name of Loughner has ever been a subscriber to American Renaissance or has ever registered for an American Renaissance conference. We have no evidence that he has even visited the AR website.”

He added, “American Renaissance condemns violence in the strongest possible terms, and nothing that has ever appeared in it pages could be interpreted as countenancing it.”

A subsequent story by Griffin claimed that American Renaissance was mentioned “in some of his [Loughner’s] internet postings and federal law enforcement officials are investigating Loughner’s possible links to the organization.”

But no evidence of such postings or links was cited or has surfaced.

In this Griffin story, the source became a “law enforcement memo based on information provided by DHS and obtained by Fox News…” She falsely characterized American Renaissance as “a pro-white racist organization.”

Giving it a high degree of credibility, Greta Van Susteren of Fox News insisted it was “an internal memo” that was “put out by DHS” and reproduced the entire thing.

While American Renaissance is critical of government affirmative action programs and unrestricted immigration, there is no evidence of anti-Semitism, and there is no evidence that American Renaissance by any objective standard is a racist organization. It does deal with racial issues. But so does the Congressional Black Caucus.

The memo in question supposedly said, in relation to AR,  “…no direct connection—but strong suspicion is being directed at AmRen / American Renaissance. Suspect is possibly linked to this group. (through videos posted on his myspace and YouTube account.). The group’s ideology is anti government, anti immigration, anti ZOG (Zionist Occupational Government), anti Semitic. Gabrielle Gifford is the first Jewish female elected to such a high position in the US government. She was also opposite this group’s ideology when it came to immigration debate.”

Jared Taylor countered: “AR is not anti-government, anti-Semitic, or anti-ZOG, as is clear from the 20 years of back issues that are posted on our website. The expression ‘ZOG’ has never appeared in the pages of AR, and we have always welcomed Jewish participation in our work. Many of the speakers at American Renaissance conferences have been Jewish.”

What’s more, Taylor noted that, “Gabrielle Giffords is not the ‘first Jewish female elected to such a high position in the US government.’ Barbara Boxer has represented California in the Senate from 1993, and Dianne Feinstein has done so since 1992. There are at least six Jewish congresswomen listed by Wikipedia as currently serving in the House. If this memo is typical of the research done by the Department of Homeland Security, our country is in serious danger. I telephoned DHS today to try to get the bottom of this nonsense, but apparently there is no homeland security on Sundays. The person who answered the phone said no one is there and that I should call back on Monday morning.”

He added, “Fortunately, some of the media organizations that have been reporting this story have contacted me, and have reported my assertion that American Renaissance knows nothing at all about Jared Loughner, that we condemn all violence, and that we cannot possibly be described as anti-Semitic.”

After going on the air with the false and malicious charges about AR, Fox News finally published a story with a response to the charges under the headline, “American Renaissance Denies DHS Charges, Any Affiliation With Shooter.”

A later Fox News story reported, “New details are emerging about Loughner as a law enforcement memo based on information provided by the Department of Homeland Security and obtained by Fox News suggests he may have ties to the American Renaissance group, though it’s unclear if he was directly affiliated with the publication or group.”

It is apparent that Fox News is backing away from the story, after already doing damage to and smearing the organization.

By this point, however, dozens of liberal-left media outlets and bloggers have already cited Fox News as the source of the claim that the killer was involved in a conservative group.

Taylor called for an investigation into how and where DHS obtained the bogus information and who leaked it to Fox News.

“I’d like to know where they are getting this nonsense,” Taylor told AIM. “What else are they telling other people?”

Ooh, ooh!  Let me answer that one!  They’re telling lies, Mr. Taylor.  Demagogic lies.  It’s what Obama does.  He has the Midas touch in that department of political talent.

Is the Obama Homeland Security totally incompetent?  You bet it is.  But you don’t have to be competent when you can lie like a snake in the grass; all you need to be able to do is blame your failures on some poor scapegoat with the help of a an either idiotic or biased media.

It sounds like the Obama DHS is at a point of impending implosion, though: it’s one thing to foment lies; it’s quite another to actually believe your own lies.  It sounds like the Department of Homeland Security has degenerated to the point where they are believing their own lies.

Fox News is the most accurate and most trusted name in news, as studies and surveys clearly demonstrate.  But it’s success has sadly transformed it into “the mainstream media.”  And many of its journalists have come from other propagandists I mean networks.

I must not be a very good conservative, because I’m frankly not familiar with American Renaissance.  All I can say is that I’ll be tuning them in from now on.  After all, in being dishonestly demonized by the Department of Homeland Security, they have joined such esteemed company as our combat veterans, pro-life defenders, and opponents of illegal immigration.

I got an idea for you, Barry Hussein: instead of smearing “right wing groups,” why don’t you try getting your act together, instead?  Because the last I heard, American Renaissance wasn’t doing the background checks that allowed Jared Loughner to legally obtain the Glock that he used on his murderous rampage.

Holocaust Museum Shooting: What Makes Someone ‘Rightwing’?

Today, an 89-year old documented nut entered the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C.  I have no idea what the politics of Stephen Tyrone Jones were, but the man serving as a guard died a hero: he died standing in the way of this evil man and the innocent and unarmed people he would have murdered.

A question immediately comes to mind: what side of the bowl did this nut inhabit?  Obviously he was a nut.  But was he a rightwing nut or a leftwing nut?

What the left want us to believe is that James von Brunn is a rightwing extremist.  Why?  Because he was an anti-Semite, and therefore a racist.  And racists, as everybody just knows, are rightwing.

This view became official government policy under the Obama administration.  Consider how the Department of Homeland Security under Janet Napolitano defined “rightwing extremism” versus “leftwing extremism,” according to the Associated Press:

In the report, right-wing extremism was defined as hate-motivated groups and movements, such as hatred of certain religions, racial or ethnic groups. “It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” the report said. […]

The department’s definition of left-wing extremism in the March 26 report includes a reference to violence, stating these groups that embrace anticapitalist, communist or socialist beliefs seek “to bring about change through violent revolution rather than through established political processes.”

So, based on that, where do you pidgeon-hole an Anti-Semitic racist like von Brunn?  Read both definitions and it’s a no-brainer.  “Hatred of certain religions, racial, or ethnic groups.”  Check, check, and check.  James von Brunn is a rightwing extremist.  Just ask Janet Napolitano.

Only that’s completely asinine.

An article by Michelle Malkin shows just how profoundly dishonest and biased the “assessment” by the Obama DHS truly is.

Let’s start with Antisemitism and polling data from a December 2008 Rasmussen survey:

Sixty-two percent (62%) of Republicans back Israel’s decision to take military action against the Palestinians, but only half as many Democrats (31%) agree. A majority of Democrats (55%) say Israel should have tried to find a diplomatic solution first, a view shared by just 27% of Republicans.

While 75% of Republicans say Israel is an ally of the United States, just 55% of Democrats agree. Seven percent (7%) of Democrats say Israel is an enemy of America, but only one percent (1%) of Republicans say the same. For 21% of Republicans, Israel is somewhere in between, and 28% of Democrats agree.

And this difference in views toward Israel and Jews is fairly established and consistent, as a Gallup survey from April 2002 shows:

The [04/17/2002 Gallup] survey of 1,009 adults conducted on April 5-7 found that 67 percent of Republicans side with Israel in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, compared to 45% of Democrats. Support for the Palestinians is at 8% among Republicans, versus 21% among Democrats.

How can Republicans/conservatives be overwhelmingly more supportive of Israel than Democrats/liberals, and yet at the same time overwhelmingly more Anti-Semitic than Democrats/liberals?  How does that even begin to make sense?  As a conservative evangelical Christian, I support Israel precisely because it is a Jewish state.  I pray for the shalom of Jerusalem according to Psalm 122:6.  I believe in something called “evil” and realize that the history of Israel and of Jews reveals that they have been victims of it FAR MORE than perpetrators of it.  I constantly refer to the “Judeo-Christian worldview” that respects and cherishes the influence of Judaism on my Christian faith.

Frontpage Magazine has an article that reveals why those on the left – who deny most of why I support Israel – end up embracing racist and Anti-Semitic views.

Let me say more.  When Republican George Bush was president, fully 88% of Israeli Jews believed the president was “pro-Israel”; today under Democrat president Barack Obama, only 31% of Israeli Jews think so.

The profoundly Anti-Semitic Nation of Islam has long and strong ties to the Democratic Party, and to Barack Obama personally via his 23 year relationship with Jeremiah Wright and Trinity United Church and via his participation with the Million Man March.  THIS VERY DAY, Jeremiah Wright said he’s denied access to Obama.  Why?  Quote: “Rev. Jeremiah Wright says Jews are keeping him from talking to President Obama.”

One article reads: “THE Rev Jesse Jackson and several other black American leaders are calling for a halt to the anti-Semitic rants of members of the black Muslim group Nation of Islam, led by Louis Farrakhan.”  And yet that itself is laughable; Jesse Jackson is a man who HIMSELF has displayed deep Antisemitism.  He has been documented calling Jews “Hymies” and New York “Hymietown.”

How DARE anyone on the left accuse the right of being Anti-Semitic.  HOW DARE THEY!!!

And if Democrats want to label Republicans as “racist,” perhaps they should either abolish the “Congressional Black Caucas” or find where Republicans are hiding their equivalent  “Congressional White Caucus.”  And you might either denounce Congressional Black Caucus member Bobby Rush or find similar racist statements coming from Republicans.   Show us where Republican leaders openly demanded that a Caucasian receive a US Senate seat.

An article on Examiner.com shows that von Brunn was more more leftwing than rightwing.  Among other things, he despised George Bush, believed 9/11 was a Bush conspiracy, and railed against “neo-cons.”

Holocaust Museum shooter von Brunn a 9/11 ‘truther’ who hated ‘neo-cons’, Bush, McCain

The man accused of opening fire at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC on June 10, James W. von Brunn, left a trail of unhinged writings around the internet.

The anti-semitism of von Brunn is the first thing one notices when visiting these bizarre websites. However, like those of most “white supremacists”, many of von Brunn’s political views track “Left” rather than “Right.” Clearly, a re-evaluation of these obsolete definitions is long overdue.

For example, he unleashed his hatred of both Presidents Bush and other “neo-conservatives” in online essays. As even some “progressives” such as the influential Adbusters magazine publicly admit, “neoconservative” is often used as a derogatory code word for “Jews”. As well, even a cursory glance at “white supremacist” writings reveals a hatred of, say, big corporations that is virtually indistinguishable from that of anti-globalization activists.

James von Brunn’s advocacy of 9/11 conspiracy theories also gives him an additional commonality with individuals on the far-left.

None of this will surprise readers of Jonah Goldberg‘s bestseller Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Change , which clearly demonstrates that “fascism” of the kind advocated by the British National Party (BNP) and the likes of James W. von Brunn is just as likely to reflect “leftwing” views as “rightwing” ones.

In fact, antisemitism is something the New Left and the “Far Right” have had in common since the 1980s, which is why so many former leftists like David Horowitz defected from one side to the other during the Reagan era and beyond. It also helps explain the otherwise baffling alliance between the Left and radical Islam.

That this shooting occurred shortly after President Obama’s former mentor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, blamed “the Jews” for his lack of access to his former parishioner is a troubling confluence of events as well.

I’m not going to answer the question posed by my title: “What Makes Someone ‘Rightwing’?  But I’ll say ONE thing for certain.

It’s most definitely NOT “racism” or “Antisemitism.”  There’s just way too much of that crap going on on the part of the leftwing to possibly attribute it exclusively to the right.

Guns, Ammo, And The Only Jobs Being Created By Obama’s Politics Of Fear

People are stockpiling guns and ammunition in a way that no one has ever seen in this country.  And it’s not just conservative rightwing extremists who are bitterly clinging to their guns and religion and racist antipathies as Obama earlier mentioned, either; it’s ordinary people.  Even liberal Democrats are buying guns.

A CNN story puts it this way:

AURORA, Colorado (CNN) — Gun shops across the country are reporting a run on ammunition, a phenomenon apparently driven by fear that the Obama administration will increase taxes on bullets or enact new gun-control measures.

“Driven by fear.”  That’s probably the best way to put it.

Obama talked about “hope” during his demagogic run for the White House.  But a lot of Americans are now finding cause to be very afraid of what Obama hopes for.

I see Obama saying he has no intention of running the auto industry while he fires CEOs, picks boards of directors, converts to common shares of stock so his administration can have an inside presence to change company policies, dictates the advertising budget of an auto company, threatens hedge funds that owned secured debt in auto companies, and changes bankruptcy proceedings to favor politically connected unions.  If that’s what NOT wanting to run the auto industry looks like, I’d sure be terrified to see what Obama would do if he really wanted to run them.  And he’s doing even more to impose his will on the banking and finance industries.

I see such naked displays of fascism, and I am driven by fear.

The Obama administration uses the Department of Homeland Security to contact every police agency in the nation to inform them that returning combat veterans, pro-lifers, and opponents of illegal immigration are not citizens who can be trusted, but should be categorized as “rightwing extremists.”

I see such clearly ideological-driven partisan political branding, and I am driven by fear.

Barack Obama and key members of his administration have repeatedly demagogued guns and the U.S. gun industry by falsely claiming that “90 percent of the guns going into Mexico come from the United Stats.”  If this isn’t demagoguery and propaganda, what is it?

I see such demagogic and dishonest behavior coming out of an administration, and I am driven by fear.

And so we see movements by states to say, “We shouldn’t have to be afraid of our own federal government.”  We see unprecedented movements of states to assert their rights under the 10th Amendment.  And so Montana passes an in-your-face gun law intended to directly challenge the Obama administration.  Utah and Texas began to follow with their own versions of a firearms freedom act.  And the floodgates are opening, as Minnesota and South Carolina are also entering the revolt.  And numerous states are beginning to sponsor state sovereignty resolutions.

States, too, are clearly being driven by fear.

Obama could largely end this fear by simply clearly stating what his until-now twisted and contradictory stance on guns actually is.  The fact that he will not do so only stimulates MORE being driven by fear.

Well, there’s a single good thing coming out of Obama’s politics of fear.  To cite Vice President Joe Biden, all of Obama’s fearmongering is creating “a three letter word”: “J-O-B-S.” In the gun and ammunition industry.

The Obama administration has to make up numbers to justify how its stimulus program has failed.  They have to ignore the 2.6 million jobs they’ve lost and point to 150,000 jobs they can’t show they’ve created.

I think Obama is looking in the wrong place for his “jobs.”  He should point to the jobs in the gun and ammunition industry that he has inspired.

There’s no question that these industries owe their success to Obama and the fear he has created in millions of American hearts and minds.  Obama should take credit for it.

More stockpiling ammunition: Fear of potential Obama laws causing mass sales
By PERRY BACKUS Ravalli Republic

FLORENCE – Every day, Darren Newsom’s three Bitterroot Valley Ammunition facilities crank out 300,000 rounds of ammunition.

It’s not nearly enough.

“I’m going about 100,000 rounds in the wrong direction every day,” Newsom said. “We probably have about six months of back orders right now.”

Newsom has been in the ammunition manufacturing business for more than 20 years and he’s never seen demand this high.

Fearful of the Obama administration’s potential to tighten gun control laws, people from all over the country are stocking up on guns and ammunition.

“I went through the Clinton years and there was a bit of a scare then,” Newsom said. “This is like the Clinton years on steroids.  On the day of the election, our phones started going nuts. It hasn’t stopped since.”

As a master distributor for ATK – the world’s largest ammunition business – Bitterroot Valley Ammunition supplies other ammunition manufacturers around the country with the components needed to make bullets.

“I get a million primers in every other day and most are shipped out the very next day,” he said. “I have 100 million primers on back order right now. We just can’t get enough of them.”

At a recent gun show in Salt Lake City, Newsom sold somewhere between 300,000 and 400,000 rounds in the first two hours.

“It’s just unreal,” he said. “Somewhere in lots of basements around the country, there are millions of rounds of ammunition being stored.”

Local businesses have felt the ammunition shortage.

At Bob Ward’s in Hamilton, Mike Matteson said there has been quite a run on ammunition and reloading supplies like bullets and powder since the election.

“We are especially low right now with pistol ammunition,” Matteson said. “There are four or five calibers that we don’t even have on our shelves.”

Matteson said he didn’t believe manufacturers were prepared for the panic buying that’s occurred since the election.

“They tell us that they’re months behind on some calibers – .22 ammo is really tough to come by,” he said. “Our gun sales are up somewhere between 30 (percent) to 35 percent or better. A good percentage of those sales are pistols.”

Firearm and ammo sales aren’t the only place where concerns about gun control are cropping up.

Ravalli County Sheriff Chris Hoffman has seen a marked increase in the number of people applying for concealed weapons permits since November.

Montana is a “will-issue” state for concealed weapons permits. Any law-abiding citizen who fills out the application and can show they’ve completed some form of firearm safety course can obtain a permit.

The county is averaging about 38 requests for renewals or new permits a month. Last year, the requests averaged about 25.

“It’s definitely a noticeable increase,” Hoffman said.

The sheriff said he’s hearing from people who are concerned about what might happen over the next four years with the gun control issue.

“We are being asked what would be the stance of local law enforcement if the federal government calls for the confiscation of firearms,” Hoffman said. “That’s a very real concern for people.”

Gary Marbut, the longtime president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association in Missoula, said the seeds of the current ammunition shortage can be traced back almost a decade to the Y2K scare.

“Many people became concerned about their ability to get ammunition back then and they stocked up quite a bit,” Marbut said.

In the intervening years, China blossomed and bought up world copper supplies. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan used up warehouses full of U.S. ammunition that needed to be replenished. That forced higher prices for civilian ammunition and people started using some of the bullets they had squirreled away after Y2K, Marbut said.

And now, with the current economic and political uncertainty, people are looking to restock their supplies at a time when most ammunition manufacturers aren’t willing to expand their operations.

“The whole demand side of this is so flexible and the supply side is not,” he said.

The ammunition shortage is creating a bit of an economic boon for Ravalli County.

Newsom plans to open a fourth manufacturing facility in Stevensville sometime in September. He employs about 50 people right now and could add up to another 100.

“There are a lot of people out of work right now,” he said. “Two years ago, I probably couldn’t find 10 people to go to work for us. Now I have 10 people a day coming in here looking for a job.”

Newsom believes the need for ammunition won’t go away. This scare is creating a whole new group of ammunition customers for the future, he said.

Need proof?

Take the .380 caliber pistol. A year ago, Newsom said there was hardly a demand for the ammunition. Since then, the .380 auto pistol has become very popular with women.

“One year ago, it wasn’t in demand and now it’s some of the most sought ammunition in the U.S.,” he said. “There are more people getting into shooting and that’s one thing about ammunition – you can only shoot it once.”

People need to understand that the Obamamania fear that is creating such an incredibly high demand for guns and ammunition is not merely fear of Obama gun laws; it is fear of the future that Obama’s out-of-control spending will have on our economy.

We may very well have a short-term recovery (which is what happened during the Great Depression following the stock market crash of Black Friday in October 1929); but that recovery will be devoured by the sheer massive weight of trillions and trillions of dollars in debt.  Obama will spend $9.3 trillion and nearly DOUBLE the national debt.  The administration has spent, loaned, or committed more than $12.8 trillion .  This year Obama is spending more than four times as much as George Bush did in 2008.  Obama is creating more debt than every single president from George Washington to George W. Bush – COMBINED.  And the Congressional Budget Office says that by 2019 a whopping 82 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) will be going to pay down the national debt.

That mind-boggling spending and that mind-boggling debt is a disaster weighting to happen.  It is only a matter of time before a ten trillion ton anvil falls on the American economy.

Trends Research Institute CEO Gerald Celente is on record predicting food riots by 2012 as massive spending creates massive inflation and devaluing of the currency.  If Celente is a nutjob, he is a nutjob that CNN, The Economist, USA Today, CNBC, The Wall Street Journal, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The New York Times, CBS News, The Detroit News, the Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Times, and the New York Post have all gone on public record to praise for his incredible predictive accuracy.

People are scared, and judging by the continuing massive purchases of people stockpiling guns and ammo, they’re not clearly not getting any less scared.

So you get your gun.  And lock and load.  Because the beast is coming.