Wednesday, 19 June 2013

Aiyana Stanley's Murderer Walks Free


Aiyana Stanley's Murderer Walks Free
Posted by William Grigg on June 19, 2013 03:09 PM

Detroit resident Joseph Weekly, who shot 7-year-old Aiyana Stanley-Jones in the head during a home invasion on May 17, 2010, is free after a jury deadlocked on felony manslaughter charges. Nobody disputes that Weekly was the killer, or that Aiyana was an entirely innocent victim. Weekly was exonerated by virtue of the fact that his home invasion crew bore the insignia of the criminal syndicate that claims a monopoly on the legitimate use of force within Detroit.

Weekly was part of the Detroit Police Department's Special Reaction Team (SRT), which staged – I'm using the word in its theatrical sense – a midnight raid on the home where Aiyana was sleeping. This was done entirely for the benefit of a camera crew from a cable "Reality TV" show called "The First 48." The police were in pursuit of a murder suspect who lived in the upstairs section of the home, and who could have been arrested through much less telegenic means – if "public safety" had been the most urgent priority.

Neighbors who saw the Berserkers assemble outside the home warned that there were children inside. The presence of toys scattered in the front yard should have made that fact obvious enough that a cop could understand it. The police could have waited out the suspect and taken him into custody through a low-key, conventional arrest. A full-force raid would needlessly imperil innocent people inside the home. But anything less than a Fallujah-style "dynamic entry" would have meant missing an agitprop opportunity, and left the jacked-up adolescents in paramilitary gear with an unbearable case of blue balls. So Weekly and his fellow sociopaths attacked the living room where Aiyana was sleeping by flinging a flash-bang grenade through a closed window, kicking down the door, and storming in with guns drawn.

There is a strong possibility that Weekly fired the fatal gunshot before entering the room. It is known that the grenade landed on the couch where Aiyana was sleeping. Her father claims that the child suffered burns as a result. In any case, she was dead within seconds, and it was Weekly who killed her without cause or legal justification.

The original account was that either Weekly or one of the other Stormtroopers engaged what was called a "tussle" with Mertilla Jones, Aiyana's grandmother. This supposedly caused an assault rifle to "go off," apparently of its own accord. That official story was a lie, of course, and Weekly admitted under oath that he had "unintentionally" pulled the trigger of his MP5 submachine gun.

For those who belong to the state-privileged criminal fraternity that includes Weekly, "officer safety" is at all times and in all places the highest and most important consideration. The same limitless self-preoccupation that typifies the state's enforcement caste is also manifest in an acute sense of self-pity on the part of police officers who murder innocent people. During his testimony, Weekly invited the public to pity him: "I'll never be the same," blubbered Aiyana's killer, who recalled playing at the park with his daughters before being called to play a part in the paramilitary assault that led to the state-sanctioned murder of someone else's 7-year-old child.

The human type Weekly represents was described very well by Hannah Arendt in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem. Referring to members of the Nazi regime's "special action squads" – which they called Einsatzgruppen, and we call SWAT teams, or SRTs – Arendt noted that the problem they faced was "how to overcome not so much their conscience as the animal pity by which all normal men are affected in the presence of physical suffering. The trick used by Himmler ­ who apparently was rather strongly afflicted by these instinctive reactions himself ­ was very simple and probably very effective; it consisted in turning these instincts around, as it were, in directing them toward the self. So that instead of saying: What horrible things I did to people!, the murderers would be able to say: What horrible things I had to watch in the pursuance of my duties, how heavily the task weighed upon my shoulders!"

Weekly is a museum-quality specimen of the self-pitying Stormtrooper – and the jurors who let him escape mortal accountability for his crime would likely have done the same for Weekly's German antecedents in the 1930s.

Stunning video shows how Obama’s family pics are Photoshopped fakes





Dr. Eowyn posted: "You must watch this video. It shows, step by step, how many of Obama's family pictures from his youth are Photoshopped images. Adobe Photoshop is a graphics editing program developed and published by Adobe Systems, which enables its users to create, a"
Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on Fellowship of the Minds

Stunning video shows how Obama's family pics are Photoshopped fakes

by Dr. Eowyn

You must watch this video.

It shows, step by step, how many of Obama's family pictures from his youth are Photoshopped images.

Adobe Photoshop is a graphics editing program developed and published by Adobe Systems, which enables its users to create, alter, and manipulate photos and images with tools such as retouching, cropping, slicing, moving, magic wand, and eraser.

Malcolm X

The video also makes a visually compelling case that the real biological father of President Lucifer (who was born in 1961) may be Malcolm X (1925-1965), the black Muslim political activist who, on February 21, 1965, at age 39, was assassinated by three members of the Nation of Islam (NOI). Less than a year before he was killed, Malcolm X had left the NOI.

The video is the work of TheDrRJP. This is what he wrote on the video's YouTube page:

Before 2004, the media had never heard of Barack Obama. They did not know about his birth place, his family, his education, his religion, his background, and his whereabouts.

They still do not know. Everything they thought they know about Obama was fabricated for their benefit from that point forward.

All of these photos "made available to the public" by the Obama Campaign and Obama's "family and friends" are forgeries created for the conspiracy to package, sell, and elect an illusion of the perfect Presidential candidate.

A conspiracy put Obama into politics. A conspiracy put him in office. A conspiracy is keeping him in power.

The Journolist conspiracy was one of hundreds of similar conspiracies to keep Americans from knowing they are being conned by the biggest criminal conspiracy in modern history.

~Eowyn

 

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/stunning-video-shows-how-obamas-family-pics-are-photoshopped-fakes/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

3 Former NSA Employees Praise Edward Snowden, Corroborate Key Claims


3 Former NSA Employees Praise Edward Snowden, Corroborate Key Claims
The men, all whistleblowers, say he succeeded where they failed.
Conor Friedersdorf
Jun 18 2013

USA Today has published an extraordinary interview with three former NSA employees who praise Edward Snowden's leaks, corroborate some of his claims, and warn about unlawful government acts.

Thomas Drake, William Binney, and J. Kirk Wiebe each protested the NSA in their own rights. "For years, the three whistle-blowers had told anyone who would listen that the NSA collects huge swaths of communications data from U.S. citizens," the newspaper reports. "They had spent decades in the top ranks of the agency, designing and managing the very data collection systems they say have been turned against Americans. When they became convinced that fundamental constitutional rights were being violated, they complained first to their superiors, then to federal investigators, congressional oversight committees and, finally, to the news media."

In other words, they blew the whistle in the way Snowden's critics suggest he should have done. Their method didn't get through to the members of Congress who are saying, in the wake of the Snowden leak, that they had no idea what was going on. But they are nonetheless owed thanks.

And among them, they've now said all of the following:
  • His disclosures did not cause grave damage to national security.
  • What Snowden discovered is "material evidence of an institutional crime."
  • As a system administrator, Snowden "could go on the network or go into any file or any system and change it or add to it or whatever, just to make sure -- because he would be responsible to get it back up and running if, in fact, it failed. So that meant he had access to go in and put anything. That's why he said, I think, 'I can even target the president or a judge.' If he knew their phone numbers or attributes, he could insert them into the target list which would be distributed worldwide. And then it would be collected, yeah, that's right. As a super-user, he could do that."
  • "The idea that we have robust checks and balances on this is a myth."
  • Congressional overseers "have no real way of seeing into what these agencies are doing. They are totally dependent on the agencies briefing them on programs, telling them what they are doing."
  • Lawmakers "don't really don't understand what the NSA does and how it operates. Even when they get briefings, they still don't understand."
  • Asked what Edward Snowden should expect to happen to him, one of the men, William Binney, answered, "first tortured, then maybe even rendered and tortured and then incarcerated and then tried and incarcerated or even executed." Interesting that this is what a whistleblower thinks the U.S. government will do to a citizen. The abuse of Bradley Manning worked.
  • "There is no path for intelligence-community whistle-blowers who know wrong is being done. There is none. It's a toss of the coin, and the odds are you are going to be hammered."

The fact that former NSA employees have said these things doesn't automatically make them true. All have reason to identify with Snowden (though one thinks he may have crossed a line by talking about surveillance on China). What this interview does mean is that some of Snowden's allegations seem even more credible than they did when he was the only one making them.


http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/3-former-nsa-employees-praise-edward-snowden-corroborate-key-claims/276964/

Eric Holder: “We must Brainwash People To Be Against Guns” 18 Years Ago!





Volubrjotr posted: " Chicago's Criminal Sanctuary.  More Americans Killed In Brainwashed Gun Free Zone Chicago Than In Afghanistan - 1 Year Ago Obama's Muslim Brotherhood Of Egypt Lends 30 Pilots To Iraq Where 4,486 Americans Gave Their Life Fighting The Islamic"
Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on Political Vel Craft

Eric Holder: "We must Brainwash People To Be Against Guns" 18 Years Ago!

by Volubrjotr

Chicago's Criminal Sanctuary. 

Read more of this post

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://politicalvelcraft.org/2009/01/18/eric-holder-we-must-brainwash-people-to-be-against-guns-18-years-ago/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

And the winner of the 2013 Dumbest Crook Award is …





Dr. Eowyn posted: "... Jamie Neil, the idiot who robbed a gas station in the UK, wearing a clear SEE-THROUGH plastic bag over his head. Ben Leach reports for The Daily Mail, June 19, 2013, that a drunk robber held up a petrol (gas) in St Austell, Cornwall, UK. But "
Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on Fellowship of the Minds

And the winner of the 2013 Dumbest Crook Award is …

by Dr. Eowyn

... Jamie Neil, the idiot who robbed a gas station in the UK, wearing a clear SEE-THROUGH plastic bag over his head.

Jamie Neil is caught on CCTV robbing a Co-op in St Austell, Cornwall with a clear plastic bag over his head

Ben Leach reports for The Daily Mail, June 19, 2013, that a drunk robber held up a petrol (gas) in St Austell, Cornwall, UK. But since he was wearing a clear plastic bag over his head, he was arrested days later when an officer recognized him from the surveillance video.

The St. Austell service station in Cornwall which was raided by Jamie Neil and his accomplice

The bag-wearing robber, Jamie Neil, 41, and his accomplice, Gareth Tilley, 20, were at home when they decided to rob the station in September last year. They both grabbed 'the nearest thing' they could find to use as a disguise. Tilley wrapped a scarf around his head but Neil used a see-through plastic bag, which meant his face was captured on video.

Officers later studied footage of the robbery and an off duty officer recognized Neil in the street days later.

Neil was arrested after a police officer recognised him from CCTV footage just days after the robbery
Neil was arrested after a police officer recognised him from CCTV footage just days after the robbery

Last week, Neil was sentenced to two years in jail for the robbery. His accomplice, Tilley, had already pleaded guilty last November and sentenced to two years in prison for his part in the robbery.

Tilley actually was no brighter than Neil. During the robbery, Tilley had pointed his mobile phone at the lone female counter worker, pretending the phone was a gun. But his plan backfired when the phone's keypad lit up.

The female worker realized it wasn't a gun and pressed an alarm. Neil then wrestled with the employee before headbutting her and fleeing with several bottles of alcohol.

Here's what Jamie Neil looks like without the plastic bag:

A police mugshot of Neil, who was given two years in jail for his part in the robbery

~Eowyn

Dr. Eowyn | June 19, 2013 at 11:58 am | Tags: Cornwall, Gareth Tilley, Jamie Neil, St Austell | Categories: crime, Humor, Idiots | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-m9C

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/and-the-winner-of-the-2013-dumbest-crook-award-is/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

The Progressive (Leftist) Contempt for Liberty




The Progressive Contempt for Liberty

Posted By Walter Williams On June 19, 2013

Grutter v. Bollinger was the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the University of Michigan Law School's racial admissions policy. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, writing for the majority, said the U.S. Constitution "does not prohibit the Law School's narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body." But what are the educational benefits of a diverse student body?

Intellectuals argue that diversity is necessary for academic excellence, but what's the evidence? For example, Japan is a nation bereft of diversity in any activity. Close to 99 percent of its population is of one race. Whose students do you think have higher academic achievement — theirs or ours? According to the 2009 Program for International Student Assessment, the academic performance of U.S. high-school students in reading, math and science pales in comparison with their diversity-starved counterparts in Japan.

Should companies be treated equally? According to a Wall Street Journal op-ed (9/7/2009) by Manhattan Institute's energy expert Robert Bryce, Exxon Mobil pleaded guilty in federal court to killing 85 birds that had come into contact with its pollutants. The company paid $600,000 in fines and fees. A recent Associated Press story (5/14/2013) reported that "more than 573,000 birds are killed by the country's wind farms each year, including 83,000 hunting birds such as hawks, falcons and eagles, according to an estimate published in March in the peer-reviewed Wildlife Society Bulletin." The Obama administration has never fined or prosecuted windmill farms, sometimes called bird Cuisinarts, for killing eagles and other protected bird species. In fact, AP reports that the Obama administration has shielded the industry from liability and has helped keep the scope of the deaths secret. It's interesting that The Associated Press chose to report the story only after the news about its reporters being secretly investigated. That caused the Obama administration to fall a bit out of favor with them.

But what the heck, the 14th Amendment's requirement of "equal protection" before the law for everybody can be cast aside in the name of diversity, so why can't it be cast aside in the name of saving the planet? There are politically favored industries just as there are politically favored groups.

What's the difference between a progressive, a liberal and a racist? In some cases, not much. President Woodrow Wilson was a leading progressive who believed in notions of racial superiority and inferiority. He was so enthralled with D.W. Griffith's "Birth of a Nation" movie, glorifying the Ku Klux Klan, that he invited various dignitaries to the White House to view it with him. During one private screening, President Wilson exclaimed: "It's like writing history with lightning. And my only regret is that it is all so terribly true." When President Wilson introduced racial segregation to the civil service, the NAACP and the National Independent Political League protested. Wilson vigorously defended it, arguing that segregation was in the interest of Negroes.

Dr. Thomas Sowell, in "Intellectuals and Race," documents other progressives who were advocates of theories of racial inferiority. They included former presidents of Stanford University and MIT, among others. Eventually, the views of progressives fell out of favor. They changed their name to liberals, but in the latter part of the 20th century, the name liberals fell into disrepute. Now they are back to calling themselves progressives.

I'm not arguing that today's progressives are racists like their predecessors, but they share a contempt for liberty, just as President Wilson did. According to Hillsdale College history professor Paul A. Rahe — author of "Soft Despotism, Democracy's Drift" — in his National Review Online (4/11/13) article "Progressive Racism," Wilson wanted to persuade his compatriots to get "beyond the Declaration of Independence." President Wilson said the document "did not mention the questions" of his day, adding, "It is of no consequence to us." My question is: Why haven't today's progressives disavowed their racist predecessors?

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.


Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2013/walter-williams/the-progressive-contempt-for-liberty/

 



__._,





   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

FBI's Robert Mueller: Drones Are In Use In America





FBI's Robert Mueller: Drones Are In Use In America

06/19/2013

WASHINGTON -- FBI Director Robert Mueller revealed Wednesday that the bureau uses drones to conduct surveillance on U.S. soil.

Asked by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) if the FBI was following in the footsteps of the Drug Enforcement Agency and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in pursuing the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, Mueller said yes. The vehicles are used in very narrow circumstances for surveillance, he said.

Asked if the bureau had developed a set of policies governing drone use and privacy protections, however, Mueller said that such a process was just starting.

"We are in the initial stages of doing that," Mueller said, emphasizing that the FBI drone program was in the nascent stages. "I will tell you that our footprint is very small. We have very few of limited use, and we're exploring not only the use, but the necessary guidelines for that use."

He added that drones were used "in a very, very minimal way, and very seldom."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a supporter of the recently revealed data collection program of the National Security Agency, told Mueller that drones represent a dire threat to Americans' privacy,

"I think the greatest threat to the privacy of Americans is the drone, and the use of the drone and the very few regulations that are on it today, and the booming industry of commercial drones," Feinstein said.

Pressed on what protections the FBI has in place to protect privacy, Mueller said the main safeguard is the way the drones are used.

"It is very narrowly focused on particularized cases and particularized needs," Mueller said. "That is the principal privacy limitation we have."

Michael McAuliff covers Congress and politics for The Huffington Post.

SOURCE: FBI's Robert Mueller: Drones Are In Use In America



__._,_.___





   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

The Calm Before the Jihadi Storm




The Calm Before the Jihadi Storm

Posted By Raymond Ibrahim On June 18, 2013

The same U.S. policies that helped created al-Qaeda in Afghanistan in the 1980s are today creating many al-Qaedas in many Muslim countries, promising to deliver future terror strikes that will make 9/11 seem like child's play.

To understand this dire prediction, we must first examine the United States' history of empowering Islamic jihadis—only to be attacked by those same jihadis many years later—and the shortsightedness of American policymakers, whose policies are based on their brief tenure, not America's long-term wellbeing.

In the 1980s, the U.S. supported Afghani rebels—among them the jihadis—to repel the Soviets. Osama bin Laden, Ayman Zawahiri, and countless foreign jihadis journeyed to Afghanistan to form a base of training and planning—the first prerequisite of the jihad, as delineated in Sayyid Qutb's Milestones.

Al-Qaeda—which tellingly means "the base"—was born.

The U.S. supported al-Qaeda, they defeated the Soviets, shook hands with Reagan, Afghanistan became ruled by the Taliban, and for many years all seemed well.

But it wasn't. For over a decade al-Qaeda, unfettered in Afghanistan, trained and plotted. Then came the strikes of 9/11, which were portrayed by the talking heads as a great and unexpected surprise: "What happened? Who knew? Why do they hate us?"

Had al-Qaeda not secured a base of operations, 9/11 would not have occurred.

But if Reagan unwittingly helped create the first al-Qaeda cell in relatively unimportant Afghanistan, Obama is helping to create al-Qaeda cells in some of the most important Islamic nations.

He is doing this by helping get rid of those Arab autocrats effective at suppressing jihadis (even if for selfish reasons), while empowering some of the most radical jihadis who were formerly imprisoned or in hiding.

And all in the name of the "Arab Spring" and "democracy."

In Egypt, Obama threw Mubarak, America's chief Mideast ally for three decades, under the bus, and cozied up to the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt's government is today overrun with Islamists, many who share al-Qaeda's radical worldview. Several of these new policymakers—including President Morsi himself—were imprisoned under Mubarak, not, as the Western media portray, because they were freedom-loving rebels, but because they were, and are, Sharia-loving radicals trying to transform Egypt into an Islamist state.

The Sinai alone is now infested with jihadis, including possibly al-Qaeda leader Ayman Zawahiri.

In Libya, Obama supported the opposition against Gaddafi—knowing full well that al-Qaeda was among them—enabling the Benghazi attack and murder of Americans on the anniversary of 9/11. The unprecedented persecution of Christians in Libya—from attacks on churches to attacks on nuns—is further indicative of the direction "liberated" Libya is taking.

And now in Syria, Obama has decided to arm foreign jihadis. One report indicates that foreigners make up 95% of Syria's so-called "opposition." As in Libya—and as in Afghanistan in the '80s—foreign jihadis are flooding Syria, terrorizing non-Muslims and cleansing the nation of Christians in their bid to create another base, another qaeda.

One of them recently declared, "When we finish with Assad, we will fight the U.S.!"—precisely al-Qaeda's thinking in the '80s-'90s when it was supported by the U.S. against the U.S.S.R.

Thus all the forces and circumstances that led up to the strikes of 9/11—foreign jihadis infiltrating and consolidating power in Muslim countries formerly run by secular dictators—are once again in full play, but in a much more profound way. Today it's not just one unimportant country, Afghanistan, that is being subverted by jihadis but several strategically important nations.

If 9/11 was the price the U.S later paid for helping turn Afghanistan into a jihadi base of operations in the 80s-90s, what price will America later pay now that it's betraying several major nations to the jihadis, who are turning them into bases, into qaedas?

So why are American politicians not blowing the whistle on Obama's suicidal policies?

Because their myopia and inability to see beyond today—beyond their tenure—has not changed since September 11, 2001. Just as it took over a decade after al-Qaeda's creation to launch the 9/11 attacks—a time of ostensible peace and calm for the U.S., a time of planning and training for the jihadis—it will take time for the jihadi storm to pour on America.

And that's the era we're currently in: the calm before the storm. Just as before 9/11, today's American leaders focus only on the moment—a moment when the U.S appears relatively safe—never considering the future or the inevitable consequences of a woefully counterproductive U.S. foreign policy.

Speaking of foreign policy, if Reagan supported the jihadis to combat the U.S.S.R—a hostile super-power—why is Obama supporting the jihadis? What exactly does America have to gain by propping up jihadis in some of the most strategic Arab nations?

In short, just as it was before 9/11, when the jihadi storm eventually does break out—and it will, it's a matter of time—those American politicians who helped empower it, chief among them Obama, will be long gone, and the talking heads will again be stupidly asking "What happened?" "Who knew?" Why do they hate us?"

Except then it will be too late.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.


Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2013/raymond-ibrahim/the-calm-before-the-jihadi-storm/

 



__._,_.___






__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

The Same Government Is Responsible


The Same Government Is Responsible
Posted by Michael S. Rozeff on June 19, 2013 09:32 AM

Governments of the U.S. show remarkable continuity of policies, despite new faces being elected and placed into control of the government machinery. That is why one can speak of "the government" without distorting reality very much  when the policies evolve and show evolutionary changes.

The government  whose policies have been problematic for the Tea Party members is the same government that the Occupy protesters have objected to. The government that bailed out Wall Street is the same government that has invaded American privacy and prosecuted whistle blowers. The government that has invaded Serbia under Clinton and Iraq in 2003 under Bush is the same government that invaded Libya, Yemen and Pakistan under Obama.

Obama never fails to take digs at the Republicans. I have seldom seen such a partisan president. But these distinctions are not all that important in the larger scheme of things. His object is to maintain his store of power and that of his party. His beefs with Republicans and theirs with him are "all in the family".

All of the major politicians in Washington are isolated from Americans, talking to each other, attending their luncheons, banquets and fund-raisers, listening to a closed circle of advisers, and being interviewed by deferential media. The way they view us is vastly different from how matters appear to us. Only someone with a distorted view due to this isolation would tell us, as Obama has, that intrusive airport searches do not mean a loss in American freedom.

The government that is responsible for loss of domestic freedoms is the same government that has encouraged the 1% vs. the 99%, and it's the same government surveilling all Americans and dropping missiles in Pakistan and Yemen. Partisan political maneuvering will not make things better. Change is not going to come until people within each party put up candidates who want to carry out a very different agenda than that of expansionism, interventions, crony capitalism, police state, and surveillance state. For that to happen, Americans are going to have to take a stand against these policies, rejecting empire, imperialism, inflationary finance, public debt and executive power.

Obama to open talks with Taliban





creeping posted: "Soon they'll be allies. Obama says the Taliban must reject al Qaeda as Obama gives money and weapons to al Qaeda in Syria. via U.S., Taliban to start peace talks in Qatar within days - ContraCostaTimes.com. KABUL, Afghanistan -- In a major breakthrough, "
Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on Creeping Sharia

Obama to open talks with Taliban

by creeping

Soon they'll be allies. Obama says the Taliban must reject al Qaeda as Obama gives money and weapons to al Qaeda in Syria. via U.S., Taliban to start peace talks in Qatar within days - ContraCostaTimes.com. KABUL, Afghanistan -- In a major breakthrough, the Taliban and the U.S. announced Tuesday that they will hold talks […]

Read more of this post

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/obama-to-open-talks-with-taliban/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.