NEW ELIGIBILITY CHALLENGE CALENDARED IN SUPREME COURT

New eligibility challenge reaches Supreme Court
Attorney calls for recusal of Obama judicial appointees

By Bob Unruh

Another legal challenge to Barack Obama's eligibility to occupy the White House has been docketed for consideration before the U.S. Supreme Court, and the plaintiff this time formally is asking that the justices appointed by Obama, the "respondent" in the case, be excluded.

"There is a widespread perception among 'conservative' media figures such as Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin that judicial appointments have been made by the respondent Obama with the expectation of favors in return. This has combined with a campaign of ridicule and 'unthinkability' on these serious issues led by the press spokesman of the respondent Obama among others," said a "motion to recuse" submitted by attorneys working on behalf of Gregory S. Hollister, a retired military officer.

The motion cites Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, both of whom were awarded the lifetime tenure positions on probably the most influential court in the world by Obama.

"What is very much at issue here is the question of public perception. Will this court be bound by the Constitution and the law that it sets out under the Constitution? It is important that this court, above all institutions, preserves and protects the Constitution and a rule of law based upon it," the motion states.

It also reminded the justices of the verbal attack they sustained from Obama at last year's State of the Union address, when Obama publicly criticized their ruling in an election case.

"We would think that this is particularly the case in light of the historically unprecedented attack on this court's determination to uphold the constitutional rule of law engaged in by the respondent Obama during the State of the Union Address that he gave in January of 2010.

It is as if he and those working with him and backing him believe that this court and the federal judiciary can be manipulated and intimidated in the manner that investigations have revealed as having occurred in the courts of Cook County, Illinois.

"We would suggest that this court should particularly avoid the appearance of favoritism as overriding the rule of law based upon the Constitution," the motion said.

Hollister's case is one of the longest-running among those challenging Obama's eligibility. It is scheduled to be heard in "conference" by the Supreme Court justices on Jan. 14.

It is at those conferences that the justices would determine by vote whether the case would be heard. Although proceedings are not public, it is believed that a case must earn four votes among the nine justices before it is heard.

WND reported when another eligibility case attorney, Orly Taitz, approached Justice Antonin Scalia about the issue.

"Scalia stated that it would be heard if I can get four people to hear it. He repeated, you need four for the argument. I got a feeling that he was saying that one of these four that call themselves constitutionalists went to the other side," Taitz said.

At that time, the Supreme Court was considered to have mainly a 4-4 conservative-liberal split, with one swing vote on most issues.

On the conservative side generally were Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito, Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas. Justice Anthony Kennedy often is the swing vote.

The liberal side frequently included Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens.

Since then Stevens and Souter have departed and were replaced by Obama, after he evaluated their philosophies, with the like-minded Kagan and Sotomayor.

Presumably, should there be only seven justices in the discussion, three votes might be sufficient to move the case forward.

Laurence Elgin, one of those coordinating the efforts to reveal the problems with following the Constitution in the United States, also announced a new organization and website, the Constitutional Rule of Law Fund, to pursue cases that defend the U.S. legal system and the Constitution.

He told WND that the Hollister case, throughout the district and appellate court levels, was never denied standing, a major hurdle that has torpedoed many of the other eligibility disputes to rise to the level of court opinions.
The pleadings submitted to the court, compiled by longtime attorney John D. Hemenway, cite the incredible importance of the claims that Obama, in fact, failed to qualify for the office.

"If proven true, those allegations mean that every command by the respondent Obama and indeed every appointment by respondent Obama, including the appointment of members [Kagan and Sotomayor] of this and every other court, may be only de facto but not de jure [by right of law]," states the pleading.

"Further, his signature on every law passed while he occupies the Oval Office is not valid if he is not constitutionally eligible to occupy that office de jure," it continued.

"Thus, it is not hyperbole to state that the entire rule of law based on the Constitution is at issue. Moreover, it would indicate that the respondent Obama ran for the office of president knowing that his eligibility was at the very least in question," it continued.

The case made headlines at the district court level because of the ruling from District Judge James Robertson of Washington.

Judge James Robertson

In refusing to hear evidence about whether Obama is eligible, Robertson wrote in his notice dismissing the case, "The issue of the president's citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America's vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama's two-year-campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court."

Besides the sarcasm involved, the pleading states, the very evidence pertinent to the dispute at issues was ignored.

The pleading outlines that information, which challenges Obama's claim to eligibility and his campaign's citation of a computer-generated Certification of Live Birth from the state of Hawaii, a document also made available to those not necessarily born in the state, as proof of Obama's eligibility.

It suggests there are "sufficient allegations" that Obama was not born inside the United States, and outlines the law and regulations in force at the time of Obama's birth, in 1961.

"At the time of the birth of the respondent Obama in 1961 as alleged, Congress had … the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952. Under the applicable provision of that act … for the respondent Obama to have been a naturalized citizen of the United States at birth, were he born of one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent, as he has alleged throughout his political career he was, his mother would have had to have been continuously resident in the United States for a period of 10 years preceding the date of his birth and, most importantly, she would have had to have resided continuously for five years preceding his birth in the United State after she had turned 14 years old.

Since she was only 18 when Obama was born, this condition was clearly not fulfilled," the arguments said.

It also raised the suggestion that there are sound arguments to the effect that a "natural born citizen," a requirement the Constitution imposes on the president but not other federal officials, is someone born to two citizen parents, and Obama himself has documented that his father never was a citizen of the U.S.

The fact that the evidence never was reviewed and the judge based a "biased" decision on "a completely extrajudicial factor" [twittering], prevented Hollister from having the constitutional rule of law applied, the petition states.

The motion to recuse explains that federal law requires that judges exclude themselves when circumstances arise that would involve "even the appearance of (lack) of impartiality."

"It would seem literally to apply to Justice Kagan in any case since she was serving as Solicitor General during the pendency of this and other cases involving the ineligibility question. The U. S. Attorney did make a brief appearance in this case in the appellate document and did appear in many parallel cases," the motion said.

The president is represented by a private law firm in the current case.

"Historical analysis establishes, therefore, that ... respondent Obama, since his father was a Kenyan of British citizenship and not a U. S. citizen, was not 'eligible to the office of president,…' Therefore his appointment of the present Justices Sotomayor and Kagan are not valid appointments under the Constitution and they should not, therefore, be sitting as justices deciding upon our petition if this court itself observes the law it has set out under the Constitution as the supreme law of the land.

Otherwise the concept of a rule of law based upon the Constitution, which we contend is at issue in our petition, is being flouted at the very outset of consideration of the petition," the motion explains.

Elgin told WND the Hollister case is the starting point for the Constitutional Rule of Law Fund and website.

The case "places squarely before the high court the question of whether the constitutional Rule of Law will be preserved in this nation, as opposed to egregious bias on the part of a judge who relied upon such extra-judicial factors as that 'The issue of the president's citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America's vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama's two-year-campaign for the president,…'

"The judge then went on to sarcastically declare: '...but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court.'

Imagine that! A citizen wanting a serious constitutional issue resolved by a court!

John Marshall, roll over in your grave. We believe this sentiment is called in the language of the Supreme Court in numerous cases a denial of 'access to the courts,' or of 'access to justice,' and is rooted in the First and Seventh Amendments as well as a number of other constitutional provisions," the website explains.

Neither is Hollister a novice on the issue of eligibility, it explains.

"It is a matter of record that Colonel Hollister, while on active duty in the Air Force, in a career from which he honorably retired, inquired into the legitimacy of President Clinton's orders because President Clinton participated, while at Oxford, in communist protest marches in Eastern Europe against the Vietnam War at a time when we were at war with communism in Vietnam, something that would seem to violate the Fourteenth Amendment," the site explains.

The questions suggested by the petition are weighty:


"Did the district court examine the complaint, as required by the decisions of this and every other federal court, to see if it alleged facts to support its claims?"


"By refusing to consider the issue of defendant Obama not being a 'natural born citizen' as set out in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, did the district court violate its obligations to consider the issues raised by the complaint?"


"In … relying on extrajudicial criteria such as an assertion that 'the issue of the president's citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered and otherwise massaged by America's vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama's two-year-campaign for the presidency' combined with an attack on petitioner … did the district court not engage in such obvious political bias and upon extrajudicial factors as to render its opinion void?"


"Did the … bias engaged in lead to a decision which ignored the law as set out above and as a result place the respondent-defendant Obama above that law and the rule of law in this country generally and threaten the constitutional basis and very existence of our rule of law?"

"Did the courts below not completely ignore the decisions of this court and the clear language of Rule 15 of the federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning amendments so as to compound its biased elevation of the defendant Obama above the rule of constitutional law?"

While the district judge dismissed the case because it had been "twittered," the appeals court simply adopted his reasoning, but wouldn't even allow its opinion affirming the decision to be published, the petition explains.

Hollister's concern rests with the fact that as a retired Air Force officer in the Individual Ready Reserve, it is possible that he at some point could be subject to Obama's orders.

"If Congress called up the Air Force Individual Ready Reserve the respondent Obama would have to give the order … If, as it appears, those orders would not be lawful, Col. Hollister would be bound … to question them and look to the respondent [Vice President Joe] Biden as constitutionally next in succession for lawful orders," the pleading said.

This case doesn't have the "standing" dispute that has brought failure to so many other challenges to Obama's eligibility, the pleading explains, because Robertson "found that it had jurisdiction of the case, and therefore that petitioner Hollister had standing."

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, has told WND a demand for verification of Obama's eligibility appears to be legitimate.

ISLAMIST BATTLE PLAN WE DENY EXISTS

The Islamists' Battle Plan

Hat tip: Seth Mandel

After centuries of warfare in which secrecy and espionage often made the difference between winning and losing, we should be grateful that our current enemy has published "and then repeatedly called attention to" his battle plan.

The only problem? Our senior leadership refuses to read it.

That's the primary takeaway from the briefing Big Peace attended by the Strategic Engagement Group (SEG). Whether it is through violence or deceit and subversion, Islamic law provides both the strategic blueprint and the justification for war against the West. And the West's refusal to read the Quranic literature and accept the religious motivation behind Islamic terrorism, instead opting for a politically correct view that they cannot accurately interpret Islam, has resulted in a "complete epistemic collapse," according to SEG's vice president of strategic communication initiatives, Stephen Coughlin.

The enemy "is who he says he is," Coughlin said, adding that everyone "including Islamic terrorists themselves" refer to such fighters as jihadis. "There's no question that the enemy we are fighting considers himself a jihadi."

And jihad, as explained by 14th century Islamic scholar Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, "means to wage war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion."

He asked if someone could be both politically correct and threat-focused? The answer seems to be a clear no.

As explained by Mohammad Hashim Kamali in Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence:


�Sovereignty in Islam is the prerogative of Almighty Allah alone� . It is neither the will of the ruler nor of any assembly of men, nor even the community as a whole, that determines the values and the laws which uphold those values.�


Such principles make Islamic law incompatible with democracy, Coughlin explained, or even recognizing the sovereign power of the law of the land, the way Christian law and Jewish halakha do.

When Coughlin speaks about Islam, he often puts the word moderate in quotes. That's because even those considered moderate, such as Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf "spiritual leader of the 'Ground Zero' mosque," believe in the primacy of Shariah law. Rauf himself wrote that since "Shariah is understood as a law with God at its center, it is not possible in principle to limit the Shariah to some aspects of human life and leave out others."

Coughlin noted that some of our Arab allies, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, have constitutions based on Islamic law. And pointing to The Quranic Concept of War, by Pakistani Gen. S. K. Malik, Coughlin said the enemy's threat doctrine is based on Islamic law, and there is no way to defeat an enemy without explicitly understanding its threat doctrine.

"I'm not asking you to read something al-Qaeda wrote. I'm asking you to read something our coalition partners wrote," Coughlin said.

The other element to the threat doctrine is the Quranic concept of taqiyya, or misleading the enemy. Coughlin showed a letter signed by about 40 Muslim leaders disapproving of an Islamic "day of violence" in response to comments made by the pope criticizing religious violence. The letter was intended for Western ears, and its audience happily accepted it, despite the fact that when Islamic leaders speak to Muslim audiences, they encourage the Quranic concept of war.

"That's the gold standard," Coughlin said, holding up the Pakistani text on jihad. Then he held up the open letter to the West: "This is the you're-going-to-lose-the-war standard."

The reason Muslim leaders can denounce "terrorism" while still supporting it, Coughlin explained, is that terrorism is not defined in Muslim parlance the same way it is in the Western lexicon. Again quoting al-Misri: "The following are not subject to retaliation: a Muslim for killing a non-Muslim. Leaders of the Muslim world will condemn 'terrorism,' meaning the killing of a Muslim, or in some cases a tourist, which is why they often say they condemn 'terrorism and the killing of innocents.'"

Coughlin then introduced the Islamic concept of abrogation (progressive revelation), which holds that the latest version of Islamic law supersedes all others. He quoted from Islamic Jurisprudence, by Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee:

�The law was laid down in the period of the Prophet (peace be unto him) gradually and in stages. The aim was to bring a society steeped in immorality to observe the highest standards of morality. This could not be done abruptly. It was done in stages, and doing so necessitated repeal and abrogation of certain laws.�


When put in order, the Medinan period is the latest period in which the Quran is ordered. And the last part of the Medinan Quran that talks about jihad (making it the final word on the subject) says: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, even if they are of the people of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

John Guandolo, vice president of strategic planning and execution for SEG, delved more into the concept of taqiyya, pointing out the infiltration into major sectors of local and federal governments by the umbrella Islamist network, the Muslim Brotherhood.

"Deception is not a tactic for these guys, it's the whole game," Guandolo said.

He went on to demonstrate this by showing a photo of the Brotherhood's Sheikh Kifah Mustapha among the graduates of a recent FBI Citizens' Academy, which takes its participants inside the FBI's investigation and community relations processes.

He showed a video of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born top terrorist recruiter for al-Qaeda now based in Yemen, leading a prayer service on Capitol Hill.

Guandolo pointed out that Abdurahman Alamoudi, "who in 2004 pled guilty to illegal financial transactions with the Libyan government and to participating in a plot to assassinate Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah," was in charge of selecting Muslim chaplains for the U.S. military. These are just a few of many examples, he said.

"They're actually inside our decision-making groups," Guandolo said, adding that decades of Soviet subversion in the U.S. laid the groundwork for radical Islam's taqiyya campaign.

Alan note: perfect playing field for Marxist-Islamist Oba-Hussein to do damage to America.

But far from accusing lawmakers of knowingly collaborating with the enemy, Guandolo made clear that he believes political leaders don't know the backgrounds of many of the people they meet with, often relying on "moderate" Muslim staffers to make the introductions. This makes counterterrorism efforts on this front virtually nonexistent.

"Not only are we not countering it, we don't know that it's going on," Guandolo said.

When the media report on a "lone wolf" attack, Guandolo said they attempt to paint each Islamic terrorist as a sort of rebellious one-man breakaway movement. But what do all these lone wolves have in common? They all cite Islamic law as the justification and inspiration of their acts.

When law enforcement or government officials classify jihad as some kind of "internal yoga," Guandolo said, groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) sit back, smile, shake their heads and say "still stupid. Still haven't cracked a book."

CAIR was founded in 1994 ostensibly to defend American Muslims from what it sees as discrimination. But the organization was born after two of its co-founders, Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad, attended a meeting in 1993 called by members of the Hamas terror outfit. The FBI investigation of the meeting showed it to be a strategy session on how to undermine the Mideast peace process and support jihadist activity against the West.

Even more troubling, Guandolo said, is the extent to which the Muslim Brotherhood's "global Islamist movement and father of Hamas" controls the Muslim community's access to American politicians. And there need be no guessing as to the Brotherhood's intentions; any visitor to the organization's Web site can find, in English, "the principles of the Muslim Brotherhood":


1-The introduction of the Islamic Shari'ah as the basis controlling the affairs of state and society.

2-Work to achieve unification among the Islamic countries and states, mainly among the Arab states, and liberating them from foreign imperialism.�


Put simply, they intend to establish Islamic law and re-establish the caliphate. In 2004, the FBI discovered a Brotherhood memorandum that laid out the "strategic goals" of the organization. The most infamous paragraph is the following:


�The process of settlement is a �Civilization-Jihadist Process� with all the word means. The Ikhwan (Brotherhood) must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and �sabotaging� its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God�s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet.�


When Western leaders put political correctness ahead of security, Guandolo said, the Brotherhood has succeeded in furthering its "civilization-jihadist" goals "by their hands." This is difficult for political leaders to accept, because it would acknowledge just how far this type of jihad has advanced. But that understanding, Guandolo said, is crucial to establishing a strategy to counter it:


"There's a doctrine here that is airtight that the enemy says he's fighting for, and we have yet to look at it. We know that because of the level of penetration that this amounts to an insurgency."

http://bigpeace.com/smandel/2010/12/17/the-islamists-battle-plan/

OBAMA'S MILLION MAN POLICE STATE HAS STARTED

Eight examples Of How The Government Is Attempting To Take Total Control Of Our Food, Our Health, Our Money And Even Our Dignity

Courtesy: Full Spectrum Dominance


Over the past several decades, no matter which political party has been in power the government has continued to become a larger part of our lives.

These days many people are speaking of the "nanny state" that we have created, but the reality is far worse than that. The truth is that the government has become a gluttonous, out of control behemoth that is gobbling up everything in sight and that is attempting to exert full spectrum dominance over our lives.

Today, the government seems to have an insatiable hunger to watch us, track us and control us. Now they even want to feel our private parts before we get on an airplane. No matter what politicians we send to Washington D.C., it just seems to get worse and worse. Anyone who still believes that we live in "the land of the free" is completely and totally delusional.

It isn't just in one particular area that all of this government intrusion into our lives is so offensive. What we are witnessing is the government slowly digging its fingers even deeper into our lives in a thousand different ways. Sadly, most Americans see the government as the one who is supposed to take care of them from the cradle to the grave, as the one who is supposed to fix all of the problems in society and as the one who is their ultimate authority.

This is in direct contradiction to the concept of a "limited government" that our Founding Fathers tried so desperately to enshrine in our founding documents. The American people need a big-time wake up call. The following are 8 examples of how the U.S. government is attempting to take even more control over our lives....

#1 Taking Total Control Of Our Food - S. 510 "The Food Safety Modernization Act"

S. 510, "The Food Safety Modernization Act", is another huge power grab by the FDA and the federal government over our food supply. The bill is written so broadly and so vaguely that nobody really knows what it means. The potential for abuse of these vague new powers would be staggering. So will the government abuse these powers? Those who are in favor of the bill say that of course the government will be reasonable, but those who are opposed to the bill point to all of the other abuses that are currently taking place as evidence that we simply cannot trust the feds with vague, undefined powers.

Fortunately, the Tester Amendment has been attached to S. 510 at least for now, but big agriculture is not happy about this, and they will be doing everything they can to get it kicked out of the final version of the law. In any event, if this food safety law does get passed, tens of millions of Americans will be left wondering what they are allowed to grow in their back yards, what seeds they are allowed to save and what can and cannot be sold at farmer's markets.

In case you think this is paranoid, just consider what is already happening. It has been documented that the feds recently raided an Amish farmer at 5 AM in the morning because they claimed that he was was engaged in the interstate sale of raw milk in violation of federal law. If the feds are willing to stoop so low as to raid Amish farmers, do you think they will have any hesitation when the time comes to raid your home?

#2 Taking Total Control Of Air Travel - The Dehumanizing Full Body Scanners And "Enhanced Pat-Downs"

Totalitarian governments throughout history have always sought to dehumanize their subjects. Sadly, that is exactly what is happening in America today. If you want to get on an airplane in the United States, you will now be forced to either let TSA agents gawk at your naked body or let TSA agents grope your entire body including your genitals.

What these TSA agents are being instructed to do to ordinary Americans is so bizarre that it is hard to believe. It is being reported that in many instances TSA agents are actually reaching down the pants of male travelers and up the skirts of female travelers. One retired special education teacher was left humiliated, crying and covered with his own urine after an "enhanced pat-down" by TSA agents. Quite a number of women that have been through these "enhanced pat-downs" have used the phrase "sexual assault" to describe the experience.

So is this what America has become? A place that is so "dangerous" that we all must be treated like prison inmates? Large numbers of Americans are swearing that they will simply not fly anymore, but what happens when these "enhanced pat-downs" start showing up at our schools, our shopping centers and our sporting events someday?

Alan Note: Napolitano of Homeland Security is taking care of that escape by mandating to use all the airport procedures and pat downs on ALL public transport! Ships, trains, buses, subways?

#3 Taking Total Control Of Our Health Care - The Loss Of Our Health Freedom

Once upon a time, Americans had control over their own health care decisions. That is no longer true today. Thanks to major changes in our health care laws, the health care landscape in America has been dramatically changed. Americans are now forced to participate in the officially-sanctioned health care system by purchasing health insurance. But Americans cannot just get any kind of health insurance policy that they want. Our health insurance choices are now tightly constrained by thousands of regulations.

Not only that, but doctors in America no longer have the freedom to treat patients however they see fit. Only "approved" treatments are permissible, and now the federal government is going to be telling doctors which of those "approved" treatments are "cost-effective" enough. As the new health care laws are fully implemented over the next decade, the American people are going to become truly horrified not only about how much their health insurance premiums are going up, but also about how much health freedom they have actually lost.

#4 Taking Control Of Our Money - Multiplying Taxes

Whenever one tax goes down, it seems like several other taxes either go up or get invented. The truth is that Americans are being drained by the federal government, state governments and local governments in dozens upon dozens of different ways. To our various levels of government, our primary function is to serve as a revenue source. Each year it seems like they find more ways to stick it to us. In fact, it looks like 2011 is going to be a banner year for tax increases. If you doubt this, just see my previous article entitled "2011: The Year Of The Tax Increase".

#5 Taking Control Of Our Businesses - Thousands Of Ridiculous Regulations

Why would anyone in America even attempt to be an entrepreneur today? Most small businesses are literally being strangled by hordes of red tape regulations.

Just consider how things have changed in America. The Federal Register is the main source of regulations for U.S. government agencies. In 1936, the number of pages in the Federal Register was about 2,600. Today, the Federal Register is over 80,000 pages long.

The following is just one example of how bizarre things have gotten in this country. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is projecting that the food service industry will have to spend an additional 14 million hours every single year just to comply with new federal regulations that mandate that all vending machine operators and chain restaurants must label all products that they sell with a calorie count in a location visible to the consumer.

Do we really need to spend 14 million more hours telling Americans that if they keep eating hamburgers and fries that they are likely to get fat?

But it is not just the federal government that is the problem. One reader recently described how difficult it was to try to run a business in the state of California....

Had 10 employees, but one almost exclusively to deal with government regs, taxes, reporting etc, Received a $144 penalty for a .33 (yes, cents) error on my quarterly payroll taxes from Cal Franchise Tax Board. I called to ask if that was not a bit repressive, why level penalize someone for what was obvisouly a didminimus error? I was told “we would have penalized you if it was .03!” I said, I did not volunteer to be the income tax collector for the State and Fed government, you should be paying me to do all this work and insane paper pushing. Reply: “That is part of the PRIVILIGE of being a business owner!!!”

#6 Taking Control Of Our Environment - The Green Police

The government is using the "green movement" as an excuse to take an unprecedented amount of control over our lives. From coast to coast, communities have been given government grants to track our trash with RFID microchips. The following are just some of the communities that will now be using microchips to track what we throw away....

*Cleveland, Ohio

*Charlotte, North Carolina

*Alexandria, Virginia

*Boise, Idaho

*Dayton, Ohio

*Flint, Michigan

Not only that, but some cities are now starting to fine citizens for not recycling properly.

In Cleveland, Ohio if an RFID tracking chip signals that a recycle bin has not been brought out to the curb within a certain period of time, a "trash supervisor" will actually sort through the trash produced by that home for recyclables.

According to Cleveland Waste Collection Commissioner Ronnie Owens, trash bins that contain over 10 percent recyclable material will be subject to a $100 fine.

Does that sound like America to you? (Or like the former Soviet Union?)

Now we don't even have the freedom to throw out trash the way we want to.

#7 Taking Away Our Independence - The Exploding Welfare State

You don't have much freedom if you can't take care of yourself. But in America today, tens of millions of Americans have literally become completely dependent on the government for survival.

Over 42 million Americans are now on food stamps. Approximately one out of every six Americans is enrolled in a federal anti-poverty program.

The number of Americans living in poverty has increased for three consecutive years, and the 43.6 million poor Americans in 2009 was the highest number that the U.S. Census Bureau has ever recorded in 51 years of record-keeping.

The more Americans that are destitute and totally dependent on the government the easier it will be for the government to control them. Today a rapidly growing percentage of Americans fully expect the government to take care of them. But this is not what our founders intended.

#8 Taking Away Our Patriotism - We Are Even Losing The Freedom To Be Proud Of America

Do you ever think things will get so repressive in America that a group of high school students will be forbidden from singing the national anthem at the Lincoln Memorial? Well, that has already happened.

Do you think that areas of our nation will ever become so anti-American that they will forbid students from riding to school with an American flag on their bikes? Well, that has already happened.

Fortunately, there was such an uproar over what happened to 13-year-old Cody Alicea that it made national headlines and he ended up being escorted to school by hundreds of other motorcycles and bicycles - most of them displaying American flags as well. The school reversed its policy and now Cody can ride his bike to school every day proudly displaying the American flag.

But what if nobody had decided to stand up?

That school would have gotten away with banning the flag if the American people had allowed them to.

Our liberties and our freedoms are under attack from a thousand different directions and they are being stripped away from us at a blinding pace.

It has gotten to the point where most of us just sit in our homes and enjoy the "freedom" of digesting the "programming" that is constantly being hurled at us through our televisions. Of course the vast majority of that programming is produced by just 6 monolithic corporations that control almost everything that we watch, hear and read.

Power and money have become more highly concentrated in America today than ever before, and yet most Americans don't even realize it.

Most Americans are so busy just trying to survive from month to month that they don't even have time to think about the deeper issues. At the end of the night most of them are so exhausted from serving the system that all they can do is collapse on the sofa and turn on some programming.

Alan Note: After the 1979 revolution by Ayatollah Khomeini, also implemented according to the Soviet playbook being used by Obama and his radicals to take over the populace in the USA, Khomeini's Soviet driven supporters immediately rationed FOOD, issuing ration cards which INTENTIONALLY required lining up on  DAILY basis at a number of different distribution locations with each only providing a single or perhaps two items.

To try to get a meal together, various family members EACH had to wait long hours at multiple locations, for instance one for bread, another for milk or cheese, another for chicken, another for meat, another for rice, another for cooking oil. Each location had limited daily supplies delivered to them and would run out.

Amounts which could be bought at a single time with the ration coupons was also very limited so YOUR FAMILY had to CONTINUALLY hustle all the time just to eat.  

Those left without getting basic food on any day had to try to rush to somewhere else or bribe someone at the distribution, THUS nobody had time to deal with politics or oppose Khomeini.

Coming to YOUR neighborhood soon in Obamaland?

But the American people desperately need to wake up. Without liberty and freedom our country cannot work. But our freedoms and liberties are being stripped away a little bit more each and every day.


The America that so many of us grew up adoring is dying right in front of our eyes. If you plan on saying something about it, you better do so before it is too late.

GATES & OBAMA STILL PROTECTING THE ISLAMIC IRAN REGIME

Alan note: Secretary Gates acting as Obama's ventriloquist's doll spouts Islamic regime's talking points. How low can he sink. He used to be someone of trust and stature, now a shill - Obama's and the  Islamic regime's. Shame on you. Leave office while you still have some dignity left.

==========================================


Article by Michael Ledeen (edits, graphics and emphasis by AntiMullah)

I sometimes wonder where some of our smartest people get their ideas. Take Defense Secretary Bob Gates, for example. Discussing the possibility of military action against Iranian nuclear weapons facilities, he said: “And if it’s a military solution, as far as I’m concerned, it will bring together a divided nation, it will make them absolutely committed to attaining nuclear weapons and they will just go deeper and more covert.”

I don’t get it. Is there some sort of evidence? What could it possibly be, aside from the sort I get from my Ouija board? So I try to imagine one of the tens of millions of Iranian opponents of the regime. Perhaps he’s got a relative in prison; he probably knows people who have lost a family member or two to the regime’s killers and torturers.

He dreams of a free Iran, of an end to the humiliating circumstances in which Iranians now find themselves: widely considered to be terrorists, barbarians, and savages. And then one day somebody blows up a bunch of nuclear labs, some secret military installations, and RG headquarters in the major cities. Does that guy now rally round the supreme leader? I don’t think so.

Not that I’m trying to talk Gates into bombing Iran; quite the opposite, in fact. Our greatest weapon is political, and consists in the overwhelming majority of Iranians who hate the regime. If we supported them with vigor and a sense of humor, I think the regime would be overthrown and we wouldn’t have to worry about the “military option.”

But we don’t hear any vigorous support for the democratic opposition from this administration. And more to the point, nothing concrete is done for them. (I can tell you a few stories about OFAC’s refusal to permit would-be supporters to help the Green Movement, for example).

In the old days, Gates was a great analyst, but I think he has decided to be a blind man when it comes to Iran. He said a few other astonishing things as well. “We even have some evidence,” he said, “evidence that Khamenei is beginning to wonder if Ahmedinejad is lying to him about the impact of the sanctions on the economy, and whether he’s getting the straight scoop in terms of how much trouble the economy really is in.”

I think I can help the secretary of Defense here: Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei doesn’t believe anything President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says about anything. He knows he is not going to get the straight scoop from the man most Iranians refer to, not with great affection, as the chimpanzee.

Khamenei only listens to a handful of people, including his son and designated successor, and members of his inner circle who have names like Larijani and Jaffari.

For the record, Khamenei said today that he and the Chimp get along famously, and the sanctions aren’t affecting much of anything in the Islamic Republic.

Khamenei’s lying. He knows that the country’s going to ruin. Just read this, which tells of a secret analysis prepared for Khamenei, and which predicts the total collapse of the national economy in the near future.

According to Les Echos, oil income, which constitutes two thirds of the country’s income, was harmed by the departure of the Western companies after they were forced by the United States Treasury to choose between their interests in the U.S. and those in Iran.

The French Total, Dutch Shell, Norwegian Statoil, and Italian ENI companies suspended their investments, and the Japanese Inpex may do the same shortly.

Lack of foreign maintenance and spare parts affected oil production, the rate of which decreased from 4.2 million barrels per day in the middle of 2009 to 3.5 million barrels in the summer of 2010.

Even the Turks are failing to deliver on their promise to supply gasoline (of which the Turks normally provide half); they stopped deliveries at the end of August. The fuel now comes from Turkmenistan, China, and Venezuela, or is smuggled in from Iraq.

At the end of September, the Korean Kia and German Thyssen followed Daimler, Toyota, Caterpillar, and Hewlett-Packard, and suspended their activities. Munich Re, Allianz, and Lloyds now refuse to insure cargos and planes that transfer supplies to Iran, while funding foreign trade is becoming more complicated, since most of the banks avoid all contact with Iran.

The banks in the UAE, which half of the Iranian import goes through, broke off all connections with the country two weeks ago, leading to a shortage of dollars (and a sudden increase of the dollar rate to 10.900 rial).

On Saturday, the regime warned that it will suppress the demonstrations and strikes by the merchants that will most likely break out after the costly subsidies on consumption of food and fuel products (10 percent of the GNP) are cancelled…

Despite the remarkably widespread belief that socio-economic misery causes revolution, it is not so. Revolution is not an act of desperation, not a final throw of the dice by those with nothing left to lose. Revolution is an act of hope undertaken by those who believe they can change the world for the better.

The regime knows it has failed to win the support of most Iranians, and like good totalitarians they are trying to recapture the culture and force it into a Shi’ite strait jacket before the people bring them to justice for their many crimes.  (Alan note: similar to Obama with Islamic sharia in the USA)

The history textbooks are being rewritten, and ancient Persian history — particularly the epic story of Cyrus the Great — are being removed, as if the country only really started with the Islamic conquest.

Religious monitors are being placed in schools from the earliest years through university. And popular culture is more and more repressed: no music is permitted, while the once-proud cinema has been crushed. One of the country’s greatest directors, Jafar Panahi, was recently dragged before an Islamic court, where he delivered a memorable defense of his art and his independence:

I am not a film maker who judges but one that invites other to see. I don’t get to decide for others or to write any kind of manual for any body; please allow me to repeat my pretension to place my cinema beyond good and evil.

This kind of belief has caused my colleagues and my self a lot of trouble; many of my films have been banned, along with the films of other filmmakers like me. But it is unprecedented in Iranian cinema to arrest and imprison a filmmaker for making a film, and harass his family while he is in prison.

This is a new development in the history of Iranian cinema that will be remembered for a long time.

Meanwhile, despite the ban, there is a flourishing musical underground, mostly in the big cities, that sings of hope and (revolutionary) change. For example, this one, from a female rapper named Mana:

Freedom, happiness go hand in hand
A way is needed, informing people is important, Rock building
Playing hard, we’re lions, not sissies with swords in our hands, path opening
problem solving in farsi, Iranian from the bottom of our heart love we spread
street to street we run around, you will hear us whether you go up or down
tonight is yours, where you going, look at em, its new years, set up your table
we give jewels, say your full

Chorus:
FreedomX6
Thats freedom ya’ll
freedomx6
Thats freedom ya’ll

more more whether you’re a boy or girl
use your voice for talent
for your children in the cold streets …

The London Telegraph provided an excellent story on the regime’s fear of rap music, and CNN tells us about the wave of recent arrests of rap musicians.

This smoldering rebellion is not the product of sanctions, pace Bob Gates. But those who are searching for a moment to fulfill their dreams of freedom are certainly encouraged to see the regime’s incompetence in dealing with its crisis. Foremost among the freedom fighters are Iranian women, long the preferred victims of the dreadful Khomeinist regime. Of late, the women in Tehran’s Evin prison were moved into cells with drug addicts, so that they might be assaulted by drug-deprived prisoners. This grisly operation was justly and powerfully denounced by the pasionaria of the Green Movement, Mousavi’s wife Zahra Rahnivard: “Transferring female political prisoners to the Methadone quarantine ward for addicts is a waste of time, as it will not only NOT cure their addiction to freedom and democracy, but will bring them closer to God.”

See what I mean about the soul of revolution?

Finally, there is a recent bombshell out of Lebanon, where the regime and its favored paramilitary instrument, Hezbollah, have been trying frantically to suppress the release of a UN report on the 2008 assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. It has just been announced that the former Revolutionary Guard Commander and former Iranian Deputy Minister of Defense Ali-Reza Asgari — who famously defected to the West in 2007 — will testify at the trial. The tribunal has accused Hezbollah of having a hand in that assassination.

Alan note: the CIVILIAN  trial instead of military tribunal of terrorist Ahmed Ghalfan Ghailani by order of Obama and Holder (he killed some 248 people)  nearly went awry when Consitutional rights he did not merit or deserve were applied to him and following civilian law, the jury acquitted the multiple murderer of ALL counts - except ONE.  This was a trial run in an effort to have the World Trade Center mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad found not guilty in civilian court and thus pay hommage to Oba-Hussein's Islamic masters and his own pro-Islamic mindsets. Clearly visible in this photo in Indonesia:


MY MOSLEM FAITH.....

 Lebanese daily Al Diyar Online, in its Monday November 15th issue, confirmed this report and said that this could be a game-changer in the various political equations inside Lebanon. Lebanese journalists have called this witness “the king on the new chess board.”

We never know what will catalyze the final crisis of a failed and hated regime.

We could have been the catalyst for revolution many times in the past years, especially the years after 9/11. But we chose to blind ourselves to the reality of an Islamic Republic that kills Americans with the same zeal it directs against its own people. The sanctions are at least a positive move, because they show the Iranian people that we are not totally supine. But the sanctions are not enough.

We need to support the forces of revolution in Iran.

Someone should tell Bob Gates. And his colleague at State, Mrs. Clinton.

And their president, who is totally absent from this gripping drama.

Faster, please.

FINANCIAL FRAUD IGNORED BY OBAMA AND HIS DEPT. OF INJUSTICE

http://www.realecontv.com/videos/banking-malfeasance/the-alice-in-wonderland-economy.html 

WHITE HOUSE IN CRISIS - Article 4 on the table

Editors Note: If the information in this article is accurate it is extremely important. The fact that Wayne Madsen has shown himself to be a very credible journalist in the past makes this situation all the more intriguing. Stay tuned.
By Wayne Madsen

Section 4 of the 25th Amendment likely to be invoked; Obama being shipped out!

Washington has not witnessed so much top level White House intrigue since October 20, 1973, when a Saturday night saw President Nixon fire the Watergate independent counsel, the U.S. attorney general, and the deputy attorney general in the “Saturday Night Massacre.” Just ten days earlier, Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned after being charged with accepting bribes while governor of Maryland.

In the case of President Obama, the senior firings are not happening during a single night but the recent involuntary sudden departures of the White House chief of staff and national security adviser, along with what WMR can confirm from multiple sources is a president who is suffering from Nixonian levels of paranoia, depression, and schizophrenia, has some top-level administration officials considering the first-ever invocation of Section 4 of the 25th Amendment — the involuntary removal of the president from office. The White House meltdown has the Washington political circuit buzzing under the surface.

Unlike Watergate and the Iran-contra scandal, however, the corporate media is refusing to report on the breakdown of the Obama administration and the internecine political warfare within the Executive Office of the President.

The “Ulsterman” Diary

Like Watergate, the rumors about Obama’s mental health, his lack of interest in the routine tasks of the presidency, and his mistaken belief that the crowds who see him on the campaign trail automatically adore him, are emanating from a “Deep Throat,” a former White House staffer who is providing detailed information on the chaos and in-fighting in the White House to a blogger who goes by the name of “Ulsterman.”

Ulsterman has conducted a number of background interviews with the former Obama staffer over the past few weeks, publishing them in a series. WMR has independently confirmed with Washington insiders, some with high-level contacts in the White House, that most of the information in the interviews is correct.

The latest leak from the former White House official has Obama offering Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the vice presidential position in 2012.

However, Clinton has no intention of taking the job and may well quit as Secretary of State after the mid-term election, especially if Secretary of Defense Robert Gates leaves earlier than his announced departure of next year and the Democrats suffer a big defeat at the polls on Nov. 2.

It is known that Gates does not like the new National Security Adviser Tom Donilon and was not happy that National Security Adviser James Jones was fired earlier than his own planned departure date.

The other Ulsterman interviews are as follows:

White House Insider On Obama: The President Is Losing It Sep. 7 http://newsflavor.com/opinions/white-house-insider-on-obama-the-president-is-losing-it/

White House Insider Part 2: The President needs to grow up. Sep. 15 http://socyberty.com/issues/white-house-insider-part-2-the-president-needs-to-grow-up/

White House Insider: What The Hell Have We Done? Sep. 18 http://newsflavor.com/politics/world-politics/white-house-insider-what-the-hell-have-we-done/

White House Insider: The Clintons Are Going For It. Sep. 21 http://newsflavor.com/opinions/white-house-insider-the-clintons-are-going-for-it/

White House Insider: Pelosi and Obama at War Oct. 7 http://newsflavor.com/politics/us-politics/white-house-insider-pelosi-and-obama-at-war/

Another similarity to the Watergate crisis is the usual “pre-crisis presence” of Washington Post influence peddler and original “Deep Throat” conjurer Bob Woodward. Woodward’s new book, Obama’s Wars, quoted Jones as calling Obama’s advisers “water bugs,” an utterance that resulted in Jones’s early firing by Obama.

Rahm Emanuel’s firing came after he and Mrs. Obama had a major argument, and the First Lady told Emanuel he had to go “for a reason.” Mrs. Obama reportedly flatly told Emanuel he was “no longer welcome at the White House.”

The “Emanuel-running-for-Chicago-mayor” story was mere window dressing to cover up the meltdown in the White House leadership.

The top-level White House resignations, just before a critical mid-term election, are unprecedented even by Watergate standards. The October 1973 White House instability was one year before the 1974 mid-terms, an election that still saw the Republicans suffer tremendous losses in the Congress.

As with “Deep Throat” and other past White House leakers, there is as much speculation on who has been speaking to Ulsterman as there is on the earth-shattering revelations coming out of his or her interviews. The leaker’s information indicates that he or she was relatively high-ranking with access to the inner workings of the Oval Office. The following have all left the White House, some abruptly:

•Rahm Emanuel, chief of staff. Resigned effective October 1, 2010.
•Retired General James Jones, National Security Adviser. Resignation announced on October 8, 2010.
•Ellen Moran, Communications Director, left in April 2009, however, the leaks indicate the Obama “Deep Throat” had more recent access to the Oval Office. Moran is now chief of Staff to Commerce Secretary Gary Locke.
•Van Jones, special adviser for “Green Jobs.” Left in September 2009, again, too early to have been privy to later inside information.
•Mark Lippert, deputy national security adviser. Left in October 2009 and went from reserve to active status in the US Navy. Lippert was a “pick-up basketball” partner of Obama during the campaign.
•David Ogden, Deputy Attorney General. Resigned in February 2010.
•Greg Craig, White House Counsel. Craig was forced to announce his resignation in November 2009. Although November 2009 was also possibly too early for Craig to be the source, he is a consummate Washington insider who may continue to be privy to information from within the Oval Office and West Wing.
•Peter Orszag, Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Resigned in June 2010. Like Craig, a strong possibility.
•Retired Admiral Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence. Resigned in May 2010. Would have had classified access to White House operations although he did not work in the White House.
•Christina Romer, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. Resigned in September 2010.
•Larry Summers, Director of National Economic Council. Resignation not to take effect until after November 2 election.

There are also reports that White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has been told to look for another job.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has announced his decision to leave but with James Jones’s early dismissal, Gates may move up his departure from the Pentagon.

David Axelrod plans to leave as early as March 2011 to work, as he has stated, on Obama’s re-election campaign from Chicago.

Obama’s depression and paranoia and Hillary’s intentions

WMR has learned that Obama’s paranoia and severe depression over his correct belief that certain interests are out to get him have been mitigated by First Lady Michelle Obama and domestic policy adviser Valerie Jarrett.

Mrs. Obama has been telling Obama that he should forgo a second term because he is “too good for the American people” and he has a future role on a “bigger world stage.”

It is also being reported from White House sources that Hillary Clinton plans to run against Obama in 2012, something WMR previously reported.

The reports that Obama has offered Mrs. Clinton the vice presidential position in 2012 is both an attempt at defusing the reports that Clinton, backed by her husband Bill Clinton, are planning a primary challenge to Obama and an attempt to send a message to Biden, who is considered by Obama to be working with the forces arrayed against him.

On August 27, 2010, WMR reported on the Obama-Clinton intrigue:

“Informed sources in Washington, DC have told WMR that President Obama has been personally told by a delegation of top Democratic Party financiers that unless he radically changes his economic policies they will bolt from him for another Democratic candidate in 2012.

The Democratic money moguls conveyed the warning to Obama in Martha’s Vineyard, where the president and his family we respending their vacation. There are various factions within the Democratic Party that see different scenarios to bail out what many Democrats see as an administration in deep trouble with the electorate.

One would have Secretary of State Hillary Clinton move up to replace Vice President Joe Biden on the 2012 ticket with Senator John Kerry becoming Secretary of State. However, WMR has been told that Clinton personally loathes Obama and his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and may not want to be part of the 2012 president ticket playing second fiddle to Obama.

WMR has also learned that Obama’s reported ‘severe narcissism’ has a number of his cabinet officials and top Democratic fundraisers perplexed.

Obama’s refusal to change course because of his ego was discussed at the recent annual Bohemian Grove conclave in northern California, which brings together influential businessmen and politicians from both parties. Top U.S. business leaders openly complained about Obama’s economic policies, with some stating that Obama is, for the business community, the worst president in anyone’s lifetime.

They also complained about White House gatekeepers like Emanuel and policy advisers Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod who are preventing access to the Oval Office.

Although such complaints could be expected from Republican businessmen, we have learned that top Democratic businessmen at the Bohemian Grove have told Jarrett, Obama’s chief liaison (Alan note:of the criminal enterprise) to them, that all she does is shake them down” for campaign contributions and that the uncertainty on the costs for Obama programs on health care and taxes has prevented the hiring of workers.

WMR has also learned that rather than change course, the White House staff, who are keenly reading anything that is critical of the president, are more interested in exacting revenge for criticism than in changing course.

The White House staff are voracious readers who are obsessed with favorable coverage,’ one source said.

The Obama administration’s interest in a favorable public image over all other interests has a number of Democrats running for re-election privately miffed.

One change many Democratic politicians and fundraisers would like to see is the replacement of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner with someone with more gravitas and a better handle on fixes for the plummeting economy.”

On January 7, 2010, WMR reported: “WMR has also learned of a schism that has opened up between Obama’s political team of Emanuel, Jarrett, David Axelrod, and White House pollsters and focus group specialists who meet at the White House every Wednesday and the national security team of National Security Adviser Jim Jones, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The national security team is convinced that the political team is only focused on the 2012 re-election campaign and not on pressing national security issues.

 Brawls have reportedly broken out between the two groups with Emanuel looking for ways to threaten Jones, Gates, and Clinton with retaliation if their criticisms of the political team continues.”

Now that Jones is out, Gates is going — maybe sooner than reported — and Clinton is contemplating leaving and challenging Obama in 2012, the national security team under Biden’s close friend Donilon is now in the hands of a veteran Democratic political team.

But the political team has also taken major hits, with Emanuel gone, Axelrod leaving next year, and White House General Counsel Greg Craig having left last January. New Chief of Staff Rouse is a protege of former Senator Tom Daschle and is considered close to Biden’s circle.

Donilon’s wife, Cathy Russell, is Biden’s chief of staff and his brother, Mike Donilon, a long-time Democratic campaign consultant who advised Bill Clinton in his 1992 presidential campaign, is counselor to the vice president.

John O. Brennan, Obama’s deputy national security adviser for Homeland Security and Counter-terrorism, is also under pressure to resign.

Brennan, after retiring as interim chief of the National Counter-terrorism Center at the CIA in 2005, became CEO of The Analysis Corporation.

Brennan’s firm’s employees were among those cited in rifling through Obama’s State Department passport files in January 2008. It was never ascertained what information was gleaned from Obama’s files and possibly those of his mother, grandfather, and grandmother. However, WMR has learned that Obama’s past is currently of interest to individuals linked closely to the CIA.

Crisis management in the White House

The White House team now consists of Biden’s circle of Donilon and Rouse, the Obama circle of Michelle Obama, Jarrett, and an increasingly weakened Axelrod, and those in the middle who are not sure about the future of the administration.

Mrs. Obama and, to a lesser extent, Jarrett, have tried to smooth things over between people like Vice President Biden and chief of staff Pete Rouse on one hand and President Obama, who is detached from his duties, and, according to the former White House staffer who is talking to Ulsterman, extremely lazy, only interested in watching ESPN and discussing sports, and playing golf, and doing what he is most comfortable at: campaigning.

Obama clearly wants to run again for president, citing the “adoring crowds” who greet him on the political stump. Mrs. Obama has reportedly told the president that “there are no more adoring crowds.”

Last March, the annual report on the president’s health contained a reference to drinking.

Obama’s doctor urged him to ”Continue smoking cessation efforts, a daily exercise program, healthy diet, moderation in alcohol intake. . .” WMR has been told by informed sources that Obama’s drinking has, on occasion, been more than moderate.

Previously, WMR reported that Michelle has told the president that he can make more money after one term as president than Bill Clinton has made after two terms.

Privately, the First Lady has made no secret of her dislike of her role as First Lady and the constraints it has put on her own ability to make money.

In a book about French First Lady Carla Bruni, “Carla and the Ambitious,” Mrs. Bruni-Sarkozy reportedly said that Mrs. Obama told her that life in the White House is “hell.”

The White House staffer told “Ulsterman” that he was uncomfortable talking about the marital situation between the president and the First Lady, but WMR has previously reported on Obama’s bi-sexuality, his activities with gay members of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ and an uptown Chicago bath house, in addition to his current controversial relationship with his personal trainer, Reggie Love, and a past short relationship with Larry Sinclair.

Obama’s depression and lack of interest in his duties have senior administration officials and some Cabinet secretaries considering the invocation of Section 4 of the 25th Amendment, which deals with the involuntary removal of the president for physical or mental incapacity.

The first invocation of the Section 4 of the 25th Amendment is on the table

Section 4 has never been invoked.

However, on two occasions it was almost invoked on President Reagan, after the March 30, 1981, assassination attempt against Reagan and in 1987 when Howard Baker took over as White House chief of staff from the fired Donald Regan. PBS reported that Baker’s team was shocked over what they heard from Regan’s staff: that “Reagan was ‘inattentive, inept,’ and ‘lazy,’ and Baker should be prepared to invoke the 25th Amendment to relieve him of his duties.”

When asked by the Associated Press in March 1983 about White House plans to invoke Section 4 after his shooting in March 1981, President Reagan responded, “No one has ever mentioned such a thing to me.” White House Chief of Staff James Baker III countered Reagan’s statement by contending that Reagan must have forgotten.

During the Bill Clinton impeachment episode, there was talk in the White House of creating the position of a White House psychiatrist who would be empowered to ascertain the mental fitness of the president to serve.

Clinton’s self-destructive sexual activities were cited as one reason for such a position.

Lyndon Johnson’s war-time depression and Richard Nixon’s paranoia were also given as reasons for an “independent psychiatrist” on the White House staff. The issue returned during President George W. Bush’s term of office with reports of alcoholism and depression.

1972 Democratic vice presidential candidate Senator Thomas Eagleton (D-MO) was stepped down from the ticket after revelations that he had been treated for mental depression. Presidential candidate George McGovern was forced to replace Eagleton with Sargent Shriver.

A March 14, 1999, New York Times report addressed the issue of presidential psychological problems and quoted former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford as being against the idea of a White House shrink.

Carter was opposed to a mandatory annual psychiatric evaluation as part of the annual physical examination of the president. He told the Times, “No — You don’t have a mandatory requirement in the law to check a President for athlete’s foot,” but he added, “I believe that mental illness should be considered with the same import as physical illness.”

Ford also opposed the idea of a presidential psychiatrist, saying, “I don’t see the need for someone in that discipline being assigned specifically to the White House medical office . . . I think I was normal. I think I am still normal. If I had any problem along that line develop, the White House can acquire the best almost instantaneously.”

Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) also voiced opposition, saying, “The signal to the world that the American President, the leader of the free world, is having to get advice as to his mental condition might destabilize a lot of things, including stock markets and negotiations.”

Zbigniew Brzezinski, former Carter national security adviser, not rejecting outright the idea of a presidential psychiatrist, said, “The psychiatrist would also probably have to sign a document obligating him to raise an alarm if he detected serious problems that could affect the President’s ability to govern.”

The present talk about invoking Section 4 has made Obama even more paranoid about his enemies, who he feels range from Biden and the Clintons to the banks and Wall Street.

Section 4 would allow Vice President Biden, along with a majority of either ‘the principal officers of the executive departments,” the Cabinet or “such other body as Congress may by law provide,” to declare the President disabled by submitting a written declaration to the president of the Senate pro tem Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI), and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Under Section 3 of the 25th Amendment, Vice President Biden would become Acting President.

Section 4 is designed to be invoked if the president’s incapacitation prevents him from discharging the duties of his office. A written declaration to that effect must be presented to Congress. The president may resume exercising the Presidential duties by sending a written declaration to the president of the Senate pro tem and the speaker of the House.

However, should the Vice president and Cabinet remain unsatisfied with the president’s condition, within four days of the president’s declaration that he is fit, may submit another declaration that the president is incapacitated.

The Congress must then assemble within 48 hours, if not already in session.

Within 21 days of assembling or of receiving the second declaration by the Vice President and the Cabinet, a two-thirds vote of each house of Congress is required to affirm the President as unfit. Upon this finding by the Congress, Section 4 states that the vice president would continue to function as the “Acting President.”

If the Republicans win one or both houses of Congress on November 2, a lame duck Democratic-led Senate and House might have to deal with the invocation of Section 4, something that could plunge the country into a constitutional crisis.

If Biden were to become president, he would have to nominate a vice president subject to a majority approval of the Senate and House of Representatives.

Again, a lame duck Congress may find itself thrust into approving a vice presidential successor and Biden would likely want such a decision to fall to Democratic-led chambers rather than one or both being controlled by the Republicans. In such an event, Secretary of State Clinton, the senior Cabinet member, may find herself as the favorite.

Current talk in the corporate media about Clinton being offered the vice presidential slot by Obama in 2012, and her rejection of such a scenario, may be part of a campaign to prepare the American people for a vice presidency, not under Obama, but under Biden.

Enter the CIA

In another eerie replay of the Watergate crisis, WMR has learned that the CIA has not sat by idly as the Obama White House has unraveled. WMR has previously reported on Obama’s and his family’s past links to the CIA. However, Langley appears ready to take advantage of the weakening position of Obama to bring about added uncertainty.

WMR has learned from a reliable intelligence source that the CIA has secretly contracted with a retired top CIA official who was a principal actor in the Iran-contra scandal, to uncover any information that could be damaging to Obama from his past.

On the table are any documents and information on Obama’s place of birth, his paternal parentage, and his past employment activities. By contracting outside the CIA’s normal channels, the agency is seeking ”plausible deniability” should documents or information damaging to Obama be uncovered and subsequently leaked to the media.

The retired CIA official has recently been active with a carve-out special Pentagon intelligence-gathering contract approved by his one-time boss at the CIA, then-CIA deputy director Robert Gates, now the defense secretary, and CIA Director Leon Panetta, President Clinton’s White House chief of staff.

There is at least $15 million of Pentagon funds unaccounted for in the CIA’s off-the-books intelligence-gathering operation, reported to have officially been for counter-terrorism operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The contractor firm has been involved in domestic and foreign intelligence operations for the CIA and FBI for at least 20 years, including monitoring labor strikes, investigating at least one U.S. Supreme Court nominee, and its linkage to the FBI corruption case involving Boston criminal syndicate boss James “‘Whitey” Bulger.

The scenario of invoking Section 4 of the 25th Amendment is a worst-case scenario but the mere fact that it is “on the table” provides an indication of the current dysfunctional situation in the White House.

Democratic Party leaders are scrambling in anticipation of major losses on Nov. 2 in the Congress and state houses. President Obama may soon find himself at the receiving end of senior Democratic Party elders who will bear a “shock therapy” message: “shape up or ship out.”

Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. He has written for several renowned papers and blogs.


Madsen is a regular contributor on Russia Today. He has been a frequent political and national security commentator on Fox News and has also appeared on ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, and MS-NBC. Madsen has taken on Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity on their television shows. He has been invited to testifty as a witness before the US House of Representatives, the UN Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and an terrorism investigation panel of the French government.


As a U.S. Naval Officer, he managed one of the first computer security programs for the U.S. Navy. He subsequently worked for the National Security Agency, the Naval Data Automation Command, Department of State, RCA Corporation, and Computer Sciences Corporation.


Madsen is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), Association for Intelligence Officers (AFIO), and the National Press Club. He is a regular contributor to Opinion Maker.

GRIZZLY BEAR CHASES BADLY BURNED YOUNG BISON

CLICK HERE TO SEE MORE PICTURES  

OBAMA IMPORTING HIS PRIVATE MOSTLY ISLAMIC ARMIES

“The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release October 08, 2010 Presidential Memorandum—Refugee Admissions
Presidential Determination
No. 2011-2

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE

SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2011 Refugee Admissions Numbers and Authorizations of In-Country Refugee Status Pursuant to Sections 207 and 101(a)(42), Respectively, of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and Determination Pursuant to Section 2(b)(2) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act, as Amended

In accordance with section 207 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the “Act”) (8 U.S.C. 1157), as amended, and after appropriate consultations with the Congress, I hereby make the following determinations and authorize the following actions:

The admission of up to 80,000 refugees to the United States during Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 is justified by humanitarian concerns or is otherwise in the national interest; provided that this number shall be understood as including persons admitted to the United States during FY 2011 with Federal refugee resettlement assistance under the Amerasian immigrant admissions program, as provided below.

The 80,000 admissions numbers shall be allocated among refugees of special humanitarian concern to the United States in accordance with the following regional allocations; provided that the number of admissions allocated to the East Asia region shall include persons admitted to the United States during FY 2011 with Federal refugee resettlement assistance under section 584 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 1988, as contained in section 101(e) of Public Law 100-202 (Amerasian immigrants and their family members):

Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,000

East Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,000

Europe and Central Asia . . . . . . . . . . 2,000

Latin America/Caribbean. . . . . . . . . . . 5,500

Near East/South Asia. . . . . . . . . . . 35,500

Unallocated Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,000

The 3,000 unallocated refugee numbers shall be allocated to regional ceilings, as needed. Upon providing notification to the Judiciary Committees of the Congress, you are hereby authorized to use unallocated admissions in regions where the need for additional admissions arises.

Additionally, upon notification to the Judiciary Committees of the Congress, you are further authorized to transfer unused admissions allocated to a particular region to one or more other regions, if there is a need for greater admissions for the region or regions to which the admissions are being transferred. Consistent with section 2(b)(2) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (22 U.S.C. 2602(b)(2)), as amended, I hereby determine that assistance to or on behalf of persons applying for admission to the United States as part of the overseas refugee admissions program will contribute to the foreign policy interests of the United States and designate such persons for this purpose.

Consistent with section 101(a)(42) of the Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(42)), and after appropriate consultation with the Congress, I also specify that, for FY 2011, the following persons may, if otherwise qualified, be considered refugees for the purpose of admission to the United States within their countries of nationality or habitual residence:

a. Persons in Cuba
b. Persons in the former Soviet Union
c. Persons in Iraq
d. In exceptional circumstances, persons identified by a United States Embassy in any location.

You are authorized and directed to report this determination to the Congress immediately and to publish it in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/10/08/presidential-memorandum-refugee-admissions

ALSO VIEW COMMENTS ON THIS AT
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2613356/posts 

AMERICAN MILITARY AGAINST OBAMA

You have to pinch yourself – a Marxist radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshipped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, has become President of the United States. And apparently it’s considered impolite to say so. (James B).

EMPHASIS AND EDITING BY ANTIMULLAH

==============================================================

By Mark McGrew

Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin, Major General Carroll D. Childers, Captain Neil B. Turner, Commander Charles Kerchner, Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick, Captain Connie Rhodes, Lieutenant Colonel David Earl Graef, Major Stefan Frederick Cook, Paul Vallely, Major General (Ret), US Army, Jim Cash, Brigadier General (Ret), USAF, Harry Riley, Colonel (Ret), US Army, Michael A. Trudell, Captain (Ret), USN, Harry Soloman, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), USAF, Carmen A. Reynolds, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), USAF, Debra A. Gunnoe, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), USAF, Greg Hollister, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), USAF, Richard C. Morris, Lieutenant Colonel (Ret), US Army, William Harker, Commander (Ret), USN, Bill Little, Commander (Ret), USN. John Johnson, 1st Lieutenant (Ret), USAF, Luther B. Neff, Captain (Ret), USAF, Fred Herndon, Captain (Ret), USAF, Jerry Curry Army Major General (Retired), General Thomas McInerney.

All of these people are either engaged in a legal action against Obama or have publicly expressed their support for people in legal actions against Obama.


What motivates these people to risk their lives, their freedom and their fortunes by publicly stating their position against a US President?

It is their sworn duty.


Upon entering the service of the American military, every SOLDIER must take this oath:


"I, __________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God"



The oath of an OFFICER of the United States Armed Forces, is as follows:



"I, __________________, having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of Major do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."



Notice that for an Officer, there is no "promise to obey the orders of the President".



This oath is based on Title 5, §3331 of the United States Code:



More can be seen here: http://www.history.army.mil/faq/oaths.htm


The question is: Are these men committing Treason or Mutiny?



Mutiny is described in Merriam Webster's Dictionary as: Forcible or passive resistance to lawful authority especially concerted revolt (as of a naval crew) against discipline or a superior officer.



And they define Treason as: 1. The betrayal of a trust. 2. The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state (COUNTRY) to which the offender owes allegiance.



IF...Obama is a lawful eligible President or lawful or eligible superior officer, their actions may be construed as Mutiny. IF......Obama is a lawful eligible President and IF he is "the government", which he is not, then their actions may be construed as Treason.



It is looking more and more that Obama is not a lawful eligible President. And no President is "the government".

"We the People" are THE government. The President is just part time hired help.



Lt. Commander Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III filed a charge of "Treason" against Obama in Federal Court in Tennessee.



Commander Charles Kerchner, through his attorney, Mario Apuzzo, has filed a lawsuit against all of the US Congress, Dick Cheney, Nancy Pelosi and Obama for violating the US Constitution in certifying the Electoral College votes for Obama's favor.



Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin has refused to be deployed until he sees proof that Obama is an eligible President. He is now being Court Marshaled, with a military Judge telling him that he can not see, nor present evidence pertaining to Obama's eligibilty to be President, because Colonel Denise Lind ruled, "It may embarrass the President".


Of the 100 or so legal actions against Obama to prove he is eligible to hold the office of President of The United States, most are dismissed without any trial, without any hearing, without any evidence presented by either side, never being judged on the merits of the case.


Instead, Judge after Judge says, "You don't have "Standing". It is none of your business if Obama is eligible or not."


One Judge's excuse was, "This has been tweeted and twittered on the Internet". The Judge knows that the Internet is not a realm of unadulterated truth.



Many of these dozens of cases can be found on http://www.therightsideoflife.com/current-lawsuit-listing/eligibility-case-archive/

and

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/2009/02/09/various-other-cases-against-obama/


Philip Berg, an attorney in Philadelphia has a case http://www.obamacrimes.com/  sitting in the US Supreme Court with Justice Thomas and his associates. Orly Taitz, an attorney with several dozen military Plaintiffs has cases http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/  before the US Supreme Court. Mario Apuzzo's case http://puzo1.blogspot.com/  against Congress is now in the Supreme Court after being told his client has no "Standing" to ask if the US Congress is corrupt.



And it is not just legal actions against Obama personally. There are dozens of legal actions against his policies, such as Health Care, closing Chrysler dealerships, Gulf oil spill and many other totally un-American policies. Policies that most Americans were taught are repugnant to a free people.



Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, on behalf of the Commonwealth of Virginia, filed suit against Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius directly after the Health Care legislation was passed by Congress in March 2010.


20 individual states filed a similar lawsuit led by Attorney General Bill McCollum of Florida. In Attorney General Kenneth Cucinelli's case, Federal District Court Judge Henry E. Hudson has ordered a Motion questioning the legality of the Health Care Bill because it was signed into law by someone (Obama) who is ineligible to do so.

The question of Obama being eligible to be the President is based on Obama's refusal to provide ANY verification that he is a Natural Born Citizen as required by the US Constitution.



And that question has finally, after dozens of denied legal actions, apparently been made a part of a valid case in Federal Court.


American citizens and military officers from Coast to Coast are told they have "No Standing" to question Obama's eligibility to be President.


What is this new legal buzzword, "Standing"? According to http://www.findlaw.com/  it is: The status of being qualified to assert or enforce legal rights or duties in a judicial forum because one has a sufficient and protectable interest in the outcome of a justiciable controversy and has suffered or is threatened with actual injury.



According to http://www.dictionary.law.com/  "Standing" is: "The right to file a lawsuit or file a petition under the circumstances. A plaintiff will have standing to sue in federal court if a) there is an actual controversy, b) a federal statute gives the federal court jurisdiction, and c) the parties are residents of different states or otherwise fit the constitutional requirements for federal court jurisdiction."



America is being decimated by a foreigner, acting as a President, and the Federal Judges want to say that an American citizen has no "Standing"?


In the matter of Obama's eligibility, there:



1. Actual controversy.

2. Federal Statutes do give the federal court jurisdiction.

3. All parties are residents of different states.

4. It does fit the constitutional requirements for federal court jurisdiction.


Consider this: If none of the cases asking Obama to prove he is eligible have "Standing", why is a Federal Judge and Obama's Department of Justice allowing 11 foreign Nations to join a lawsuit against the State of Arizona?? NONE of those Nations are... residents of different states and NONE of those Nations has suffered or are threatened with actual injury.


Regarding the current cases pending in the Supreme Court of the United States, US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is on record answering a question about Obama's eligibility, "We're evading that one."

We are witnessing corruption at the highest levels of government.

The military officers listed in this report are attempting to correct that corruption.

Is the situation so serious that America may experience a "Military Coup"? Under normal circumstances that would be a delusional consideration. America is not a 3rd World country. Our Constitution allows for a "peaceful revolution" every four years.


But, under present circumstances, with an illegitimate President who has spent nearly $2 million to keep his citizenship secret, with a Congress ignoring Constitutional requirements to certify Obama's Electoral Votes, with a Department of Justice attacking an individual State attempting to enforce Federal Immigration Law and allowing 11 Nations to join in that attack, with Federal Judges across the country resorting to the illicit reasoning of "Standing" to prohibit questions about Obama's citizenship, with a Supreme Court whose job it is, to consider cases before them, and instead is proudly "evading that issue", with certain factions of the military illegally and unconstitutionally attempting to silence any questions of Obama's eligibility, with record unemployment, with record foreclosures, with record poverty levels, and with Obama going out of his way to insult every World leader he meets, there are only three options to restore the operations of the American government to it's rightful owners:



1. We the People, take to the streets and forcibly remove every anti-American politician and government employee and/or forcibly remove any politician or government employee that the People "perceive" to be anti-American.


2. The United States Military must do a "surgical strike" to permanently remove the correctly identified anti-American forces in government positions.


3. Foreign intervention of overwhelming force.


There are no other options. All other options have been exhausted.

In 1934 Colonel Smedley Butler http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler  was asked by extremely anti-American forces to amass an Armyof 500,000 soldiers and forcefully take over the sitting government, including President Franklin Roosevelt.

Then, like now, their own arrogance was their downfall.

Who but an idiot would ask the most highly decorated United States Marine Corps Officer in history to use weapons and soldiers to destroy his own government? The same government that granted them the ability to amass the wealth that they could not have acquired in any other Nation or any other time period in history.




Why were those traitors not arrested and executed? Some stories say it is because Franklin Roosevelt, who was a Democrat, did not want to tarnish the reputation of Democrats, being as the conspirators were Democrats.


In the summer prior to the election of Obama, there was perhaps 1 or 2% of the population questioning Obama's eligibility. Obama said that that issue would go away 2 weeks after he was elected. However, 2 years after that election, over 65% of the American People question his eligibility and that number is growing.



If Obama is not eligible to be President, ALL of his Executive Orders, Laws, Treaties and Agreements can be reneged on by future administrations and by foreign entities. ALL orders being given to the United States military are unlawful orders and no soldier or officer has the duty to obey them. In fact, any and all military personnel who do obey his orders are subject to immense criminal punishment and possibly can be charged with and prosecuted successfully for War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity. Their duty is to not obey unlawful orders.


The vast majority of American citizens, "We the People" are fed up with Obama's grossly anti-American policies. The vast majority are fed up with major media's lies and distortions, as evidenced by massive amounts of readers and listeners abandoning the major news sources.


They are sick of billions or trillions of their dollars going to reward the crooked banks and other financial institutions who stole from them to begin with. They are sick of being punished for the crimes of the politician's friends and campaign donors.


Obama and his supporters are so far detached from reality, they have absolutely no concept of what 100 million angry American's are capable of inflicting upon them.


IF the military of America does not eliminate the corrupt Obama regime, the American people can and will do to them, far worse that the military would do.


The World has learned the hard way, that when America sneezes, their Nation's catch a cold. If hard, fast and brutal remedies are not applied to the Obama Flu virus, America and other Nations will cease to exist as we know them and hundreds of millions of this Earth's population will die a miserable death, far worse and farther reaching than the Black Plague of the Middle Ages. Poverty kills.

Massive poverty kills massively.



In America, the opposing forces are not Liberal vs. Conservative or Right vs. Left or Democrat vs. Republican. The effective forces are only American vs. Anti-American.


If the American forces had one message to deliver to the Anti-American forces, it would be this: "We have been tolerant of your actions. We have been respectful of your Constitutional Right to Free Speech. We have been such, not solely because we are gentle people and respect your Rights, but also, because of our Biblical principles.

The Bible says, "Know thine enemy." How could we have known you if we did not allow you to speak? And this is why you don't know us and don't realize what we are capable of, because you have attempted and succeeded in many areas to silence us. In public maybe. And now, the bell can not be un-rung. You have spoken and We the People know you. And you will be destroyed as We the People have destroyed you many times in the history of America."


Here are some links to just a few of the hundreds, maybe thousands of sites of organizations that are fighting Obama and his policies.


http://www.standupamericaus.com/  Supporting Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin

http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/ / Col. Lakin's legal defense fund

http://www.veterandefenders.org/  80,000 vets standing up for Constitution and against Islam

http://www.soldiersmemorialfund.org/  To commend members of the US Armed Forces.

http://www.patriotsunion/. For Americans fed up with corruption.

http://oathkeepers.org/  Uniformed personnel refusing to obey un-Constitutional orders.

http://www.riseupforamerica/. Carl Swenson, rejuvenated the Citizen Grand Juries

http://thejaghunter.wordpress.com/  Lt. Commander Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III.



And just when we thought there were no protest songs since the Vietnam days, Bruce Bellot spells it out: "We Ain't Going Away" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7xPMq45p6Q



This one by Jeremy Hoop, calling for Americans to rise up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX7xjAs1UuA&feature=player_embedded



And one of our old favorites, Lynyrd Skynyrd:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KVmRtEO18k&feature=related



When it is all added up, when it is all understood by the American people, there is one solid truth that will become self evident: The forces controlling Obama can not legally execute us for what we are doing, but We the People can hang them by the neck until dead, for what they have done and are doing.



Mark S. McGrew can be reached at McGrewMX@aol.com . More of his articles can be seen at http://www.marksmcgrew.blogspot.com/   Please include a link to www.English.Pravda.ru if you republish this article.