Categories
Archives
HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
target="_top">

Posts Tagged ‘terrorism’

The Myth of Islamic Extremism

Those who study such things point out that Islam is not the problem; the radical element, the extremists, who make up only about 20% of the Muslims of the world, actually support terrorism. ONLY, 20% of the 1.6 Billion Muslims comes out to 320 million people who believe you must either convert to Islam or be killed. The fight to end extremism and terrorism in the Islamic world is not being conducted by our moderate friends in Islamic nations. In fact the overwhelming financial support as well as toleration of extremist training camps and radical mosques comes from our “friends” in the Muslim world.

So this 20% represents all the radicals and terrorists. Yet the Pew research polls show that in much of the Islamic world overwhelming majorities (87% Egypt, 82% Jordan, 79% Afghanistan, 77% Pakistan, 66% Palestinians) believe that one who leaves Islam should be executed, and that beating, disfiguring, and removing limbs by religious leaders is appropriate punishment for those who break either religious rules or civil law, and these are not numbered among the terrorists but are main-stream Muslims. Extremism and terrorism only exist because the majority in the Islamic world allows it to exist, they do nothing to prevent or punish this so-called “high-jacking of Islam” by extremists.

Think about how we would accept this if it were 20% of Southern Baptists who believed that those who leave their church for another religion, or because they no longer believe at all, should be executed and actually carried out the execution. How would you feel if Baptist ministers were determining when a person should be beaten or stoned for sinning, or when their hand would be chopped off for stealing? Would you argue that the government should be tolerant of their religious rights?

We are told there is a strong moderate movement in Islam. Then where is it and what is it doing about the problem? The problem is that even these moderates know that they are apostates from Islam, because they are standing against the fundamental teachings of Mohammed upon which all Islam stands. The very concepts of God-given rights to liberty, choice of religion, right to express your opinion, and virtually all our constitutional rights are a violation of Islam and are offensive to those who believe the Koran. There cannot be a faithful moderate Muslim, because to be so is to go against the very teachings of the Prophet, so is punishable by death.

We will know when there is a moderate Islam, when Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, or Buddhists can freely teach their religion in Islamic countries and Muslims can freely choose to accept those teachings without any punishment. As it now exists, and as it has from the beginning, Islam is an extreme system of tyranny. Or government should impose the same standard of religious tolerance for Islam that is granted in Islamic countries. That would mean there would currently be no Islam practiced here except for non-citizens, and then under the watchful eye of the FBI.

It will someday come to this if individual liberty is to survive in the world. Liberty cannot coexist with “accept my religion, or be a tribute-paying vassal, or I will kill you.” This is not an extremist view it is doctrineIslam Europe from the base teachings of Islam.

Canada passes legislation to combat nuclear terrorism

by Jim Kouri
With the prospect of the radical Islamist regime in Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, and the Iranians’ propensity for supporting, aiding and abetting terrorist organizations, the Canadian government passed legislation that amended its criminal code to specifically include nuclear terrorism, a U.S. intelligence analyst — who requested anonymity — told the Public Safety Examiner on Thursday.

Senator Raynell Andreychuk had written the amendments for the Senate and urged the government to acknowledge that nuclear terrorism is a very real threat to both national and global security.

“This bill would improve our existing approach to counter-terrorism by punishing those who aspire to commit acts of nuclear terrorism,” he said in a statement.

The amendments to the criminal code would create new classifications of offenses related to nuclear or radiological (“dirty bombs’) terrorism and includes:

* Possessing or trafficking nuclear or radioactive material or a nuclear or radioactive device, or committing an act against a nuclear facility or its operations, with the intent to cause death, serious bodily harm or substantial damage to property or the environment;

* Using or altering nuclear or radioactive material or a nuclear or radioactive device, or committing an act against a nuclear facility or its operation, with the intent to compel a person, a government or a domestic or international organization to do, or refrain from doing anything;

* Committing an indictable offense for the purpose of obtaining nuclear or radioactive material or a nuclear or radioactive device or to obtain access or control of a nuclear facility;

* And the threat to commit these offenses.

The enactment of these proposed amendments permits Canada to ratify the 2005 Amendment to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM) and the 2005 International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism, the Canadian government said in its announcement.

The CPPNM Amendment also provides for expanded cooperation between and among states regarding rapid measures to locate and recover stolen or smuggled nuclear material, mitigate any radiological consequences of sabotage, and prevent and combat related offenses.

Canada’s Nuclear Safety and Control Act and Nuclear Security regulations already outlawed illegal possession and use of nuclear material, but the CPPNM requires these restrictions to be spelled out in criminal law.

Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper stated that Canada was allocating $369 million dollars to help eliminate the threat of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons and so- called “dirty bombs.” Dirty bombs are regular explosives encased with radiological material.

While Canadian officials were discussing nuclear terrorism, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta was in the midst of meetings with his Canadian and Mexican counterparts in Ottawa, Canada, discussing military and law enforcement cooperation to combat organized crime, drugs and cross-border security operations

Continue reading on Examiner.com Canada passes legislation to combat nuclear terrorism – National public safety | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/public-safety-in-national/canada-passes-legislation-to-combat-nuclear-terrorism#ixzz1qsYs9pny

Obama Unveils New Milquetoast Anti-Terror Strategy To “Prevent Violent Extremism,” Makes No Mention of Islam…

No way you can defeat an enemy if you can’t even describe them without fear of upsetting the PC gods.

Officials Detail Plans To Fight Homegrown Terrorism — NPR

The White House will unveil a broad, new strategy Thursday aimed at battling homegrown terrorism in the U.S. The program aims to empower communities by teaching local officials to recognize violent extremism and see the threat as a public safety issue, like the battle against gangs and drugs.

The plan comes as the terrorism threat against the U.S. continues to evolve. All eyes used to be trained on al-Qaida in Pakistan. But more recently the attacks have come from violent extremists here in the U.S. who picked up radical ideas from the Internet. Those plots, though less spectacular, are the ones the Obama administration is trying to fend off.

“What we have to do is be prepared for these different types of approaches that al-Qaida is pursuing,” John Brennan, Obama’s chief counterterrorism adviser, told NPR in an interview about the plan. “The large attacks, the small attacks, the groups that are operating together and the individuals who may be vulnerable to these types of entreaties.”

The 20-page White House strategy — entitled “Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States” — puts some meat on a bare-bones outline the administration released four months ago. In that August dispatch, the White House laid out broad initiatives for preventing the spread of violent extremism in the United States. That plan, just seven pages long, was criticized for being thin on details.

The latest offering, which is expected to be released Thursday afternoon, is not exhaustive, but it provides a better idea of what the administration has in mind. The plan envisions a fusion of local partners — schools, community boards and leaders — with both local and federal law enforcement and other agencies. Many of these new partners, like the Department of Education, have never participated in national security issues before.

“We had a long conversation about what kinds of things education can do,” said Quintan Wiktorowicz, a senior director of the National Security Council at the White House, who spearheaded the initiative. “In the same way they fight gangs, or bullying, they can help here. The challenge is going to be trying to put the violent extremism initiatives into existing programs. But there are lots of ways to do it, and we’ll work with the schools to tailor the approach to what they need.”

The White House will unveil a broad, new strategy Thursday aimed at battling homegrown terrorism in the U.S. The program aims to empower communities by teaching local officials to recognize violent extremism and see the threat as a public safety issue, like the battle against gangs and drugs.

The plan comes as the terrorism threat against the U.S. continues to evolve. All eyes used to be trained on al-Qaida in Pakistan. But more recently the attacks have come from violent extremists here in the U.S. who picked up radical ideas from the Internet. Those plots, though less spectacular, are the ones the Obama administration is trying to fend off.

“What we have to do is be prepared for these different types of approaches that al-Qaida is pursuing,” John Brennan, Obama’s chief counterterrorism adviser, told NPR in an interview about the plan. “The large attacks, the small attacks, the groups that are operating together and the individuals who may be vulnerable to these types of entreaties.”

New Partners

The 20-page White House strategy — entitled “Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States” — puts some meat on a bare-bones outline the administration released four months ago. In that August dispatch, the White House laid out broad initiatives for preventing the spread of violent extremism in the United States. That plan, just seven pages long, was criticized for being thin on details.

The latest offering, which is expected to be released Thursday afternoon, is not exhaustive, but it provides a better idea of what the administration has in mind. The plan envisions a fusion of local partners — schools, community boards and leaders — with both local and federal law enforcement and other agencies. Many of these new partners, like the Department of Education, have never participated in national security issues before.

“We had a long conversation about what kinds of things education can do,” said Quintan Wiktorowicz, a senior director of the National Security Council at the White House, who spearheaded the initiative. “In the same way they fight gangs, or bullying, they can help here. The challenge is going to be trying to put the violent extremism initiatives into existing programs. But there are lots of ways to do it, and we’ll work with the schools to tailor the approach to what they need.”

U.S. counterterrorism officials have become adept at spotting terrorism suspects who travel overseas to get training or arrange large money transfers to support terrorist groups. But homegrown followers who quietly embrace violent extremism after watching al-Qaida propaganda on their computers don’t raise those same flags. In those cases, federal officials often learn about their intentions when it is too late. That’s why the Obama administration is so eager to get into the fight local partners who are better positioned to pick up on these subtle cues.

A U.K. Model

The plan has some hints of a 2008 program in the United Kingdom called “Prevent.” Authorities in the U.K. began dealing with homegrown terrorism long before it became an issue in the United States. Wiktorowicz was in London studying the program for years before starting his job on the National Security Council in Washington.

The Prevent program broke new ground in trying to get local officials and community leaders involved in spotting radicalization in its early stages. The program came in for some criticism, though; specifically, detractors said there wasn’t enough separation between the community work officials were doing and the intelligence they ended up gathering. But Prevent has taught counterterrorism officials a lot about how to engage communities.

Because the new American strategy will fold in many players who haven’t had much exposure to counterterrorism, it will require a good deal of training. Officials familiar with the plan said they are concerned that if the training isn’t done properly, or sensitively, it could hobble the strategy. Wiktorowicz said he is familiar with the concern.

Training has become a bugaboo in the wake of revelations about FBI counterterrorism training practices. The first inkling that something was amiss came in March. That’s when NPR reported on the cottage industry of independent counterterrorism trainers who signed up to teach local and federal law enforcement officials about terrorism. The report found that the instructors were not being properly vetted and some were presenting skewed views about Muslim-Americans and their potential links to terrorism. Follow-up reports showed how Islamophobia had crept into both federal and local law enforcement training.

Wiktorowicz said the new strategy addresses those issues. A complete training review and specific training standards are expected to be in place by spring. The Department of Homeland Security will review the training and evaluate experts to weed out any lurking anti-Muslim bias. The idea is to inject some quality control into the training process. Wiktorowicz said the new program will focus on behavior, not religion or appearances.

“There are potential behavioral signals,” he said. “For example, has someone in the community seen them watching violent extremist videos? Are they publicly coming out in defense of Osama bin Laden? Are they talking about the kuffar [unbelievers]? That’s not enough alone, but if that is in a combination of other things, that’s what we are looking for.”

Public Safety

The new White House strategy is attempting to broaden the government’s engagement with local communities across the board. If it works, the idea is to broaden the context of local discussions so they aren’t just about terrorism; they are about something bigger.

“We see what we’re doing as a public safety issue,” Wiktorowicz said. “If a community was being targeted by gangs, the government would have some responsibility to help them. The same applies to a community that might be targeted with violent extremism; we have the same responsibility to help them. All parents are concerned about these kinds of issues, not just Muslim parents.”

WHO Exactly IS Obama Protecting?

By Craig Andresen
THIS makes me SICK. Sick to my stomach. This may well be the sickest thing I have heard in a long, long time. It’s DISGUSTING and exactly what I should expect from this administration.

I was tipped off to this today by a tweet from Congressman Allen West who has just been named as a member of the National Defense Authorization Act Conference.

“This declaration by Obama is a slap in the face to Fort Hood victims. America has no Commander in Chief!”

Congressman could not be more correct but, I will go farther in my assessment.

What has me so riled up, and Congressman West likewise, is a statement from the Defense Department.

Obama and his Defense Department have declared that the Fort Hood shooting was…

WORKPLACE VIOLENCE!!!

All of this blather from liberals…Obama’s not a Muslim…Not siding with Muslims and so on…
STUFF IT WHERE THE SUN DON’T SHINE!!!

Workplace violence my keester!

Two years ago, on November 5th 2009, Major Nidal Malik Hasan shot and killed13 people and wounded 29 more at Fort Hood Texas. As he started his rampage, he was yelling, “Allah Akbar!!”

Hasan is a MUSLIM.

Hasan, according to a witness, walked into the Soldier Readiness Processing Center at Fort Hood and sat at an empty table where he bowed his head for a few minutes before suddenly standing, yelling “Allah Akbar!” and opened fire!

Here is a list of those killed that day.

Michael Grant Cahill 62 Spokane, Washington Civilian Physician Assistant.

Libardo Eduardo Caraveo 52 Woodbridge, Virginia Major

Justin Michael DeCrow 32 Plymouth, Indiana Staff Sergeant

John P. Gaffaney 56 Serra Mesa, California Captain

Frederick Greene 29 Mountain City, Tennessee Specialist

Jason Dean Hunt 22 Tipton, Oklahoma Specialist Amy

Sue Krueger 29 Kiel, Wisconsin Staff Sergeant

Aaron Thomas Nemelka 19 West Jordan, Utah Private First Class

Michael S. Pearson 22 Bolingbrook, Illinois Private First Class

Russell Gilbert Seager 51 Racine, Wisconsin Captain

Francheska Velez 21 Chicago, Illinois Private First Class

Juanita L. Warman 55 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Lieutenant Colonel

Kham See Xiong 23 Saint Paul, Minnesota Private First Class

Killed by workplace violence?

This TERRORIST, Hasan, went to the same mosque, at the same time, as two of the 9-11 hijackers!

This TERRORIST, Hasan, had a computer full of visits to radical Islamist websites!!

This TERRORIST, Hasan, while speaking at a medical seminar, went off topic and talked about Islam and how non believers would be sent to hell, decapitated, set on fire, and have burning oil poured down their throats.!!!

This TERRORIST, Hasan, has at times, expressed his admiration for Anwar al Awlaki!!!!

THIS TERRORIST, Hasan, ON THE VERY DAY OF THE SHOOTING…HANDED OUT COPIES OF THE KORAN WITH BUSINESS CARDS STATING… “Behavioral Heatlh – Mental Health – Life Skills | Nidal Hasan, MD, MPH | SoA(SWT) | Psychiatrist”!!!!!!

And now, Obama and his administration is classifying what the TERRORIST HASAN did as…

WORKPLACE VIOLENCE???????http://www.thenationalpatriot.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/hood-3.jpg

Hasan IS a TERRORIST and what he perpetrated was an ACT of TERRORISM. To call it anything less is not just a slap in the face to the victims and families who lost loved ones that day, it’s a slap in the face to ALL Americans.
Hasan IS a TERRORIST and what he perpetrated was an ACT of TERRORISM. To call it anything less is not just a slap in the face to the victims and families who lost loved ones that day, it’s a slap in the face to ALL Americans.
Obama and this administration has been systematically making the world a safer place for terrorists and elevating them to positions of government everywhere a vacuum can be created.

Libya and Egypt are PRIME examples of that.

Iran continues to build a nuclear weapons program. Obama told Israel to return to their pre 1967 borders. All mentions of radical Islam, as though there is any other sort, have been REMOVED from Defense Department reports. Obama has broadcast our departure dates for Iraq and Afghanistan to our, and their enemies.

Yes, bin Laden is dead and so is Gadaffi but he made sure bin Laden got a proper Muslim funeral and the flag of al Qaeda now flies over the court house in Benghazi!!!

Obama props up Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood while he scolds Israel for building apartments in east Jerusalem.

And now he calls the Fort Hood shootings, carried out by a TERRORIST…workplace violence.

Were the 13 people listed above at their place of work?http://www.thenationalpatriot.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/hood-4.jpg

Yes.
They were working to protect our nation and We the People from our enemies and those enemies include terrorists.

Hell, Obama can’t even call terrorism terrorism…He calls it “Man Made Disasters.”

It was Obama’s homeland Security Department which said of returning veterans and right wing groups like the Tea Party that fears of possible new restrictions on firearms, as well as troubled veterans returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violence attacks.”

Obama’s Vice President called the Tea Party Terrorists just a few months ago and Obama said NOTHING about it.

But…Call a TERRORIST a TERRORIST???

Oh HELL NO.

Hasan committed an act of workplace violence.
Hasan committed an act of workplace violence.

This Obama administration made it so against political correctness that those who saw bright red flags waving all over the place regarding the TERRORIST Hasan wouldn’t even report what they saw for fear of being labeled “Racist” or “Islamophobic!!!”

For those who refuse to believe Obama leans toward the side of Islam…Just WHO exactly is he protecting by declaring the Fort Hood Shootings an act of workplace violence?

WHO?

Labeling this terrorist act as workplace violence is despicable, disgusting, lacking in any credibility whatsoever, disturbing, abhorrent and flies in the face of reality.

As for Obama and this administration of his…SEE THE ABOVE!!!

Bilderberg conference 2011: agenda overview

by NEWWORLDORDER on JUNE 12, 2011

 

According several inside sources, the Bilderberg 2011 agenda included a number of critical issues at the top of the elite’s to-do list.

These breakdown as follows:

Arab Spring:

The elite are concerned that the American Congress may soon turn against the illegal and immoral invasion under humanitarian cover by NATO and the UN against the north African dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

Congress is rising in opposition to bogus wars launched by the executive branch in violation of the Constitution. More than a third of House Republicans voted to pull out of the NATO coalition attacking Gaddafi’s forces, in essence forcing a NATO withdrawal from the color revolution engineered civil war in that country.

The elite behind closed doors in Switzerland are pushing for a wider war and incalculable suffering in the Middle East. The money masters have long profited from war and mass murder: Nathan Rothschild made a financial bet on Napoleon at the Battle of Waterloo  while also funding the Duke of Wellington’s peninsular campaign against Napoleon. The House of Rothschild financed the Prussian War, the Crimean War and the British attempt to seize the Suez Canal from the Frenchand also financed the Mexican War and the Civil War in the U.S.

Internet Censorship:

In addition to worrying about Congress waking up to the Libyan scam, the global elite is also concerned about a diverse liberty movement that has grown exponentially with the help of an open and free internet. In response, the pocketed pawns in Congress have introduced a raft of bills over the last few months designed to take down the internet and blunt its impact as a medium for alternative news and information.

On the international front, the European Commission gave a nod toward implementing the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), a draconian measure that will subvert national sovereignty, trash Net Neutrality, consumer privacy, and civil liberties. In the United States, the corporate media has virtually ignored ACTA, but then key players in the Mockingbird media are often Bilderberg attendees and privy to aspects of the agenda.

The above represent a small sampling of legislation and treaties that will be used to shut down the opposition under the cover of protecting copyright and preventing terrorism.

The globalists are not opposed to the internet, especially as a corporatized money-making instrument. They are, however, opposed to an open, free, and unregulated by government internet where alternative media opposed to their globalist devices are allowed to thrive. In addition, we can expect minions of the global elite who parade around as our elected representatives and appointed government officials to continue their propaganda efforts to convince the people that the internet will be used as a terrorist weapon of mass destruction and as such needs to be tightly regulated – for our own safety, of course, and that of the children.

Prolonging the economic crisis:

Finally, the Bilderbergers will work on an effort to continue into further fantastic debt producing bankster bailouts, specifically for Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and other member EU nations sliding toward bankruptcy and social disruption on a monumental scale.

Oil prices will skyrocket – a faith accomplished with gas prices at the pump now at historically high levels – as the global elite work behind the scenes to take take down national economies. New revelations also deal with the death of the dollar, exploding energy prices, and the engineered onset of order out of chaos revolution worldwide.

Because the plan is to take down national sovereignty, impose drastic austerity measures, hold fire sales on national assets, consolidate wealth and power, and use an endless economic crisis as an excuse to usher in world government, a one-world currency, and a sprawling high-tech police state.

New head of the IMF decision:

It was reported that the new IMF head would be decided at the Bilderberg meeting. A prominent attendee to the elitist gathering has been entered into the race to become the IMF head at the eleventh hour.

Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer, an insider favorite of Bilderberg and multiple time attendee, announced his intention to bid to become the replacement managing director of the IMF, taking the position previously held by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, himself a former Bilderberg attendee. Fischer is also a member of The Council on Foreign Relations and The Trilateral Commission.

Strauss-Kahn stepped down from the position after it was alleged he attempted to rape a hotel maid. Some believe Strauss-Kahn was set-up in order to remove him from the IMF.

A three way race is now in place between Fischer, Mexican central banker Agustín Carstens and French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde.

Both Carstens and Lagarde have embarked on tours to promote their bids and will be joined now by Stanley Fischer.

Over-population:

Jim Tucker’s anonymous steering level Bilderberg inside source told him war in the Middle East is at the top of the elite’s agenda.

The long time Bilderberg sleuth said the elite believe the world is over-populated and war represents a partial solution.

“They are unified on their war project,” said Tucker, citing his Trilateralist-Bilderberg source, “their rationalize the world is too crowded anyway, they have to limit the population growth, the one way to do it is with wars. They have been emphasizing that all day.”

Bilderberg Conference awareness and coverage:

Picture

Tucker also said the elite are outraged by the patriot movement and the alternative media’s coverage of the Bilderberg meetings and the release of information by moles and insiders. He said the elite attempted to get media magnate Rupert Murdoch to convince The Guardian in the United Kingdom and the Irish Times to scale back their reportage on the Bilderbergers, but he was unable to do so.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GehoGXyS6R0&feature=player_embedded#![/youtube]

Tucker’s sources also said the Bilderbergers are stunned about the presence of demonstrators and alternative media.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1tLFuI58_g&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

Economic crisis has proved a boon to the sovereign-citizen movement

By MICHAEL BRAGA – www.hearldtribune.com

Paper terrorism.

That is what the FBI believes sovereign citizens like Jacob-Franz Dyck are committing when they file lengthy lawsuits loaded with non sequiturs and so-called wild deeds backed by supposedly all-powerful land patents on behalf of people facing foreclosure.

But the proclivity of members of this anti-government organization to burden the courts with paperwork is not the only thing law enforcement officials are worried about.

“These people just don’t respect the badge,” said Stephen Emmett, a spokesman for the FBI in Atlanta. “There is a potential for violence in them that stems from their extreme philosophy.”

Terry Nichols, who assisted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, was a sovereign citizen. So was Joe Stack, who flew his small plane into the Internal Revenue Service building in Austin, Texas, during February 2010.

Jared Loughner, who allegedly shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and 18 others earlier this year in a Tuscon, Ariz., shopping plaza, also is said to be a member.

So are Jerry Kane and his 16-year-old son, Joe, who gunned down two Arkansas policemen after being stopped and questioned about their license plate in West Memphis during May 2010. In that case, police videos show the police trying to decipher the drivers license they were handed when Kane’s son pulled out an AK-47 and riddled them with bullets.

Born of an anti-tax current in the 1970s, the sovereign-citizen movement now claims as many as 300,000 members across the U.S. and Canada, the Southern Poverty Law Center reports.

Their core beliefs are that the U.S. government sold its people into servitude by becoming a corporation in 1868 and abandoning the gold standard in 1933. Since then, the U.S. government has mortgaged the future of Americans by falling deeply into debt to foreigners.

But it is possible to reclaim one’s freedom by acknowledging that each individual became a sovereign after overthrowing the tyranny of King George III in 1776, the movement’s participants maintain.

After that momentous event, the story goes, the American people established no higher power than the sovereign citizen himself and no higher authority than the One Supreme Court, which was established to rule on matters of dispute.

Both state courts and federal courts are considered inferior, and sovereign citizens have filed suits charging state and federal judges with fraud and treason for failing to adhere to the dictates of their higher court.

“The whole belief system revolves around a bunch of pseudo-legal theories that basically allow them to do anything they want,” said Mark Pitcavage, director of fact finding for the Anti Defamation League in Columbus, Ohio, and the creator of the Militia Watchdog Archives.

Drivers licenses, Social Security cards, licence plates and other forms of government-sponsored identification are not considered valid by members of the movement.

While they do not respect the U.S. judicial system, sovereign citizens have found the courts to be the best venue for waging their protests. By filing copious lawsuits against government officials and banks that invariably include a string of biblical references and arcane laws, they can broadcast their beliefs and opposition.

News reports from around the country show these suits usually follow foreclosures or other government actions.

In Ulster County, N.Y., residents Ed-George Parenteau and Jeffrey Charles Burfeindt filed suits against area municipalities and prominent individuals claiming $135 billion in damages after being ousted from a foreclosed house they were illegally occupying in March 2009.

Though the suits were eventually dismissed and Parenteau was jailed, the liens they filed against their adversaries caused credit problems that took months to clear. In Jefferson County, Ala., Donald Joe Barber and his son, Donald Jason Barber, bombarded local government officials with lawsuits and liens after being sued for not paying sewer impact fees, ultimately prompting the government to arrest the two men.

More recently, sovereign citizens have been filing wild deeds on properties in an effort to help members defend themselves against foreclosure or to get properties back that were already seized by banks.

In the Atlanta area, sovereign citizens have gone further, using wild deeds to help squatters occupy dozens of vacant homes.

“They file the deeds and then go to vacant homes and put the deeds in the window,” said Emmett, the FBI spokesman. “Then when law enforcement responds to a trespassing complaint, they see the deeds in the window and treat them as a civil matter instead of a criminal matter.”

Though squatting has not taken off among sovereign citizens in Florida, at least one title agency claims that members of the movement are trying to use wild deeds to blackmail banks into paying money in order to get clear title to properties without having to go to court.

A sovereign citizen pays 70 cents to file a certificate of title and then waits for someone from a title company trying to close a sale on the same property to send him a letter requesting he sign a quit claim deed to clear the title, said David Heine of Orlando’s PCS Title in a missive sent to clients around the state.

“He agrees, however, it will cost the selling bank $1,500 to $2,000 even though he has no legal right to the property,” Heine said. “Here is where ‘we’ facilitate the scam. Rather than lose the sale of a foreclosed property the bank agrees to pay the money as it is much less costly to pay him to go away than pay to straighten this out through legal means.”

Lawyers say the filing of such deeds is legal, but banks can sue for slander of title.

“Slander of title suits are civil actions in which perpetrators can be liable for damages,” said Lee Husagh, the former president of the Florida Land Title Association. “But most of these screwballs don’t have any money to begin with. So judgments often end up being worthless.”

For more information go to www.hearldtribune.com

Pres Barack Obama Embraces 'Transnational' Law

The Wall Street Journal   MARCH 23, 2011  By DOUGLAS J. FEITH

The Senate never approved Protocol 1 of the Geneva Convention.

This month, President Barack Obama declared he has a “legal obligation” to treat wartime detainees according to provisions of a treaty that the United States has never ratified. The maneuver raises a basic question: Who makes law for Americans?

The standard answer, drawing on the Constitution, is Congress. One of American democracy’s quaint conceits, after all, is that laws should be made by the people American voters have elected.

But that old-school answer doesn’t satisfy those in the progressive “transnational legal norms” movement. Frustrated that elected officials often refuse to enact the measures they favor, these reformers aim to persuade judges that progressive ideas on war crimes, arms control, the death penalty and other matters should be accepted as rights. They encourage judges to ground these rights not in local statutes produced by legislators, but in treaties, laws and court decisions of other countries, in academic writing, and in customary international law.

This legal movement, potent in Europe, has had less success in this country, where citizens fervently safeguard democratic accountability and national sovereignty. But Mr. Obama has brought some eminent transnational law supporters into his administration, including the chief lawyer at the State Department, Harold Koh. And the president’s announcement about the proper way to treat wartime detainees is a precedent-setting endorsement of transnational legal theory.

The move hasn’t gone unnoticed. Sen. Jon Kyl (R., Ariz.) has already criticized the announcement, and more opposition can be expected from senators protective of their advice-and-consent authority on treaties.

The treaty Mr. Obama cited is Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions on the laws of war. Drafted in the mid-1970s, the Carter administration signed Protocol 1, but President Ronald Reagan, after years of interagency review, concluded that it is “fundamentally and irreconcilably flawed,” because it contains provisions that would “undermine humanitarian law and endanger civilians in war.”

Reagan noted that one of its provisions would undo the traditional distinction between international and non-international conflicts. Another would grant prisoner-of-war status and other privileges to irregular forces—even if they fight in civilian garb and violate the laws of war by using terrorism.

In opposing Protocol 1, Reagan was accepting the unanimous recommendation of his top military and civilian advisers, and no later president reversed Reagan’s decision. The Senate has never approved ratification of Protocol 1, so it never became U.S. law.

Yet Mr. Obama declared that America has a “legal obligation” to adhere to a portion of Protocol 1: Article 75, which establishes standards for detainee treatment. While acknowledging that the U.S. government still has “significant concerns” about Protocol 1, the president says he accepts Article 75 as consistent with current American practice. His key conclusion: “The U.S. Government will therefore choose out of a sense of legal obligation to treat the principles set forth in Article 75 as applicable to any individual it detains in an international armed conflict, and expects all other nations to adhere to these principles as well.”

What makes this statement so controversial is not the substance of Article 75 (the protection it gives detainees has bipartisan support). Rather, it is the fact that the president is embracing a treaty provision never approved by the Senate.

The administration’s language carefully tracked the formula by which the practice of nations can win acceptance as customary international law. Such law is based on the idea that some practices—like the ancient rule against killing diplomats—have been adhered to nearly universally for so long as legal obligations that they have achieved the status of law throughout the world. Since the beginning of the American republic, presidents and judges have accepted certain practices as customary international law deserving of respect by U.S. officials and courts. But the standards for qualifying have to be extremely high, for obvious reasons. The lifetime of Protocol 1—a few decades—doesn’t qualify as a long time.

If Article 75 is accepted as customary international law, then how could Mr. Obama deny that the rest of Protocol 1 also qualifies? And what of all other treaties with a long list of parties? If a large number of countries, simply by joining a treaty, can convert it promptly into customary law, then America loses its right to opt out.

In the coming months, the Senate will have the opportunity to declare that Protocol 1 is not, in whole or in part, a U.S. legal obligation. It can shore up American sovereignty by making that point.

Mr. Obama has the constitutional authority to make his own detainee policy. And, if he wants to, he can issue a regulation or an executive order using principles from Article 75. But the Constitution does not empower him to recognize as a legal obligation a part of a treaty that the Senate has never approved.

Mr. Feith, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, served as under secretary of defense from 2001 to 2005. He is the author of “War and Decision: Inside the Pentagon at the Dawn of the War on Terrorism” (Harper, 2008).

UK PRIME MINISTER BLAMES MULTICULTURALISM FOR ISLAMIC EXTREMISM

EUROPE NEEDS TO WAKE UP

Posted on February 5, 2011 at 1:07pm by  Scott Baker

Europe must stamp out intolerance of Western values within its own Muslim communities and far-right groups if it is to defeat the roots of terrorism, British Prime Minister David Cameron said Saturday.
Cameron told the annual Munich Security Conference that European governments have been too tolerant of some sectors of society that publicly oppose democracy or reject equal rights for all.
He said Britain had found that many convicted terrorists had initially been influenced by so-called “nonviolent extremists” – people who aren’t involved in encouraging plots, but denounce Western politics and culture – before going on to carry out violence.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p48F7W3sS0&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

“We won’t defeat terrorism simply by the actions we take outside our borders. Europe needs to wake up to what is happening in our own countries,” Cameron told the conference.
Both Britain and Germany have had noisy domestic debates about the impact of immigration, and the difficulties of integrating some religious communities, or those who struggle with the language of their new home.
In an attack on Britain’s previous government, Cameron said authorities there had been too hesitant to intervene when some sectors of society espoused abhorrent views.
“We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values,” Cameron said. “We have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream.”
Cameron said a culture of tolerance had allowed both Islamic extremists, and far-right extremists, to build support for their causes. “We’ve been too cautious, frankly even fearful, to stand up to them,” he said.
Some European allies have criticized Britain for harboring hardline Islamic clerics and failing to clamp down on mosques that promote a perverted view of Islam.
Several terrorists involved in attacks or attempted plots in the U.S., Sweden, Denmark and Norway over the last two years have had links to Britain, or British-based clerics.
“If we are to defeat this threat, I believe it’s time to turn the page on the failed policies of the past,” Cameron said. “Instead of ignoring this extremist ideology, we – as governments and societies – have got to confront it, in all its forms.”
He told the conference that developments in the Middle East should be harnessed to disprove Muslims who claim their religion cannot be observed properly within the democratic system.
“If they want an example of how Western values and Islam can be entirely compatible, they should look at what’s happened in the past few weeks on the streets of Tunis and Cairo,” Cameron said.
Mohammed Shafiq, of the Ramadhan Foundation – a British Muslim youth group – said in a statement following the speech that Cameron has risked angering Muslims by suggesting there was widespread intolerance within the religion.
“Singling out Muslims as he has done feeds the hysteria and paranoia about Islam and Muslims,” Shafiq said. “British Muslims abhor terrorism and extremism and we have worked hard to eradicate this evil from our country.”
The British leader’s comments follow tensions across Europe since November of possible new terrorist attacks. Officials said last year that a sleeper cell of some 20 to 25 people may have been planning an attack inside Germany or another European nation.
Nine men were charged last month in Britain over an alleged plan to attack Parliament and the U.S. Embassy in London.
Last week, the U.S. State Department warned of an ongoing high threat-level in Britain, and told tourists of a specific risk to transit networks and airports.

A Seuss-like Ode to Jihad Jane, American Terrorist

I do not like you Jihad Jane.
I do not like you; not at all.
I do not like you on a train.
I do not like your Jihad call.

I do not like you on a plane.
I do not like you a little bit.
I do not like you in the rain.
I do not like your murderous snit.

And I will not like you ever again.
I hope you go to federal jail,
There to feed on ham and gin,
So you will go to infidel hell.

Big Sis Makes Global Warming a Homeland Security Priority

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

There she goes again. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano just can’t speak in public without destroying any remaining confidence Americans have left in her agency. CNS News reports that at a conference devoted to “environmental justice”, Secretary Napolitano announced that the Department of Homeland Security would be creating the “Climate Change and Adaptation Task Force” to mitigate the affects of global warming on security and response operations. No…really.

According to CNS, Napolitano said the task force would examine: 1) “How will FEMA work with state and local partners to plan for increased flooding or wildfire or hurricane activity that is more serious than we’ve seen before?” 2) “What assistance can the Coast Guard bring to bear to assist remote villages in, for example, Alaska which already have been negatively affected by changes up in the Arctic?” 3) “How can we focus on how climate change is going to affect our rural citizenry including those who live along our boarders both northern and southern?”, and 4) how will the Coast Guard or border services react to rising water levels.

We were first warned of these coming priorities in the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, released in February, which was intended to be a strategic outline for the department but instead discussed global warming, while barely mentioning the U.S. Coast Guard. Of course, these new priorities don’t mean better resources for the Coast Guard or anyone at the department. The distracting initiative is merely a stunt aimed at President Obama’s leftist base.

If it worries you that the department created in 2002 has not only lost considerable focus on securing our nation, but become an outpost for misguided political musings, you are not alone. Secretary Napolitano has time and time again proven that she fails to understand the immediate threats facing Americans and will waste breath and resources on liberal dogma rather than warning our enemies of our continued vigilance, and demonstrating it to them.

In April 2009, Napolitano’s department issued a report that warned of “right wing extremism” praying on returning veterans joining and planning harm against the nation they just finished serving. At the time, American Legion National Commander David Rehbein didn’t demand an apology, but instead correctly assessed the problem: “Trying to monitor a group of several million veterans is frankly going to cost them a lot of time and resources, they don’t have, that they could better spend monitoring already identified groups.” Exactly.

The current leadership at DHS spends so much time placating politically-correct leftists, they are guaranteed to not be using every available minute and resource afforded to them to prevent terrorism, respond to disasters and protect us from obvious Islamist plots.

But let’s pretend that global warming does indeed pose an imminent national security threat, do the goals of this “task force” even make sense? No.

First, it’s built on the faulty premise that we are facing increased hurricane activity, flooding and wildfires due to global warming. Casual or not, the numbers simply don’t add up. In fact, we’ve had two consecutive hurricane seasons that were historically quiet. But again, pretending the premise is correct, wouldn’t the department be prepared for a greater-than-average number of response activities simply based on resource potential rather than adding some political cause to it all?

This alone proves that the intent of the “task force” is to make a silly political statement; otherwise Secretary Napolitano currently has her department vastly unprepared for no valid reason.

Secondly, the Coast Guard can already offer the specific assistance to Americans with which it is mandated. If our neighbors in the Arctic region are experiencing any of the issues that liberals attach to global warming — i.e. land loss, water-levels rising, extreme temperatures — what exactly would be the Coast Guard’s new mission? They perform rescue operations, but surely Napolitano doesn’t expect water levels to rise so fast that Alaskans can’t slowly back away?

An already stretched-too-thin Coast Guard should, again, always be planning for a greater-than-average number of events, but not adding to which events they respond to based on political whim. As for their infrastructure, Coast Guard headquarters are hopefully prepared for most coastal weather activity regardless of cause, and their vessels hopefully remain floating on water, despite its rise.

President Obama has also reallocated considerable resources at NASA, from its original mission of human exploration to global warming research. And other agencies like the Departments of Energy, Commerce and the EPA are also diverting considerable taxpayer dollars to fight global warming and increase economic burdens on our country while ignoring other urgent and pressing priorities. But the misplaced focus of DHS is particularly worrisome given its critical mandate.

Secretary Napolitano dismissed the Times Square bomber as a “one-off”, which of course turned out to be false as we learned of his connection to Islamist terror networks. Napolitano also said the “system worked” after the Christmas Day attack, when we later learned the system was lucky and again, we had an attacker tied to a large Islamist network.

While belittling the Islamist threat against America, Napolitano increased intrusive security measures across the nation and then acted with shock when the public noticed the illogical disconnection. Simply put, Napolitano has said nothing to make Americans feel safer, and far too often, does the exact opposite.

DHS is currently spending considerable time assigning politically convenient causes to potential events rather than operating on known threats. It’s time for Secretary Napolitano to start demonstrating she has some basic understanding of the mission of her department, and that she is carrying out in a competent way, before Americans aren’t the only ones who recognize her misplaced priorities.

SEO Powered By SEOPressor