Monday, September 26, 2011

Obama’s Conspiracy to Disarm America

Hopefully this could just be Obama’s undoing. Obama’s conspiracy to violate international gun trafficking laws has led to the death of hundreds, maybe thousands, of innocent Mexicans as well as Americans.

By de Andréa

Obama’s top secret mission, named Operation Fast and Furious was led to its exposure by the unplanned murder of Brian Terry, a U.S. Border agent. The law states that if someone dies in the commission of a crime then all involved are guilty of murder. So what is Obama’s top secret mission “Operation Fast and Furious”? Well read on my friend…

For those who might not be up on all the details of the ever-ballooning Obama “Fast and Furious” scandal, a short primer may be in order, you will find a link to the full story below.

The government-sanctioned gun running conspiracy operated for two years, beginning in 2009, out of the BATFE office in Phoenix, Ariz.—though evidence is mounting that similar scams were also run in other locations, such as Houston, Texas.

Under “Fast and Furious,” BATFE street agents were instructed to stand down as felony violations of federal firearm and smuggling laws—punishable by decades in federal prison—were committed. When conscientious, federally licensed dealers reported illegal straw sales involving large numbers of guns, they were told by agency officials to allow the felonious sales to be completed on the spot and to look the other way in the future

Agency superiors thus forced field agents to passively observe the “walking” of as many as 2,500 illegally acquired firearms beyond agency control into the cave-darkness of criminal commerce—in Mexico.

The cover story was, to trace those guns to drug “kingpins” across the border.
According to William Newell, the man in charge of the Phoenix operation, “The goal of the opperation and investigation was to disrupt and dismantle an entire firearm trafficking network in Mexico.”

The question begging to be asked is how could that even be remotely feasible when neither Mexican law enforcement at any level, nor BATFE representatives stationed as guests of the Mexican government, were even made aware of the operation? It was top secret.

In truth is, the scheme originated as a means to “trace” guns back to U.S. retailers from Mexican crime scenes in order to prove the Obama administration and media big lie—that 90 percent of the firearms used in Mexico’s narco-anarchy come from federally licensed U.S. gun dealers. The purpose of that entire campaign was to glean power and money for BATFE—power in the form of more gun laws and more bureaucratic restrictions on the rights of law-abiding private citizens. Ban semi-autos. Shut down gun shows and gun registration. In other words carry out Obama’s agenda of disarming America.

The logic of the BATFE/Justice Department agitprop goes this way—this is what we are all supposed to believe: Mexican society is terrorized by narco-anarchy, with over 35,000 unarmed citizens murdered during the past four years. For the law-abiding, Mexico has the most restrictive gun laws in the hemisphere. Therefore, American freedom and the rights of our citizens must be equally restricted, since our guns can be illegally acquired and smuggled to that terrorized nation.

Proving that insanity is what “Fast and Furious” is really all about.
Some in the media have called “Fast and Furious” a “plan gone horribly wrong.” Led by President Barack Obama’s blithe admission that there were “mistakes made,” the administration is saying, “Nothing to see here folks, let’s move on.”

This was not a mistake. Illegally moving guns to Mexico was not a mistake. The intended purpose “Fast and Furious,” when you get down to it, is a criminal conspiracy on the part of BATFE leadership and officials in the U.S. Department of Justice and the Obama administration. It was a conspiracy hatched for Obama’s anti-gun propaganda purposes. The deaths and bloodletting in Mexico were the natural results of a government conspiracy gone completely wrong.

For the planners of “Fast and Furious,” the free big-media ride ended a few days before Christmas 2010 in a lonely canyon in Arizona near the Mexican border, where Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in the wee-hours armed with a beanbag gun versus 7.62×39 mm firefight—was easily gunned down. Two of the semi-automatics at the scene were the product of Obama’s “Operation Fast and Furious.”

The death of Terry, a family man and veteran, changed everything.
Were it not for Terry’s death, the operation doubtless would have continued unabated, with U.S. gun-control forces ghoulishly pointing to the ever-mounting body count south of the border to further their agenda of disarming America.

For the full story including transcripts of a congressional hearing click here! You have a right to know…

de Andréa.

Obama’s Operation Fast and Furious

The full story and cover-up

President Barack Obama and his cronies at the Department of Justice are now circling the wagons in a full-blown cover-up through the promotion of hostile witnesses as investigators within BATFE.

By de Andréa
September 25, 2011

As the sordid details of “Operation Fast and Furious” unfold, the Obama/BATFE/Justice Department conspiracy of arming violent narco-terrorists in Mexico, continues to be unveiled, Obama’s response was to promote a central facilitator of the scandalous conspiracy to the rogue agency’s central internal affairs division. The fox will investigate why there are so many dead chickens in the hen house. Or in this case so many dead people. The congressional investigation involves the question of “what did he know and when did he know it” of members in the highest echelon of the Justice Department and the BATFE as well as the President himself.

The lengthy story below includes transcript testimony in a congressional investigation. I truly hope this doesn’t just go away…

The promotion of William McMahon (the fox) to the agency’s Office of Professional Responsibility and Security Operations is seen as a warning—actually, a threat—to agency whistle blowers.

So…just what is, or what was “Operation Fast and Furious.” Obama, like Hitler in Europe, has a, not so secret, agenda of disarming America. Once that has been accomplished there is very little the American citizen can do to preserve his freedom against Obama’s Communist Muslim agenda of social oppression and dictatorship.

A little more than a year ago president Felipe Calderón of Mexico accused U.S. gun owners of supplying guns to the Mexican drug cartel. It gave the Obama administration and the anti-gun activists in the U.S. the ammunition; so to speak, that they needed to promote gun bans in the U.S. that is until it was proven that the guns were not coming from the U.S. but instead from the Eastern Block Nations of Europe. Disappointed in the loss of the needed momentum, Obama pressured attorney General Erik Holder of the DOJ to enlist the help of the BATFE to reverse this bit of bad luck, and regain the upper hand in the war against the Second Amendment right of Americans to keep and bear arms.

Subsequently the BATFE coerced gun dealers in the Border States to illegally and secretly sell guns to the Mexican drug lords, thereby recreating the fiction of American guns killing hundreds of innocent Mexican people. Only this time it was real and these BATFE guns not only killed Mexicans but Americans as well. The whole sordid operation may have been successful if it hadn’t been for one little problem, Patrol Agent Brian Terry was shot and killed in December 2010 with one of Obama’s guns. The *^~&# had hit the fan so to speak and the cover-up began. The cover up may have also been successful if it was for the courageous efforts of conscientious individual BATFE agents who stepped forward to expose what is proving to be a Justice Department criminal conspiracy as high as the White House. That conspiracy was to passively watch continual violations of federal firearm statutes, international anti-smuggling laws, and violation of Mexican sovereignty, not to mention the ugly trail of dead.

As the deputy assistant director for BATFE’s Western Region, McMahon supervised Special Agent in Charge William Newell, who ran “Operation Fast and Furious.” McMahon told Congress he was in daily contact with Newell over the scheme that allowed thousands of guns to be “walked” into Mexican criminal commerce—a scheme held secret from both Mexican authorities and U.S. officials in Mexico, including most BATFE operatives.

Among the most cogent red flags over the McMahon move was a posting on the BATFE dissident-insider website, “The promotion itself was a message that DOJ intends to charge full speed ahead on its defense-slash-deflection of ‘Gunwalker.’ But it’s also the sound of a shotgun chambering a round for street agents … telling their agents to be very careful what they say, and to whom.”

Part of the cover up is the agency’s Office of Professional Responsibility and Security Operations. According to the 2005 BATFE annual report announcing the then-newly reorganized internal affairs apparatus, OPRSO (ironically pronounced “oppresso”) “determines adherence to ATF and DOJ organizational policies, regulations and procedures.”

Under the heading “Integrity,” the report declares that, “OPRSO conducts employee misconduct and integrity investigations, either criminal or administrative. It speaks of an early warning detection system to … strengthen adherence to organization policies and procedures.

But what if those BATFE “policies and procedures” are politically and criminally corrupt and motivated? What if those “policies and procedures” are in violation of U.S. law and foreign sovereignty, as was the case of “Fast and Furious”? Those are the questions now pursued by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and his House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.

Coupled with President Barack Obama’s failure to acknowledge congressional oversight of the BATFE scandal and his insistence that an internal investigation will suffice, McMahon’s appointment gives more than the appearance that any internal look at misconduct will be a whitewash. McMahon’s capacity for forthrightness can only be measured by his recent public performance before Congress.

McMahon’s transfer as internal ethics watchdog came just days following his July 26, 2011 appearance—as a forgetful, foggy, petulant, recalcitrant, cranky witness and self-proclaimed inattentive supervisor—before Rep. Issa’s hot-on-the-trail inquiry into the two-year-long “gun-walking” operation. McMahon gave the committee the impression that, as the Western District supervisor, had slept through the whole scandal and simply wasn’t paying attention. Aw shucks!

Newell’s and McMahon’s passive aggressive non-cooperation with the committee was counter pointed by the dramatic testimony of BATFE supervisors and field agents, including officers serving in Mexico who had been locked out of any knowledge of “Fast and Furious.” These men spoke with revulsion as to the very concept of allowing guns to “walk”—where by law-enforcement supervisors ordered that contraband arms be allowed to slip into criminal commerce out of any possible control. Well of course this was the whole idea, to prove out of control guns.

And it has been clear from the outset of the Issa and Grassley investigations that there is absolutely no doubt guns were “walked.” That truth was the centerpiece of Chairman Issa’s first congressional hearing June 15.

During the second House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing, the practice was proven a certainty. Jose Wall, the current BATFE senior special agent serving in Tijuana, Mexico, told the committee: "I could not believe that someone in ATF would so callously let firearms wind up in the hands of criminals. But it appears that I was wrong, and that hundreds and quite possibly thousands of guns have been allowed to reach the hands of organized crime in Mexico. … These firearms are now in the hands of people who have no regard for human life, pose a threat to all of us, a threat to which none of us is immune.”

His sentiments were echoed by another agent also serving in Mexico, Carlos Canino, a 23-year agency veteran and acting BATFE attaché to the Mexican government. “Never, never in my wildest dreams would I think that ATF agents were ordered or participated in actually following known gun traffickers and just walking away,” Canino said. “That is to me inconceivable. And to this day I’m still trying to get my head around this.” He said the supervisors “went to the shredder and shredded the best practices, all the techniques that you use to investigate a gun trafficking case. As to fault”, Canino said, “In my professional opinion, this investigative strategy was flawed. It was allowed to continue due to ineffective oversight in the Phoenix field division, and possibly beyond.”

In fact, the two individuals holding the buck on all of those scores—egregiously bad management, judgment, leadership and oversight—were sitting at the far end of the same witness table: William Newell and William McMahon. McMahon and Newell, reluctant star witnesses before this second hearing on the BATFE scandal, hardly ever answered straight questions with straight answers. At one point, an angry Issa called Newell a “paid non answerer,” and in another exchange, U.S. Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., chairman emeritus of the committee, warned Newell that he was testifying under oath, implying his evasiveness might be skirting perjury. Newell’s actions during the hearings exuded a comfortable contempt for the committee’s investigation.

Further, after listening to and reading testimony from BATFE witnesses in this and earlier hearings, Newell and McMahon dug in on the central issue of “gun walking.” According to them, it never happened.

Issa and other members drew out Newell to agree that “Fast and Furious” guns that he allowed to be illegally purchased at licensed dealers had, indeed, ended up traced back from Mexico. No doubt. But as for walking?

From the transripts, consider this exchange between Newell and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah.

Chaffetz began:
You testified today in your opening statement; ‘It is not the purpose of the investigation [‘Fast and Furious’] to permit the transportation of firearms into Mexico.’ That’s today … Yet in … January 8, 2010 … you write, ‘Currently our strategy is to allow the transfer of firearms [to Mexico] to continue to take place.’ … So it was the goal. It was the intention of the program to allow guns to be trafficked to Mexico based on this memo. Is that correct?

Newell answered: No, sir.

Chaffetz shot back that he was reading from Newell’s own statement:. “It also says in here, a number of different seizures in Mexico. It seems very inconsistent at best to suggest that it was not the purpose to allow them to go to Mexico.”

Newell’s answer was pure double-talk: Well, sir, if I may, and I’m, I’m glad I’m given the opportunity to clarify that paragraph that has been obviously well publicized. The wording in that, the way my understanding was when that briefing paper was drafted was that our efforts to allow the transfer to identify additional co-conspirators was so that we could further the investigation, takeout the whole organization. Otherwise these individuals would in fact continue in a probably a larger …

In utter frustration, Chaffetz said: So you allowed hundreds or thousands of weapons to continue to flow through this program and go into Mexico?

Newell, pumping the fog machine, replied: I’m sorry; can you repeat the question, sir?

Chaffetz: How many hundreds or thousands of weapons did you allow to be purchased knowing that they were going to Mexico?

Newell: The purchase was being done by a criminal organization, a large scale …

Chaffetz: But you facilitated it. You allowed it, did you not? You were a part of the program. Allow these straw purchases to happen so that the guns could end up in Mexico? And you know in 2009, that that’s happening.

Newell: Sir, again, the goal of the organization, the goal of the investigation was to disrupt and dismantle the entire …

Chaffetz: … the problem is you were purposely, knowingly allowing the guns to go to Mexico. And you have information in 2009 that it’s being successful.
Yet you never put a stop to it. It’s meeting the goals and intentions you laid out in this memo in January 2010and it continued on and on. And consequently there were thousands of weapons that ended up in Mexico killing people.
That’s the reason that we’re here today. When did you first know or think that guns were walking?

Newell: Sir, in this investigation, to the best of my knowledge we didn’t let guns walk from that perspective.

And so it went over and over.

On that question of “gun walking,” especially involving a straw buyer allowed to violate multiple gun laws in the purchase of 730 civilian AK variants, Chairman Issa pushed Newell to come clean.

Issa: So from day one you had a straw purchaser with no credit, no means of support, buying hundreds of weapons, providing them to his intermediary … You had an individual who could be charged with his participation on the actual trafficking of weapons. You had somebody who was trafficking specifically for the intent of getting it to the drug cartels providing huge amounts of money.” Issa pressed on: “It seems like you knowingly allowed these weapons to get out of your control, knowingly to someone you knew was trafficking into Mexico. You saw the results. You allowed it to continue, and now you’re telling us, ‘We don’t let guns walk.’ Well, I’ve got to tell you, before this investigation ends, I’ve got to have somebody in your position or at Justice to admit you knowingly let guns walk, because right now your agents, both the agents here today from Mexico and the agents that were part of Phoenix and part of this program who became whistleblowers, had told us you were letting guns walk. It’s only you and Mr. McMahon and other people at Justice who continue to come before this committee and say, ‘We don’t let guns walk.’ Are they lying or are you lying?

Newell replied, mumbling: A, sir, in this investigation it is my opinion that we did not let guns walk.

Chairman Issa snapped back: You’re entitled to your opinion, not to your facts.

End of transcript testimony.

If the elevation of McMahon was an in-your-face insult to Congress and to anyone deeply concerned about the rogue nature of the Obama/Holder Justice Department, the DOJ’s chief prosecutor in Phoenix doubled the insult to an unspeakably low level by slapping down the family of slain Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

But no less grievous an insult as the one the Obama administration, through its Justice Department, has foisted on Congress and the American people by its continuous attempts to confuse and cover up the facts. The facts that show it intentionally allowed guns to go to Mexican drug cartels to further fuel its desire to pass more gun control laws here in the United States

More Moves For A Cover-Up
If you think the McMahon appointment was an in-your-face insult to Congress and to whistleblowers, try this explanation from the agency’s PR office: “On Aug. 1, 2011, Special Agent Newell, who had been selected as Country Attaché Mexico City, was reassigned to the Office of Management to assist with the OIG investigation and congressional inquiry.” The man who is at the center of an insane project with the intended consequence of tracing guns to bloody Mexican crime scenes is promoted to “assist” Eric Holder’s internal investigation of that scandal. If there were ever a question that the Obama White House was not ordering a total whitewash, this answers it.

Further evidence of the cover-up is what is touted as an “independent” investigation by the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General came with a request from Attorney General Holder that Rep. Darrell Issa surrender to him transcripts of meetings that the chairman, U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, had with BATFE Acting Director Ken Melson—a figure the Obama administration was prepared to crush under its bus. Since Holder may well prove to be a part of the “Fast and Furious” conspiracy, his involvement corrupts OIG’s supposed neutrality. In addition, Issa and Grassley upped their lawful demands for production of documents that Holder has refused to supply for congressional oversight.

That e-mail is proof positive that BATFE’s gun-running scheme was intended to garner power and funds to prove a big-lie campaign claiming that federally licensed gun dealers were the virtual sole source of firearms used by the murderous Mexican drug cartels.

“We are looking for anecdotal cases to support a demand letter on long gun multiple sales,”
Chait wrote to McMahon and his direct subordinate, William Newell, the Phoenix special agent in charge, who directed the guns-to-Mexican “Fast and Furious” criminal enterprise.

And of course, despite specific prohibitions in federal law, the Department of Justice has blithely gone ahead with the “demand letter,” which is in reality a long gun registration scheme in the border states of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas that is being challenged in federal court by the NRA. Ironically, it was just that kind of information voluntarily provided by dealers to BATFE with respect to highly suspicious multiple purchases by law-breaking criminal buyers that kicked off “Fast and Furious” in the first place.

And in that case, those buyers were encouraged by BATFE leadership to repeatedly commit felony acquisition of firearms. In the Phoenix operation, dealers who reported obvious illegal activity were told to let it continue, and continue, and continue.

THE BOTTOM LINE: The death of Terry, a family man and veteran, changed everything. Were it not for Terry’s death, the operation doubtless would have continued unabated, with U.S. gun-control forces ghoulishly pointing to the ever-mounting body count south of the border to further their agenda of disarming America.

Out of all the outrageous, treasoness, criminal acts by Obama in the past three years, this truly should be the one that will put him away. But it too will likely be treated like so much fodder from the racist conspiracy people on the far right and swept away in a dust pan and deposited in the historical round file.

de Andrae.

Saturday, September 24, 2011

The Constitution or Sharia?

Is the Constitution of the United States, whose adoption we celebrate every Sept. 17, the supreme law of America, or is it Islamic Sharia?

By de Andréa

First let me make this perfectly clear…Obama, as every president before him, took an oath to uphold, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. Let's just take a short look at what Barack Obama, is empowered to do and then see if he might have allegiance to different ideology.

In Article II, Section 1, he is sworn to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Section 2 names the president as commander in chief of the armed forces, grants him the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate and to appoint ambassadors, federal judges, cabinet officials and other federal officers. In Section 3, the president "shall take care that the Laws be faithfully executed…” Not violated. In his two years and nine months in office, Barack Hussein Obama has compiled a spectacular record of Constitutional violations. Here are just a few of the ways his administration has failed to uphold and execute the laws while using raw, unauthorized power. You will notice that it was the Constitution that Obama swore to obey, not Sharia. But are you sure? What did he actually come to “Change?”

He violated the Defense of Marriage Act -
On Feb. 23, 2011, Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. announced that, under Obama's direction, the Justice Department would no longer defend DOMA, which is under attack in several federal courts, DOMA, which was passed by overwhelming majorities in Congress and signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1996. It defines marriage for all federal purposes as the union of a man and a woman, and allows states under the Full Faith and Credit clause not to be forced to recognize unions from other states that do not comport with their state marriage laws. Forty-five states have moved to strengthen their marriage laws, with 30 enacting constitutional amendments.

He violated the 15th Amendment - At Obama dictates, the Justice Department has effectively become a race-based enforcement unit. After New Black Panther Party members were caught on tape intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place in 2008, the Justice Department declined to defend the convictions, and thus sent the message that baton-wielding thuggish-ness on Election Day is no longer a big deal, so I guess we can expect more of the same in the future. Former Justice Department attorney J. Christian Adams, who laid out the case before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, described the administration's dismissal of charges as "lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law."

He has promoted Illegal Immigration - The Obama administration has ignored the illegal actions of "sanctuary cities" and instead sued the state of Arizona in July for enforcing federal law. Then, in August, the administration announced a new policy that, in effect, ends enforcement of illegal immigration completely, providing the illegal aliens meet the requirements of the DREAM Act, a bill that Congress failed to pass. So, Obama is ignoring current federal law while creating rules based on a law that never was legislated. In defense of Arizona, at the end of Article 1 of the Constitution it says: “No State shall, without the consent of Congress…engage in war, unless actually invaded or in such eminent danger as will not admit delay.” Arizona has been invaded. And Article 4 sec 4 the law says: “…and [the government] shall protect each of them [the States] against invasion.” This forces Arizona to do what the Fed refuses to do under the law. Read about “America’s secret war”

Cap and Trade - In 2010, the Senate rejected a sweeping environmental bill that would have created a massive federal carbon regulation system. Despite this, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would treat carbon dioxide (the air we breathe out and the gas that all vegetation needs to live) as a pollutant, and begin cracking down on America's businesses and power plants. The EPA has become a law unto itself. The Obama Administration also has ignored a federal judge's ruling that he acted illegally in prohibiting new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

He violated the Fifth Amendment - The Constitution guarantees that no one is deprived of their property without "due process of law" or without "just compensation.” The National Labor Relations Board's absurd order to Boeing not to open a newly built $750-million Dreamliner facility in right-to-work South Carolina because unions in Boeing's home state of Washington violates that guarantee. Even liberal New York Times columnist Joseph Nocera commented: “Seriously, when has a president ever tried to dictate where a company makes its products?”

He violated the First Amendment -
The NLRB struck again this year, declaring two Catholic universities -- St. Xavier University in Chicago and Manhattan College in New York -- as not sufficiently "religious.” If the holdings stand, the schools may see the NLRB assert jurisdiction and rope the faculty and employees into a union election.

Right out of the gate, there was his bowing of allegiance to the Muslim Saudi king and Obama’s declaration in the course of a 2009 speech at Cairo University that; “I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight negative stereotypes of Islam wherever I find them”. That is of course found in Article 8, the Presidential-Responsibility-To-Fight-Negative-Stereotypes-of-Islam- section of the Constitution, just kidding. But it is Sharia law and it is found in the Quran, and under Sharia it is punishable by death. You see, if America knew what Islam was, we would totally understand why Obama is the way he is. He is a Muslim first and foremost, and is commanded by his god Allah to obey and enforce Sharia, not the Constitution. If you don’t believe me, then maybe you will believe him. Watch his Video telling us exactly that.

More frightening is Obama's heavy-handed seizure of the nation's healthcare system and ObamaCare's unconstitutional mandate for everyone to purchase health insurance. Nowhere, not even in the much-abused Commerce Clause, does the Constitution give the government the power to force citizens to engage in commerce. If ObamaCare is upheld, government bureaucrats can pretty much order us to do anything they want.

This list, which is actually much longer, should include Obama's failure as commander in chief to lead our armed forces with honor. Can you imagine George Washington's or Gen. George S. Patton's response to the Obama administration's doctoring the results of a troop survey, leaking misleading "findings" to the press, ignoring strong opposition by combat troops, and ramming through a policy of homosexualizing the armed forces? This violates 235 years of tradition in the world's finest military. Paraphrasing Ted Koppel's comment about the Ten Commandments, the Constitution is not a set of ‘suggestions’. The Constitution's enumerated powers and limitations ensure maximum liberty for a people as part of a Free Republic.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Just how many times can ‘anyone’, not just and oath sworn president of the United States, ‘but anyone’ --- so blatantly violate the supreme law of America and not be brought up on charges. When the chief enforcer shows such profound contempt for the Constitution, he needs to be impeached and at the very least charged with multiple contemptuous violations of the law and the abuse of power.

Obama is now under investigation in the Solyndra scandal (the misappropriation of taxpayer funds). The FBI is investigating what happened with Solyndra, a solar panel company that got more that a half a billion of your money with the help of Obama over the objections of federal budget analysts. Then Solyndra immediately went bankrupt, Americans lost jobs, taxpayers got stuck with the bill, Solyndra executives are living high and taking the “fifth”, and Obama and members of Congress are now in deep dodo.

And then there is the Fast and Furious scandal of the DOJ and the ATF where the BATFE was ordered by the Department of Justice to supply the Mexican drug cartel with guns. Several U.S. boarder agents were killed with those guns as a result. Eric Holder of the DOJ answers directly to Obama. Can you make the connection? Is President Obama connected to a crime where innocent Americans were killed? Should he be brought up on charges of conspiracy to commit fraud if not murder? I mean I could go on and on hear for at least another 50 or so pages, but I won’t.

There is only one place that I would actually come to visit Obama, and that would be in federal prison where he belongs.

de Andréa

Friday, September 23, 2011

The Sharia Pandemic

If for some ignorant reason you believe that Sharia is just the law of the Middle East, you would be deceptively wrong.

By de Andréa
September 10, 2011

History repeats itself in Germany…for the third time.
As in the case of Pancreatic Cancer, or a vicious contagious virus once one becomes aware of its symptoms one can be nearly assured of certain death. For the third time in its history, Germany is becoming aware of a terminal disease which is exemplified in a new book titled "Germany Does Away With Itself,"(not available in English). The first time Germany began to be overrun by Islam was in approximately 800 AD. It took the bloody Crusades three hundred years to save the country and the rest of Europe. The second time was in the 1930’s in the form of Nazism, Islam was Hitler’s only ally, and took a world war to save Germany and the rest of the world. And now history is again repeating itself, for the third time, different people, different time, same scenario, and the same blind deception. One might think the German people must not be educated in their own history but this same blind deception is affecting every Kaffaar (non-Muslim) on the planet. What will it take to stop Islam this time?

According to the Muslim bible, the Quran, Sharia is the law that governs the world. The spread of Islamic Sharia law in Germany for example is far more advanced than previously thought. German authorities recognize that they are now "powerless" to do anything about it; this is according to a new book about the Muslim shadow justice system in the Islamic State of Germany. This is the result of allowing the Muslim foot in the door. An unsuspecting benevolent country that goes down the slippery slope of Islamic deception, will eventually find itself beyond the point of no return. As you read ‘this’ account, remember Islamic Sharia law has already found its way into American courts. And unless you want to be subjected to barbaric Sharia law and Islamic oppression, you had better do what ever you can to help stop Sharia in your state and in America. And you had better do it right now!

The 236-page book titled "Judges Without Law: Islamic Parallel Justice Endangers Our Constitutional State," (not yet available in English) which was authored by Joachim Wagner, a German legal expert and former investigative journalist for ARD German public television, says “Islamic Sharia courts are now operating in all of Germany's big cities. This parallel justice system is undermining the rule of law in Germany”, Wagner says, because Muslim arbiters-cum-imams are settling criminal cases out of court without the involvement of German prosecutors or lawyers before law enforcement can bring the cases to a German court.

Note: In most cases this involves Muslim crimes against Muslims. But in some cases it involves cases of non Muslims against Muslim Sharia law, and the latter is on the increase both in Europe and in America.

In an interview with the German broadcaster Deutsche Welle, Wagner said political correctness in Germany is enabling the problem: "I've studied 16 recent crime cases here with Muslim citizens involved. In almost 90% of all cases where Muslim arbitrators were commissioned, the perpetrators were acquitted by German courts or the cases were dropped altogether by the prosecution for lack of evidence. It's an alarming finding, and it throws a bad light on our courts."

In fact, German judges often refer and/or defer to Sharia law. For example, the Federal Social Court in Kassel recently supported the claim of a second wife for a share of her dead husband's pension payments, which his first wife wanted to keep all to herself. The judge ruled they should share the pension.

In March 2007, Judge Christa Datz-Winter, a judge at Frankfurt's family court cited the Islamic Koran in a divorce case involving a 26-year-old German woman of Moroccan origin, who was terrified of her violent Moroccan husband, a man who had continued to threaten her despite having been ordered to stay away by the authorities. He had beaten his wife and he had allegedly threatened to kill her. Judge Datz-Winter refused to grant the divorce, arguing that a woman who marries a Muslim should know what she is getting herself into. In her ruling, the judge quoted Sura 4, verse 34 of the Koran. She wrote that the Koran contains "both the husband's right to use corporal punishment against a disobedient wife and the establishment of the husband's superiority over the wife."

In February 2011, Germany's Federal Labor Court ruled that a Muslim supermarket employee can refuse to handle alcohol on religious grounds. The case in question involved a Muslim man who was employed in a supermarket in the northern German city of Kiel. He refused to stock shelves with alcoholic drinks, saying that his religion forbade him from any contact with alcohol, and was dismissed as a result in March 2008.

In an interview with the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel, Wagner described the Islamic shadow justice system in Germany as "very foreign, and for a German lawyer, completely incomprehensible at first. It follows its own rules. The Islamic arbitrators aren't interested in evidence when they deliver a judgment, and unlike in German criminal law, the question of who is at fault doesn't play much of a role."

When Der Spiegel asked why it was wrong for two parties to try to resolve a dispute between themselves, Wagner replied: "The problem starts when the arbitrators force the justice system out of the picture, especially in the case of criminal offenses. At that point they undermine the state monopoly on violence. Islamic conflict resolution in particular, as I've experienced it, is often achieved through violence and threats. It's often a dictate of power on the part of the stronger family."

Wagner's findings largely confirm a report published by the German Interior Ministry in 2009 which warned that Islamic groups in Germany want to live under Sharia law in Germany. Unlike any other people on the planet, Muslims do not assimilate. Wagner's book comes at a time when Germany is immersed in a heated national debate over Muslim immigration. That debate was launched in August 2010 with the publication of a best-selling book titled "Germany Does Away With Itself,"(not available in English) which broke Germany's long-standing taboo on discussing the impact of Muslim immigration. Authored by Thilo Sarrazin, a renowned German banker who is also a long-time member of the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), the book is now on its 20th edition. At last count, more than 1.5 million copies have been sold, making it one of the most widely read titles in Germany since the Second World War. Sarrazin's book has resonated with vast numbers of ordinary Germans who are becoming increasingly uneasy about the social changes that are transforming Germany, largely due to the presence of millions of non-integrated Muslims in the country.

German President Christian Wulff has tried to defuse the row ignited by Sarrazin. During a keynote speech(in German, you can translate using Google) to mark the 20th anniversary of German reunification on October 3, 2010, Wulff proclaimed that "Islam belongs in Germany" because of the four million Muslims who now live there. Germany has Western Europe's second-biggest Islamic population after France, with Turks the single biggest minority. [Wulff is wrong, truth is, Germany belongs to Islam]

Opinion polls show broad public support for Sarrazin's argument that Muslim immigrants shut themselves off from Germany, do not speak German, and do not share the German, European or Western culture or worldview. Why is that? In our Western culture we understand that a people will immigrate from one country to another mostly because they hate their own culture and want to adopt yours. While this may be true in most cases, it does not generally apply to Muslims. Muslims generally immigrate to your country because the hate your culture and want to change it to their own. We can’t understand that much less comprehend it. And that my Western friend is because we have no concept of Muslim Ideology.

According to a poll conducted by the mass-circulation Bild am Sonntag, 89% of those surveyed say Sarrazin's arguments are convincing. "For them, Sarrazin is somebody who is finally saying what many are thinking," according to the pollsters.

The Friedrich Ebert Foundation, a think tank linked to the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), recently published a survey which found that many Germans believe their country is being "overrun" by Muslim immigrants. It also found that these views are not isolated at the extremes of German society, but are to a large degree "at the center of it."

An opinion survey, "Perception and Acceptance of Religious Diversity," conducted by the sociology department of the University of Münster, in partnership with the prestigious TNS Emnid political polling firm, shows that only 34% of West Germans and 26% of East Germans have a positive view of Muslims. Fewer than 5% of Germans think Islam is a tolerant religion, and only 30% say they approve of the building of mosques. The number of Germans who approve of the building of minarets or the introduction of Muslim holidays is even lower. Fewer than 10% of West Germans and 5% of East Germans say that Islam is a peaceful religion.

As the political winds shift, so are German politicians. After initially distancing herself from Sarrazin's views, German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently said Germany's roots are Judeo-Christian. She also said: "Now we obviously have Muslims in Germany. But it is important in regard to Islam that the values represented by Islam must correspond with our constitution. What applies here is the constitution, not Sharia law.” But the proliferation of Sharia law in Germany suggests Merkel is mistaken: Sharia law ‘does’ apply in Germany, and now, there is nothing they can do to stop it short of a bloody civil war.

As Europe begins to wake up from the deception of multiculturalism and political correctness, it finds itself sinking in the quagmire of Islamic ideology and oppression. As I have said so many times before, once a culture begins to open their deceived eyes and understand what Islam is about, it is too late.

I have written similar articles about France, Holland and the U.K. as well as America. Allowing a Muslim to put his foot in the door of your country, is tantamount to jumping out of an airplane at 10 thousand feet, there is just no going back.

THE BOTTOM LINE: I will repeat what I said at the beginning: This is the result of benevolently allowing the Muslim foot in the door. An unsuspecting benevolent country that goes down the slippery slope of Islamic deception will eventually find itself beyond the point of no return. Remember Islamic Sharia law has already found its way into American courts, (read a previous article). And unless you want to be subjected to the supremacy of Sharia law and Islamic oppression, you had better do what ever you can to help stop Sharia in your state and in America. And you had better do it right now my friend!

If you continue to delay, soon everything else you do or that is important to you will be moot! Your appeal to a higher court will simply be to another Muslim court.

Islam has already infiltrated every other aspect of American government, Federal, State, and local. The Infiltration of public schools and our courts has already begun. Soon we will be at the same stage of Islamic Jihad as most countries in Europe. And then war will be the only way to stop the “World Nation of Islam”.

Is that what you want???

de Andréa

Thursday, September 22, 2011

On A Lighter Side

No, not the light we walk into when we die, the light the Government forces us to buy and use. On second thought, it might ‘be’ the light we walk into when we die.

On a personal note: I hope you find this amusing or as I was, ‘fighting mad’. And it’s true, all true.

By de Andréa

And God said: “Let their be light”… or was that the government?

Most of you, have been reading my column long enough to know that I will fight the government regulatory agencies all the way to the mat. I have fought them in the trenches; I have fought them on the mountain tops. For thirty years I fought them in and out of the courts; until I was so exhausted and broken I finally walked away from my business and retired early. With that being said, and now refreshed, I’m ‘back’ and ready to fight!

Several months ago the electric company called me and said that a federal regulatory agency has ordered them to replace all the light bulbs in America, starting with our local rural and residential areas with these more efficient (dreaded) CFL’s, I think it means Curly Fried Lights, but don’t quote me on that. Oh! That’s not all; they also had to replace all the ceiling light fixtures with the new ones that use a circular florescent bulb with the curious and flamboyant name of “Circular Florescent Bulb”. They said the new circular one would give me a lot more light, use half the electricity, and last for years. Up to ‘five’ years she said. And it was all free. Well now, ‘I’ know, there’s no free lunch or light, as in this case. So I asked… just who is paying for all this free stuff that the government says is so good for me. Well the government is of course! Soooo! I said, then… I am paying for it. NO! It’s free, all free she said, installation and everything.

Now I could have gone into a long dissertation of how the government doesn’t produce anything to earn the money to buy the free stuff to give away, so they have to get it from me and you…but I didn’t. So I thought if I have already paid for this free stuff, I might as well accept it. Besides --- I was going to save money, right? And get more light too.

We made an appointment and two nice young men came and took down my old fixtures and replaced them with these wonderful brighter energy saving green ones. No, they weren’t the color green, they had a green philosophy, and they didn’t make carbon footprints all over the house. Again I was tempted to say, well…my other lights didn’t leave footprints, but again I was very gracious and bit my tongue. When they finished removing my old fixtures and replaced all my other familiar round bulbs with those scary little curly CFL’s, I very graciously thanked them and they left.

While I didn’t notice a significant increase in lumens, lumens, that’s light talk for more light, ‘or’ a drop in my electric bill, a few months later however, I did notice a difference when the light stopped coming out of one of my new free fixtures. One of those with the wonderful new circular free bulb in it, you know, the one that is so appropriately called “The Circular Bulb”, the one that was supposed to last for years, up to ‘five’ years I believe she said. Or was it five minutes, I don’t know anymore, I can’t remember.

Anyway, no use crying over a burned bulb right, or is that something spilled? No matter. I mean they were all free anyway. I didn’t even begin crying until I got to the hardware store. Oh! They had replacement bulbs alright! That wasn’t what made all the water well up in my eyes; it was what I read on the little sticker on the package that caused all that burning salt water to leak down my sweet taxpaying cheeks. $9.98 it said, plus tax. No… this was not for a whole case of bulbs, this was for one single light bulb that doesn’t give me anymore light and doesn’t lower my electric bill and doesn’t last too long. And what’s this plus tax, didn’t I already pay for this with my taxes? Oh that’s right --- it was free. Oh! Wait… That’s not all; it cost $5.00 at the hazardous waste site to dispose of the free one that no longer emitted any light or lumens either, just wonderful free silver colored mercury, no, it was silver not green. But we must remember it was free, paid for with my taxes and yours. As I recall they said they would replace my refrigerator too, if mine were one of the old inefficient kind. For free. Boy! Am I’m sure glad I already had one of the new types. What if I had an inefficient car or horse, I mean house, would they replace them too? For free? I …don’t think I can afford anymore of this free stuff.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Well…as I said, there is still a little fight left in me so I’ll show em. I’ll just put my old light fixture back up, with my old round bulbs, the ones that are not free and not green, the ones they say leave those nasty carbon footprints all over and are cheap and last a long time and contain no mercury. Mark my words, this is truly ‘war’ my friend, footprints or no. And I defy the government light police to check my bulbs, whether they be round, Circular, or the scary Curly Fried ones.

I can tell, that you see I still have a ‘little’ fight left me, and you would be right. Be it very little…

Now I'm wondering if those free fixtures have microphones and cameras in them. Just remember there’s no free lunch…or as in this case, “Free Light”.

-de Andréa

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Life on the Reservation

See the future of America as a Socialist State:
If you want to read a true story about what socialism has already done in the free nation of America then read on my friend. This is truly like looking into the future of American liberal socialism…

By de Andréa

Beginning in 1944, Mr. Rousas Rushdoony served for eight and a half years as a missionary to the Shoshone and Paiute Indians on the Duck Valley Indian Reservation in a remote area of Nevada. It was this time spent on the reservation where Rushdoony deduced correctly that the state “is the giver of all things, the source power, of land, food, clothing, and (having built a reservoir for irrigation here) even of water"…

The government’s “mismanagement” of the Indians totally ruined their lives.
Rushdoony told about the impact of this process in “Life on the Reservation”, an article published in 1954 in Essays on Liberty, a publication of the Foundation for Economic Education. As you read it, note how Rushdoony’s reservation experience has broadened in scope to include a majority of Americans who are now becoming --- just part of a much larger reservation.

His story…
“Life on the Reservation” By Rousas J. Rushdoony 1954 Essays on Liberty

"The reservation Indian is becoming less self-sufficient and more dependent upon what he calls the Great White Father in Washington. Instead of freedom, the Indian has government-guaranteed “security.” Instead of individual responsibility, he has a government bureau to handle his personal affairs. There are special laws governing his right to own land and to spend tribal money. Under that system of bondage it would surprise no one to find that the many thousands of Indians have remained uneducated, hungry, diseased, mismanaged, and helpless dependants.

One of the surest consequences of a government of “welfare” and “security” is the rapid decline and death of responsibility and character.

Whatever the pre-reservation Indian was—and his faults were real—he was able to take care of himself and had a character becoming his culture and religion. He was a responsible person. Today he is far from that. The wretched security he has had, beginning with the food and clothing dole of early years, designed to enforce the reservation system and destroy Indian resistance, has sapped him of his character. The average Indian knows that he can gamble and drink away his earnings and still be sure that his house and land will remain his own; and; with his hunting rights, he can always maintain the illusion of eking out some kind of resistance.

Governments too often hamper and impede the man with initiative and character. This is because their program inevitably must be formulated in terms of the lowest common denominator, the weakest Indian. In addition, the provisions of the government for the “welfare” and “security” of the Indians remove the consequences from their sinning and irresponsibility. The result is a license to irresponsibility, in which all the touted government projects cannot counteract.

And I believe the results would be no better, for the best hundred or thousand persons selected from any society after a generation or so of the same kind of “welfare” and “security” government.

Many of the men in the Indian Affairs Service are sincerely and earnestly trying to improve the Indian’s welfare. And herein may lay the problem, as well as the solution that they are faced with, this is the constant dilemma: All their zealous and patient efforts to help the Indian simply tend to become another crutch that the Indian depends on. Those Indians who have ‘left’ the reservation have become progressive and independent, they apparently have done so because of personal, and religious factors totally unrelated to the government program"… END

So what does this story about Native Americans have to do with today’s economic downfall and the current American government administration or (regime)? Well first, since 1944 the reservation Indian is still no better off. He still lives in poverty; he still drinks more alcohol than the free water food and clothing he receives, and because he has never learned to be responsible for himself, we have made a lazy welfare sucking dependant out of him in one generation. The proof of the putting here, is that most of the Indians that have left the reservation for what ever reason, have become self sustaining productive Americans.

The Third World America
This statement made by your president Obama caught my attention: Obama quipped this in response to the proposed ‘Republican’ budget plan, which is to let the American citizen take more control of the economy. “We will be a nation of potholes” he said, “and our airports will be worse than places that we used to call the ‘Third World Governments’, but who are now investing in infrastructure.” Obama failed however to elaborate on which third world countries he thinks should be models for the United States, and how his government welfare policies, as in the reservation Indian, have secured America’s status as part of the declining and dependant third world.

THE BOTTOM LINE: If you want to see and understand a microcosm of what Government intervention and social programs can and will do to our nation, then pay very close attention to these words of Mr. Rousas Rushdoony and his story about the social and economic demise of the Native American Indian, in… “Life on the Reservation”

You might want to e-mail this to a fellow American who also - may want to remain free from social economic tyranny…

de Andréa

Monday, September 19, 2011

Who Are We at War With?

We are certainly at war with the Nation of Islam and the Jihadist ideology of supremism, but we may also be at war with our own government’s ideology of elitism.

By de Andréa

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: “The right of the ‘people’ to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to protect ‘citizen’s privacy’ and private property rights. But if we lose our Fourth Amendment, then we will soon lose all of our constitutional rights and protections.

“The only purpose of law in a free country is to protect the rights and freedoms of its citizens” Frederic Bastiat.

Just as a herd of sheep, we are led to the slaughter of our rights freedoms, and human dignity every time we board a plane in the U.S. All because our government refuses to do its constitutional job of protecting this nation from a foreign invasion, THE INVASION OF MUSLIM JIHADISTS.

Just where is the warrant and/or probable cause to search one’s person in an American airport? As you have just read the U.S. Constitution clearly states that we have the right to be ‘secure’ in our “’persons’, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures”. And this “shall not be ‘violated’,” Well it is violated. “and no warrants shall [be] issue[d], but upon probable cause”, and it must be “supported by oath or affirmation”. How many violations of the 4th amendment can you count?

Illegal legislation from the bench is now actually ‘taking away’ our rights and freedoms. So according to Bastiat and the definition of law in a FREE NATION, America is no longer a free country! And unless we rebel against these atrocities ‘now’, we will get what we deserve --- an oppressive Police State.

The dismantling of our Constitution and our Fourth Amendment by governing authorities who don’t even know who the enemy of western civilization is, has led to such violations as the stripping down of a 95-year-old leukemia patient and young children by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents. And it has also led to the killing of an innocent Iraq War veteran by law enforcement.

Personally I would not be so adversely opposed to this kind of airport security if it were used as a last resort in the fight for our very survival, but this kind of insanity is being used as a first line of defense and it is used reactively. This kind of abuse proves that our government isn’t as interested in proactively winning this so-called war on terrorism as much as it is in terrorizing our own American citizens. Truth is, that most all of the failed attempts at terrorism since 9/11 have been as a result of ignorance on the part of the terrorist, such as the underwear bomber ‘or’ smart and prompt civilian action such as in the case of the shoe bomber.

“It’s something I couldn’t imagine happening on American soil,” said Jean Weber, the daughter of the 95-year-old leukemia patient who was stripped of her Depends adult diaper by TSA agents and held for one hour so the agents could inspect the contents of her undergarments.

Americans are in a battle with their own government whether they know it or not. And if we continue to sit on the sidelines and allow our rights to be taken from us, then more innocent Americans will lose their right to defend themselves against harassment, intimidation, and unwarranted search and seizure of their persons and property.

If our government were to do their (#^&*) constitutional job of protecting this Nation against a foreign invasion as it says in article 4 section 4 of the Constitution we wouldn’t have the enemy of the free world running loose in this country. Let me ask you this, did we allow German Nazi’s to run free in the U.S. when we were at war with them? Of course not, it would have been insane. Then why do we, not only, allow Middle Eastern Muslim Terrorists to run free in America, but we encourage, enable, and protect them. Isn’t it just as, or more insane??? And as a result we Americans pay the price by losing the very thing we are fighting for…our Constitutional rights and freedom.

“We need to be doing better police work and doing less of the universal giving up of our freedom to live our life the way we would like to live our life,” Sen. Paul said to John Pistole, the administrator of the TSA at the DHS, during a Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on invasive TSA searches.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety, – Benjamin Franklin

Recently, a Tennessee woman was added to the list of those who stood up for their rights at the TSA line and paid the price by being arrested. Because the woman refused to go through the TSA’s airport screening machine, and refused to allow her daughter to be patted-down by a TSA agent, she was arrested by police at the Nashville International Airport on a charge of disorderly conduct. According to a police report, the mother told TSA agents that she didn’t want her daughter to be “touched inappropriately” or have her “crotch grabbed.” The mother was also prevented from taking a video of the incident on her mobile phone. Of course the Gestapo doesn’t want to be photographed while performing their indecent duties.

Please send your free messages to your State Representative and Senators — tell them to Oppose DHS Police State Measures here!

Meant to be a part of the war on terrorism, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently released a series of terrorist-watch videos called See Something, Say Something that while it addresses the obvious of reporting suspicious activities anytime you are a witness, it ignorantly and in a politically correct way depicts the suspicious characters as western men not Middle eastern men. It effectively tells Americans to spy on each other. The USSR paid people to spy and turn in their fellow Russian’s citizens for speaking out against Communism. These video clips, in the name of the war on terror, depict western Americans as terror threats, and then advise citizens to report the behaviors of their fellow Americans. Dispite the fact that all foreign terrorism and acts of war on the west including 9/11 have been done by Middle Eastern men between the ages of 19 and 37, Our brain dead federal government obviously believes that our enemy must be 95 year old sick grandmothers, Catholic Nuns, young girls and European looking American men.

One of the DHS videos displays newspaper clippings of Americans who have committed acts of terror, such as Ted Kaczynski the Unabomber, and Timothy McVey one of the men involved in the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Yet, the video fails to show pictures of the 19 9/11 hijackers, or members of al-Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah, or members of other foreign terrorist organizations.

Unfortunately, these profiling tactics aren’t new, because according to documents written by the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) in 2009, if you display the Gadsden flag, (similar to my website logo) or consider yourself a Libertarian or a supporter of the liberty movement, or a Constitutional conservative, then you just might be considered the biggest threat to our national security. It is politically correct to profile every other ethic, religious, and/or political group in America except Middle Eastern Muslims. And as the Nazi’s in the 1940’s we are at war with the Nation of Islam, not Freedom loving patriot Americans.

This is a prime example of an imposing police state, where the government tasks citizens with the job of spying on their neighbors, instead of using the government’s resources to protect patriotic Americans from the real terror threats like getting the Nazi’s out of this country, or in this case, the Muslim Jihadists.

How much longer will you remain silent and continue to be pushed around before you stand up and tell every member of Congress to stand up and protect ‘your’ Fourth Amendment Constitutional rights?

Law enforcement kills innocent Iraq War veteran
Right now, SWAT teams can invade your home without probable cause or warrent. And if you dare to protect your home and your family from an intruder, not knowing that the “intruder” is law enforcement, then you could be shot and killed if you are armed. This is what happened to Jose Guereña, a young Marine and Iraq War veteran who was killed by a SWAT team that invaded his home and fired 71 bullets — 22 penetrating Guereña’s body — all because his brother, who did not live with him, was suspected of drug trafficking. Jose Guereña had a clean record, and police never found anything suspicious in his home. Now his young wife is left to raise their child as a single parent.

The loss of our rights is happening across the country because the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Kentucky v. King has effectively and illegally revoked Americans’ Fourth Amendment protections — the SCOTUS decision gives police the authority to stage a search and seizure of your property without obtaining a warrant from a judge.

What this means for you, and your law-abiding friends and family members, is that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision has effectively stripped every citizen of their Fourth Amendment protections! The Fourth Amendment was written to protect us from police excess and police mistakes. The warrant requirement ranks among the fundamental distinctions between our form of government – where officers are under the law – and the police-state, where they are the law.

“Most Americans would agree that requiring third-party judicial oversight is what protects all of us from living fear, where those doing the arresting are answerable only to themselves,” Sen. Paul said.

Our un-American renegade Supreme Court decision has opened the door to allow a nation-wide abuse of power, and there is nothing that we can do – ONLY CONGRESS CAN TAKE ACTION!

Along with thousands of your fellow Americans, you can join me to DEMAND that members of Congress circumvent the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision by voting for a law that will reclaim and secure our Fourth Amendment protections!

Please send your free messages to your State Representative and Senators — tell them to Oppose DHS warrantless Police State Measures Please click here!

‘Or do nothing’, and thereby help the elitists dictators take away, one by one, your God given rights and freedoms. You will get what you deserve with no effort at all…

"No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant in its preservation.” -- General Douglas MacArthur

de Andréa

Friday, September 16, 2011

The Millennium Papers and Agenda 21

Warning, Big Brother Is Here
George Orwell’s Movie of 1984 about the predicted Global big brother, may be a little late in coming but ‘he’ is here and has been for some time now, if not in the obvious then in the form of a quietly implemented U.N. program called Agenda 21, code name “Smart Growth”.

By de Andréa
September 15, 2011

Totalitarianism is here in the form of Agenda 21: Watch the video
Most Americans are totally unaware that among the obvious, and since 1992 one of the greatest threats to our freedom is a secret United Nations program known as Agenda 21. The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for “Sustainable Development” created “Agenda 21” as a sustainability agenda which is undoubtedly an amalgamation of social communism and extreme environmentalism fraught with American capitalist hatred. Agenda 21 has been signed into law in more that 170 countries including the United States of America and is secretly being implemented right here, right now in your community.

Watch a video by David Spaldy of Americans For Prosperity (AFP) about the effect of Agenda 21 on your private property rights. Click Here!

A detailed history on sustainable development, definitions, and critical actions can be found here. Section III of the Agenda 21 Plan addresses local community sustainable development. The Preamble and Chapter 28 discuss how Agenda 21 should be implemented at a local level. The United Nations purposely recommends avoiding the term Agenda 21 and suggests a cleverly named alternative, a code name: "smart growth.” The United Nations Millennium Papers - Issue 2 (page 5) says this of Agenda 21 and smart growth:

“Participating in a UN-advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society such as the National Rifle Association, citizen militias and some members of Congress. This segment of our society who fear 'one-world government' and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined 'the conspiracy' by undertaking LA21. So, we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management, or smart growth” [ red emphasis added].

Undoubtedly, residents of any town, county, or city in the United States that treasure their freedom, liberty, and property rights couldn't care less whether it's called Agenda 21 or the code name “smart growth”. A recent example of this can be found in Carroll County, Maryland, where a smart growth plan called Pathways was drafted by the County Planning Department. The plan, if enacted, proposed a hidden breathtaking reshuffling of land rights: Rezoning of thousands of acres of beautiful, low-density agricultural farmland and protected residential conservation land into office parks and down-zoning of agriculture land to prevent future subdivision by farmers, up-zoning of low-density residential land around small towns into higher density zoning to permit construction of hundreds or possibly thousands of inclusive housing units, including apartments and condominiums, inclusive housing with placement of multi-family construction on in-fill lots within existing residential single family communities.
And endorsement of government-sponsored housing initiatives (subsidies) to ensure so-called healthier, balanced neighborhoods

Carroll County, Maryland is one of 1,168 cities, towns, and counties worldwide that are members of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) - Local Governments for Sustainability, which is an international association of local governments as well as national and regional local government organizations that have made a commitment to sustainable development. The ICLEI mission statement closely resembles that of Agenda 21. In fact, the ICLEI has Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council and coordinates local government representation in the UN processes related to Agenda 21.

Clearly, smart growth plans will impact Americans' future choices in where and how they live. Furthermore, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other federal and state agencies may attempt to deny grant funds to states and cities that do not adopt smart growth plans.

Most Americans will remain unaware of the implications of smart growth and Agenda 21 until after it is promulgated in their own backyards, then it will be too late to hit the undo button. Ironically, these plans are more insidious than the unconstitutional expansion and liberalizing of the Eminent Domain ruling by the Supreme Court in the case of Kelo v City of New London. Under Eminent Domain rulings, property owners usually receive compensation for their losses.

Conversely, smart growth municipal plans under Agenda 21, required by statute, enable municipalities to change zoning laws and engage in other regulatory actions that devalue property, restrict off-conveyances, and otherwise erode property values without payment of any compensation to the property owner. Regardless of political orientation, two indisputable facts remain. Agenda 21 is a direct assault on private property rights and American sovereignty, and it is coming to a neighborhood near you.

The United Nations Agenda 21 was signed by the United States in 1992 and 14 years later, people are still in the dark. If you were to ask at random the question, "Have you heard of Agenda 21?" the answer would be an over-whelming "No," although it is being implemented in every local community throughout the United States.

In conclusion:
Agenda 21 is a part of the environmentalist agenda of Power and Control.
Agenda 21 is a 40 chapter document listing goals to be achieved globally. It is the global plan to change the way we "live, eat, learn and communicate" and has absolutely nothing to do with "saving the earth." It will instead destroy the earth…

"Its regulation would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - and deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas, it would monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system," according to Berit Kjos, author of Brave New Schools the indoctrination of America through its children.

Maurice Strong, Secretary-general of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro said, "...Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat consumption and large amounts of frozen and convenience foods. [We will be reduced to eating government oatmeal three meals a day.] The elimination of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing that are not sustainable. A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations”. George Orwell was a visionary that was way ahead of his time my friend.

In other words, the Global plan is for us to live on the level of third world nations. That means no box mixes or microwave meals, limited use of fuel of any kind, no air-conditioning, and very little meat. When the cost of Freon skyrocketed, when mad cow disease hit, the National Animal Identification System introduced, the price of fuel soared, it has become apparent that given time, these sustainable controls will be put into place - one way or another - and the Global Governance is very powerful.

In 1992, Agenda 21 unknowingly began to change our lives. In that same year, Al Gore wrote his book, Earth in the Balance. To advance his cause, he has written another piece of fiction entitled, An Inconvenient Truth about global warming.

Although groundwork had been laid, it took a Bill Clinton to actually introduce something so invasive to our nation and get by with it without the public becoming aware. President Clinton appointed his "President’s Council on Sustainable Development" and he literally gave away the rights and freedoms the framers of the Constitution had provided.

People in the United States may not know about Agenda 21 and the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, but people around the world do. They know for example that Chicago has one of the greatest numbers of activities existing at the local, neighborhood, and/or micro-regional level. They also know that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) monitors and promotes activities in this field through their Office for Sustainable Ecosystem and Communities.

Found on a Slovakian website: "To the leading countries in the field of development but especially of practical using of sustainable development indicators belong to the U.S.A. At the top level these activities are promoted by the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (1996), which defined a set of ten national goals toward sustainable development. These goals express in concrete terms the elements of sustainability. Alongside the goals are suggested indicators that can be used to help measure progress toward achieving them.”

Agenda 21 is certainly not a secret anymore but it is introduced to local communities in a secret deceptive way and many times it is implemented by unsuspecting community leaders. The internet is full of how Agenda 21 has been fulfilled through Smart Growth planning, land use, sustainable development, and extreme environmentalism. Agenda 21 is grant driven to your city council or county board disguised with terms like - sustainable, visioning, partners, tourism and stakeholders, along with consensus and other terms with the intent to make you believe we are running out of all our resources and we must do our part and "save for tomorrow. [See Agenda 21's Table of Contents.]

It has nothing to do with “saving anything” – it has everything to do with “ power and control.” Sadly, very few congressmen even know Agenda 21 is actually running our country when they are voting to send grant money to their constituents. Agenda 21 is incentive driven, as the planners know that greed in the heart of man will be his downfall.

Another example of the power of Agenda 21 is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, better known as ANWR, it has oil we need to be drilling for the security of our nation. Environmentalists don’t care that we are dependent on foreign oil from nations who hate us, and that our nation’s defense is at stake. The area where drilling would occur is just a dot in this vast land, yet they would gamble the strength of our nation in behalf of their agenda of tyrannical power and control.

THE BOTTOM LINE: The main goal of Agenda 21 is to redistribute the wealth of western nations to third world countries and to bring our great nation to its knees in the name of socialism, fascism, communism or some other “ism.” Our founding fathers founded this nation on the belief of a Sovereign God and because of that we have been blessed. Do you know anything about the gods of the nations to which we would become equal?

I think I am going to Mars…

de Andréa

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Social[ist] [In]security

Is Social Security a Ponzi scheme? Well if it isn’t, it is surly a socialistic system that can only work under the most ideal conditions and then for only a short while, until the foundation crumbles under its own weight. I ask again, is Social Security a Ponzi scheme?

By de Andréa

What with the diminishing demographics and the selfish irresponsibility of abortion we are systematically destroying the American dream and American freedom. Although a socialist program, Social Security may just be one of those dreams.

Social Security is in the news. Are people finally telling the truth: Is it a government sponsored Ponzi (Pyramid) scheme? Isn’t it interesting that after defeating the policies and ideologies of Nazism we then adopt those same policies and ideologies.

Read on about the history of Social Security, where it came from, where it’s going, who really designed it and why.

The financial structure of Social Security
In the beginning, and even though everybody was not in the system the costs of Social Security were not all that great. In fact, Congress had exempted itself. Most federal and state workers were not in the system. Public school teachers were exempt. They could opt for a private system. Members of Congress had their own private government (taxpayer funded) system. This didn’t change until 1984, and not unlike Obama’s healthcare system, it became mandatory. Compared to today, the cost of Social Security was small. Those in the system paid less than two percent (employee and employer pay-in combined) on just $3000 per year income for a total of only $60 per year. Now it’s nearly 15.5 percent on more than $106,000 per year, that’s as much as $2000 per year. This will eventually have to be more than 50.000 per year, per worker. Sound ludicrous? Exactly!

According to the Social Security board of trustees, there were 42 “contributing workers” per Social Security beneficiary in 1945. In other words for every person receiving benefits, 42 people paid for that single recipient. Seemed like magic, except that few people anticipated the “birth death rate,” a decline in family size, legislated abortion (government murder of small people), increased SS benefits, and a larger recipient pool. And then there’s the fact that taking money from one person only to give it to another is immoral and unconstitutional. But we’re talking about “government funding,” here, and “Immorality” is its middle name.

According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics - since 1945, the number paying into the system has changed dramatically:
There were only 1.75 full-time private-sector workers in the United States last year [2010] for each person receiving benefits from Social Security, and the Social Security board of trustees. That means that for each husband and wife who worked full-time in the private sector last year, there was a Social Security recipient somewhere in the country taking benefits from those two people. Soon it will be one to one and then each working person will be supporting two retired seniors as well as their own families, of course it will collapse long before that. Now! Does privatization sound good?

Most Americans don’t know much about the ‘history’ of Social Security. So here goes: In William L. Shirer’s book The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich we learn about the origin of Social Security policies, and the effect they had on the German people. Our Social Security System was actually engineered by German Chancellor Otto Von Bismarck in the 19th century, (yes the fellow the Nazis named the giant battleship after). His policies gradually made the German people value security over political freedom and deceptively caused them to trust in the State as a benefactor and a protector. Between 1883 and 1889 Bismarck had put through a program for social security far beyond anything known in other countries at the time. It included compulsory insurance for workers against the inevitability of old age, sickness, accident, and incapacity, and though it was organized by the State it was financed equally by employers and employees. Does this sound familiar? It should…this my friend, is American Social Security!

Adolf Hitler took full advantage of the German state of mind and Bismarck’s early progress in turning the nation into a model of socialist reform. Hitler remarks in Mein Kampf, “I studied Bismarck’s socialist legislation in its intention, struggle, and success.” It was Hitler’s social security policies and promises that helped get him elected. What is the real “intention” of Bismarck’s Social programs that Hitler so diligently studied? One word…DEPENDENCE.

Hitler was not alone in his admiration of Bismarck and what he was able to accomplish. FDR was no different; he along with Hitler borrowed Bismarck’s socialist agenda and created what became known as the American Social Security System. Bismarck said, “…the State must take the matter in hand, since the State can most easily supply the requisite funds. It must provide them not as alms but in fulfillment of the workers’ right to look to the State where their own good will can achieve nothing more.” Roosevelt and his socialist admirers agreed. P. J. O’Brien, writing in Forward with Roosevelt, links Bismarck’s social policies with those of Roosevelt: “[The quotation by Bismarck] might have been lifted out of a speech by President Roosevelt in 1936”, but the socialist Iron Chancellor Otto Von Bismarck uttered it in 1871.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Well there you have it, simple, direct, and to the point, and as usual I pull no punches, just the raw truth. The American Social Security System is nothing less than warmed over Fascist Nazi Socialistic program. With the beloved and heralded Franklin D. Roosevelt at the helm, (Americas first successful dictator) his socialist policies extended the length of the recession of 1929 to a full-blown 10 year depression by 1934. This lasted until the 1940’s when the freedom of capitalism began producing a military powerful enough to guarantee our survival, ironically ‘against’ the same tyranny of socialism that was becoming prevalent in our own government.

Government guaranteed socialism in any form has never been the answer to long-term security. And yet we blindly continue to create failed social policy after failed social policy, even to the extent of adopting our own enemy’s social policies and programs.

Have we become our own worst enemy??? Remember, “Ignorance leads to deception and deception leads to destruction”…de Andréa