Border Patrol Urges American People Rise Against Obama

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Council is the union that represents members of the government’s immigration service. They have over 12,000 members. Council President Kenneth Palinkas issued a statement decrying President Barack Obama’s planned amnesty by executive action….

His frustration was clearly evident, saying, “We are still the world’s rubber-stamp for entry into the United States – regardless of the ramifications of the constant violations to the Immigration and Nationality Act. Whether it’s the failure to uphold the public charge laws, the abuse of our asylum procedures, the admission of Islamist radicals, or visas for health risks, the taxpayers are being fleeced and public safety is being endangered on a daily basis.”

Palinkas appealed to the American public for help to pressure the federal government against unilateral amnesty. He said, “That is why this statement is intended for the public: if you care about your immigration security and your neighborhood security, you must act now to ensure that Congress stops this unilateral amnesty. Let your voice be heard and spread the word to your neighbors. We who serve in our nation’s immigration agencies are pleading for your help – don’t let this happen. Express your concern to your Senators and Congressmen before it is too late.”

From Conservative Tribune –

Bill for Marriage and Religious Freedom Act coming up

Why do we need a new federal law to protect those whose religious convictions see marriage as it has been understood for our whole national history? Because a war is taking place in America to delegitimize religion.

The Marriage and Religious Freedom Act was introduced in the last Congress – in the Senate by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) with 11 co-sponsors and in the House by Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID) with 92 co-sponsors.

This legislation will soon be re-introduced in the current session and should be given priority by Senate and House leadership and passed. It is of enormous national importance.

The bill will protect individuals from discrimination, under federal law, so that they may be free to express and conduct their business according to their religious conviction that marriage is a union between one man and one woman and that sexual relations take place within this framework.

The bill only affects federal law, not state law. But it is an important step in the right direction of establishing a federal legal regime protecting those with traditional biblical faith and convictions regarding marriage, sex, and sin.

This law would not preclude anyone from choosing alternative lifestyles. What it would do is protect those who, because of their faith, reject those lifestyles from being forced to accept them.

Why do we need a new federal law to protect those whose religious convictions see marriage as it has been understood for our whole national history?

Because a war is taking place in our country to delegitimize religion and to use every means of legal aggression to make it impossible for those with traditional biblical faith to live according to their convictions in their public lives….

By Star Parker – One News Now –

Obscure TPP Provision: Corporations Replacing Nations As the Rulers of the Planet

An obscure Trans-Pacific Partnership provision will serve to threaten the very existence of the nation state and replace governmental authority with the power and the whim of the corporation….

When something is secret and kept from you, it is usually very bad for you! As America races toward her date with destiny, there is yet another “fundamentally transforming” event coming her way and that event is known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The TPP is a plot designed to hand over control of the world’s governments to private corporate interests and it is all being done in secret. Even Congress is not allowed to examine the TPP provisions.

Under the TPP, for example, GMO labels for US food would not be allowed. To make matters worse, there is an obscure portion of the TPP and other trade agreements which is so diabolical, so devastating, that the planet will eventually resemble the movie, Rollerball, in which a small number of corporations will rule the planet.

Many of us in the media believe that some of the effects of the TPP will be felt before the coming war and martial law crackdown. However, after careful analysis, I am convinced that the brunt of the TPP will be felt after the America we know has been totally taken over in a post-war and post-economic collapse scenario. In other words, following World War III, the United Nations, as a body, will be replaced with the United Corporations. At the end of the day, it does not matter when the implementation of the TPP comes, because when it does, America will no longer be recognizable to anyone who has grown up in this once great country. The reason that America will no longer be recognizable is because America will no longer exist because of a key provision contained in the TPP.

Within a few short years, following implementation of the TPP, which will surely grow from the 40% of the world’s population that it will soon control as it will eventually encompass 100% of the planet. The TPP will eliminate all nation states as the ruling authority and it will be supplanted by corporate authority. This will be made possible because of an obscure provision of the TPP known as the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). ISDS is a key component of the TPP. Unfortunately, for the planet, ISDS principles are being negotiated as I write these words, outside of the TPP, in ongoing trade deals between the United States and the European Union. ISDS allows corporations to sue governments, for any government action (at any level, including local government level) which hinders a corporation’s future profits. Literally, Monsanto could provably be poisoning the entire population of a nation and the nation could do nothing which might result in the loss of profits to Monsanto. This also means that as a private citizen, if you organize a boycott against Monsanto, you could be sued in a foreign court for obstructing Monsanto profits.

If a corporation feels that a government has impeded its ability to maximize profits, a suit is filed, outside the country being sued, and the case will be heard by an arbitration panel of trade lawyers, in a jurisdiction totally of the corporation’s choosing. Under ISDS, the dispute panel may only consider the ‘free trade’ values of the case. No other factors may be considered when deciding the case. This means that these corporate panels must disregard values of public health, civil liberties, environmental protection, or the rights of workers (e.g. working conditions) or any other Constitutionally protected liberties.

ISDS will primarily be enacted through the TPP legal process. However, the corporations, growing impatient with the progress of implementation of the TPP have begun to include ISDS in most trade talks on the planet. This means the end of the nation state as we know it and before you applaud the demise of corrupt governments, consider what we are replacing national governments with….

By Dave Hodges – The Common Sense Show –

Arizona House Committee Passes Measure to Effectively Nullify EPA Rules

Today, an Arizona state House Committee approved a measure that would require the state to block unilateral EPA agency rules over “nonnavigable intrastate waters or waterways,” an action that would make them nearly impossible to enforce.

Introduced by Rep. Brenda Barton (R-Payson), House Concurrent Resolution 2037 (HCR2037) directly challenges and would effectively nullify in practice new rules over in-state waters issued unilaterally in 2014 by the EPA. Citing new authority in the state constitution passed by voters under Prop 122 last fall, the legislation would withdraw critical state enforcement and material support for enforcing such rules. It passed the House Rules committee today by a vote of 5-2.

If approved by the legislature, HCR2037 would bypass the Governor’s desk and go to a vote of the People. It reads, in part:

Section 1. A. To preserve the checks and balances of the constitution of the united states, this state hereby exercises its sovereign authority:

1. To prohibit any federal agency or official from enforcing any federal regulation that purports to regulate nonnavigable, intrastate waters or waterways within the boundaries of this state unless that regulation is clearly and manifestly authorized by an act of congress.

2. To prohibit this state, its agencies and all of its political subdivisions from using any personnel or resources to enforce, administer or cooperate with any federal action or program that purports to regulate nonnavigable, intrastate waters or waterways unless a showing is first made in the courts of this state without deference to any administrative determination and based on clear and convincing evidence that such regulation is absolutely necessary to the exercise of powers expressly delegated to the federal government by the constitution of the united states.

The issue at hand is that the EPA and the United States Army Corps of Engineers lack the authority to enforce proposed rules published in the Federal Register titled “Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’ under the Clean Water Act (CWA).

According to the Federal Register, the proposal would involve the following:

The agencies propose to define ‘‘waters of the United States’’ in section (a) of the proposed rule for all sections of the CWA to mean: Traditional navigable waters; interstate waters, including interstate wetlands; the territorial seas; impoundments of traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, including interstate wetlands, the territorial seas, and tributaries, as defined, of such waters; tributaries, as defined, of traditional navigable waters, interstate waters,1 or the territorial seas; and adjacent waters, including adjacent wetlands. Waters in these categories would be jurisdictional ‘‘waters of the United States’’ by rule—no additional analysis would be required.

While interstate waters appear to be a target of the proposed rule, another section was written so broadly that virtually all waters will be under its reach:

In addition, the agencies propose that “other waters” (those not fitting in any of the above categories) could be determined to be “waters of the United States” through a case-specific showing that, either alone or in combination with similarly situated “other waters” in the region, they have a “significant nexus” to a traditional navigable water, interstate water, or the territorial seas. The proposed rule also offers a definition of significant nexus and explains how similarly situated “other waters” in the region should be identified.

Should the legislature and People of Arizona pass HCR2037, any attempt by the EPA to establish authority over nonnavigable intrastate waters will be met with resistance and an effort to block such moves.

In addition, passage would ensure that the state doesn’t use any resources to assist the federal government in such activities. As approved by Arizona voters in Nov. 2014, Prop 122 is now part of the state constitution creating a mechanism to withdraw all state support for federal programs outside the scope of the constitution….

By Michael Boldin – Tenth Amendment Center –

Wyoming Food Freedom Act Becomes Law

Wyoming Governor Matt Mead signed into law legislation that would stop the government from interfering in certain transactions between consumers and farmers to procure food.

The bill was sponsored by state Rep. Tyler Lindholm and will “stop overregulation of locally produced foods typically sold at farmers markets and like venues. As long as there is only a single transaction between the producer and the informed end consumer, there would be no government regulation or inspection. Meats would not be allowed to be sold in this manner, except for chicken. Chicken meat is already allowed under federal regulations.”

Said Lindholm, “This law will take local foods off the black market. It will no longer be illegal to buy a lemon meringue pie from your neighbor or a jar of milk from your local farm.”

The government has long interfered in the relationship between local farmers and their communities to the detriment of the communities’ freedom and hurting small farmer’s abilities to sell, literally, the fruits of their labors….

By Liz Sheld – PJ Media –

Alabama Supreme Court rules 7-1: no gay marriage licenses

The Alabama Supreme Court ordered probate judges on Tuesday to stop issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples in apparent defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court, underscoring the depth of opposition to gay matrimony in the socially conservative state.

The 7-1 ruling comes roughly three weeks after U.S. District Judge Callie Granade’s decision overturning Alabama’s ban on gay marriage went into effect after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to put it on hold.

“As it has done for approximately two centuries, Alabama law allows for ‘marriage’ between only one man and one woman,” Tuesday’s state supreme court ruling said. “Alabama probate judges have a ministerial duty not to issue any marriage license contrary to this law.

“Nothing in the United States Constitution alters or overrides this duty.”

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed this year to take up the issue of whether states can ban gay marriage. Its expected ruling in June likely will provide clarity on the issue in Alabama, as well as the 13 states where gay marriage remains illegal.

The Alabama high court ruling, which granted an emergency petition by two Alabama groups opposed to gay marriage, will likely not affect those same-sex couples in Alabama who have already received marriage licenses….

By Jonathan Kaminsky – Reuters –

Minnesota: Police Wear Body Cams, No One Can See Footage

From the one-way-surveillance-and-zero-accountability department:

More cities and states are getting behind the idea that outfitting their law enforcement officers with body cameras will result in better policing and more accountability. Unfortunately, many of them then follow this moment of clarity by gutting the “accountability” part of the programs.

Los Angeles law enforcement agencies will only turn over camera footage if it’s part of a criminal or civil suit. Florida legislators are pushing for additional exceptions in the state’s open records laws specifically for body camera footage and specifically at the request of the state’s police union.

Minnesota seems to be taking the same route. The state wants its law enforcement officers to wear cameras but some legislators don’t feel the public should have access to the footage. A bill supported by the state’s law enforcement aims to keep as many recordings out of the public’s hands as possible.

The bill states:

[A]udio and video data captured by a portable video recording system that is not part of an active or inactive criminal investigation must be destroyed within 90 days of the date the data were captured, unless the data subject, or any peace officer identifiable by the data, submits a written request to the law enforcement agency to retain the data for possible use in a future proceeding related to the circumstances under which the data were originally collected. Any law enforcement agency that receives a request to retain data shall retain it for a reasonable time, based upon the likelihood of its future use and the agency’s policies for retention. Peace officers who are identifiable by portable video recording system data shall have unrestricted access to the data while it is retained and must be permitted to make copies.

It seems reasonable… until you realize what it’s allowing law enforcement agencies to do. Anything retained by these agencies will only be accessible to civilians in the recording, and then only by request. Alleged misconduct that is cleared by law enforcement oversight will move affected recordings into the “destroy” pile, which means agencies can start deleting potentially damning footage almost immediately….

By Tim Cushing – Tech Dirt –

Ohio Supreme Court: Gun Penalties Don’t Apply To Cops

COLUMBUS, Ohio — The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a specification in the law that provides stiffer penalties for people who use a gun in commission of a crime cannot be applied to a police officer convicted of wrongdoing while performing his duty.

In a split decision, the court held that Ohio’s firearms specification was intended to deter criminals from using firearms while committing an offense and not to deter police officers from carrying a firearm while on duty.

The case involved an Ottawa Hills police officer, Thomas White, who shot a motorcyclist he had pulled over for a traffic stop, leaving him paralyzed.

By Robert Higgs – The Liberty Crier –

“Moderate Muslims…deceive Americans not to resist the process of Islam”

We sat down with a leading Shariah lawyer from Iran, Daniel Akbari, to discuss his illuminating new book, Honor Killing: A Professional’s Guide to Sexual Relations and Ghayra Violence from the Islamic Sources, in which he seeks to awaken Americans to the generally antithetical nature of Islam to Judeo-Christian society, and specifically Shariah-dictated domestic violence towards women — up to and including so-called honor killings — and how we in the West can prevent such atrocities.

During the extensive interview, which you can skip to here, we had a chance to ask him a series of questions on the nature of Islam, its goals, tactics, how Western Muslims become jihadists, and all manner of other topics.

But it was in response to a question on whether there is such a thing as moderate Islam that Mr. Akbari, a man who studied at the seat of Shia religious learning at the Tehran University School of Law, and specialized in criminal and family law before leaving Iran, gave perhaps his most stunning response of all, stating:

What Erdogan, the Prime Minister of Turkey says is actually perfect and totally Islamic because Islam is Islam. We don’t have such a thing like — “radical Islam extremism” — many things that are said in Islam like beheading, like stoning, like flogging — they are not extremism acts, those are pure Islam.
….The second thing is, this is not “extremism,” this is “fundamentalism.” People who believe in [the] Koran understand it and practice it and take it serious.

About moderate Muslims, we have to…make a distinction between those people who come from Islamic backgrounds, come from [the] Middle East, their names are ‘Mohammed’…they might not believe in [the] Koran at all. They might just be atheists. They just come from that region.

Who are moderate Muslims in reality according to Akbari?

….Moderate Muslims actually are kind of like CAIR [Council on American-Islamic Relations] people — people who are Muslim Brotherhood types…and these people fight for Islam, love it, but they give a peaceful feature, and good-looking [nature] to Islam, to…deceive Americans not to resist the process of Islam.

Sometimes they deceive Americans this way that “We are the same as your neighbor….

By Benjamin Weingarten – The Blaze –

Sudan Aids Muslim Investors Take Last Piece Of Church Land

JUBA, South Sudan (Morning Star News) – The Sudanese government today helped Muslim investors take over the remaining property of Khartoum Bahri Evangelical Church in Khartoum North, church leaders said.

Riot police on two trucks arrived at the church property at noon and assisted in the seizure of the land by force.

“Over the past year they have aided another Muslim businessman to seize a piece of the land, and today they are taking the only piece of land left for the church,” a church leader who requested anonymity told Morning Star News.

The take-over comes less than a month after the government seized another Christian facility in Khartoum.

The church is appealing to Christians worldwide to pray for them.

“We are asking all of you to pray for our situation in Sudan,” another church leader said. “Oh God, have mercy upon us.”

On Oct. 5, 2013, Sudan’s police and security forces broke through the church fence and beat and arrested Christians in the compound, asserting parts of the property belonged to a Muslim investor accompanying them. As Muslims nearby shouted, “Allahu Akbar [God is greater],” plainclothes police ….

Church leaders hold ownership papers to the property and believe any contract surrendering it comes from a government ruse.

Harassment, arrests and persecution of Christians have intensified since the secession of South Sudan in 2011, when President Omar al-Bashir vowed to adopt a stricter version of sharia (Islamic law) and recognize only Islamic culture and the Arabic language.

The Sudanese Minister of Guidance and Endowments announced in April 2013 that no new licenses would be granted for building new churches in Sudan, citing a decrease in the South Sudanese population.

Sudan since 2012 has expelled foreign Christians and bulldozed church buildings on the pretext that they belonged to South Sudanese. Besides raiding Christian bookstores and arresting Christians, authorities threatened to kill South Sudanese Christians who do not leave or cooperate with them in their effort to find other Christians.

From the Religious Freedom Coalition –

THINKING THROUGH MY KEYBOARD

So few people do that anymore…think, that is. It is so much easier to waste your time watching the boob tube where the talking heads tell you what to think, or perhaps sports programming, where the goal is to occupy your mind so that you don’t think at all. Or better yet, they keep you glued to your hand-held device while you waste away the hours.

Well, I like to think, and today I would like to share just a few of my thoughts with you. I make no judgments and cast no aspersions; I simply pose some questions that rattle around inside my head. Think with me for a moment. Feel free to come to your own conclusions. Ready? Here we go…

Obama’s “Christianity” –

Governor Scott Walker was recently asked if he believed the President is a Christian. The media went bonkers when he refused to express his views regarding Obama’s Christianity, yet Obama has spent a great deal of time telling us that ISIS isn’t Muslim. In fact, according to Obama, none of the terrorists are Muslim, Boko Haram isn’t Muslim, Al Qaeda isn’t Muslim, and neither are Al-Badr, Ansar Al-Islam, Hamas, or the scores of others listed here. However, we aren’t permitted to question Obama’s faith while he questions everybody else’s. Matthew 7:16 says, “Ye shall know them by their fruits.”

Rudy Guiliani and President Obama share the same views on most issues. Both are pro-abortion, pro-gay, anti-gun, big-tent, big-government politicians. One happens to be a Catholic-Christian; the other appears to be a Muslim-Christian. In reality, neither of them holds values consistent with Christianity….

Jesus Cursed –

Did you know that Jesus cursed? That’s right, He cursed a lot. But today we confuse cursing with cussing. Many of the words that we consider “curse” words appear in the Bible. To cuss is “to profane” or use unholy words. To curse, is to project evil, harm, or danger upon another. Jesus didn’t cuss, but He certainly did a lot of cursing. The 2nd Commandment has nothing to do with cussing, but rather using the Name of God for an unholy purpose. Do people take the Lord’s name in vain when they calls themselves Christian yet don’t adhere to Biblical positions? Is that worse than cussing?

Jesus Called People Names –

Is calling people names a sin? If so, then does that make Jesus a sinner? He called people “vipers, hypocrites, whited sepulchers, a child of hell, fools, serpents…” If Jesus was all about love, why did He use such harsh language when speaking to “sinners?” If Jesus “loves the sinner but hates the sin”, why is it that He casts the sinner into the lake of fire instead of merely the sin? Souls go to hell, not sin….

By Coach Dave Daubenmire – News With Views –

FBI Raids Republic of Texas Meeting – Common Law Court

The Bryan Police Department, the Brazos County Sheriff’s Office, the Kerr County Sheriff’s Office, Agents of the Texas District Attorney, the Texas Rangers and the FBI raided a congressional meeting for the Republic of Texas held in Bryan, Texas.

More than 20 police and agents prevented the members from leaving, seized their cellphones, recording equipment, computers and fingerprinted them.

The raid was in response to to legal summons sent by Republic of Texas members to a Kerr County judge and bank employee. The organization demanded the judge and bank employee appear before Republic of Texas court held at the Veterans and Foreign Wars building in Bryan on the day the police raided the meeting.

State and federal officials say the chief justice of the international Common Law Court for the Republic of Texas had issued writs of quo warranto, mandamus and a subpoena not recognized by county, state and federal governments.

“You can’t just let people go around filing false documents to judges trying to make them appear in front of courts that aren’t even real courts,” Kerr County sheriff Rusty Hierholzer told the Houston Chronicle.

The group believes the state of Texas was illegally annexed by the federal government and Texas remains an independent nation under occupation.

Police told the newspaper they did not want a repeat of a 1997 week-long standoff between the group and police.

The Republic of Texas group cites public opinion polls that show significant support for the secession of Texas and other states from the federal Union.

A poll conducted last September during the Scottish independence vote shows one in four Americans are in favor of seceding from the United States.

Former Congressman Ron Paul believes secession is already underway in the United States.

“I would like to start off by talking about the subject and the subject is secession and nullification, the breaking up of government, and the good news is it’s going to happen. It’s happening,” Paul said last month during a speech at the Mises Institute.

“And it’s not going to be because there will be enough people in the U.S. Congress to legislate it. It won’t happen. It will be defacto. You know, you’ll have a gold standard when the paper standard fails and we’re getting awfully close to that. And people will have to resort to taking care of themselves. So when conditions breakdown, there’s going to be an alternative. And I think that’s what we’re witnessing.”

By Kurt Nimmo – Infowars –

Speaking Freely About Politics Can Cost You Your Job

HERE’S a quiz for the coming campaign season. Which one of these actions could get you disciplined or fired?

A) Hanging political cartoons on your office door.

B) Sending emails to your colleagues soliciting support for a controversial cause.

C) Writing a blog at home stating your opinions about a local campaign and posting it on Facebook.

D) All of the above.

The answer is D. Now, that’s not an absolute. It depends on whether you are a private or public employee. It also depends on where you live.

But if you’re a nonunion private employee, your boss has great latitude to control your political actions. As Lee Tien, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, put it, “You don’t have the right to speak freely in the workplace.” Or even outside it.

It’s an issue that bubbles up around every major election, said Paula Brantner, executive director of Workplace Fairness, an informational site for employees. But the combination of intense political polarization, the Internet’s power to spread and magnify seemingly innocuous or private statements and technology’s growing ability to blur the line between workplace and home, make it a conundrum for employers and employees.

So it’s crucial that workers and their bosses understand their rights and responsibilities.

Here are the two most important points:

For private employees, who account for about 85 percent of the work force, the First Amendment’s guarantee offers no protection from being fired for something you’ve said, either in the workplace or outside of it, as on social media. That’s because the amendment addresses actions by the government to impede free speech, not by the private sector.

And while federal laws bar employers from firing workers because of such variables as their race, religion and gender, there is no such protection for political affiliation or activity.

A handful of states and localities address this issue, among them New York, California, Colorado, North Dakota and the District of Columbia. The broadest-based laws, such as those in California and New York, make it illegal to discriminate on the basis of an employees’ political activity or beliefs in or out of work, Ms. Brantner said, unless such activity interferes with the functioning of the business….

By Alina Tugend – The New York Times –

The Language of Rights and Privileges

Have you noticed how governments want to own your language, so they can more easily manipulate you into giving up your rights and resources?

All Caps Names –

For example, Bob Podolsky is a real person, and has all sorts of natural rights. Yet every single piece of correspondence coming from the BORG such as Bank statements, Drivers Licenses, IRS correspondence, Traffic Tickets has my name in all capital letters. I know these people went to school and learned the same grammar I did. Why is my name is all CAPS? Somehow, BOB PODOLSKY, became a vassal of the state. The argument, the all caps name is not the real person, has been thrown out as frivolous in court, yet there must be a reason why is it done this way.

Right to Travel –

Similarly, I have a right to travel on public roads by riding a conveyance under my control. This is something that human beings have done since the domestication of animals, somehow adding a motor to power it and voilà, the state re-names the conveyance a Motor Vehicle and I am now a Driver. Thus the state converts my “right” into a “privilege” and grants itself the “right” to force me to pay for these privileges by buying a title, a license plate, a driver’s license, and specified insurance. If you don’t fill out forms and pay, this magically grants a ‘right” to an armed group of thugs in costumes to beat you up, put you in a cage, steal your “property” and fine you.

Right to Migrate –

Since time began, humans have had the right to move to wherever they pleased, based on resources, climate, scenery or religious beliefs. That’s how the the American Indians got to the western Hemisphere, Australians and New Zealanders got to Oceania, Caucasians moved to Europe and the Pilgrims got to Plymouth Rock. They didn’t like where they were, and they moved. However the government calls the right to move, a privileged known as “immigration”. If you don’t fill out forms and pay, this magically grants a ‘right” to an armed group of thugs in costumes to beat you up, put you in a cage, steal your “property” and fine you.

Right to Property –

It used to be that a human being had the right to own the land they live on. The Government changed this into a privilege by converting all own-able land into “Real Estate” You acquire the privilege of being a “tenant” on your Government controlled Bank owned land. It is impossible to own it. Want to test that? Stop paying the property tax. If you don’t fill out forms and pay, this magically grants a ‘right” to an armed group of thugs in costumes to beat you up, put you in a cage, steal your “property” and fine you.

….Natural Person –

….Right to Eat –

….About “Authority” –

According to Larken Rose, whose philosophy I much admire, the whole concept of “authority” exists but for one purpose, to fool the public into complying willingly with the demands of a particular class of people who consider themselves our “betters”, our “superiors”, our modern “nobility”, and ultimately our “masters”. In their eyes, the rest of us are of no value to them except as a source of endless plunder – and they are forever inventing new excuses to abuse the rest of us financially, socially, taking away our natural liberties, stealing our property, and enacting violence against us at their will.

While they claim this behavior is necessary in order to “protect the public”, the reality is that this notion is a total fiction, that in fact the real purpose of most of todays laws is merely to excuse the actions of our gargantuan “plunderers league” – who do to the rest of us whatever they want, up to and including killing us, with complete impunity. Surely the governments of the world collectively comprise the biggest, most powerful organized crime syndicate the world has ever known – egged on I suspect by previously existing crime syndicates that joined ranks with them – the Mafia, I believe, being a case in point.

Walk into a courthouse anywhere, and at any rank, and consider that the salaries of everyone working in the building are paid for with plunder – money stolen from ordinary folks in punishment for doing the things we all have a right to do. And their only “authority” for doing this is the fact that someone who supposedly “represents” you, wrote on a piece of paper that they had the “right” to plunder you….

By Bob Podolsky – Titanians.org –

THE DECEPTION THREATENING AMERICA’S SURVIVAL: ‘All Lies are Equally True’

George Friedman wrote in his book, Flashpoints that Civilizations are divided into three phases. The first is Barbarism in which people believe the laws and beliefs of their village are the laws of nature. The second is Civilization where people continue to believe in the justice of their ways but harbor openness to the idea that they might not have everything correct. The third is Decadence. It begins the moment people come to believe there is no truth, or that All Lies are Equally True.

Watching the Obama administration flounder around so many things ranging from whether or not to target ISIS to telling Christians not to get on their high horses generates anger and head shaking. These problems bring me to the conclusion that at the highest levels, Washington, D.C. believes All Lies are Equally True. Two pieces of core evidence take me there. First, the Lord hates those who shed innocent blood. Since the early seventies, our nation has shed innocent blood to the tune of 50 million aborted babies. That number is coming home in the form of lost consumers, lost workers, lost intellect, and lost taxpayers. In our coming future, that equates to lost soldiers, lost Marines, and lost men and women defending our nation. In a land where All Lies are Equally True, dismissing a voiceless, faceless baby to oblivion becomes a medical detail in the ethics of convenience.

A second piece of core evidence arrives with our failure to protect innocent blood. If the Lord hates those who shed innocent blood, then he loves those who protect innocent blood. As I write this column, hard, violent, faith filled men are going in harm’s way to rescue women and children from ISIS. While Washington, D.C. wrestles with their amoral ass-inanity trying to figure out how to even respond, rank and file Americans see the correctness of protecting innocent life.

Our Perfumed Princes walk a tortuous maze where All Lies are Equally True. Their disconnect from the American people grows because they cannot understand people who still believe innocent life is precious. The worst part about the decadence of believing All Lies are Equally True is that they do not have to make any decisions because all decisions are wrong. Or Right. Or not necessary. Or maybe will go away.

Rome did not exactly fall. It sort of crumbled until Attila the Hun and his minions took out the last vestiges of an empire that had more than enough wealth to raise a first class Army. The problem with Rome in the 3rd and 4th Century was that it was in the last decadent throes of a nation where All Lies were Equally True. As a result, in the words of Gibbons, rank and file citizens hated their own government more than the barbarians at the gate. Families fled north to escape confiscatory taxation that otherwise swept them into slavery for failure to pay taxes.

The Last Centurion (a nameless man tired of enduring the death of his nation) married a barbarian bride somewhere in central Europe and started over in a feudal landscape. He had to take it back to Barbarian 101… His people believing the laws and beliefs of their village were the laws of nature.

Our nation is different from Rome but our demons are very similar. Like the Romans, we face a rising Moslem civilization that is wiping people, nations, and entire histories into dust. Our own leaders imitate the Emperors by coming from a morally relative place where All Lies are Equally True. They fail to believe the civilizing strengths and great beliefs the founding fathers used to kick start our Republic.

It is ironic that just as the Enlightenment was a war against church and faith, our similar New Age deceivers actively war against believers. That war straddles the courts, community, public school and the boiling pot of weapons confiscation. The mantel of “Right to Life” seems as far down in the bin of mediocrity as the issue of slavery after the 1856 Dred-Scott decision.

Historically, when an empire or nation hits the point of ultimate decadence in which the beliefs that made it great recede into a background where All Lies are Equally True, the nation falls….

By Clearchus – The Clash Daily –

US Police Kill Over 70 Times Rate of Other First-World Nations

In case you’ve been under a rock lately, it is becoming quite clear that police in the US can and will kill people, even unarmed people, even on video, and do so with impunity.

The tallying methods, or rather lack thereof, used by both the FBI and individual police departments to count the amount of people killed by police, have been shown to be staggeringly inaccurate.

However, this inability of the government to count the number of people it kills, has been met with multiple alternative means of calculating just how deadly the state actually is.

One of these citizen run databases, is the website www.killedbypolice.com. The site is basically a spreadsheet that lists every person killed by cops in the years 2013 and 2014. In addition to naming those killed, it also provides a link to media reports for each of the killings, age, sex and race if available.

The tally for 2014? 1,100 people killed by those sworn to protect. That is an average of three people a day.

Do not mistake this as saying that those who were killed were innocent. However, when we look at violent crime in this country, we can see that it is at an all time low.

While violence among citizens has dropped, violence against citizens carried out by police has been rising sharply.

When we look at citizens killed by police over the last two years, deaths have increased 44 percent in this short time; 763 people were killing by police in 2013.

As a comparison, the total number of US troops killed in Afghanistan and Iraq, in 2014 was 58.

Fewer soldiers were killed in war than citizens back home in “the land of the free” in 2014, by a large margin.

So why is that?

Is this some natural tendency of police in “free societies” to kill their citizens more, in an effort to maintain this freedom? Hardly, and hardly is the US a free country.

According to the 2014 Legatum Prosperity Index released in November, in the measure of personal freedom, the United States has fallen from 9th place in 2010 to 21st worldwide—behind such countries as Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Uruguay and Costa Rica.

Other such rankings systems show the US as low as 46.

Let’s look at our immediate neighbors to the north, Canada. The total number of citizens killed by law enforcement officers in the year 2014, was 14; that is 78 times less people than the US.

….China, whose population is 4 and 1/2 times the size of the United States, recorded 12 killings by law enforcement officers in 2014.

Let that sink in. Law enforcement in the US killed 92 times more people than a country with nearly 1.4 billion people.

It doesn’t stop there.

From 2013-2014, German police killed absolutely no one….

Unfortunately when officers do speak out against their own department they are met with horrid backlash from their peers.

The Free Thought Project is contacted regularly by police officers who know the system they uphold is completely corrupt, but they find it nearly impossible to call out the corruption…

By Matt Agorist – The Free Thought Project –

Border Patrol orders: release all illegal alien drunk drivers!

If you are caught driving while intoxicated and happen to be an American citizen than you’re going to be arrested, fined, and potentially jailed – and rightfully so, as by driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs you are putting the lives of others in danger when you drive on public roads.

But, as we’ve come to learn in recent years, if you are an undocumented alien who has entered this country illegally, the laws don’t really apply to you. You not only get to break the law by entering the United States without authorization, but you also get free health care, housing, food and tax refunds even if you falsified your employment paperwork.

Though all of the aforementioned benefits have crossed the line as many hardworking Americans struggle to make ends meet for their own families while also paying for the free ride being given to illegal immigrants, the latest move by the Obama administration is nothing short of outrageous.

It is not only a slap in the face to Americans who are fed up with what are essentially two different legal systems, the new policy will result in the deaths of countless Americans.

According to Judicial Watch, the Obama administration has ordered all Border Patrol agents to stop apprehending illegal aliens who have been detained for drunk driving.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Not only are illegal aliens being released and their violations of U.S. immigration law being ignored, but now, even if they are hammered drunk the Border Patrol has been advised to let them go on their way while under the influence.

Obtained by Judicial Watch this week, the notice is titled “Enforcement Options With Alcohol-Impaired Drivers” and directs the 4,000-plus U.S. Border Patrol agents in the Tucson, Arizona sector to “release” individuals under the influence and “allow them to go on their way.”

The document acknowledges that this feels counter-intuitive for Border Patrol agents, but eases concerns by answering a hypothetical question for the officers who have sworn to uphold the law: “If you allow this driver to continue down the road and they kill someone, aren’t you liable?” The answer is no, according to the new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) memo. “There is no legal requirement for a Border Patrol agent to intervene in a state crime, including DUI,” the order says, adding that “therefore there is generally no liability that will attach to the agent or agency for failing to act in this situation.”

Great, so when concerned Border Patrol officers let someone go, they don’t have to worry about being sued by the family of the individuals that will inevitably be killed by drunk drivers who are set free to roam the streets of America.

By Mac Slavo – Common Dreams – Intellihub –

Virginia House Votes 96-4 Against NDAA Indefinite Detention

RICHMOND (Feb. 10, 2015) – Today, the Virginia House of Delegates passed a bill to push back against federal indefinite detention powers. The vote was 96-4.

In 2013, Virginia was the first state to pass legislation in response to the indefinite detention powers purportedly authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012, still active today. That law was a first step, limited in scope, forbidding state agencies, in some situations, from cooperating with some federal attempts to exercise the indefinite detention provisions written into sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act.

For 2015, House Bill 2144 (HB2144), sponsored by Del. Benjamin L. Cline (R-Rockbridge), takes things two steps beyond simply refusing to cooperate with federal agents in the event of indefinite detention in Virginia. It sets the stage to create the type of leverage and attention D.C. would not want public if it refuses to cooperate with the state of Virginia.

This legislation would require two things from the feds if it wants to detains, pursuant to NDAA, any U.S. citizen in the state of Virginia.

One:

“the U.S.Secretary of Defense shall provide notification within 24 hours of the detention to both the Secretary of Public Safety and the chief law-enforcement officer of the locality in which the citizen is detained…

Two:

the U.S. Secretary of Defense or his designee shall seek authorization from the chief law-enforcement officer of the locality in which the citizen is detained prior to removal of the citizen from the locality”

A series of events is triggered upon failure to comply during such detainment of any person in the state of Virginia by the DoD. The state of Virginia will gather and publish Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs). These are essentially partnerships with state funds attached to them. These agreements are not necessarily legally binding, but usually offer some privacy between state, private enterprises (contractors), and federal agencies. Much of this kind of information usually remains hidden from the general public….

By Michael Boldin – Tenth Amendment Center –

The Eugenics Plot Behind the Minimum Wage

In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” Martin Luther King Jr. identifies the government as the enemy of the rights and dignity of blacks. He was locked up for marching without a permit. King cites the injustices of the police and courts in particular. And he inspired a movement to raise public consciousness against state brutality, especially as it involved fire hoses, billy clubs, and jail cells.

Less obvious, however, had been the role of a more covert means of subjugation — forms of state coercion deeply embedded in the law and history of the United States. And they were offered as policies grounded in science and the scientific management of society.

Consider the minimum wage. How much does racism have to do with it? Far more than most people realize. A careful look at its history shows that the minimum wage was originally conceived as part of a eugenics strategy — an attempt to engineer a master race through public policy designed to cleanse the citizenry of undesirables. To that end, the state would have to bring about the isolation, sterilization, and extermination of nonprivileged populations.

The eugenics movement — almost universally supported by the scholarly and popular press in the first decades of the 20th century — came about as a reaction to the dramatic demographic changes of the latter part of the 19th century. Incomes rose and lifetimes had expanded like never before in history. Such gains applied to all races and classes. Infant mortality collapsed. All of this was due to a massive expansion of markets, technology, and trade, and it changed the world. It meant a dramatic expansion of population among all groups. The great unwashed masses were living longer and reproducing faster….

The eugenics movement, as an application of the principle of the “planned society,” was deeply hostile to free markets. As The New Republic summarized in a 1916 editorial:

“Imbecility breeds imbecility as certainly as white hens breed white chickens; and under laissez-faire imbecility is given full chance to breed, and does so in fact at a rate far superior to that of able stocks.”

To counter the trends unleashed by capitalism, states and the national government began to implement policies designed to support “superior” races and classes and discourage procreation of the “inferior” ones. As explained by Edwin Black’s 2003 book
, War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, the goal as regards women and children was exclusionist, but as regards nonwhites, it was essentially exterminationist. The chosen means were not firing squads and gas chambers but the more peaceful and subtle methods of sterilization, exclusion from jobs, and coercive segregation.

It was during this period and for this reason that we saw the first trial runs of the minimum wage in Massachusetts in 1912. The new law pertained only to women and children as a measure to disemploy them and other “social dependents” from the labor force. Even though the measure was small and not well enforced, it did indeed reduce employment among the targeted groups.

To understand why this wasn’t seen as a failure, take a look at the first modern discussions of the minimum wage appearing in the academic literature. Most of these writings would have been completely forgotten but for a seminal 2005 article in the Journal of Economic Perspectives by Thomas C. Leonard.

Leonard documents an alarming series of academic articles and books appearing between the 1890s and the 1920s that were remarkably explicit about a variety of legislative attempts to squeeze people out of the work force. These articles were not written by marginal figures or radicals but by the leaders of the profession, the authors of the great textbooks, and the opinion leaders who shaped public policy.

“Progressive economists, like their neoclassical critics,” Leonard explains, “believed that binding minimum wages would cause job losses. However, the progressive economists also believed that the job loss induced by minimum wages was a social benefit, as it performed the eugenic service ridding the labor force of the ‘unemployable.’”

At least the eugenicists, for all their pseudo-scientific blathering, were not naïve about the effects of wage floors. These days, you can count on media talking heads and countless politicians to proclaim how wonderful the minimum wage is for the poor. Wage floors will improve the standard of living, they say. But back in 1912, they knew better — minimum wages exclude workers — and they favored them precisely because such wage floors drive people out of the job market. People without jobs cannot prosper and are thereby discouraged from reproducing. Minimum wages were designed specifically to purify the demographic landscape of racial inferiors and to keep women at the margins of society.

The famed Fabian socialist Sidney Webb was as blunt as anyone in his 1912 article “The Economic Theory of the Minimum Wage”:

Legal Minimum Wage positively increases the productivity of the nation’s industry, by ensuring that the surplus of unemployed workmen shall be exclusively the least efficient workmen; or, to put it in another way, by ensuring that all the situations shall be filled by the most efficient operatives who are available.

The intellectual history shows that whole purpose of the minimum wage was to create unemployment among people who the elites did not believe were worthy of holding jobs.

And it gets worse….

Eugenics as an idea eventually lost favor after World War II, when it came to be associated with the Third Reich. But the labor policies to which it gave rise did not go away. They came to be promoted not as a method of exclusion and extermination but rather, however implausibly, as a positive effort to benefit the poor.

Whatever the intentions, the effects are still the same. On that the eugenicists were right. The eugenics movement, however evil its motive, understood an economic truth: the minimum wage excludes people from the job market. It takes away from marginal populations their most important power in the job market: the power to work for less. It cartelizes the labor market by allowing higher-wage groups access while excluding lower-wage groups.

King wrote of the cruelty of government in his day. That cruelty extends far back in time, and is crystallized by a wage policy that effectively makes productivity and upward mobility illegal. If we want to reject eugenic policies and the racial malice behind them, we should also repudiate the minimum wage and embrace the universal right to bargain.

By JEFFREY A. TUCKER – Foundation for Economic Education –

Do You Own Your Body? Vaccination By Force of Law ?

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie unwittingly ignited a firestorm earlier this week when he responded to a reporter’s question in Great Britain about forced vaccinations of children in New Jersey by suggesting that the law in the U.S. needs to balance the rights of parents against the government’s duty to maintain standards of public health.

Before Christie could soften the tone of his use of the word “balance,” Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul jumped into the fray to support the governor. In doing so, he made a stronger case for the rights of parents by advancing the view that all vaccines do not work for all children and the ultimate decision-maker should be parents and not bureaucrats or judges. He argued not for balance, but for bias — in favor of parents.

When Christie articulated the pro-balance view, he must have known that New Jersey law, which he enforces, has no balance, shows no deference to parents’ rights and permits exceptions to universal vaccinations only for medical reasons (where a physician certifies that the child will get sicker because of a vaccination) or religious objections. Short of those narrow reasons, in New Jersey, if you don’t vaccinate your children, you risk losing parental custody of them.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie unwittingly ignited a firestorm earlier this week when he responded to a reporter’s question in Great Britain about forced vaccinations of children in New Jersey by suggesting that the law in the U.S. needs to balance the rights of parents against the government’s duty to maintain standards of public health.

Before Christie could soften the tone of his use of the word “balance,” Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul jumped into the fray to support the governor. In doing so, he made a stronger case for the rights of parents by advancing the view that all vaccines do not work for all children and the ultimate decision-maker should be parents and not bureaucrats or judges. He argued not for balance, but for bias — in favor of parents.

The science is overwhelming that vaccinations work for most children most of the time. Paul, who is a physician, said, however, he knew of instances in which poorly timed vaccinations had led to mental disorders. Yet, he was wise enough to make the pro-freedom case, and he made it stronger than Christie did.

To Paul, the issue is not science. That’s because in a free society, we are free to reject scientific orthodoxy and seek unorthodox scientific cures. Of course, we do that at our peril if our rejection of truth and selection of alternatives results in harm to others.

The issue, according to Paul, is: WHO OWNS YOUR BODY? This is a question the government does not want to answer truthfully, because if it does, it will sound like Big Brother in George Orwell’s novel “1984.” That’s because the government believes it owns your body.

Paul and no less an authority than the U.S. Supreme Court have rejected that concept. Under the natural law, because you retain the rights inherent in your birth that you have not individually given away to government, the government does not own your body.

Rather, you do. And you alone can decide your fate with respect to the ingestion of medicine. What about children? Paul argues that parents are the natural and legal custodians of their children’s bodies until they reach maturity….

By Andrew P. Napolitano – Lew Rockwell.com –

Patent law reform to stop trolls could stifle innovation

House Republicans on Thursday restarted their campaign to reform U.S. patent laws, a bipartisan effort backed by heavyweights such as Google and Facebook that also has awakened protest from some conservatives who are fearful it will trample inventors’ protections.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, Virginia Republican and House Judiciary Committee chairman, reintroduced the Innovation Act, which passed in the House last session by a vote of 325-91 but was killed in the Senate.

Supporters say the bill will update intellectual property laws to rein in “patent trolls,” mostly shell companies that buy up vague patents with the intent of suing other companies for infringement.

“In recent years, we have seen an exponential increase in the use of weak or poorly granted patents by patent trolls to file numerous patent infringement lawsuits against American businesses with the hope of securing a quick payday,” Mr. Goodlatte said. “With our current patent laws being abused, American businesses small and large are being forced to spend valuable resources on litigation rather than on innovating and growing their businesses.”

Opponents of the legislation unveiled their high-profile pitchwoman, former Hewlett-Packard CEO and potential presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, who argued that the bill imposes overreaching standards on patent litigation that would make it hard for innovators to protect their property rights….

By Kellan Howell – The Washington Times –

Church Freedom and Corporation Sole vs. 501(c)(3) Church

Our goal here at ChurchFreedom.org is to help set America’s Churches FREE from 501(c)(3) and to raise up the next generation of leaders for the Body of Christ.To raise up Christian Leaders that will boldly preach 100% Biblical Truth. No wavering. No fear of backlash, IRS codes, or threats from the government. Just Pure Unfiltered Holy Spirit Empowered God-given fortitude.

We accomplish this by freely helping Christian leaders properly establish or financially reorganize their ministries with both a Church Establishment Affidavit and a Corporation Sole. With these two resources, a Church becomes lawfully immune to both 501(c)(3) political restrictions and current gender identity laws.

ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES: Take a look at the recent political effects of what happens when Christian Churches are barred from influencing public policy because of restrictive 501(c)(3) laws:

◾Gov’t tells Christian ministers: Perform same-sex weddings or face jail, fines.
◾The City of Houston Texas has demanded that local Churches turn over sermons for examination by the state to see if the Pastors discriminated against LGBTQ individuals.
◾Throughout America, the Internal Revenue Service is intimidating churches and pastors into silence on what Scripture says about candidates and elections.
◾A politically appointed activist Federal Judge has ruled that ALL Christian Pastor’s mandatory housing allowances have been ruled ‘un-constitutional’.
◾Elected Officials in New York have barred Christians from organizing in public schools.
◾In Montana, Canyon Ferry Road Baptist Church faced election law charges after a volunteer passed out petitions to place a marriage amendment on the Montana ballot.
◾In Arizona, Pastor Michael Salman of Harvest Christian Fellowship has been jailed for having Church services in his home.
◾In Arizona, Gilbert city officials ordered Oasis of Truth Church to stop meeting or holding Bible studies in its pastor’s private home.
◾Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed SB 1064, ‘Religious Freedom Act’ meant to protect Christian corporations from restrictive, ‘Gender Identity Laws’.
◾Over 32 States have adopted anti-discriminatory, “Gender Identity Laws” that restrict incorporations from discriminating against LGBTQ individuals in any form (this includes most 501c3 Churches).
◾California Democratic State Senator, Ricardo Lara introduced SB 323 in an attempt to legally force 501c3 Churches into accepting homosexuals as full members….

The benefits of the Corporation Sole are near limitless compared to every other form of a Church legally organizing itself. Let us explain each one of the benefits in great detail so you have a better understanding for how the Corporation Sole can bring legal deliverance to your ministry as a whole.

Benefit #1 – IT BRINGS RELIGIOUS FREEDOM OF SPEECH BACK TO THE CHURCH!: A Church/Ministry that has been properly established with a Statutory Declaration of Church Establishment Affidavit and has organized it’s finances with a Corporation Sole CAN participate and intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements) any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office (so long as the office of the Corporation Sole does not). It allows the Church itself (not the Corporation Sole) to influence politics, influence its members who to vote for or against any political candidate running for office and lobby congress.

Now, we’re not suggesting that your Church directly influences politics with a specific message, we want you to be Holy Spirit led in every message that is delivered out of your Church. However, we want your Church to reserve the RIGHT and PRIVILEGE that if the Lord DOES LEAD YOU to speak about public policy that you DO NOT FEAR the IRS attempting to revoke your Churches tax exemption status and that you speak the 100% uncompromising Word of God that the Holy Spirit leads you to say in regards to public policy….

Benefit #2 – Local Cities and Governments Can No Longer Impose Permits, Fines and Penalties to Churches for Helping Feed the Homeless….

Benefit #3 – A Corporation Sole Requires NO BOARD OF TRUSTEES….

Benefit #4 – The Church Is Now MANDATORILY EXEMPTED From Both Taxation and Being Required to File Annual Information Returns to the IRS….

Benefit #5 – NO BY-LAWS OR CHURCH CORPORATE CHARTER….

Benefit #6 – A CORPORATION SOLE CAN ISSUE PROMISSORY NOTES….

Benefit #7 – STATE TAX EXEMPTIONS….

Benefit #8 – TAX DEDUCTIBLE CONTRIBUTIONS….

Benefit #9 – TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY….

Benefit #10 – CLEAR LINE OF SUCCESSION….

Benefit #11 – DOES NOT REQUIRE AN ATTORNEY….

Benefit #12 – THE CORPORATION SOLE ACTS AS A NATURAL PERSON….

There is a possible legal argument to be made that even though a Corporation Sole is registered with a Secretary of State as a corporation, that it in fact has the same rights as individual rights, which supersede corporate law. It is the only known corporation in American law to do this. It is also important to note that this argument has not been used in Federal Court as a defense (because they have not thought to do so).

Learn Everything About the Corporation Sole and How to FREE Christians and the Church from Restrictive 501(c)(3) Laws….

From ChurchFreedom.org –

2nd Amendment threatened in Obama’s TPP trade plans

Giving President Obama fast-track authority to conclude an international trade agreement is like playing Russian roulette with six bullets in the chamber, says one of America’s leading gun rights organizations.

Gun Owners of America is blasting a congressional proposal that empowers Obama to unilaterally negotiate international agreements as “a ‘bait and switch’ scheme that could seriously impact the Second Amendment.”

House and Senate committees are currently preparing to hand Obama so-called “fast-track” trade promotion authority. It would enable the president to unilaterally negotiate the TransPacific Partnership, a trade and global governance agreement with the U.S. and 11 other nations bordering the Pacific Ocean.

Under fast-track rules, Congress would not be able to amend or even vet the completed agreement. It could only approve everything that Obama has included, including anything tucked away in the 99th page that no one really wants to talk about, or kill it.

Gun Owners of America warns fast track “delegates to Barack Obama the legislative authority to do anything he wants – absolutely anything – so long as he includes it in a ‘trade agreement.’”

Second Amendment defenders worry, for example, anti-gun measures such as gun or ammunition import bans could be relegated to the bowels of the so-called “trade agreement.” They say Congress would be unable to stop it “when every Establishment interest in Washington starts pushing Congress to immediately approve this ‘up-or-down’ deal.”

They point to the experience with the recently approved trillion-dollar “Cromnibus” spending bill, which included the largest funding increase in history for the federal gun database, empowered states to impose gun bans based on doctor’s orders and increased the budget for the ATF.

Fast track “is the same dynamic as the Cromnibus, and if we hadn’t just gone through that we wouldn’t see what will happen if they give him fast track,” Michael Hammond, legislative counsel with Gun Owners of America, told WND.

“Republicans whine about Obama usurping legislative authority, so why in heaven’s name are they thinking of giving him unlimited legislative authority to do anything he can put into a trade agreement?” Hammond asked

But Hammond points out the TransPacific Partnership agreement “has already largely been negotiated and is being kept secret only for the sole purpose of getting us to give it a rubber stamp.”

“What kind of idiot would bite on that deal?”

The Obama administration has been negotiating the TransPacific Partnership without congressional input for the past six years and acknowledges the deal is near completion.

“I don’t think it’s wise to allow Obama to promulgate any law he wants as long as he succeeds in sticking it in this agreement and then gets Congress’ assent on an up or down vote without any possibility for amendment,” Hammond said.

“It’s playing Russian Roulette with a gun with six bullets in the chamber,” he said….

By Curtis Ellis – WND –

EMBEDDED AND INSTITUTIONALIZED IRS CORRUPTION

As we continue our articles on corruption it has become readily apparent that there is almost nowhere to stop, in that waste, fraud, abuse and corruption are not ancillary to government, they are part and parcel of it. Most of the federal bureaucracies have not only grown into powers unto themselves with little oversight, they embody this culture of waste, fraud, abuse and corruption. This is the peril that each new nation faces as it ages, especially if the citizenry is wholly apathetic, as most Americans are today.

None in the list of the ever-growing federal bureaucracies epitomizes this waste, fraud, abuse and corruption more than the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Its power to collect or to incarcerate, by virtually any means is almost absolute. As many Americans have found out the hard way, challenges to IRS power are met with silence, or the intransigence, arrogance and corruption of America’s judicial system that have become pitch hitters and enablers of IRS corruption, overreach and abuse. We wrote about this judicial corruption in our last article entitled:

“Corruption, Collusion and Cronyism, America’s Judicial System”

The history of the IRS is checkered at best and much of the blame of what the IRS has become can be laid directly at the feet of the U. S. Congress. Since its creation out of the 16th Amendment in 1913, the IRS Act was reconstituted every two years by Congressional legislation. Then in 1939, the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) was codified into statute under 26 USC. Several machinations and revisions to the code took place in the 50’s, then again in the 80’s and once more in the 90’s. Congress has toyed with it, manipulated it, revised it and bastardized it at almost every Congressional session with new laws to placate some special interest group, advance some social goal, or enhance some business interest.

The Treasury Department and the IRS itself have added to this congressional injustice by piling rule on top of rule in the IRC with no attempt to remove the conflicts or the ambiguities. With Obama Care now being tied to it, the IRC has virtually made slaves of every single American that believes they must comply with its twisted, mangled, distorted, confusing and conflicting regulations.

The controversy surrounding the IRS and its underhanded tactics to collect the revenue needed to operate the government is never ending. Worse than that, the IRS is being used as a political weapon by this and past administrations. It’s not just the Lois Lerner’s in the IRS. It’s an embedded culture of corrupted power throughout the agency.

Attempts to get to the bottom of its corruption by Congressional oversight are stonewalled by the IRS, the Treasury Department, the Justice Department and the White House, thereby allowing the IRS to continue its illegal and abusive tactics unimpeded. No one is fined, fired, or sent to jail. As the IRS stonewalls, the questions surrounding the legality of the Internal Revenue Code rage on….

By Ron Ewart – News With Views –

Senate GOP demands Obama submit IRS communications

Senate Republicans on Thursday asked President Obama to turn over all communications he and his aides have had with the IRS since 2010, hoping to find out whether the tax collection agency shared private taxpayer information with political operatives at the White House.

The request, made in a letter obtained by The Washington Times, is signed by Senate Finance Chairman Orrin G. Hatch and all 13 other Republicans on the committee, and is addressed specifically to Mr. Obama, saying they want to see if his employees broke the law by acquiring or sharing private information.

“We have an obligation to conduct oversight of the federal government’s administration of our tax laws,” the lawmakers wrote. “As part of this oversight, we are seeking to determine the degree to and manner in which the Internal Revenue Service shares taxpayer information with the Executive Office of the President.”

The Republicans said they tried to get the information from the IRS, but it has been “unable to provide a full accounting of its employees’ communications with the White House.” The GOP senators gave the president a Feb. 20 deadline.

The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment.

By Stephen Dinan – The Washington Times –

Law Has Been Murdered

Barrett Brown, Kathy Kelly, and Bonny Mahoney are the kind of people who are imprisoned in America. It is not the perjurers and liars, the torturers, war criminals and mass murderers. It is the good people who peacefully protest the crimes of those who control the US government and its policies.

Since around 1990 I have studied and reported on cases that have resulted in the erosion of the protective features in law that made law a shield of the people instead of a weapon in the hands of the government. Barrett Brown’s statement to the Judge in his show trial shows that the US Department of Justice has been successful in preventing the system from delivering any justice. The US Court system delivers support for the government’s crimes. That’s it.

Brown’s statement shows how the system works. The government brings false charges against you or they bring charges that are not illegal under law as understood. However, prosecutors invent new interpretations of laws and judges and juries accept legislation-by-prosecutor-to-fit-the-made-up-case. Almost never is a jury involved, not that jurors show any inclination to go against the government’s case. However, prosecutors only face that unlikely risk in 3 or 4 percent of the cases. All other cases are settled on the basis of self-incrimination. The prosecutor tells the defendant and his attorney, “you can admit to this and that and have a sentence of 5 or 10 years. Otherwise, we are indicting you with 105 offenses with imprisonment of at least one lifetime.

Read Brown’s statement to the judge. This young man describes perfectly how the so-called “criminal justice system” actually works. I have seen it time after time in cases I have investigated. Read “The Tyranny of Good Intentions”.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/journalist-barrett-brown-sentenced-to-63-months-in-prison-for-linking-to-hacked-material-read-his-speech-here/5426421

Kathy Kelly and Bonny Mahoney were sentenced to prison for stepping across the perimeters of Air Force bases in peaceful protests against murder-by-drone. There was no real reason for charges to be brought against them or for a judge to sentence them to prison except to continue to make it crystal clear that the US government tolerates no dissent.

http://warisacrime.org/content/hancock-drone-resister-convicted-unexpected-new-charge

A democracy protected by free speech would permit these demonstrations, but the US is not a democracy and does not have free speech. That is the fact that Barrett Brown, Kathy Kelly and Bonny Mahoney are proving….

What Brown, Kelly, and Mahoney are in fact proving is that the US is lawless in the sense that law serves only the government and its agenda. In America law no longer has any other meaning. There is no rule of law. We are ruled by the government’s agenda.

By Paul Craig Roberts – Infowars.com –

Best Pro-Life Arguments for Secular Audiences

Abortion is unlike any other issue debated today. Millions of American women have aborted a child, and the pain, loss, and emotional need to justify what was done, both on the part of the mother and on the part of her loved ones, is strong and deep.[1] This means that, in any debate, you may face an invisible thumb on the scale so that even the best logic will fail to persuade.

The best you can do is arm yourself with the facts and deliver them in what you hope will be a winning way for your audience — meaning you will need to make your case, in most instances, not in the language of faith or religion but in the language of the post-modern secularist.

What follows, therefore, are the best arguments from science, the law, and women’s rights to advance the pro-life case against abortion.

Argue from Science.

The “classic” arguments from the other side are collapsing under the weight of science. “No one knows when life begins” and “It’s a blob of tissue” are frankly on the wane, especially in the context of surgical abortion, which is how the vast majority of abortions are done today.[2]

Still, establishing the evidence of the beginnings of human life will ground your argumentation in science, giving you a firm foundation for additional arguments and preempting the charge that you are basing your position on faith or religious belief.

Cite the facts.

Here is a thumbnail sketch of the scientific evidence of the existence of human life before birth. These are irrefutable facts, about which there is no dispute in the scientific community.[3]

At the moment when a human sperm penetrates a human ovum, or egg, generally in the upper portion of the Fallopian Tube, a new entity comes into existence. “Zygote” is the name of the first cell formed at conception, the earliest developmental stage of the human embryo, followed by the “Morula” and “Blastocyst” stages.[4]

Is it human? Is it alive? Is it just a cell or is it an actual organism, a “being?” These are logical questions. You should raise them, and then provide the answers….

By Rob Schwarzwalder – Family Research Council –

What “Jury Nullification” Is And Why It Matters

If you happen to be lurking around the Manhattan courthouse where Ross Ulbricht’s trial began on Tuesday, you may notice one of about a dozen signs urging you to Google something called “jury nullification.”

Walk a little further, and you may just encounter activists handing out jury nullification leaflets. But if you ask them to explain what it is, they may refuse—because doing so could land them in jail.

Jury nullification is one of the oldest legal concepts in the world. It means that jury members have the right to find a defendant innocent, even if they believe he’s guilty of the crime with which he’s charged. They would do so, theoretically, if they believed the crime shouldn’t actually be labeled a crime. Some of the most famous examples came in the mid-1800s, when Northern abolitionists, sitting on juries, refused to convict slaves for fleeing their masters under the Fugitive Slave Act.

More recently, a jury in New Hampshire acquitted a man in 2012 who openly admitted that he was growing marijuana in his backyard. “He grows for his own personal religious and medicinal use,” one of the jurors said after the case. “[A]fter chewing on all of the possibilities…we all decided that the only fair thing to do was to vote with our consciences and acquit the defendant of all charges.”

Jury nullification has become a popular tactic among activists, academics and lawyers as the government’s $51 billion-per-year drug war has heated up. Many of these people believe it’s crazy that a person can get thrown in the slammer for 10 or 20 years simply for using or selling drugs.

Some of these same people believe that Ulbricht, who is accused of being the mastermind behind the drug site Silk Road, should be set free regardless of his guilt—because simply operating a website shouldn’t land you in prison. Nicholas J. Sarwark, chair of the Libertarian National Committee, the official group that manages the United States Libertarian Party, called on Tuesday for outright dismissal of the charges against Ulbricht, saying that trial “grossly oversteps the bounds of a properly limited government.”

This week, I spoke with James Babb, the activist who raised the money for the jury nullification ads—and who is personally handing out leaflets at the New York City courthouse. “I’m reminding people that you’ve got a conscience—use it, don’t just rubber-stamp the prosecution,” he says.

Babb won’t explicitly say he’s there for the Silk Road trial. He’s cagey because jury nullification activists have a history of being sent to jail for jury tampering. Perhaps the most famous case came in 2011, when an 80-year-old retired chemistry professor named Julien Heicklin was jailed for standing outside a Manhattan court where he distributed jury nullification pamphlets.

Heicklin, whom Babb calls his personal hero, was eventually acquitted, with the judge remarking that it’s only jury tampering if someone tries “to influence a juror’s decision through a written communication ‘made in relation to a specific case pending before that juror.’”

To make sure that no jury nullification activists breaks jury tampering laws, the Fully Informed Jury Association has recently put out several guidelines. They include:
•Stick to the public sidewalk in front of the courthouse.
•Offer literature to everyone without regard to who they are and do not try to single out jurors in any way.
•Go the extra mile to be friendly and courteous, and to avoid being perceived as belligerent, profane, harassing or a nuisance.

From Vocativ.com –

Supreme Court Green Lights Detention of Americans

Right about now, you ought to be scared to death. Obama claims he will develop “An Appropriate Legal Regime” to permanently detain people PRIOR to having committed any crime.

The idea of these detentions would be to prevent any individual from committing a FUTURE crime. Obama even goes as far as to say he might detain someone up to TEN YEARS before they MIGHT commit a crime.

Aren’t you glad they passed the NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT?

….A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court means the federal government now has an open door to “detain as a threat to national security anyone viewed as a troublemaker,” according to critics.

The high court this week refused to review an appeals court decision that said the president and U.S. military can arrest and indefinitely detain individuals.

The firm of William J. Olson, P.C., which filed a friend-of-the court brief asking the court to step in, noted that not a single justice dissented from the denial of the request for review.

“The court ducked, having no appetite to confront both political parties in order to protect the citizens from military detention,” the legal team said in a statement to WND. “The government has won, creating a tragic moment for the people – and what will someday be viewed as an embarrassment for the court.”

The controversial provision authorizes the military, under presidential authority, to arrest, kidnap, detain without trial and hold indefinitely American citizens thought to “represent an enduring security threat to the United States.”

Journalist Chris Hedges was among the plaintiffs charging the law could be used to target journalists who report on terror-related issues.

A friend-of-the-court brief submitted in the case stated: “The central question now before this court is whether the federal judiciary will stand idly by while Congress and the president establish the legal framework for the establishment of a police state and the subjugation of the American citizenry through the threat of indefinite military arrest and detention, without the right to counsel, the right to confront one’s accusers, or the right to trial.”

By Voice of Reason – Right.is –

America on the Precipice of Immigration Anarchy

It may be difficult to understand how the leadership of our own government could be behind a push for anarchy, but incredibly this is precisely what we are witnessing — not only in Washington, but among political leaders in some states and cities across the United States. The prime issue behind this lunacy is immigration. Entering the realm of immigration is the equivalent of entering a parallel universe where up is down, left is right and right is wrong.

On December 22, 2014 the newspaper, Arizona Daily Star published an article titled “Tucson ‘dreamers’ line up to get driver’s licenses” that contained the following quote:

Many undocumented immigrants have to drive without licenses to get to work or school or do anything in their daily lives, said Rodriguez, who said he was brought to the United States from Agua Prieta, Sonora, when he was in third grade.

Consider that illegal aliens who should not be in the United States in the first place openly say that they “had to drive” to work or go to school. Illegal aliens are not supposed to be here or be working. However, their attitudes are perfectly normal and understandable considering the statements made by the president of the United States as well as by politicians from both political parties on the federal, state and local levels.

Consider how many politicians in Washington and in cities and states around the United States have blithely stated that illegal aliens are going to drive anyway so that providing them with licenses will enable them to drive safely. Given the terror attacks conducted in Paris, it is clear that the “all clear” has not sounded. We remain at risk of terror attacks and our leaders had better dust off their copies of the 9/11 Commission Report and relating documentation and finally get serious about truly protecting America and Americans.

It is more than mere irony that legislators, also known as “lawmakers,” are quick to justify illegal activities that aliens who have violated our borders and immigration laws engage in, such as driving without licenses, committing identity theft to gain unlawful employment, etc.

These are the same politicians who will seek opportunities to stand before television cameras and microphones to talk about the need to protect America and Americans from terrorism yet they will never, ever make any references to the findings of the 9/11 Commission which was prepared in the wake of the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 to identify the vulnerabilities that enabled those terrorists, as well as others, to enter the United States and embed themselves as they went about their deadly preparations.

Advocates for Comprehensive Immigration Reform ignore the fact that the administration has provided hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens up to age 31 with temporary lawful status and official identity documents without an interview or a field investigation to verify the information contained in their applications leading to a lack of integrity to the process. There is no reliable way to verify the identities of the applicants. There is, consequently, no way to know anything about their backgrounds, affiliations or when, where or how they actually entered the United States. Yet all too many of our “leaders” are more than willing to overlook these issues and the way that this undermines national security….

When we consider words, we must consider that the oaths of office taken by members of our armed forces, law enforcement officers and publicly elected officials do not provide for any “wiggle room” where our Constitution or our laws are concerned.

Our Constitution and our laws are not the equivalent of items on a menu where the patron of a restaurant decides whether or not to order both soup and salad or one or the other.

Oaths of office do not provide the person taking that oath the option of picking and choosing what laws he/she will uphold, defend or enforce. The oaths mandate that the person taking that oath will honor and respect all laws equally.

All too often, politicians who invoke the “Rule of Law” when they claim to be “constitutionalists” will, however, frequently call for changing our laws and ignoring elements of the Constitution that they, or more likely their major campaign contributors, find inconvenient and an impediment to huge profits often at the expense of America and Americans.

Our political leaders must be made to understand that they cannot have it both ways — they either support our Constitution and our laws or they do not.

They either stand with America and Americans or they do not.

By Michael Cutler – FrontPage Mag –

THE NEW AMERICAN ARISTOCRACY

“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” – Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776 –

A recent study by professors Martin Gilens of Princeton and Benjamin I. Page found that the U.S. now resembles an oligarchy rather than a democratic republic.

“The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and very well heeled organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence.” Means the aristocracy gets the lion share of the pie and everyone else gets the crumbs…

The author of a recent commentary about oligarchy in the 21st century, Matthew Continetti, of the Free Beacon, might even suggest that last phrase be repeated.

“Mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence on legislation or the law…..”

Continetti wrote:
“What we, the commoners, are now in danger of losing is the classical liberal values of personal freedom, of religious liberty, of equality before the law, of free markets,”…….WHY???? Because of the ‘extreme inequality in terms of political influence and the production of knowledge and information is managed and controlled by the elite….’.

Continetti continues “The inequality of income our bipartisan ruling class sanctimoniously condemns is the very tool it uses to shore up the inequalities of power and communication from which it benefits. Affluent, self-righteous, self-seeking, self-possessed, out of touch, hostile to dissent, triumphalist like Soros– is what oligarchy looks like in the 21st century,” .

The study looked at 1,779 policy issues and found that, “The probability of policy change is nearly the same (around 0.3) whether a tiny minority or a large majority of average citizens favor a proposed policy change. Commoners have little or no influence over the law and legislation…

By Tony Passaro – Bel Air Tea Party Patriots –

Merry Christmas From the United Nations: Arms Treaty Took Effect December 24th

35 Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?” “Nothing,” they answered.

36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.

Jesus’ view of gun control is made clear in Luke 22:35-36, in which Jesus commanded his followers to purchase a sword in defiance of Roman law. Within the Roman Empire, to carry such a weapon was a crime punishable by death. I submit that this represents Jesus’ view of gun control, for when a government is permitted to disarm its citizens, genocide is usually what follows next.

Gun control and Gun Confiscation Has Preceded Every Instance of Genocide In the 20th Century.

Twentieth century governments committed “democide” (i.e. genocide committed by government) to the tune of murdering 262 million of its own citizens according to a University of Hawaii study. Just to give perspective on this incredible rate of murder by government, “this democide murdered 6 times more people than died in combat in” all the of the wars fought in the 20th century….

Merry Christmas from the UN The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty took effect on Christmas Eve. Even though the treaty has very little chance of being ratified by two-thirds of the Senate, Second Amendment advocates are concerned that the Obama administration will use a United Nations treaty as a basis for executive action on gun control as well they should be. Still, others feel that this leftist gun control treaty becomes binding international law and any Executive Action by Obama would merely be an endorsement of our nation’s contractual obligation to support the UN ban on guns. Enough countries around the world have ratified it so the gun control treaty will now be enforced.

The founders included the words “shall not be infringed” for a reason. And they gave YOU the power to fight against any tyrannical government that would try to take your rights away.

The Most Egregious Portions of the UN Ban

• Article 2 of the treaty defines the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty.

• Article 3 places the “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2” within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well….

I would remind the reader that gun confiscation is not an end unto itself. It is a means to an end. For when the people are finally disarmed, the banking mafia that runs this country can have their way with this country with very little opposition. In the words of Jesus, we would be well-advised to never be without our swords (i.e. guns).

By Dave Hodges – DC Clothesline –

New Law Would Make Taxpayers Liable For Trillions In Bank Derivatives Debt

If the quadrillion dollar derivatives bubble implodes, who should be stuck with the bill? Well, if the “too big to fail” banks have their way it will be you and I.

Right now, lobbyists for the big Wall Street banks are pushing really hard to include an extremely insidious provision in a bill that would keep the federal government funded past the upcoming December 11th deadline. This provision would allow these big banks to trade derivatives through subsidiaries that are federally insured by the FDIC.

What this would mean is that the big banks would be able to continue their incredibly reckless derivatives trading without having to worry about the downside. If they win on their bets, the big banks would keep all of the profits. If they lose on their bets, the federal government would come in and bail them out using taxpayer money. In other words, it would essentially be a “heads I win, tails you lose” proposition.

Just imagine the following scenario. I go to Las Vegas and I place a million dollar bet on who will win the Super Bowl this year. If I am correct, I keep all of the winnings. If I lose, federal law requires you to bail me out and give me the million dollars that I just lost.

Does that sound fair?

Of course not! In fact, it is utter insanity. But through their influence in Congress, this is exactly what the big Wall Street banks are attempting to pull off. And according to the Huffington Post, there is a very good chance that this provision will be in the final bill that will soon be voted on….

By Michael Snyder – Activist Post –

Texas leads coalition of states in lawsuit against Obama’s immigration action

Texas Gov.-elect Greg Abbott announced Wednesday that Texas is leading a 17-state coalition suing the Obama administration over the president’s executive actions on immigration.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Texas on Wednesday, and names the heads of the top immigration enforcement agencies as defendants.

Abbott, in a news conference in Austin, said the “broken” immigration system should be fixed by Congress, not by “presidential fiat.”

He said President Obama’s recently announced executive actions — a move designed to spare as many as 5 million people living illegally in the United States from deportation — “directly violate the fundamental promise to the American people” by running afoul of the Constitution.

“The ability of the president to dispense with laws was specifically considered and unanimously rejected at the Constitutional Convention,” he said.

Abbott specifically cited Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution which states the president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

He said the lawsuit asks the court to require Obama to go through Congress before enforcing laws, “rather than making them up himself.”

However, a White House official defended the actions as perfectly within the president’s authority.

From Fox News & Associated Press –

Fed Up With Govt Misconduct, Federal Judge Takes Nuclear Option

By Sidney Powell – New York Observer –

Federal Prosecutor Alleges Boss Pressured Him To Engage in ‘Unethical Conduct’; Judge Calls Abuses ‘Egregious,’ ‘Pervasive,” and “Reprehensible”

Judge Morrison C. England Jr. ordered the entire judiciary recused from a case another judge called “egregious” and “reprehensible”

In perhaps the most stunning documentation yet of abuses by Eric Holder’s Justice Department, two former Assistant United States Attorneys spoke to defense attorneys and revealed appalling deceit and corruption of justice. This latest litigation time bomb has exploded from multi-million dollar litigation originally brought by the Department of Justice against Sierra Pacific based on allegations that the lumber company and related defendants were responsible for a wildfire that destroyed 65,000 acres in California.

In what was dubbed the “Moonlight Fire” case, the tables are now turned. The defendants have discovered new evidence and filed a stunning motion. The new evidence and disclosures are being taken seriously by the Chief Judge of the Eastern District of California—as they should be. In a shocking action, Judge Morrison C. England Jr. ordered the recusal of every federal judge in the Eastern District of California.

Sierra Pacific Industries and other defendants were compelled to pay $55 million to the United States over a period of five years and transfer 22,500 acres of land to settle massive litigation brought against them by the United States alleging that they caused a 2007 fire that destroyed 65,000 acres in California. Sierra Pacific has always maintained that the fire started elsewhere and that the state and federal investigators and Department attorneys lied. Now that settlement may go up in smoke because of the new evidence of outrageous misconduct by the federal prosecutors and the investigators from state and federal offices, as well as findings earlier this year by a state judge.

In an extraordinary development, Judge England, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, ordered the recusal of all the Eastern District judges from the case because of serious allegations that the Court itself was defrauded by the government in the original prosecution. To avoid any appearance of partiality, he has referred the case to Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski to appoint a judge from outside the Eastern District to handle the case going forward. Judge Kozinski has excoriated prosecutors for failing to meet their legal and ethical obligations.

The order notes that the defendants filed an action this week to set aside the $55 million settlement because, as the defendants allege, “the United States presented false evidence to the Defendants and the Court; advanced arguments to the Court premised on that false evidence; or, for which material evidence had been withheld, and obtaining court rulings based thereon; prepared key Moonlight Fire investigators for depositions, and allowed them to repeatedly give false testimony about the most important aspects of their investigation; and failed to disclose the facts and circumstances associated with the Moonlight Fire lead investigator’s direct financial interest in the outcome of the investigation arising from an illegal bank account that has since been exposed and terminated.”

The Sacramento Bee reported on the Defendant’s filing. Indeed, the Defendants’ motion informs us that a former Assistant United States Attorney came forward and disclosed that he believes that he was removed from the original prosecution by “his boss, David Shelledy, chief of the civil division in the United States Attorney’s office,” because he “rebuffed” pressure to “engage in unethical conduct as a lawyer.” Of course, like other former prosecutors who were unethical, Mr. Shelledy is to receive Attorney General Holder’s highest award for excellence—this week.

The defendants also reveal that another former federal prosecutor, Eric Overby, left the Moonlight Fire prosecution team also, stating: “It’s called the Department of Justice. It’s not called the Department of Revenue.” According to the motion, Mr. Overby told defense counsel that in his entire career, “I’ve never seen anything like this. Never.”

Well, sadly we have….

The entire original prosecution against Sierra Pacific appears to have been driven by the Department of Justice’s interest in hitting a “deep pocket” for millions of dollars of revenue. The Defendants’ motion to set aside the settlement reveals a series of fraudulent acts by federal and state authorities that defiles our system of justice….

A California state judge, Leslie C. Nichols, in a related state case issued orders earlier this year describing what he called “egregious,” “pervasive,” and “reprehensible” abuses in the investigation and prosecution amounting to “government corruption.” He found the state case to “betray the primary purpose of the judicial system—to reveal the truth.” He awarded $32 million in fees and expenses to the Defendants, finding as the Sacramento Bee reports, that the state agency, Cal Fire, “withheld some documents, destroyed other evidence and ‘engaged in a systematic campaign of misdirection with the purpose of recovering money’ from Sierra Pacific.”

It’s encouraging to see Judge England join Judge Emmet G. Sullivan and Judge Bates, and others, as our Article III judges begin to demand that federal attorneys and agents follow the law and their oaths of office. But there remains a lot more work to do. It’s way past time to hold Holder accountable….

 
Continue Reading

The Lie Machine

By Paul Craig Robert – A Nation Beguiled –

I have come to the conclusion that the West is a vast lie machine for the secret agendas of vested interests. Consider, for example, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Transpacific Trade and Investment Partnership.

These so-called “partnerships” are in fact vehicles by which US corporations make themselves immune to the sovereign laws of foreign countries in which they do business. A sovereign country that attempts to enforce its laws against an American corporation can be sued by the corporation for “restraint of trade.” For example, if Monsanto wants to sell GMO seeds in France or US corporations wish to sell genetically-modified foods in France, and France enforces its laws against GMOs, the Transatlantic Trade Partnership allows France to be sued in jurisdictions outside the courts of France for “restraint of trade.” In other words, preventing the entry into France of a prohibited product constitutes restraint of trade.

This is the reason that the US has insisted that the Transatlantic and Transpacific Partnerships be totally secretive and negotiated outside the democratic process. Not even the US Congress has been permitted knowledge of the negotiations.

Obviously, the Europeans and Asians who are agreeing with the terms of these “partnerships” are the bought-and-paid-for agents of the US corporations. If the partnerships go through, the only law in Europe and Asia will be US law. The European and Asian government officials who agree to the hegemony of US corporations over the laws of their countries will be so handsomely paid that they could enter the realm of the One Percent.

It is interesting to compare the BBC’s coverage (October 10) with that of RT (October 11). The BBC reports that the aim of the Transatlantic Partnership is to remove “barriers to bilateral commerce” and to stimulate more trade and investment, economic growth and employment. The BBC does not report that the removal of barriers includes barriers against GMO products.

Everyone knows that the European Commission is corrupt. Who would be surprised if its members hope to be enriched by the American corporations? Little wonder the European Commission declared that concerns that the Transatlantic partnership would impact the sovereignty of countries is misplaced.

 
Continue Reading

Pharisee Christians

By Sartre – Global Gulag –

Artificial Christians are AWOL: apostate whores – orthodoxy lost. What does it means to be a believer? The most fundamental canon is to accept the Creator as Lord. Since this concept seems to evade the store bought social climbers who pretend to be religious, why not just settle this issue once and for all time.

The total disconnect, from simple logic, would have you accept that a Nation assembled upon the “free exercise thereof” of religion must ban the expression of belief in the Deity of creation, as a condition of a free society. By default this sophistry demands that the standard for the public government MUST be that of the non-believer. Pray tell – the atheist has become the converted idol – for the proclaimed secular humanism deus society. Common sense affirms that prohibition produces replacement. If God is taboo, the State commits the supreme sin of absolute pride.

If the highest law is denied, how can it be possible to have a valid rule of law passed by men! Which is to be obeyed? Lacking communal acknowledgment on the reality of God and that His laws for human conduct were revealed within the Ten Commandments, obligates honest rational citizens to concede that the basic schism is between those who believe and those who deny.

It would be one thing to base a government upon the principle that one cannot know for sure, and therefore requires a standard of agnosticism. But this is not the case. America has their share of skeptics and empiricists; however, it would be deceitful to claim that our heritage is one of cynicism. Abandoning worship of the almighty for a secular culture guarantees the reign of the Prince of Darkness. Confusing the issue with institutions of clergy, church sects or religious denominations totally avoids the central tenet. Is the source of moral and ethical law a function of court decree, arbitrary public sentiment or relative circumstance OR has all mankind been touched by the hand of the divine creator with the tablets that prescribe authentic behavior? It doesn’t get any more basic then the choice you will make. Your answer determines if our country has any common ground to continue as one nation. It’s an either – or – acceptance. No society can sustain a civic nihilism and preserve a private faith. The civil war that is being waged is a spiritual conflict. The cultural fallout is a symptom of the godless secularists intent to outlaw our founding beliefs.

 
Continue Reading –

When Can Police Demand Your ID?

From Flex Your Rights – LewRockwell.com –

You’ve probably seen old movies where the protagonist is approached by a Nazi or Soviet guard and ordered to “show your papers.” We know that’s a tell-tale sign of a police state. So if police ever ask you to show ID during your travels, it’s natural to feel violated.

In a free society, citizens who are minding their own business are not obligated to “show their papers” to police. In fact, in the United States there’s no law requiring citizens to carry identification of any kind.

So when can police ask for ID?

Carrying an ID is generally required if you’re driving a vehicle or a passenger on a commercial airline. These requirements have been upheld on the slippery premise that individuals who prefer not to carry ID can choose not to drive or fly.

From here, ID laws only get more complicated. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, the Supreme Court upheld state laws requiring citizens to reveal their identity when officers have reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity may be taking place. Commonly known as “stop-and-identify” statutes, these laws permit police to arrest criminal suspects who refuse to identify themselves.

As of 2013, 24 states had stop-and-identify laws. Regardless of your state’s law, keep in mind that police can never compel you to identify yourself without reasonable suspicion to believe you’re involved in illegal activity.

 
Continue Reading

Know Jesus or No Jesus? The Coming Persecution of Christians

By Dave Hodges – DCClothesline.com –

There is a war going on against Christians. For a long time the war has been covert and centered around issues such as nativity scenes at Christmas. More recently, the satanic influence which is beginning to dominate American public lives is becoming demonstrably open and aggressive and this spirit has invaded the sports world where so many young people look for role models…

We are witnessing the persecution of Christians through the principle of incrementalism. Hitler did the same. First, there was the public chastising of the Jews. Then they were denied employment and the right to publicly practice their religion. The worst began to happen.

Today in the United States, the abolishment of Christianity is underway. Through the DHS sponsored Clergy Response Team and making churches into IRS controlled tax exempt foundations, the message from the pulpit is being controlled. Now we are witnessing the marginalizing of Christians and the removal Christian practices from all public venues. Christian traditions are being erased. A famous quote was offered which helps frame these current events of persecution against Christians “wherever they burn books, in the end, they will burn human beings”. I would offer a variation of this theme, “where they erase religion, they will soon do the same to the followers of that religion”.

Any first year law school student will tell you that the 10 Commandments are the basis for our legal code. This is all about to change as well.

 
Continue Reading

FBI: Protecting Yourself From Intruders Is Going “Beyond The Law”

By Scott Lazarowitz – LewRockwell.com –

The FBI director James Comey is concerned that the new Apple and Google phones are too secure, so secure that they may actually make customers “beyond the law.” He says that such security measures will make it difficult for police and FBI goons to access people’s private data. Noooo. Really? But Comey says that a phone user trying to protect one’s security and private data is “beyond the law,” like the user is trying to hide evidence of criminality from the law by using a product with such advanced security measures.

 
Continue Reading

Truth in Media: Feds Say Cannabis Is Not Medicine While Holding The Patent on Cannabis as Medicine

By Ben Swann – Truth In Media –

In marijuana there are multiple cannabinoids including THC, CBD, CBN, CBA, THCA, THCB and over 160 other compounds in the plant including terpenes from the plant that create the most effective medicine.

What you need to know, is where the U.S. government actually stands on this issue. Cannabis, marijuana, is today still a Schedule 1 Drug. That means, according to our government it has no medicinal use and has a high potential for abuse. Does our government really believe that? No. In 1999, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services filed for a patent for the use of cannabinoids for medicinal purposes.

Also in 1999, HHS filed for a second patent, specifically for cannabis oil for the treatment of disease. That’s right, our government through the taxpayer funded Department of Health and Human Services holds two patents on cannabinoids and cannabis oil to treat certain diseases like alzheimer’s and auto-immune diseases like crohn’s.

Meanwhile, our government through taxpayer funded agencies like the Department of Justice pursue, arrest and in prison Americans who would attempt to access or use cannabis oil to heal their own bodies. Because in public they claim cannabis oil is not medicine and in private they seek to own the rights to that medicine.

 
Continue Reading

Indy Police Chief : We Are a Paramilitary Organization At War

By The Skeptical Libertarian –

It’s not just libertarians who believe that police have become militarized. It’s police themselves. Last week, Indianapolis Police Chief Rick Hite told his city council that he sees himself as a “soldier in an army” and his police force as “paramilitary organization” that is preparing for “battle.”

With the issue of police militarization still hot after the heavily-militarized response by the Ferguson, Missouri police, Hite’s comments come across as remarkably insensitive to the political climate. When asked by a city councilmember whether the police department needed a $29 million tax increase to fund its expansion, the police chief was terrifyingly blunt:

“I’m going to say something very candid to you my good friend, Councilman Robinson. As a 36-year veteran of law enforcement, never in my career have I seen public safety been politicized the way it has been in this country. Why I say that is because we have historically been a paramilitary organization…. I don’t know what we would do if we had to go to battle, and we had to make a determination, based on past practices, whether or not we wanted to go into battle. … I am a soldier in an army. We serve you in that way.” (2:39:00)

Let’s catalog these comments away for the next time there’s a large scale public disturbance in Indianapolis and see how the police force responds. The Rise of the Warrior Cop, to use the title of Radley Balko’s book, has not gone unnoticed within law enforcement. Rather, it has been encouraged and indeed used to justify an ever-expanding amount of resources being devoted to fighting various “wars” on citizens, whether in the name of eliminating “guns,” drugs, or terrorism.

Hite’s comments were also out-of-touch given the local news events as well. Two Indianapolis police officers were arrested just this month for beating a man unconscious outside a bar. Hite was reported to have said at a news conference that “days like this make us wonder how we’ve lost our way.” Given the stated ethos of his department, I, for one, am no longer wondering.

 
Continue Reading

Satanic Information Given To Children in Florida Schools

By Chris Carrington – FreedomOutpost.com –

A group called the Satanic Temple is to start distributing information about their practices and beliefs to school children in Florida.

Last month the authorities decided that they would permit the distribution of religious materials in Florida schools, and the Satanic Temple claim to be a religion so they can legally give out the pamphlets to kids.

The information will include advising the kids of their legal right to practice satanism, the philosophy of satanism and the way the Satanic Temple works.

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/09/satanic-information-given-children-florida-schools/#0DJS2YsC7ybvOEfa.99

 
Continue Reading