The shooting was reported on the 900 block of Taylor Avenue after 6 p.m. Thursday. Police would not offer details, but did confirm that someone was shot.
To read more click here
Friday, May 31, 2013
Oak Park Shooting - The once working class quiet suburb falls to black crime
The shooting was reported on the 900 block of Taylor Avenue after 6 p.m. Thursday. Police would not offer details, but did confirm that someone was shot.
To read more click here
Omaha Nebraska Officer Puts His Gun to the Back of My Head
Some friends and I were standing at Qt Gas Station on 103rd and Fort street on 5/14/13 around 2:15 am. We had just gotten off our bikes and we all went in and bought some food and drinks.
We were standing there eating and talking when two officers pulled up in a black and white Chevy Tahoe. I saw that the officers were looking at my firearm that was on my side in a holster. I didn’t really think anything of it because I have an open/concealed carry permit, so I just went on with what I was doing.
I saw that they started walking our way, but I was still not worried about it. The officers approached us asking everyone how we were doing. One of the officers then walked in between all of us. The officer then proceeded to walk behind me without saying anything more. He then turned and said, “Who do you think you are?” then pulled his firearm out and pointed it about an inch from the back of my head, like I was being executed, and ordered me to get face down on the ground. Not knowing what was going on, I did what was ordered of me.
He then told us that he never wanted to see our bikes parked the way they were again. We had three bikes between two spots, in an empty lot.
I had bought some sunflower seeds and was eating them prior to the officers arriving, and was spitting them on the ground. While I was face down, he saw the sunflower seed shells and asked me if I “really wanted to go to jail for littering.” I told him no and that I would clean them up. He then stated that he knew I was “going to be picking them up.”
He then ordered the other three bikers I was with to “leave, right now.” They had to put on all their riding gear but the officer was very impatient and proceeded to ask them why they were still there. He then ordered them to leave again.
The other officer came up to me and disarmed me while asking if it was loaded. I told him yes, that it was. They then asked me if I had any ID on myself. I told them yes and that it was in my left front pocket of my pants. The officer that disarmed me came over and took my wallet. Then while both officers were searching through my wallet, asked me if I had my permit in my wallet. As before, I said yes and told them what the permit looked like and where it was in the wallet.
The officer who grabbed my firearm then ran my ID, my permit, and the serial number on my firearm. The officer that had pointed his firearm at the back of my head was proceeding to call a detective. He asked the detective if Nebraska honored a gun permit from Iowa. He then stated to the detective that they had pulled up to the QT and a couple of people on bikes where standing around. It also appeared that one had a firearm so he approached and he did, in fact, have a firearm on his side.
That officer said that the detective asked how I was acting and he told him that I was not acting in a suspicious manner. I did not act any differently when he approached me, either. I was cooperating fully and was not causing a problem at all.
They then asked me why I felt the need to carry a firearm other then the fact that I have the 2nd Amendment right to do so. I stated “I have the firearm and the permit, so why not.” The officer that pulled his firearm then asked me if I ever felt that my life was endangered on my bike. I said yes and that “I have had a bunch of people swerve at me while I have been riding.” Later the other officer said, “Earlier you said that you carry your firearm on the bike because people swerve at you.” I said “No, he asked me if I have ever felt endangered on my bike and I said I have due to people swerving at me.”
The officer that pulled his firearm then told me I could sit up; he also told me to make sure all my stuff was there and that I could go.
Congressman Stockmann letter to the people
And he will twist the US Senate to approve it, just like he did with ObamaCare and the NDAA.
I just signed a letter to Obama warning him to not sign this UN gun grab.
They claim it only targets "arms dealers, " but it would also require nations to ban many popular types of personal firearms.
Not angry yet?
The text of the UN treaty requires nations to record and track all guns...
...and all "end users" of guns.
That means Obama's UN gun scheme would create a national registry of private gun owners.
Even worse, Obama would submit his list of gun owners to the UN's "international secretariat.”
The right to keep and bear arms is granted by God and protecting from government aggression by the Constitution. It is not subject to the whims of global totalitarians massed in New York City.
I will not back down.
We must not let Obama literally hand over our gun rights to the UN.
Please go here to chip in $10 or more to help me mount an aggressive campaign to defeat Obama's UN gun grab and turn over the names of all US gun owners to the UN's "international secretariat.”
Obama and the U.N. Treaty may be signed yet
Last month, with a lot of help from Barack Obama, the United Nations passed its global gun ban treaty.
And now, Obama is expected to sign this freedom-crushing disaster as soon as June 3rd — just days from now!!
The only way you and I can stop the Obama-U.N. collusion from trampling our Second Amendment freedoms is through the U.S. Senate.
Your signed petition is the best tool we have against this attack on our gun rights and our national sovereignty. We need to line the halls of the Senate with boxes and boxes of these petitions — and every petition counts, starting with yours!
We need to send a clear message to every Senator that they have only two choices: Side with us and stop the U.N. gun ban treaty...or start looking for a new job at election time.
So please, sign your petition today...we have zero time to lose. And after you do, I hope that you'll make a much-needed contribution to NRA-ILA so we can WIN THIS FIGHT.
We need to hammer key battleground states with hard-hitting radio and T.V. ads. We need to blanket the Senate with millions of these petitions. We need to put our grassroots boots on the ground and win every last vote we need to stop this dangerous treaty before it becomes the law of the land.
We need to send a clear message to every Senator that they have only two choices: Side with us and stop the U.N. gun ban treaty...or start looking for a new job at election time.
So please, sign your petition today...we have zero time to lose. And after you do, I hope that you'll make a much-needed contribution to NRA-ILA so we can WIN THIS FIGHT.
We need to hammer key battleground states with hard-hitting radio and T.V. ads. We need to blanket the Senate with millions of these petitions. We need to put our grassroots boots on the ground and win every last vote we need to stop this dangerous treaty before it becomes the law of the land.
Congressman Stockman says ggodbye to Michele Bachmann
After much prayer and consideration my friend and colleague Michele Bachmann has decided she will not run for re-election next year.
Congressman Steve Stockman
With Obama planning wholesale government takeovers of virtually every sector of the economy while using government agencies to attack his critics, now more than ever we must fight to keep constitutional conservatives in Congress.
The radical Left defeated Allen West last year.
Warmest wishes,
Congressman Steve Stockman
P.S. My friend and colleague Michele Bachmann has decided she will not run for re-election next year.
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Obama's Goons violate the 1st Amendment
Since this ghetto rat has been in office the U.S. Secret Service and police have been allowed to violate your constitutional rights. If you talk bad about him or protest peacefully they arrest you and visit you at your home or place of work. Listen up OBAMA and all you other shit bag ghetto rat loven ass holes in office none of you have the right to violate civil rights. I don't care if the NDAA gives you that right the constitution gives me the right to arrest and come after a tyranny government for treason. But when you quote the Constitution these arrogant pricks take it as a threat. Well we take this action a threat so Obama needs to be impeached or arrested for treason. But when ever this nigger comes in police start violating constitutional rights. II'm going to be there tomorrow protesting I dare the Chicago Police to arrest me because the minute those cuffs go on that officer's life will be changed for the worst I would love for him or her to explain why they will be losing their home, cars, and bank accounts. 
About half had gathered to express their frustration with ongoing deportations of immigrants and with the immigration bill that is pending in Congress.
Some of the others waved red signs opposing the Keystone XL Pipeline. About a dozen abortion opponents also were gathered at the protest site, on the east side of the 700 block of South Michigan Avenue, with signs depicting aborted fetuses."I don't know what he has in his head to come in and fundraise for politicians a week after 50 schools got shut down in Chicago," said Esteban Burgoa, an Iraq war vet who was born in Mexico and carried a sign that urged an end to deportations, among other things. "Why doesn't he raise money for the educators?"
The demonstration was organized in part by immigration activists, including Undocumented Illinois, a coalition of groups across the state that want deportations halted as Congress works out an immigration reform bill.
"We're seeing people that would qualify for the reform be deported and displaced," said Xanat Sobrevilla, 25, an organizer from Chicago Ridge. "They are community members, they are parents, they are workers."
Twelve protesters who were expressing that message were arrested earlier today after they staged a sit-in outside the hotel, Sobrevilla said.
The eight female and four male protesters were taken into custody a little after 9:45 a.m. after they blocked traffic and refused to move, said Police News Affairs Officer John Mirabelli.
They were expected to be charged with reckless conduct, obstructing or resisting the actions of a police officer, and obstructing a roadway, all misdemeanors, Mirabelli said.
Alfonso Seiva, of Pilsen, said he was there to "remind Obama of the Latino people."
"Nothing happened in the last four years and nothing is happening now," Seiva said as he held a large sign that said "Stop Deportation."
Others said they disapprove of the immigration bill under consideration in the Senate.
"We don't accept it; we believe it's not a just reform," said Vicki Cervantes, of the Coalition for Migrant Justice. "It creates semi-legal status where people don't have full rights. It leaves people still vulnerable."
Obama is in town for two fundraisers hosted by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. After speaking at the Hilton this evening, he will attend the second fundraiser at a private residence.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Illinois congress violates 4th Amendment
Illinois: Right to Carry Legislation Endangered in Springfield
Vote on Flawed Bill Imminent- Contact your state Senator TODAY!
This week, in another attempt to skirt the United States Court of Appeals ruling to institute Right to Carry in Illinois, anti-gun state Senators are racing to force votes on severely flawed House Bill 183 with Amendment 4. This faulty concealed carry legislation does not have total firearms preemption safeguards, and instead attempts to exempt certain municipalities from any “shall-issue” mandate and allow individual towns to expand the list of places statewide that are off-limits to anyone carrying a concealed firearm for self-defense. If such exemptions are adopted, a large percentage of Illinois’ population would be denied the ability to carry a concealed firearm for self-defense based on their residency and the confusing patchwork of laws will put ALL gun owners statewide at risk of felony prosecution. Additionally, Senate President John Cullerton plans to further punish those who are concealed carrying by omitting provisions to safeguard carry in your vehicle, ban carry in restaurants and increase penalties for violating some of the arbitrary and deeply flawed provisions of the bill.
Call your state Senator TODAY: Tell him or her that any compromise and vote in favor of this type of legislation is a vote against Right to Carry. Demand their opposition to House Bill 183 with Amendment 4, and any anti-gun legislation.
Illinois concealed carry still violates constitution
Illinois House passes concealed carry law
May 24, 2013Gov. Pat Quinn.Photo by: Bloomberg(AP) — Gun owners in the only state still banning concealed weapons would win that right under a plan approved by the Illinois House on Friday, but the governor and other powerful Democrats oppose the plan because it would wipe out local gun ordinances — including Chicago's ban on assault weapons.The proposal was brokered by House Speaker Michael Madigan, a Chicago Democrat, as a way to abide by afederal appeals court's ruling that ordered the state to adopt a concealed-carry law by June 9. But the plan has drawn strong opposition, with Gov. Pat Quinn calling it a "massive overreach" because of the way it would curb local firearms regulations.Chief among those regulations is Chicago's ban on assault-style weapons, which would be stricken from the books. That's a deal-breaker for Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who backs tough restrictions to curb gun violence in the nation's third largest city."This legislation is wrong for Illinois. It was wrong yesterday in committee, it's wrong today, and it's wrong for the future of public safety in our state," Quinn said in a statement after the House vote."The principle of home rule is an important one. As written, this legislation is a massive overreach that would repeal critical gun safety ordinances," he said. "I will not support this bill and I will work with members of the Illinois Senate to stop it in its tracks."The measure would require Illinois State Police to issue a permit to any applicant who has a Firearm Owners Identification card, completes required training, passes a background check, and pays a $150 fee. But it significantly broadens the places where guns would be prohibited, including mass-transit buses and trains, which was a demand of Chicago Democrats.The legislation is being sponsored by Rep. Brandon Phelps, a southern Illinois Democrat and ardent gun-rights supporter whose more permissive plan failed by seven votes last month.Madigan stepped in after that failed vote, and the resulting plan would pre-empt any city or county gun regulation, such as taxes on gun sales or requirements for reporting lost or stolen guns. Phelps and Madigan argue that it would be best to have one statewide law to reduce confusion and have future restrictions get state legislators' approval in Springfield.But Quinn's office said the pre-emption would jeopardize public safety.The legislation also is opposed by Senate President John Cullerton, a Chicago Democrat like Quinn and Madigan. The Senate's plan would only pre-empt local laws by requiring them to adopt concealed-carry laws. Opponents of Phelps' plan note that the only issue that the federal court addressed was conceal-and-carry, not other gun provisions.The legislation was forced by a 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in December that decreed the state's ban on concealed carry unconstitutional. The court gave lawmakers until June 9 to enact a law.
Monday, May 27, 2013
Monday, May 20, 2013
Obama send Tax Dollars to his birth country Kenya now maybe we can impeach the Nigger
Strengthening Kenya’s county governments, at cost to U.S. taxpayers of millions of dollars, could spark the redistribution of political power across the African republic, whose national government is viewed as one of the most notoriously corrupt in the world.
Efforts to bring about such decentralization, however, may inadvertently create 47 equally corrupt county systems, the Obama administration has acknowledged.
Obama, through the U.S. Agency for International Development, nonetheless intends to dole out upwards of $50 million in U.S. taxpayer funds to help the Kenyans get it right, according to contracting documents that WND discovered via routine database research.
One potential obstacle to accomplishing the task is the relatively recent discovery of significant oil resources in Kenya, USAID says.
Corruption, therefore, could magnify due to the lack of transparency between the government and the “land and extractive industries.”
The new Kenyan Constitution and related legislation raise the issue of transparency; however, they contain “few if any specific mechanisms” to guarantee it.
USAID is wasting no time in preparing for the five-year endeavor, known as the Harmonized Assistance for Devolved Institutions Project, or AHADI – which means “promise” in Kiswahili.
The agency will meet in Nairobi May 30 with private vendors potentially interested in securing AHADI contracts. The anticipated official execution of the project is the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2013.
USAID says it has learned from prior experience that decentralization, when successfully implemented, can create a “more responsive, open and pluralistic government,” the agency points out in the AHADI Statement of Work.
On the other hand, decentralization “also runs the risk of systemic failure that further exacerbates the problems that it was intended to alleviate – often leading to a frustrated populace and a re-centralization of power.”
“This is nowhere more true than in the Kenyan context,” it says.
This planned diffusion of power – which USAID calls “devolution” – stands to alleviate conflict, improve service delivery and empower Kenyan citizens, according to USAID.
“It could just as easily exacerbate ethnic tension, worsen service delivery and reinforce corruption and unaccountable governance,” the agency admits.
The hiring of a contractor to advise Kenyan county governments is intended to help Kenyan authorities avoid such pitfalls.
The selected company will be tasked with improving a targeted number of county governments, ensuring that the systems are “more informed, capable, transparent, accountable and open to the participation of its citizens – especially historically marginalized groups,” the Statement of Work says.
The contractor also will advise county officials on how to work more cooperatively with each other and with the national government.
While the devolution process aims to more closely connect the Kenyan government with its citizens – thereby increasing transparency and accountability – “it also provides new entry points and opportunities for corruption, and could easily replicate old national patterns of obfuscation, unresponsiveness and unaccountability at the local level.”
The AHADI program is one of several new endeavors that the Obama administration is pursuing in Kenya.
As WND recently reported, Obama is embarking upon a nationwide reading project that aims to improve the skills of children in tens of thousands of Kenyan schools.
Similarly, the administration earlier this year launched new peace initiatives in and around Kenya, despite acknowledging that chronic cattle rustling and other cultural practices – such as killing rivals “to prove their manhood or impress young women” – might impede progress.
WND last year reported Obama administration spending and projects in Kenya had become so voluminous that USAID had to hire more contractors to oversee endeavors other providers already carried out across the African nation.
USAID, in its own words, had admitted that the “overall USAID/Kenya program has increased rapidly and exponentially, outstripping workforce resources available to effectively perform assessments and rigorous analyses … track results … manage recordkeeping, and other project development and program office functions.”
According to a Statement of Work for the USAID/Kenya program-support initiative, the agency acknowledged the level of U.S.-financed Kenyan operations has outpaced Washington’s ability to adequately manage it.
After WND’s reporting, USAID in turn eliminated public access to documents about the unwieldy portfolio of Kenyan projects, which included a formal plan to manipulate Kenyan and global media
Former Libertain Party Presidential Candidate says Obama told him back off or he would have the IRS investigate his former Columbia Classmate
The former Libertarian Party vice presidential candidate who has claimed Barack Obama was unknown to him and his fellow Columbia University classmates charges the president is using the Internal Revenue Service to punish and silence him.
Wayne Allyn Root – a pre-law and political science major in the class of 1983, like the president – told WND that despite a spotless tax record, he became the target of an audit in January 2011 when he received an “unsettling” call from an IRS agent who called himself a fan of his and considered it “an honor” to audit him.
Root won a complete victory three months ago in tax court, which found no taxes owed in his 2007 and 2008 filings. But then, he said, something shocking happened – something his tax attorney has never heard of in his entire career. Root was hit with a new audit just five days later, for 2009 and 2010.
“That order had to come from the highest levels of government,” he asserted.
“Obama is using the power of the IRS and other government agencies to punish his political opposition and intimidate and silence his critics,” Root charged.
Root has been a relentless critic of Obama in more than 4,000 appearances on political talk shows on TV and radio over the past four years, focusing on what he calls the president’s anti-business and anti-capitalist policies. He also writes columns and commentaries for many of the most popular conservative websites.
Root is now calling for congressional hearings “to determine if the Obama administration is misusing its power to damage or ruin the lives, drain the finances, or just distract Obama’s critics and political opposition.”
“It is time to demand an end to government witch hunts ordered by powerful politicians,” he told WND. “It is time to shine the light of day on government attempts to intimidate and silence political opponents. This just isn’t right, but especially to a small businessman who happens to have a media megaphone. I have a wife and four young children. This is just so wrong on so many levels.”
The IRS national media office told WND that Section 6103 of the tax code prohibits the agency from discussing matters relating to any taxpayer. An IRS media officer said she also would not be able to comment, in general terms, on accusations that the agency is being used by the administration to punish political enemies.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/columbia-classmate-obama-using-irs-to-punish-me/#4YYG8eZGVfbjK4TP.99
Chicago Police Marine Memorial Day PArade and Party
 | ||||
|
Respected L.A. Reporter tells Obama were to stick his Banana
Mychal Massie is a respected writer and... talk show host in Los Angeles . The other evening on my twitter, a person asked me why I didn't like the Obama's? Specifically I was asked: "I have to ask, why do you hate the Obama's? It seems personal, not policy related. You even dissed (disrespect) their Christmas family picture."
The truth is I do not like the Obamas, what they represent, their ideology, and I certainly do not like his policies and legislation. I've made no secret of my contempt for the Obamas. As I responded to the person who asked me the aforementioned question, I don't like them because they are committed to the fundamental change of my/our country into what can only be regarded as a Communist state.
I don't hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists, they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America . They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds, and for those who are willing to admit same, Michelle Obama's raw contempt for white America is transpicuous. I don't like them because they comport themselves as emperor and empress.
I expect, no I demand respect, for the Office of President and a love of our country and her citizenry from the leader entrusted with the governance of same. President and Mrs. Reagan displayed an unparalleled love for the country and her people.
The Reagan's made Americans feel good about themselves and about what we could accomplish. Obama's arrogance by appointing 32 leftist czars and constantly bypassing congress is impeachable. Eric Holder is probably the MOST incompetent and arrogant DOJ head to ever hold the job. Could you envision President Reagan instructing his Justice Department to act like jack-booted thugs?
Presidents are politicians and all politicians are known and pretty much expected to manipulate the truth, if not outright lie, but even using that low standard, the Obama's have taken lies, dishonesty, deceit, mendacity, subterfuge and obfuscation to new depths. They are verbally abusive to the citizenry, and they display an animus for civility.
I do not like them, because they both display bigotry overtly, as in the case of Harvard Professor Louis Gates, when he accused the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly, and her code speak pursuant to not being able to be proud of America . I view that statement and that mindset as an insult to those who died to provide a country where a Kenyan, his illegal alien relatives, and his alleged progeny, could come and not only live freely, but rise to the highest, most powerful, position in the world.
Michelle Obama is free to hate and disparage whites because Americans of every description paid with their blood to ensure her right to do same. I have a saying, that "the only reason a person hides things, is because they have something to hide." No president in history has spent millions of dollars to keep his records and his past sealed.
And what the two of them have shared has been proved to be lies. He lied about when and how they met, he lied about his mother's death and problems with insurance, Michelle lied to a crowd pursuant to nearly $500,000 bank stocks they inherited from his family. He has lied about his father's military service, about the civil rights movement, ad nausea. He lied to the world about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address. He berated and publicly insulted a sitting Congressman. He has surrounded himself with the most rabidly, radical, socialist academicians today.
He opposed rulings that protected women and children that even Planned Parenthood did not seek to support. He is openly hostile to business and aggressively hostile to Israel . His wife treats being the First Lady as her personal American Express Black Card (arguably the most prestigious credit card in the world). I condemn them because, as people are suffering, losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements, he and his family are arrogantly showing off their life of entitlement - as he goes about creating and fomenting class warfare.
I don't like them, and I neither apologize nor retreat from my public condemnation of them and of his policies. We should condemn them for the disrespect they show our people, for his willful and unconstitutional actions pursuant to obeying the Constitutional parameters he is bound by, and his willful disregard for Congressional authority.
Dislike for them has nothing to do with the color of their skin; it has everything to do with their behavior, attitudes, and policies. And I have open scorn for their constantly playing the race card.
I could go on, but let me conclude with this. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the media for refusing to investigate them, as they did President Bush and President Clinton, and for refusing to label them for what they truly are. There is no scenario known to man, whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people, as these two are permitted out of fear for their color.
As I wrote in a syndicated column titled, "Nero In The White House" - "Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequalled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood...
Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation, and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement - while America 's people go homeless, hungry and unemployed."
--
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those that are willing to work and give to those who would not"
This is proof of the new NDAA. Military will be used against you.
The NDAA of 2012, however, is unlike any previous ones. This year’s legislation contains highly controversial provisions that empower the Armed Forces to engage in civilian law enforcement and to selectively suspend due process and habeas corpus, as well as other rights guaranteed by the 5th and 6th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution,apprehended on U.S. soil.
A recent Department of Defense instruction alters the US code applying to the military’s involvement in domestic law enforcement by allowing US troops to quell “civil disturbances” domestically without any Presidential authorization, greasing the skids for a de facto military coup in America along with the wholesale abolition of Posse Comitatus.
On page 16 of the document (PDF), we find the following amendment (emphasis mine);The instruction (embedded at the end of this article), which was originally released in February yet has only come to light this week, outlines DoD policy regarding, “DoD support to Federal, State, tribal, and local civilian law enforcement agencies, including responses to civil disturbances within the United States.”(3) When permitted under emergency authority in accordance with Reference (c), Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances because:
(a) Such activities are necessary to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order; or,
(b) When duly constituted Federal, State, or local authorities are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for Federal property or Federal governmental functions. Federal action, including the use of Federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect Federal property or functions.
On page 17 of the document, a number of different scenarios are listed under which the military is forbidden involvement, although the broader power of quelling domestic disturbances without presidential or congressional authorization is claimed.
In essence, this policy change seeks to supersede Posse Comitatus, the 1878 law which forbids the military from being involved in domestic law enforcement “except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.”
Under the Insurrection Act of 1807, the President may deploy armed forces domestically under extreme circumstances but Congress has to review the action every 14 days.
Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, the President cannot commit troops to an armed conflict for a period longer than 60 days without an authorization from Congress of the use of military force or a declaration of war.
Under no circumstances in current US law is it legal for the military to deploy itself domestically without authorization from either the President, Congress or both.
In claiming this power, the Pentagon is effectively opening the door to a potential future military coup. Continue reading via Infowars...
In essence, this policy change seeks to supersede Posse Comitatus, the 1878 law which forbids the military from being involved in domestic law enforcement “except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.”
Under the Insurrection Act of 1807, the President may deploy armed forces domestically under extreme circumstances but Congress has to review the action every 14 days.
Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, the President cannot commit troops to an armed conflict for a period longer than 60 days without an authorization from Congress of the use of military force or a declaration of war.
Under no circumstances in current US law is it legal for the military to deploy itself domestically without authorization from either the President, Congress or both.
In claiming this power, the Pentagon is effectively opening the door to a potential future military coup. Continue reading via Infowars...
Sunday, May 19, 2013
BBC : US drone strikes: Memo reveals case for killing Americans
The legal basis for using drone
strikes to kill US citizens has been disclosed in a leaked justice department
memo.
US officials can authorise the killing of Americans abroad if they are leaders of al-Qaeda or its allies, according to the document obtained by NBC News.
Lethal force is lawful if they are judged to pose an "imminent threat" and their capture is not feasible, it adds.
US drone strikes against militant suspects in countries such as Yemen and Pakistan are deeply controversial.
Under President Barack Obama the US has expanded its use of drones to kill hundreds of al-Qaeda suspects, arguing that it is acting in self-defence in accordance with international law.
Critics argue the drone strikes amount to execution without trial and cause many civilian casualties.
Legal framework
The undated 16-page Department of Justice white paper published by NBC gives more details of the justification for the use of drones outside recognised war zones.
It says sovereignty is not deemed to have been violated if the host nation gives its consent, or is unwilling or unable to suppress the threat posed by the individual targeted.
It also sets out a "legal framework" for the use of lethal force against US citizens in foreign countries.
It concludes that such killings do not violate the US Constitution as long as:
- An informed, high-level official of the US government has determined that the targeted individual poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the US
- Capture is infeasible and the US continues to monitor whether capture becomes feasible
- The operation would be conducted in a manner consistent with applicable law of war principles
The paper adopts a broad definition of "imminent threat", saying it is not necessary to produce evidence that a specific attack is being planned if the target is generally engaged in plotting against the US.
'Remarkable document'
It also asserts that courts should not play a role in reviewing or controlling such decisions.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said the white paper was a "pretty remarkable document".
Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU, said in a blog post the paper revealed "both the recklessness of the government's central claim and the deficiencies in the government's defense" of its drone strike policy.
"This sweeping authority is said to exist even if the threat presented isn't imminent in any ordinary sense of that word, even if the target has never been charged with a crime or informed of the allegations against him, and even if the target is not located anywhere near an actual battlefield," Mr Jaffer added.
The ACLU has helped the relatives of three Americans who died in drone strikes sue the Pentagon and CIA. Their lawsuit claims the deaths were unconstitutional.
Anwar al-Awlaki, an al-Qaeda suspect born in the US state of New Mexico, was killed by an unmanned plane in September 2011.
Samir Khan, a naturalised US citizen who produced an online magazine promoting al-Qaeda's ideology, died in the same missile strike.
Awlaki's 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman, who was born in Colorado, was killed a month later.
The Obama administration has been under growing pressure from politicians in Congress to share more details of its drone strike programme, including secret legal documents.
Last month the UN launched an inquiry into the impact of drone strikes on civilians.
NRA backs 54 Colorado Sheriff's Lawsuit Against Gun Control
The NRA is proud to support a lawsuit filed today in federal court by 54 Colorado county sheriffs, the firearms industry trade association, several firearms retailers, individuals with disabilities and other parties, which challenges the State of Colorado's recently enacted gun control laws.
"The National Rifle Association, the many plaintiffs in this case, and the law-abiding gun owners in the state of Colorado know that the recently enacted gun control laws are unconstitutional," said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox.
The laws being challenged include an unconstitutional magazine capacity limit which has a negative effect on all law-abiding citizens, and disproportionately so on disabled adults. Also, the law requires 'transfers' to be conducted through a federally-licensed firearms dealer as if they are selling the firearm from their own inventory. This creates administrative and regulatory burdens on the dealers, the cost of which dealers will not be able to recoup. It is reasonable to assume that many dealers will not be able provide this service, making it impossible for firearms owners to comply with this unenforceable, unconstitutional law.
"The National Rifle Association, the many plaintiffs in this case, and the law-abiding gun owners in the state of Colorado know that the recently enacted gun control laws are unconstitutional," said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox.
The laws being challenged include an unconstitutional magazine capacity limit which has a negative effect on all law-abiding citizens, and disproportionately so on disabled adults. Also, the law requires 'transfers' to be conducted through a federally-licensed firearms dealer as if they are selling the firearm from their own inventory. This creates administrative and regulatory burdens on the dealers, the cost of which dealers will not be able to recoup. It is reasonable to assume that many dealers will not be able provide this service, making it impossible for firearms owners to comply with this unenforceable, unconstitutional law.
Pussy Obama is trying to take our guns
As we reported last month, on April 2, the United Nations General Assembly voted 153-4 to pass the Arms Trade Treaty, with the United States voting in favor and several countries abstaining. The vote in the General Assembly pushed the treaty process forward after negotiations twice failed to deliver on the goal of developing the treaty by consensus. The Obama Administration is expected to sign the treaty soon after it is opened for signature on June 3.
According to a May 16 Amnesty International article, a senior US diplomat--Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman--has confirmed the U.S. government will be quick to sign the new treaty. According to the article, Countryman said on Wednesday that the United States would sign the ATT "in the very near future."
If the deeply problematic treaty is signed, the fight will move to the U.S. Senate, where the Obama administration would need to find 67 senators to ratify the treaty.
Of course, anti-gun Amnesty International approves of the treaty and is advocating its signing and ratification. In addition, Amnesty International has gone so far as to claim that the treaty will not affect "domestic gun control regulations."
On the contrary, the ATT does indeed threaten the rights and privacy of American gun owners. Signatories will be encouraged to keep information on the "end users" of arms imported into their territory and supply such information to the exporting country. Exporting nations, nearly all of which have civilian firearm control regimes far harsher than the U.S., will be encouraged to take the firearm control laws of an importing country into account before approving a transfer of arms. And the treaty also encourages states to adopt domestic legislation to facilitate the treaty's onerous requirements.
A majority of senators have already made clear their opposition to ratifying the ATT. On March 23, 53 senators endorsed an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2014, "establish[ing] a deficit neutral fund" to oppose United States entrance into the treaty. Additionally, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kans.), along with 32 cosponsors, has put forth a concurrent resolution expressing the Senate's opposition to the ATT, as it "fails to expressly recognize the fundamental, individual right to keep and to bear arms and the individual right of personal self-defense... and thus risks infringing on freedoms protected by the Second Amendment."
Unfortunately, once a treaty has been signed, it normally remains available for the Senate to ratify in perpetuity, unless a later president withdraws from it. This means that American gun owners must remain vigilant in ensuring this treaty is never ratified. The NRA will continue to keep gun owners up to date on any movement toward ratification, and will work with our allies in the Senate to ensure the treaty remains unratified
According to a May 16 Amnesty International article, a senior US diplomat--Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman--has confirmed the U.S. government will be quick to sign the new treaty. According to the article, Countryman said on Wednesday that the United States would sign the ATT "in the very near future."
If the deeply problematic treaty is signed, the fight will move to the U.S. Senate, where the Obama administration would need to find 67 senators to ratify the treaty.
Of course, anti-gun Amnesty International approves of the treaty and is advocating its signing and ratification. In addition, Amnesty International has gone so far as to claim that the treaty will not affect "domestic gun control regulations."
On the contrary, the ATT does indeed threaten the rights and privacy of American gun owners. Signatories will be encouraged to keep information on the "end users" of arms imported into their territory and supply such information to the exporting country. Exporting nations, nearly all of which have civilian firearm control regimes far harsher than the U.S., will be encouraged to take the firearm control laws of an importing country into account before approving a transfer of arms. And the treaty also encourages states to adopt domestic legislation to facilitate the treaty's onerous requirements.
A majority of senators have already made clear their opposition to ratifying the ATT. On March 23, 53 senators endorsed an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2014, "establish[ing] a deficit neutral fund" to oppose United States entrance into the treaty. Additionally, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kans.), along with 32 cosponsors, has put forth a concurrent resolution expressing the Senate's opposition to the ATT, as it "fails to expressly recognize the fundamental, individual right to keep and to bear arms and the individual right of personal self-defense... and thus risks infringing on freedoms protected by the Second Amendment."
Unfortunately, once a treaty has been signed, it normally remains available for the Senate to ratify in perpetuity, unless a later president withdraws from it. This means that American gun owners must remain vigilant in ensuring this treaty is never ratified. The NRA will continue to keep gun owners up to date on any movement toward ratification, and will work with our allies in the Senate to ensure the treaty remains unratified
Second Letter from Senator John Stockton
The battle for the right to keep and bear arms in America continues to heat up. President Obama and Sen. Harry Reid are not happy that they didn't pass any gun control yet this year, but they have promised that they'll be back for more.
My name is Steve Stockman, Representative of Texas' 36th Congressional District.
I hope you realize that the only reason Obama has not been able to ban guns is because of you. Your activism — along with millions of concerned gun owners — is what's standing in the way of gun bans, a ban on magazines, the end of gun shows, and much more.
Please understand, the President feels that he MUST pass some form of gun control, because he knows if he doesn't he'll be viewed as weakened when he tries to pass the rest of his socialist agenda.
Senate Majority Leader Reid is meeting right now with wobbly Senators who he thinks he can win over. That's why it's so important to keep up the pressure!
I also want to say thank you for all of your hard work so far, and I can think of no better way to do that than to give away, completely FREE, the firearm that Obama most wants to ban — the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle.
You read that right. By clicking the link below, you can register to win a FREE rifle that is almost impossible to find at a gun store!Warm regards,
Steve Stockman
Member of CongressPS: Obama and the gun grabbers in Congress are relentless in their attack on the 2nd Amendment. Please continue your activism in defense of liberty, and don't forget to register to win a FREE Bushmaster AR-15.
Paid for by Friends of Steve Stockman
PO Box 57135, Webster, Texas 77598
PO Box 57135, Webster, Texas 77598
A Letter from Senator John Stockton
Dear patriot,
The United Nations’ so-called “Arms Trade Treaty” makes me sick!
I’m Congressman Steve Stockman, and this UN Gun Grab is the biggest threat to gun owners in decades.
It requires an international license to own a gun.
It requires registration of all guns worldwide.
It bans all transfers of semi-automatic firearms
It even requires the confiscation and destruction of any gun not approved by the UN.
Your gun.
Right now anti-gun and global lobbyists are infesting the halls of the Capitol, twisting arms and offering favors in exchange for the U.S. ratifying this gun-grabbing atrocity.
Obama is 100% on board and using every corrupt tool in his arsenal to approve it.
When international forces threaten American sovereignty and freedom, real Americans fight back!
I know you’re a real American, fighting for the rights of every man.
I hope you will join me.
And we must fight the UN Gun Ban without fear and without mercy.
Courage is the thing that keeps us free.
Working with my friend Senator Rand Paul I’ve introduced legislation to overturn Obama’s anti-gun Executive Orders. (HR 410)
I’ve also introduced legislation to:
>> Repeal deadly, failed, “Gun Free School Zones.” (HR 35)
>> Protect veterans from having their guns confiscated simply because they talked to a counselor about their wartime experiences. (HR 577)
But this UN Gun Grab is an entirely different threat.
That’s why I introduced HR 575, The Second Amendment Protection Act, which states Congress must not approve any treaty that threatens the Second Amendment.
But it won’t pass unless Americans rise up and demand it.
That means putting together an aggressive grassroots campaign to alert patriots and blow the whistle on the UN Gun Grab.
You’d be stunned how many patriots have no idea this is happening.
Help me raise a grassroots army and stop the UN Gun Grab.
This UN Gun Grab is much worse than anything Clinton ever did.
I will fight it as hard as I can.
But I need you with me.
My Second Amendment Protection Act can stop the UN Gun Grab.
With courage and a unified patriot front, we can do this.
Warmest wishes,
CONGRESSMAN STEVE STOCKMAN
Constitutional Republican from Texas
P.S. The United Nations’ so-called “Arms Trade Treaty” is an atrocity!
That’s why I introduced HR 575, The Second Amendment Protection Act, which states Congress must not approve any treaty that threatens the Second Amendment.
But it won’t pass unless Americans rise up and demand it.
Help me alert patriots across the Republic and stuff this down Obama’s throat! I just need you to go here and chip in $10 or more to help me get it done
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)