Middle America's Worldview

Alert: Members of a coalition organized to fight attacks on America's First Amendment rights in response to a multitude of developments under President Obama are expressing alarm at the United Kingdom's decision to ban popular U.S. talk radio host Michael Savage from its shores.

British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced that Savage was on a list of people who would be unwelcome in the island nation.

Roger Hedgecock, who recently was named as the chief of the new American Radio Free Speech Coalition, said the designation is a shot across the bow to American rights.

"The British government action barring Michael Savage is a frightening preview of what we can expect in our own country as the PC police shut down the voices of dissent," he said.

The coalition was launched under the Don't Touch My Dial slogan to defend free speech and First Amendment rights from a variety of attacks that have developed, including the current Washington demand for a return to some form of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine," which has been determined by the Supreme Court to be constitutionally questionable.

One effort is Washington's plan to assemble local "commissions" to provide "accountability" for radio station. Free speech advocates contends the groups would be no more than complaint boards for liberal interests to launch attacks on conservative talk radio.

Some found the U.K. move against Savage to be so outlandish they looked for further reasons behind it.

It's time to put up or shut up, America. Literally. Get the book that shows how to fight the assault on your freedom of speech!

One WND reader said, "[Homeland Security Secretary Janet] Napolitano has been releasing odd DHS lists about extremists, heavily criticized by Savage, and mysteriously he appears on England's watch list at the same time? Napolitano should be forced to resign over this and not just Smith."

Napolitano's recent "extremist" reports have targeted Americans who support Second Amendment rights, third party political candidates, homeschool and oppose abortion as "extremists" who would bear close watching.

Joseph Farah, founder, editor and CEO of WorldNetDaily, wrote in a commentary that the U.K. ban wouldn't track logically, pointing out that Savage wasn't asking to travel there.

But he said if the ban is clothed in the backdrop of what's happening in Washington, it makes a little more sense.

"Barack Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress are conducting a scorched-earth war on the First Amendment. The Federal Communications Commission will soon be headed and controlled by an appointee who thinks government, not the free market, should control broadcast programming. The appointee to be regulatory czar for the administration has flirted with ideas like a 'Fairness Doctrine' for the Internet and mandatory 24-hour, cooling-off periods before sending angry e-mails. As we speak, local 'commissar commissions' are being established in every radio market to monitor programming and challenge broadcast licenses on the basis of content. Hate-crimes legislation has passed the House and is headed for the Senate a bill that would punish thoughts and speech and provide, for the first time, special protections to a new 'victim class' of pedophiles," he wrote.

"There is little question for any serious and objective observer that the new Washington power structure is targeting the most significant voice of dissent left in America talk radio," he continued. "I believe with near 100 percent certainty, though I admit I can't prove it, that the initiative for this symbolic effort to ban Michael Savage from a country he had no intention of visiting came not from London, but from Washington."

Savage's audience is the third-largest in the U.S., and he's been arguably the most critical of Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress.

"He was the perfect target for a pre-emptive and insidious attack on his character," Farah wrote.

The Don't Touch My Dial coalition said Smith's linking Savage with "terrorists and Neo-Nazi murderers" was a "disgraceful injustice."

Other members of the coalition include Lars Larson, Rusty Humphries, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, Steve Gill, Joyce Kaufman and Steve Malzberg.

Kaufman wrote that she does not "subscribe to any of the many conspiracy theories designed to strike fear in the hearts of patriotic Americans."

But word of Savage's ban "sent a shudder down my spine."

"How did two great western civilizations, the U.K. and the U.S. find themselves challenging John Locke's ideals and the U.S. Constitution?" she asked.

"We cannot call ourselves a Judeo-Christian nation, we cannot speak without fear of national or even international censure and sanction, the fourth estate has become the president's cheerleaders rather than inquisitors, and when half a million patriots gather together in mock 'American Tea Parties,' they are ignored and marginalized by the very government they are attempting to petition for a redress of their grievances," she wrote.

Savage, she said, "is making his stand. He stands alone on the wall. He has fought these battles before, on the air, in the courts and in the court of public opinion. I say every patriot needs to join him on the wall this time. These are the times that separate the men from the boys and the women from the boys as well. When the Patrick Henrys and Molly Pitchers need to get off their butts and up on the wall."

One WND reader copied the news agency in on an e-mail to Smith:

"It is obvious you do not listen to his show on a daily basis and rely on others to tell you what Dr. Savage is all about. Let me briefly tell you what Dr. Michael Savage is all about. His manifesto is borders, language and culture. Something your country could definitely focus on as you continue to allow the hordes of illegal Muslim immigrants to come in your country and erode your borders, language and culture. "If you are going to put Savage on your black list, you better put me and millions of other listeners of Dr. Savage on that list as well."

The "Fairness Doctrine" at issue now in the U.S. was established in 1949 by the FCC to require broadcasters to provide "fair" programming, essentially demanding the broadcast of opposing views.

But the Supreme Court in 1969 ruled that while the policy did not violate a broadcaster's First Amendment rights, if the doctrine ever began to restrain free speech, its constitutionality should be reviewed. In 1974, the court said the doctrine "dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate."

Ten years later, the court found the rationale that debate was scarce and therefore the opposing viewpoints should be required was flawed, and in 1987 the plan was abolished.

At the Frugal-Café blog, Vicki McClure Davidson wrote, "It seems bizarre that a radio entertainer in one country can be banned from entry into another simply because of their opinions. Especially if those opinions aren't of the 'All capitalists must die like pigs' variety."

"I didn't see Michael Moore or Al Franken on the list, nor Janeane Garofalo or Keith Olbermann or Sandra Bernhard for their hate speech. What about William Ayres or Rev. Jeremiah Wright or Al Sharpton? They may not have asked to be allowed to enter the U.K. Or they could all be on the longer, unpublished list, right up there with 'who knows who.' Would it be reasonable to assume that Howard Stern would also be on the U.K. list for his outrageous behavior?" she wrote.

"I'm curious. Does the ban in Britain work both ways? If so, does this mean the U.K. won't be hypocritical and will deport their own left-wing extremist comedian Russell Brand for his 'undesirable behavior'? Yeah, thought not," she wrote.

Brian Myrick of the Seattle Examiner said, "The idea that his [Savage's] views might pose a threat to the United Kingdom or its citizens as do other persons who made it on the list is preposterous. "If Britain is a teeming pool of volatile hate, only waiting for someone to walk along and toss a match, that is a societal problem for the British to tackle as a nation."

Note: Concerned individuals may contact Britain's Home Office Secretary Jacqui Smith by e-mail, call 011 44 20 7035 4848 or fax 011 44 20 7035 4745. (WND)

I wonder if there is really anything to this conspiracy of Illimunati?

Conspiracy

Fascinating. I will start to follow this YOUTUBE. The undercover video clearly shows Plan Parenthood clinics are providing abortions to underage girls, without (lawfully) informing the authorities on supposed adult partners. However, the organization will simply say it's due to the workers, not the organization itself.

In the day of transparency, why would one of America's leading soda company's refuse to have this type of resolution?

PepsiCo, is opposing a shareholder resolution that requires it provide more information concerning its charitable contributions. The resolution will be voted on at the shareholders meeting May 6. The resolution reads:

"Resolved: That the shareholders request the Company to provide a semiannual report...disclosing: the Company's standards for choosing which organizations receive the Company's assets in the form of charitable contributions; business rationale and purpose for each of the charitable contributions; personnel who participated in making the decisions to contribute; the benefits to the Company and beneficiaries produced by Company contributions; and a follow-up confirming that the organization actually used the contributions for the purpose stated."

Quick to take credit for the hostage rescue, but now we learn why it was dragged out over four days.


Source

1. BHO wouldn’t authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.
2. Once they arrived, BHO imposed restrictions on their ROE that they couldn’t do anything unless the hostage’s life was in “imminent” danger
3. The first time the hostage jumped, the SEALS had the raggies all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restriction
4. When the navy RIB came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the raggies were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in.
5. BHO specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge CPN and SEAL teams
6. Bainbridge CPN and SEAL team CDR finally decide they have the OpArea and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later, 3 dead raggies
7. BHO immediately claims credit for his “daring and decisive” behaviour. As usual with him, it’s BS.

Thanks to Stop the ACLU for sharing.

This movie looks interesting.




The film was created by a family on low budget. Home schoolers on top of it all.

I am disappointed in this flip/flop of a mentality.

California mega-church pastor and author of The Purpose Driven Life Rick Warren says he apologized to his homosexual friends for making comments in support of California's Proposition 8, and now claims he "never once even gave an endorsement" of the marriage amendment.

Monday night on CNN's Larry King Live, Pastor Rick Warren apologized for his support of Prop. 8, California's voter-approved marriage protection amendment, saying he has "never been and never will be" an "anti-gay or anti-gay marriage activist."

"During the whole Proposition 8 thing, I never once went to a meeting, never once issued a statement, never -- never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop. 8 was going," Warren claimed.

However, just two weeks before the November 4 Prop. 8 vote, Pastor Warren issued a clear endorsement of the marriage amendment while speaking to church members. "We support Proposition 8 -- and if you believe what the Bible says about marriage, you need to support Proposition 8," he said.

The following is a complete transcript of Warren's comments just weeks before the Prop. 8 election:

"The election's coming just in a couple of weeks, and I hope you're praying about your vote. One of the propositions, of course, that I want to mention is Proposition 8, which is the proposition that had to be instituted because the courts threw out the will of the people. And a court of four guys actually voted to change a definition of marriage that has been going for 5,000 years.

"Now let me say this really clearly: we support Proposition 8 -- and if you believe what the Bible says about marriage, you need to support Proposition 8. I never support a candidate, but on moral issues I come out very clear.

"This is one thing, friends, that all politicians tend to agree on. Both Barack Obama and John McCain, I flat-out asked both of them: what is your definition of marriage? And they both said the same thing -- it is the traditional, historic, universal definition of marriage: one man and one woman, for life. And every culture for 5,000 years, and every religion for 5,000 years, has said the definition of marriage is between one man and a woman.

"Now here's an interesting thing. There are about two percent of Americans [who] are homosexual or gay/lesbian people. We should not let two percent of the population determine to change a definition of marriage that has been supported by every single culture and every single religion for 5,000 years.

"This is not even just a Christian issue -- it's a humanitarian and human issue that God created marriage for the purpose of family, love, and procreation.

"So I urge you to support Proposition 8, and pass that word on. I'm going to be sending out a note to pastors on what I believe about this. But everybody knows what I believe about it. They heard me at the Civil Forum when I asked both Obama and McCain on their views."

During his CNN interview on Monday, Warren expressed regret for backing Prop. 8. "There were a number of things that were put out. I wrote to all my gay friends -- the leaders that I knew -- and actually apologized to them. That never got out," he admitted.

Additionally, Pastor Warren said he did not want to comment on or criticize the Iowa Supreme Court's decision last week to legalize same-sex "marriage" because it was "not his agenda."

So he was for Prop 8 before, now since Iowa's court passed Gay Marriage, he is against Prop 8? Doesn't make sense. Either your for or against gay marriage.

Bryan Fischer with the Idaho Values Alliance says Warren is abdicating his biblical role as a pastor. "For Pastor Warren to say that shoring up marriage is not something that's on his agenda is just something that's hard to believe for somebody who believes the Bible is our rule for faith and practice," Fischer notes.

Dr. Jim Garlow, the senior pastor of Skyline Wesleyan Church in the San Diego suburb of La Mesa, helped spearhead the Prop. 8 effort in California. Garlow admits he is confused and troubled by Pastor Warren's decision to apologize for supporting Prop. 8.

"Historically when institutions and individuals back away from convictional biblical truth, it is driven primarily by one single factor -- and that is the respectability of other people. In other words, much more caring about what other people think about them than what God thinks about them," he concludes.

I agree with both guys on this one. Seems Warren is straddling the fence on this one, for some reason. This sending mix messages, only confuse the listener and devalues his support or non-support on items of interest.

Crazy end of last week and weekend of violence, as two gunmen fired upon people (separately and in total different locations).


3 officers shot in Stanton

A gunman wearing a bulletproof vest and "lying in wait" opened fire on officers responding to a domestic disturbance call Saturday, killing three of them and turning a quiet Pittsburgh street into a battlefield, police said.

Police Chief Nate Harper said the motive for the shooting isn't clear, but friends said the gunman recently had been upset about losing his job and feared the Obama administration was poised to ban guns.

This guy laid in wait with a bulletproof vest. When two cops answered, bang bang. Both where immediately shot in the head. Crazy. Now 3 of our policemen are dead, and this guy only has wounds to the legs. This supposed fear of the Obama Admin to take away his guns (IMHO), is bull.

Most likely now, the Obama Admin will use his actions as an excuse to restrict gun ownernship.

------

Next on the list this occured.

FOX news reports that an "Asian" male (not the UK Asian?), 20's, entered the building, a civic center, and started shooting. Number of dead is unknown, at least 4 shot, 41 people have been taken hostage. The American Civic Association "assists immigrants and refugees with immigration and personal counseling, resettlement, citizenship, family reunification, interpreters, and translators. Fosters cross cultural understanding for the entire community". A center dedicated to assimilation into America.

Story here
This guy thought ahead. He blocked the back door, came in the front blazing.

Five people with gunshot wounds were being treated at Wilson Medical Center in Johnson City, according to hospital spokeswoman Christina Boyd.

The wounded ranged in age from 20 to their mid-50s, and their conditions ranged from stable to critical, she said.

Sounds like this guy just went in, firing on any and everyone. He killed himself afterwards. We probably will never know the real reason (in his mind) on the 'WHY'.

Gee, I wonder if someone had the ability to have a concealed weapon in New York and in the building to assist, if there would had been less senseless deaths.

You gotta be kidding me. I guess it shouldn't come to any surprise.

April 1, 2009 – Harold Koh, the former dean of the Yale Law School has been picked by President Barack Hussein Obama to be the legal adviser to the Department of State. Koh will represent America at the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.

Koh is an outrageous transnationalist lawyer who believes that American law should be interpreted according to international “norms” instead of our U.S. Constitution.

In 2007, at a speech before the Yale Club in Greenwich, he claimed that he didn’t see why Shariah law couldn’t be applied to govern cases in the United States. Shariah law is a ruthless Islamic legal system that calls for stoning of women who are victims of rape; for cutting off heads and hands of adulterers; and death for anyone who leaves Islam for another religion.

As TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty has stated: “Shariah is counter-Constitutional, based on Islamic principles which favor Muslims over non-Muslims and men over women and children. Rights are dispensed unequally according to religion and gender.”

Koh also wants American law to be subjugated to international law and to the International Criminal Court. He suggests pushing a “transnational legal process” in the U.S. that will “generate legal interpretations that can in turn be internalized into the domestic law of even resistant nation-states.”

TVC warned about Koh back in November when he was being touted as a possible Supreme Court nominee. At that time, Lafferty described him as a “committed pro-abortionist who views the Constitution as an etch-a-sketch tablet. Koh thinks that the meaning of the Constitution is whatever a judge of U.N. resolution says it means.” Koh is clearly willing to give away our national sovereignty.

He wants “human rights advocates” to litigate in domestic courts as well as international courts to bring out rulings that will subvert American constitutional government.

Wow, you need to check this out.

This is a very interesting article. Long, but worth the read.

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily



U.S. Rep. Bill Posey

A new member of Congress arrived in Washington to a flood of questions from his constituency about Barack Obama's eligibility to be president: Was he really born in the United States, and was he qualified under the Constitution's requirement that the office be occupied only by a "natural born" citizen?

So U.S. Rep. Bill Posey did what most congressmen would do regarding a subject of grave concern to their voters: He proposed a bill that would require future presidential candidates to document their eligibility. And that has earned him scorn and ridicule.

"What you should do is stop embarrassing yourself and take the Reynolds Wrap off your head," MSNBC commentator Keith Olbermann suggested to Posey.

U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, has gone so far as to suggest that Posey's judgment is skewed.


"It's one thing to try to be responsive to your constituents, no matter how marginal," Abercrombie told the St. Petersburg Times. "I understand that. But to take it to the point of putting it into a bill -- you open yourself up, then, to having your judgment questioned."

Abercrombie said legislation generally is to "address common issues or concerns."

"The citizenship of someone who has reached the point of running for president of the United States is not really an issue," Abercrombie said.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 340,000 others and sign up now!

Some of the legal challenges question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Further, others question his citizenship by virtue of his attendance in Indonesian schools during his childhood and question on what passport did he travel to Pakistan three decades ago.

Adding fuel to the fire is Obama's persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers. While his supporters cite an online version of a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii, critics point out the documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.

"Why'd I do this?" Posey wrote on his blog. "Well, for a number of reasons and the more and more I get called names by leftwing activists, partisan hacks and political operatives for doing it, the more and more I think I did the right thing."

He said, "I've been called some pretty nasty things. That's fine. But none of these tolerant people actually want to discuss the issue at hand … whether or not a presidential candidate should have to file these documents with the government.

"I could easily fill up a page listing all the activities an American needs to show their ID for … everything from playing youth soccer to getting a drivers license, buying cigarettes and alcohol, to opening bank accounts and even playing little league. So I was pretty surprised to find out that to run for president, despite the constitutional requirement and the media scrubbing that goes on, it's not required for a candidate to file these documents when they submit their statement of candidacy with the FEC," he said.

Posey comes from a background of reforming elections. In Florida after the 2000 recounts and lawsuits, he worked to offer solutions. So when he arrived in Washington, the questions raised by voters and his investigation of the constitutional demands led him to his suggestion.

"I thought I could offer a solution to this question on eligibility," he wrote. "There's nothing anyone can do about changing past elections… the president won. All the lawsuits in the world are not going to change that. But if what some folks are worried about – that presidential candidates don't have to submit to the same documentation that average folks have to submit to – well, then we can change that for the next election."

Posey cited an AOL poll that found three-quarters of Americans participating in the survey agreed.

"I'm willing to discuss this issue with anyone who wants to talk in a rational manner, but I WILL NOT engage in name calling, smear campaigns, or any other venomous activity," Posey wrote. "For one thing, it's childish. But on another level, we're supposed to be able to have a civil debate on the issues in this country."

Posey's spokesman, George Cecala, told WND the congressman has no plans to withdraw the proposal, even though it may not get a lot of support.

Abercrombie told the Times Posey's suggestion is " the kind of sick politics that permeates a certain portion of the electorate."

But Posey said he would have made the proposal even if a Republican had won the White House.

WND reported Posey's H.R. 1503, an amendment to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, would "require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of president to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution."

Hawaiian officials have confirmed they have a birth certificate on file for Obama, but it cannot be released without his permission, and they have not revealed the information it contains.

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

Eidsmoe said it's clear that Obama has something in the documentation of his history, including his birth certificate, college records and other documents that "he does not want the public to know."

Officials for the Obama campaign repeatedly have refused to comment on the questions, relenting only once to call the concerns "garbage."

Other members of Congress have been reading from what appears to be a prepared script in response to queries about Obama's eligibility:

Among the statements from members of Congress:


Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala.: "Well, his father was Kenyan and they said he was born in Hawaii, but I haven't seen any birth certificate. You have to be born in America to be president." Shelby later backed off, saying he was confident Obama is a U.S. citizen.


Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.: "Thank you for your recent e-mail. Senator Obama meets the constitutional requirements for presidential office. Rumors pertaining to his citizenship status have been circulating on the Internet, and this information has been debunked by Snopes.com, which investigates the truth behind Internet rumors."


Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla.: "Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice – first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party's nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history. And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama's birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of president."


Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio: "President Obama has provided several news organizations with a copy of his birth certificate, showing he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Hawaii became a state in 1959, and all individuals born in Hawaii after its admission are considered natural-born United States citizens. In addition, the Hawaii State Health Department recently issued a public statement verifying the authenticity of President Obama's birth certificate."


U.S. Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J.: "The claim that President Obama was born outside of the United States, thus rendering him ineligible for the presidency, is part of a larger number of pernicious and factually baseless claims that were circulated about then-Senator Obama during his presidential campaign. President Obama was born in Hawaii." The response provided no documentation.


U.S. Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Fla.: "The claim that Barack Obama is not a citizen of the U.S. is false. This rumor is simply election year politics." She referred questioners to Snopes for documentation.


U.S. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Mich.: He cited the U.S. Supreme Court's constitutional authority to rule on the dispute and the fact that the court refused to hear evidence in at least four cases brought before the justices. "Rest assured, however, I will well remember your concerns regarding this issue during the 111th Congress."


Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas: "As we enter the 111th Congress, our nation faces many challenges. We are in the midst of tough economic times, and the federal government must stand on the side of taxpayers and small businesses. Now more than ever, we need fiscal discipline in Washington. I welcome President-elect Obama's commitment to reform the federal budget process and rein in wasteful government spending, and I will hold the President-elect accountable as Congress works to quickly identify and eliminate inefficient, ineffective, and outdated federal programs." He didn't respond to the eligibility issue.


Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.: "The courts have held that President Obama is a natural-born American citizen. Moreover, in December 2008, the Supreme Court declined to hear a lawsuit challenging Mr. Obama's eligibility to serve as president, concurring with three other federal courts in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Washington. The courts have confirmed the determination of state officials in Hawaii that health department records prove that Barack Obama was born a U.S. citizen in Honolulu."


Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.: "President Obama demonstrated his citizenship during his campaign by circulating copies of his birth certificate, which showed he was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961."


U.S. Rep. John Mica, R-Fla.: He noted the dispute is under court review. "I will carefully monitor the progress of this case. However, as a Representative in Congress, my opportunity to intervene in resolving this question is limited. As further court and judicial action is taken, please be assured I will continue to raise the questions and concerns we both share."


U.S. Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas: "Now that the election is over and the campaigns have ended, I think it is important that the politicians and the citizens of our nation put the fierce partisan rhetoric aside so that we can work together to come up with real solutions to our country's challenges."

Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa.: "I am confident that Mr. Obama meets all the constitutional requirements to be our 44th president. Mr. Obama has posted a copy of his birth certificate on his campaign website and submitted an additional copy to the independent website FactCheck.org. The birth certificate demonstrates that he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii in 1961, thereby making him a natural-born citizen eligible to be president."


U.S. Rep. Wally Herger, R-Calif.: "As you know, some questions were raised about whether President Obama is a natural born citizen. There was a recent lawsuit arguing that he is not eligible for the Presidency for this reason. I understand that the Supreme Court considered hearing this lawsuit, but it ultimately turned down the request to have the case considered before the full court. I further understand that the director of Hawaii's Department of Health recently confirmed that President Obama was born in Honolulu and has personally verified that her agency has his original birth certificate on record. As you know, the U.S. Congress certified his election on January 8, and he was sworn into office on January 20, 2009. While I may disagree with President Obama on a multitude of issues, he has been elected as President of the United States through a fair process and has shown sufficient documentation, via a state birth certificate, that has been verified as being authentic. In short, therefore, I do not believe sufficient evidence was brought to light to conclude that President Obama was ineligible for the office."


U.S. Rep. Paul Hodes, D-N.H.: "President Obama publicly posted his birth certificate on his campaign website which confirms that he was born in Hawaii in 1961. This birth certificate confirms that President Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States, above the age of 35, and is therefore qualified to be President of the United States of America. If you would like to view President Obama's birth certificate, I encourage you to go to the website http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate."


"Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, "The Constitution and federal law require that, among other things, only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to parents who were both American citizens) may be President of the United States. In President Obama's case, some individuals have filed lawsuits in state and federal courts alleging that he has not proven that he is an American citizen, but each of those lawsuits have been dismissed. This includes a recent decision by the United States Supreme Court to not review an "application for emergency stay" filed by a New Jersey resident claiming that the President is not a natural born citizen because his father was born in Kenya. Furthermore, both the Director of Hawaii's Department of Health and the state's Registrar of Vital Statistics recently confirmed that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961 and, as such, meets the constitutional citizenship requirements for the presidency. If contrary documentation is produced and verified, this matter will necessarily be resolved by the judicial branch of our government under the Constitution."


"Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa.: "On June 13, 2008, the Obama campaign released a copy of his birth certificate after numerous claims were made about his eligibility to hold the office of President. The released copy created additional questions, because it contained a blacked out department file number and was apparently missing a seal, and it was impossible to detect raised text, a common characteristic of official documents. There were satisfactory answers to such questions, however: the department file number had been blacked out to prevent hackers from breaking into the Health Department's system, and the State places the seal on the back of the certificate. The website Factcheck.org investigated the matter and provided high-resolution photos taken at multiple angles that revealed the raised text and the seal on the back of the document. ... Accordingly, it has been concluded that President Obama has met the constitutional qualifications to be President of the United States."


U.S. Rep Vic Snyder, D-Ark.: "According to State of Hawai'i officials, the Hawai'i State Department of Health has President-elect Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with that state's policies and procedures.
Here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:

New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.


Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.

Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.


Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.


In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.


Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff.


In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.


In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

I absolutely love this series.

Ever notice when you start that sought after movie, or think you acquire that time to do something special and behold something comes up. Distractions.

You plan an event, perhaps down to a T. Boom, something comes up. Distractions.

You try to read or watch that tv show that's been in the DVR for a week already. Someone calls to discuss frivoulous things. Distractions.

My dad always tells me, "Best laid plans of mice and men". I am sure he heard it somewhere as well. But it's true. No matter how much planning or thinking something might occur, Murphy's Law tends to intervene.

This holds true of the important things of life, as well as the small stuff.

Telling your wife you will do something, but things seems to intervene. This causes frustration on her part, and friction between the two. Distractions.

If a soldier is given a task to complete, will he be distracted on the battlefield? I guess it depends on the soldier and his/her dedication.

I think on these things randomly. I, personally, get distracted easy. Call it a short attention span. However, perhaps I can kill some of these distractions by restricting my viewing/activities.

Back in early 2008, I already posted my thoughts on the 2009 elections, calling Obama a socialist. This was before our downward spiral of the economy, stock market and massive spending bailouts.
Depressed yet?

This current President, I find, is the most deceitful one thus far. There's a difference of being mis-interpreted or mis-construed then a flat out lie.

American Thinker points out some of the most blatant lies presented by Obama, from the campaign trail.

Here's an interested vid on the subject.




The Coffee Shop also makes note of this.


Although the above seems to be a rant, I am merely pointing out what others are finally catching up with. Also, I wanted to point out the character of this person.

Now after Trillions of dollars thrown into United States, they are looking to thow more money globally, for the global market. Seriously?

Personally IMHO, the operation in hand is to create a global market utilizing one form of currency. You have to deconstruct the current United States system first (which he is doing well for his first 6 weeks of Presidency), then tell the flock, we need to all work together, IE Globally.

Bible readers shouldn't be surprised of this movement. Readers of Revelation have been waiting for it since 1948 (Israel's rebirth, Ezekiel 38:8). Revelation speaks of the end times where no-one can buy or sell without the mark. In order for this to occur, you need a means to keep track of all buying and selling, IE a Global currency.

Do I believe Obama is the Anti-Christ? No.

Do I believe he will push us further to the end of this age? Absolutely.

I'm getting to the point of thought, to have the ability of concealed weapon for all.

I understand to have spies for war. But within our own country against each other? Sigh. I guess this is part of the new administrations 'transparency' promise.

March 4, 2009 – After unprecedented access to Bush Administration documents, dirty trickster Shauna Daly has left the White House Counsel’s office to go to work for the Democratic National Committee.

Daly, 29, had no legal experience when hired to work for White House Counsel Greg Craig, but she had earned a reputation as a dirt-digger against Republican candidates. She formerly worked for the DNC as a dirty trickster.

According to Democrats, Daly’s short stay in the White House gave her unprecedented access to all sorts of documents from the Bush Administration – documents that can be used against Bush officials by Sen. Patrick Leahy and by Rep. John Conyers – who has long sought to impeach Bush and staffers over our nation’s war on Islamic terrorism.

The American Spectator reports that Daly had documents related to the firings of U.S. Attorneys, the use of the Patriot Act, FISA, and the Scooter Libby and Karl Rove investigations.

According to a DNC staffer: “She realized that she could do more with all the material she saw outside of the building than inside, where she'd be bound by the rules and legalities of the White House Counsel's Office. Now she isn't. She's good at what she does; her time at the White House means we've got a mother load of material that will have Republicans scrambling. At least that's what we hope.”

So, her sole purpose for being in the White House Counsel’s office was to do data mining for the DNC to use against Republicans and the Bush Administration in future Stalinist show trial hearings during the next four years. This is clearly an abuse of this office.

Daly should be investigated to find out what she took from the White House Counsel’s office and if she violated any federal laws on the handling of government documents. She should be forced to testify under oath about her activities.

This is an outrageous abuse of power and Republicans should raise a major stink over this. Of course, what kind of justice can we expect with Obamunist Eric Holder as U.S. Attorney General.

Obama has just released numerous Bush Administration documents that will be used by Sen. Patrick Leahy and Rep. John Conyers to pursue the prosecution of Bush officials over alleged war crimes!

Additional articles on this subject.

Outside the Beltway

I absolutely love this song and meaning. The little choices we make each day leading us on a particular path.

A warning on these videos. Don't play them if your easily offended.
We know Obama said himself, he smoked pot and done cocaine. Now we learn he may be bi-sexual?

We're not officially a communist country yet,but this is a bit much already.

The Oklahoma City Police Department admits one of its officers made a mistake in pulling over a man last week for carrying an anti-President Obama sign in his car.

According to The Oklahoman newspaper, an officer pulled over Chip Harrison last week because he had in his car a sign that said, "Abort Obama, not the unborn."

The officer confiscated the sign and handed Harrison a slip telling him he was under investigation, even though Harrison argued that the sign only meant he wanted Obama removed from office.

The officer thought Harrison was threatening to kill the president, according to the article. But the department later explained that the officer misinterpreted the sign.

That didn't stop Harrison from getting a visit from the Secret Service. They interviewed him at his house and determined he was not a threat to the president, according to the report.

Click on the picture to enlarge it enough to read the sign.

The mother of a 12-year-old girl whose pro-life speech has become a hit YouTube video says her daughter's passion for the unborn is genuine.



Lia is a preteen from Canada who decided to speak out against abortion in her school's speech contest, despite teachers and school officials who encouraged her to pick a different topic.

"What if I told you that right now someone was choosing if you were going to live or die? What if I told you that this choice wasn't based on what you could or couldn't do, what you had done in the past, or what you would do in the future? And what if I told you [that] you could nothing about it? Fellow students and teachers, thousands of children are right now in that very situation," she says in her speech.

Kimberly, Lia's mother, says Lia was told by school officials that if she chose the topic of abortion, she would not be allowed to participate in the speech contest. But both were surprised when Lia's pro-choice teacher had a change of heart.

"Her teacher was really impressed by this speech and perhaps moved by it, and therefore her teacher kind of was a real supporter of [Lia] winning for the class," Kimberly notes. "And she had to go through a couple of hoops and get clearance from a couple of other teachers before she could be declared winner of the class."

Another controversy erupted when the panel of judges had a supposed big disagreement and one stepped down. Initially Lia was disqualified, but later the panel declared her the winner. She was asked to take out this portion of her speech: "[F]etuses are definitely humans knit together in their mother's womb by their wonderful Creator who knows them all by name."

Kimberly says after Lia was told to remove that portion of her speech, she took time to think about her decision and ultimately decided to leave it in. Lia also competed in a regional speech competition but did not win. However, her speech has been viewed by over 200,000 people on YouTube.

Here is the video embedded below.

As you 3-5 viewers might have guessed now, my job has me in front of a PC all day. I guess you can call it a desk job. If I am not in a conference call, viewing a webex, or simply working on projects, I monitor interfaces. Many times, all at the same time. Irregardless, I am in front of my PC all day long.

Last Christmas,I was given a pedometer. Out of curiosity, I wondered how many steps I really took each day.

Before I show my number of steps, check this out.

How many steps per day are enough? Dr. Catrine Tudor-Locke has been studying pedometer walking and released a new opinion in the January, 2004 issue of "Sports Medicine."

10,000 Steps a Magic Number?

A goal of 10,000 steps per day has become common, based on promotion in Japan by pedometer companies and its adoption by walking clubs. But there was no body of research to back up that number. Numbers as low as 6000 steps a day were shown to be correlated with a lower death rate in men in the Harvard Study.

Many people view 10,000 steps a day as too few for children, yet not achievable by many who are aged, sedentary, or who have chronic diseases. Some suggest instead of using a blanket 10,000 steps per day that instead the goal be based on the individual's baseline plus an increment of steps. For example, a woman who wears a pedometer in her ordinary activities notes that she logs 4000 steps per day. Her goal should be to add the equivalent of a half hour of walking to her day, for example 2000-3000 more steps per day.

They say average number of steps is 3000 per day.

So here are my steps. I noticed the higher ones are those days, I had extra activities (errands) in the evenings. I didn't "try" to walk any more. I just did my normal routine.

Mon- 3391
Tue- 2360
Wed- 2124
Thur- 773
Fri- 147
Sat- 5351
Sun- 6540

Total all week, 20686.

So, if I took the 10,000 rule, only 2 days of walking done in a full week.
Wow.

My wife informed me, I am posting too much boring political stuff. So here is a bit of an personal update.

Our Sunday School class took on the 'Love Dare' challenge between spouses. I totally loved the move FIREPROOF and thought this was actually a good idea.

I knew it would be difficult, but after day 5 it's a bit harder than I even knew it would be. The Love Dare puts a light (sometimes an uncomfortable one) on your own flaws. As I read this daily, aspects really stand out and personally hits me.

Here are some random snippets that stood out to me.

Day 1 "Love is built on two pillars that best define what it is. Those pillars are patience and kindness."

Day 2 "A kind husband ends thousands of potential arguments by his willingness to listen first rather than demand his way."

Day 3 "Why do we have such low standards for ourselves but high expectations for our mate? The answer is a painful pill to swallow. We are selfish."

Day 4 "Men for example, tend to think in headlines adn say exactly what they mean. Not much is needed to understand the message. His words are more literal and shouldn't be over analyzed. But women think and speak between the lines. They tend to hint. A man often has to listen for what is implied if he wants to get the full meaning."

Day 5 "There are two main reasons why people are rude: ignorance and selfishness.

So I am up to day 5 today and have already learned alot. Even though I have only begun reading this, I do recommened it to all couples, especially those married.

You can check out Fire Proof my Marriage for additional information.

There is also a free online 40 day Love Dare for those wishing to take the dare!

Have we finally entered the Twilight Zone? Yesterday I heard the prior Soviet Union leader told USA new Administration, 'what your attempting does not work' (paraphrase). This modified communist approach is the same reason the Soviet Union failed.

This new United States administration is making radical changes. So much so, the freaking stock market/dow is dropping faster than the biggest loser weight.

Check out the new press release yesterday(below).

"One idea Waxman's committee staff is looking at is a congressionally mandated policy that would require all TV and radio stations to have in place 'advisory boards' that would act as watchdogs to ensure 'community needs and opinions' are given fair treatment. ... Waxman and the FCC staff are also said to be looking at ways to ease the 'consumer complaint' process, which could also be used along with the advisory boards."

-The American Spectator

Just in case you were thinking that attempts by Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi to institute the so-called Fairness Doctrine were simply about shutting-down Rush Limbaugh and conservative talk-radio... THINK AGAIN.

It's actually much worse than we initially thought!

Now, according to the above report by The American Spectator, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, under the leadership of far-left Congressman Henry Waxman is talking about Congressional mandated advisory boards of community watchdogs for conservative talk-radio!

Sound familiar?

It should. The Soviet Union used to call them commissars... political officers... politruk!

To put it another way, can you actually envision ACORN-like "advisory boards" acting as "community watchdogs" over Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or Laura Ingraham... telling them, through the station owners that carry their shows, what they can or cannot say?

And just in case you're thinking that such a scenario sounds a little far-fetched, remember that our present economic crisis can be directly traced back to liberals in Congress giving the green light to so-called community-based organizations like ACORN - that utilized draconian and potentially fraudulent strong-arm tactics - to force banks into giving out tons of bad loans!

And for those of us with short memories, let us not forget that liberals tried to pull Rush from Armed Forces Radio two years ago.

Now with Obama in the White House, why stop with Armed Forces Radio? The sky is the limit!

Does that upset you?

If so, TOUGH!

To quote The American Spectator again:

"Waxman and the FCC staff are also said to be looking at ways to ease the 'consumer complaint' process, which could also be used along with the advisory boards."

So if you don't like the new regime of talk-radio... SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP!

Has anyone else heard this one?

1/6/2009--Introduced. Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit a person from possessing a firearm unless that person has been issued a firearm license under this Act or a state system certified under this Act and such license has not been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and renewal requirements.

Prohibits transferring or receiving a qualifying firearm unless the recipient presents a valid firearms license, the license is verified, and the dealer records a tracking authorization number. Prescribes firearms transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.

Prohibits:
1. Transferring a firearm to any person other than a licensee, unless the transfer is processed through a licensed dealer in accordance with national instant criminal background check system requirements, with exceptions;
2. Licensed manufacturer or dealer from failing to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements of this Act;
3. Failing to report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72 hours;
4. Failing to report to the Attorney General an address change within 60 days;
5. Keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury.
Prescribes criminal penalties for violations of firearms provisions covered by this Act. Directs the Attorney General to:
1. Establish and maintain a firearm injury information clearinghouse;
2. Conduct continuing studies and investigations of firearm-related deaths and injuries; and
3. Collect and maintain current production and sales figures of each licensed manufacturer. Authorizes the Attorney General to certify state firearm licensing or record of sale systems.

Like all other threats against our freedoms, we must rise and defeat this bill, slap it down hard.

From:
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

12500 NE Tenth Place
Dept Code 2110
Bellevue, Washington 98004

Is California really becoming the un-hinged?

An Oakland, California, pastor could face jail time for expressing his pro-life views.



Pastor Walter Hoye ran into trouble with an abortion clinic while doing an informational picket. Dennis Howard, leader of The Movement for a Better America, believes Hoye is innocent.

"His approach was simply to carry a sign that said 'Jesus Loves You. Can We Help?' and offering those who wanted it some information about alternatives to abortion," Howard explains.

A complaint was filed and Hoye was found guilty in spite of proof to the contrary. "There was a video taken of him doing this, and it shows that he was not harassing anybody," Howard points out. "In fact, he was being harassed by escorts from the abortion clinic."

Pastor Hoye faces up to two years in jail and a $4,000 fine. Howard is calling Christians into action. "We feel that pro-life organizations around the country ought to take up this man's cause and pray and fast between now and February 19," he concludes.

That is when Hoye is due to be sentenced.

The American Family Association (AFA), a pro-family group based in Mississippi, has encountered resistance in its attempts to air a television special called Speechless: Silencing the Christians.


According to the website SilencingChristians.com, the majority of Americans get their information about the homosexual movement from Hollywood and the secular news media -- outlets that deliver what AFA says is a message "tainted by pro-homosexual propaganda." That is why the pro-family group produced the 14-episode Speechless series that initially aired on the INSP Network, and then put together a one-hour special based on the series.

AFA is now buying prime-time slots on the nation's television stations to present that special to provide factual, Christian-based information on the topic. But the pro-family group reports it has run up against blatant "silencing" of that message. "There's a real threat to our First Amendment and free-speech rights because Christians are being shut down and shut out and shut up by the very people who say they champion freedom of speech," asserts AFA president Tim Wildmon.

For example, WSXY in Columbus, Ohio, has refused the air the program. WSPA in Greenville, South Carolina, aired it, but then ran an apology from the station manager. And in Grand Rapids, Michigan, WOOD-TV agreed initially to air the show Monday evening, then bumped it to Wednesday, then proposed to run it on Saturday afternoon -- and now has cancelled it entirely.

WOOD-TV general manager Diane Kniowski told The Grand Rapids Press that the station made a "fair offer" to AFA, but received no response regarding the Saturday airing.

"Our station is being bombarded with calls and messages, and we find ourselves in the middle of someone else's fight," Kniowski stated. "Ours was a fair offer and we are removing ourselves from this matter."


Wildmon sees outright irony in what is happening. "It's ironic that the very issue we're bringing up -- that Christians are being rendered speechless when they talk about this issue -- is actually happening to us when it comes to the program itself," he observes.

Why are stations responding that way? According to Wildmon, they are reacting to complaints from homosexual activists about airing Speechless. "[The stations are] just giving us the runaround," he says. "They've heard from a few of the homosexual, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered supporters out there -- and so they haven't heard massively from our folks yet."

But the AFA president predicts they will. He argues that the TV special simply tells the truth -- and he urges people to visit SilencingChristians.com, where segments of the show can be viewed. Wildmon also encourages people in cities where the show is scheduled to contact their local TV station and voice their support for airing it.

You can quickly go to the TV schedule here.

Interesting. I would think they could at least narrow down subjects due to their geographical activity.

Cybercriminals Try Phishing With Fliers
By Thomas Claburn
Read the Original Article at InformationWeek

The link advertised leads to malicious hacking script that attempts to establish a connection to a Web site that Symantec said has been associated with malware.
As part of their ongoing effort to convince people to visit malicious Web sites, cybercriminals are experimenting with a new medium: phony advertisement fliers.

In a post on the SANS Internet Storm Center blog, security consultant Lenny Zeltser describes a scheme to drive traffic to a malicious Web site using pamphlets left on cars.

A few days ago, yellow fliers appeared on cars in Grand Forks, N.D., Zeltser reports. They purported to be parking violation notices and advised recipients to go to a specific Web site "to view pictures with information about your parking preferences." (If you've never heard of parking preferences, you're not alone.)

At the specified Web site, visitors found snapshots of cars at area parking lots, along with the instructions, "To view pictures of your vehicle from Grand Forks, North Dakota download here," followed by a link to a file called PictureSearchToolbar.exe.

Once installed, that program downloaded a malicious DLL and attempted to establish a connection to a Web site that Symantec said has been associated with malware.

"The initial program installed itself as a browser helper object for Internet Explorer that downloaded a component from childhe.com and attempted to trick the victim into installing a fake anti-virus scanner from bestantispyware securityscan.com and protectionsoft warecheck.com," Zeltser explains in his post. "Attackers continue to come up with creative ways of tricking potential victims into installing malicious software. Merging physical and virtual worlds via objects that point to Web sites is one way to do this. I imagine we'll be seeing such approaches more often."

Don't worry too much, though. The sentence construction in the fake Windows security alert rather ruins the scam. The alert reads like a transcription of the Russian-inflected English uttered by Chekov on the original Star Trek series: "Your system requires immediate anti viruses check!"

An interesting article on the fallacy of RFID security for our passports, and building access. Rather than the RFID company suing Chris, they should hire him as a consultant to beef up their holes in security.

But that would make too much sense.

Hacker clones passports in drive-by RFID heist

White hat demonstrates security vulnerabilities in radio technology

A British hacker has shown how easy it is to clone US passport cards that use Radio Frequency ID chips by conducting a drive-by test on the streets of San Francisco.

Chris Paget, director of research and development at Seattle-based IOActive, used a $250 Motorola RFID reader and an antenna mounted in a car's side window and drove for 20 minutes around San Francisco, with a colleague videoing the demonstration.

Paget picked up the details of two US passport cards, which are fitted with RFID chips and can be used instead of traditional passports for travel to Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean.

"I believe that RFID is very unsuitable for tagging people," he said. "I do not believe we should have any kind of identity document with RFID tags in them. My ultimate goal would be to see the entire Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative scrapped."

Paget claimed that it would be relatively simple to make cloned passport cards from the information he had gathered.

Genuine passport cards support a 'kill code' which can wipe the card's data, and a 'lock code' that prevents the tag's data being changed. But Paget believes that these protections are not being used and that, even if they were, the radio interrogation is done in plain text so is relatively easy for a hacker to collect and analyse.

The ease with which the passport cards were picked up is even more worrying considering that fewer than a million have been issued to date.

Paget is a renowned 'white hat' ethical hacker, and has made the study of the security failings of RFID something of a speciality.

In 2007 he was due to present a paper on the subject at the Black Hat security conference in Washington, but was forced to abandon the plans after an RFID company threatened him with legal action.

Paget points out that RFID tags are increasingly being used in physical security systems such as building access cards, and that the technology needs significant extra security before it can be considered safe for commercial use.

2008 Voting Stats - Scary


Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul ,
Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the
Presidential election:


Number of States won by: Democrats: 19
Republicans: 29

Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000
Republicans:
2,427,000

Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127
million Republicans: 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won
by: Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory
Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of
the country.
Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in
government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government
welfare..."



Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the
"complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of
democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already
having reached the "governmental dependency"
phase.



If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal
invaders called illegals and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the
USA in fewer than five years. If you are in favor of this, then by all
means, delete this message.



If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how
much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our
freedom.

I ran across this and thought it was interesting. If it holds true, then we should see policy change to effect radio talk shows. I know they tried in the past to stimy conservative talk shows. Recall The Fairness Doctrine?

The Fairness Doctrine was anything but fair.

Now that Obama is writing executive orders left and right, we will probably see something similar hit our radio hosts.

Rush Limbaugh may command a large following, but his caustic comments Monday about the GOP’s congressional leadership have at least one Republican House member defending his colleagues and offering an unusually candid critique of the talk radio powerhouse and his fellow commentators.

Responding to President Obama’s recommendation to Republican congressional leaders last week that they not follow Limbaugh’s lead, the conservative talkmeister said on his show that Obama is “obviously more frightened of me than he is Mitch McConnell. He's more frightened of me, than he is of, say, John Boehner, which doesn't say much about our party."

Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., did not take kindly to this assessment in an interview with Politico Tuesday.

“I think that our leadership, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, are taking the right approach,” Gingrey said. “I mean, it’s easy if you’re Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks. You don’t have to try to do what’s best for your people and your party. You know you’re just on these talk shows and you’re living well and plus you stir up a bit of controversy and gin the base and that sort of that thing. But when it comes to true leadership, not that these people couldn’t be or wouldn’t be good leaders, they’re not in that position of John Boehner or Mitch McConnell."
See Also

* Saltsman pins 'Magic Negro' on media
* GOP weapon: Obama earmarks pledge
* Republicans chew on DeMint


Asked to respond to Gingrey, Limbaugh, in an email to Politico, wrote: “I'm sure he is doing his best but it does not appear to be good enough. He may not have noticed that the number of Republican colleagues he has in the House has dwindled. And they will dwindle more if he and his friends don't show more leadership and effectiveness in battling the most left-wing agenda in modern history. And they won't continue to lose because of me, but because of their relationship with the grassroots, which is hurting. Conservatives want leadership from those who claim to represent them. And we'll know it when we see it.”

The back and forth comes as some on the right speak more openly about what they perceive as the lack of leadership in the Republican Party. Unapologetic conservatives, like Limbaugh would prefer to see elected Republicans confront the new president. But many GOP officials, daunted by the new president’s approval rating and what they believe is fatigue on the part of voters over partisan fighting, are loath to openly criticize Obama.

An author and critic of Islam says the recent decision by a Dutch court to prosecute a Dutch lawmaker for comparing the Koran to Hitler's Mein Kampf does not bode well for the future of free speech rights in the United States.



Dutch Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders made headlines around the world in March of 2008 with his film Fitna, which juxtaposed Koran verses against a background of violent film clips and images of terrorism by Islamic radicals.

The Islamic world complained, but last year prosecutors decided against launching a case against Wilders, saying his strident anti-Islamic statements were "hurtful to Muslims, but not criminal."

But now the Amsterdam Appeals Court has ruled that prosecutors will launch a hate-speech case against Wilders. Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch, a project of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He says this case is part of a larger effort to criminalize any discussion of Islam to which jihadists object.

"The Organization of the Islamic Conference, which is 57 Muslim governments around the world, is making a concerted effort at the United Nations to criminalize any discussion of the elements of Islam that jihadists use to make recruits and justify their actions," he contends.

Spencer says the Wilders prosecution shows that Europe is falling in line with the Islamic initiative to prosecute anyone who engages in what the Islamists say is hate speech. He adds that could affect the free speech rights of Americans as well.

"Especially at a time when the Obama administration has announced its intention to bring the United States into line with European sensibilities about this and closer to the U.N.," he points out. "And with both Europe and the U.N giving way on free speech at a rapid clip, that bodes ill for our freedoms in the United States."

Geez, we are nearing a depression and President Obama throws out $441 million dollars? I guess it's a small drop.

President Obama’s executive order will increase the number of unborn children killed overseas by abortion as federal grants totaling $441 million start flowing to groups like the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

President Obama’s order rescinds the “Mexico City” policy, first established by President Ronald Reagan in 1984. The policy, in effect during both Bush administrations but revoked under President Clinton, limited federal “population assistance” program dollars to groups that agreed not to "perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning."

As a candidate, Obama said he was interested in seeking “common ground” on the abortion issue and finding ways to “reduce the number of abortions.” His executive order does the opposite and is only the first in a series of attacks on the unborn child.

The President wants to force taxpayers to pay for abortions by repealing the “Hyde Amendment,” a measure in force since 1976. The National Right to Life Committee estimates that more than one million Americans have been spared from abortion as a result of this law, which is now targeted for repeal.

The president also wants to mandate abortion as one of the “services” required to be insured under a new federal standard of health care. And he has loudly announced his support for the Freedom of Choice Act, legislation that will invalidate all state and federal limitations on abortion. FOCA will increase the number of children who die from abortion annually by about 125,000, according to one estimate.

You can respectfully tell the President what you think about his executive order and his pro-abortion agenda with a letter, email, or phone call. For contact information, please click here.

I watched a funny video over the weekend called "An American Carol". I normally don't like slapstick, but there were some funny parts in this video.

Netflix users can link it here.

David Zucker directs a star-studded cast in this comedy about Michael Malone, a sarcastic, unpatriotic documentary filmmaker who wants to abolish the Fourth of July holiday -- at least until he is visited by three ghosts who want him to reconsider. But can the spirits of America's past, present and future spark a genuine change of heart? Kelsey Grammer, Jon Voight, Dennis Hopper and Kevin P. Farley star in this modern-day, Dickens-inspired fable.

The film is definitely politically incorrect. I was surprised to see how many stars are actually in this film. My favorite scene is where Bill Orielly (played by Bill Orielly), was interviewing Michael Malone and Rosie O'connel.

Been another busy week, and yes, one to follow.

Today will get crazy with running. Here is a snapshot of the expected day.

9:00 to 12:00 Church
2:00 to 3:00 Basketball practice
2:50 to 4:00 Wife has Girl scout meeting
5:00 to 6:00 Church

This is with on-call looming over me all day. Who knows if/when I will get called.

That gives us approximately 3 hrs today to eat/run.

As for the coming week, the evenings looks like this.

Mon- Boyscout meeting
Tue- ?
Wed- School Board meeting
Thur- We leave for Texas.

We will be in Texas over the weekend for a wedding. That might be a retreat.

Another daunting hit, as Obama swings into action for (Ahem) civil liberties.

Stop the ACLU has a snapshot of Obama's first action items he hit, once in office. The article ACLU Hero Obama Hits Civil Liberties Trifecta; America Can Be Proud Again! shows the media adoration of their new king. The ACLU is basically frothing with excitement.

“These executive orders represent a giant step forward. Putting an end to Guantanamo, torture and secret prisons is a civil liberties trifecta, and President Obama should be highly commended for this bold and decisive action so early in his administration on an issue so critical to restoring an America we can be proud of again.

Well, personally I don't see how it will be done. I am thinking Obama is doing so, because he told his followers he would. He essentially now has provided his end of the deal.

However, questions of 'who will take these prisoners?', 'how will they be parsed out, via trial or awarded money for their inhumane treatment?'.

It will be interesting to see.

Not really surprised by this. Thanks to Fred Jackson for this informative article.

The Barack Obama administration has wasted no time in announcing what his pro-homosexual agenda will include.

Just hours after becoming president, the Whitehouse.gov website has laid out Barack Obama's agenda. Under a section of that agenda titled Civil Rights is a very detailed outline of what Obama plans to do for the homosexual community.

First on the list is the expansion of "hate crimes" statutes to include extra punishment for crimes committed because of sexual orientation and gender identity. Highlighted is the president's political history of support for hate crimes legislation.

Obama also supports full civil unions and federal rights for homosexual couples, and calls for repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). According to the agenda explanation, the president also is opposed to a constitutional amendment to protect marriage as only between a man and a woman.

As expected, the Obama agenda calls for the repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy to allow open homosexuals to serve. "The President will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals," says the website.

Obama also wants to expand adoption rights for homosexuals. The 44th president, states the website, "thinks that a child will benefit from a healthy and loving home, whether the parents are gay or not."

Elsewhere on the Whitehouse.gov Agenda section (The Agenda - Women) is a statement noting Obama's longstanding support for abortion rights. On that issue, the "consistent champion of reproductive choice" -- as Obama is described on the website -- promises to stand against any effort to overturn Roe v. Wade, increase funding for "family planning and comprehensive sex education," and remove any insurance restrictions against contraception.

Anyone else wondering why all these "Clinton" nominees are in the Obama camp now? I thought we were going to have change, not a regurgitation of Clinton era.

The Washington Times is reporting that president-elect Obama's climate czar has ties to an international organization that promotes "global governance."





According to the report, as recently as last week Carol M. Browner was listed as one of "14 leaders of a socialist group's Commission for a Sustainable World Society." The group, one of many under the umbrella group Socialist International, calls for rich countries to shrink their economies in order to combat climate change.

Browner's name and biography has since been removed from the Socialist International's web page.



Ms. Browner's appointment as Obama's climate czar does not need Senate confirmation. She served previously as head of the Environmental Protection Agency under President Bill Clinton.

Here's the problem. One group want's something, another group has it. The first group is fighting hard for it. The second group puts it to all for a vote in who should have possession of it. The vote goes to the second group.

Now the first group is oppressing the second group, because they still do not have it.

Sounds like a mini-war going on to me. Not only does this group fight, but harass and whine when they lose. Sigh.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Supporters of the ballot measure that banned same-sex "marriage" in California have filed a lawsuit seeking to block their campaign finance records from public view, saying the reports have led to the harassment of donors.

"No one should have to worry about getting a death threat because of the way he or she votes," said James Bopp, Jr., an attorney representing two groups that supported Proposition 8, Protect Marriage.com and the National Organization for Marriage California. "This lawsuit will protect the right of all people to help support causes they agree with, without having to worry about harassment or threats."

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in federal court in Sacramento, asks the court to order the secretary of state's office to remove all donations for the proposition from its website. It also asks the court to relieve the two groups and "all similarly situated persons" from having to meet the state's campaign disclosure requirements. That would include having to file a final report on Proposition 8 contributions at the end of January, as well as reports for any future campaigns the groups undertake.



Proposition 8, approved by 52.3 percent of California voters on Nov. 4, reversed a state Supreme Court decision allowing homosexual marriage. The measure's opponents have asked the Supreme Court to overturn it.



The lawsuit filed Wednesday cites a series of incidents in which those who gave money to support Proposition 8 received threatening phone calls, e-mails and postcards. One woman claims she was told: "If I had a gun, I would have gunned you down along with each and every other supporter." Another donor reported a broken window, one said a fliyer calling him a bigot was distributed around his hometown and others received envelopes containing suspicious white power, according to the lawsuit.

Businesses employing people who contributed to the Proposition 8 campaign have been threatened with boycotts, the suit said.

Supporters of the homosexual marriage ban fear the donor backlash will hurt their efforts to raise money in the future, perhaps to fight an initiative seeking to overturn the ban.



"Several donors have indicated that they will not contribute to committee plaintiffs or similar organizations in the future because of the threats and harassment directed at them as a result of their contributions...and the public disclosure of that fact," the lawsuit said.



The suit said courts have held that laws requiring disclosure of campaign contributions can be overturned or restricted if a group can make "an uncontroverted showing" that identifying its members can result in economic reprisals or threats of physical coercion. California's Political Reform Act, which voters approved in 1974, established disclosure requirements for candidates and campaign committees.


The secretary of state's office and another defendant, the state's Fair Political Practices Commission, declined to comment Thursday on the lawsuit. But Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, the homosexual-rights group that led the campaign against Proposition 8, called it hypocritical for supporters of the measure to try to overturn voter-approved campaign finance laws.



He said Proposition 8 supporters used campaign finance records during the campaign to threaten homosexual-rights supporters. "They've used these records to attack corporations, to attack individuals," Kors said.



Peter Scheer, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, which supports public access to government records and meetings, said the lawsuit is likely to be unsuccessful. But he also said the plaintiffs' arguments are not trivial. "The problem with their argument, of course, is that campaign finance laws, both at the state and federal level, have been litigated endlessly now since Watergate and the argument has, in one form or another, been rejected," Scheer said.



He said courts have consistently failed to agree that contributors have a right to donate directly and anonymously to a candidate or campaign. He said some states have less restrictive reporting requirements, but they always include disclosure of donors.

Check this out. I posted an article of muslim cabbies in Minneapolis, now it appears Minneapolis Airport is also jumping in with the muslims. Check out this article regarding public dollars being used for foot baths for muslims.

Why oh why can public dollars go to one religion but ACLU makes a stink over a penny going to another?

Tucked away in a corner of an out-of-the-way bathroom on the vast grounds of Indianapolis’ new airport, back where the cab drivers play gin rummy while they wait for fares, is evidence of the city’s growing diversity.

It’s a trough, about 2 feet by 6 feet, marked off by a cement wall about six inches high. Two faucets empty into the trough.

It’s a foot bath, and it’s not for travelers. Rather, it’s for the Muslims cabbies who observe the purification ritual of “wudu.”

“It’s very nice, much better than the old airport,” said Farh Nasir, a Muslim from Somalia who washes his feet in the bath several times a day.

There was no foot bath at the old airport.

Nasir used to sit down outdoors and pour water over his feet from a bottle. Others used bathroom sinks.

The custom in Islam is to pray five times a day. Cleanliness is a prerequisite to prayer.

As the number of Muslim cab drivers in the U.S. has grown, other airports, such as those in Phoenix and Kansas City, have accommodated them with foot baths.

There have been mild protests. Last year, when the foot baths were in the planning stages here, members of an Indianapolis Baptist church staged a rally to oppose the baths as a dangerous caving-in to Islam.

Today there are two foot baths, one in the cabbies’ men’s room, the other in the women’s. The women’s doesn’t get used, cabbies say, because there are no female Muslim cab drivers.

source

Came across this interesting video showing Tokyo's new "Airborne Ultrasound Tactile Display" technology. Essentially the ultrasound provides a 3d feel. Looks impressive. They are saying this would be a great means for future gameplay and design applications.

I was pondering the game risk, then a thought on applying the strategies with life.

It would be interesting to do a pet project by applying the same skills to a possible corporation takedown.

I was listening to a CD referring Christian Financial Practices and my mind wandered on applying Risk.

The project would be simple enough. Take a company or cooperation. You would have to first identify the key players (CIO, Board, ect.). Map out the primary base and divisions, creating a heirarchy. Then you would find their main funds, expenses, ect.

Once you identify the landscape, you would then strategize the means of cutting off the funds, creating chaos, ect.

The question would be which company or cooperation would be a good target?

Now this is interesting. British citizens will be the first to have biometric identity by year end 2009. I have already posted my thoughts before, and knew the technology was already availible. Although, technology being availible to do such things, doesn't mean the people are. However, as identity theft, terrorist activity grows, the people may welcome it more.

For identity theft fear, the world itself (or at least the western world) will move toward this biometric identity.

For the love of our planet and the global warming sensitivity, we will go green, thus moving us to the all-tech mode.

There you have two of the end-times biblical prophecy (written 2000 years ago before electricity), coming into play. A cash-less society where all transactions are controlled and known.

British police have been granted authority to hack into personal computers without first obtaining a warrant.

However, officers must still seek the permission of a local chief constable before accessing a suspect's machine.

Remote searches can be executed by infecting a computer with stealth malware capable of relaying e-mail and browsing habits to a remote surveillance team. Detectives may also hijack wireless networks to access stored data on hard-drives or USB devices.

UK police reportedly carried out 194 hacking operations during 2007-08 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, including 133 in private homes, 37 in offices and 24 in hotel rooms. MI5 and GCHQ currently monitor the Internet via a network of black boxes attached to servers, but are studying ways of expanding the already invasive system.

Law enforcement officials claim the new snooping policy is a critical component in their fight against cyber-crime. However, shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve expressed concern over the "exercise of such intrusive powers" and demanded the government explain what safeguards, if any, would be established.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights campaign group Liberty, believes the practice is no different "from breaking down someone's door, rifling through their paperwork and seizing their computer hard drive".

A Home Office spokesman addressed the above-mentioned concerns by telling the Telegraph that the UK had "agreed to a strategic approach towards tackling cyber crime on the same basis as all member states." The spokesman added that Britian fully supported efforts to develop an understanding of the impact of electronic crime across the UK and would work with states to clarify details of the proposal.

It should be noted that the British political echelon has faced serious criticism over plans for a "big brother" database slated to contain information regarding phone calls, email and Internet visits made by UK residents. British citizens will also receive biometric identity cards by the end of 2009, effectively creating the world's largest identity register. X

One of our friends had sent our son the game Risk. I haven't played it in years and was curious how the kids would take it. Surprisingly, our son hung in 2 hours on our first game. This in itself was a surprise. Our daughter was hooked. I played 2 games with her alone already.




The Risk game itself is a fascinating game. I am not sure if we are playing the easy version or not, the rules seem to be self-explaning and easy to move through.

I can see us playing this more as time allows. We noticed a game takes around 2 hours to play.

This is too funny!

I am not sure how realistic this is. By law, children attend the local school in their area of living. Most states shut down the school ballot initiative (choice).

However, it brings up an issue, most christians should already be aware of. The fight for the culture of the youth is being lost. Bible prophecy already speaks of the last days as the same as the day of Noah. Everyone will be pretty much thinking and doing for themselves, and the hell with anyone else.

The Obama campaign, much like a military operation, succeeded in large part by the youth, rather than the educated. Hitler had it right, control the youth, control the country.

Critics of America's public school system have launched a new effort highlighting the need for Christians to exit the system.

The initiative -- dubbed The Call to Dunkirk (Critics of America's public school system have launched a new effort highlighting the need for Christians to exit the system.


The initiative -- dubbed The Call to Dunkirk (video link) -- was launched by Dr. Bruce Shortt, author of The Harsh Truth About Public Schools; Rev. Voddie Baucham, author of Family Driven Faith: Doing What It Takes to Raise Sons and Daughters Who Walk with God; and the founder and director of the Exodus Mandate Project, retired U.S. Army Chaplain Lt. Col. E. Ray Moore.

Moore explains the proposal. "The Call to Dunkirk is a special emergency effort to try to get other ministries, churches, pastors, and the major Christian right and pro-family movement to join with us and the other K-12 home-school ministries in rescuing the children from the public schools during the year 2009," he says.

Although Christians have fought other aspects of the culture war such as homosexual "marriage," Moore contends they are losing the fight when it comes to the education of their children.

"The real target of the liberals and the left has always been the children. And we can see in California where the conservatives won Proposition 8 -- the vote [was] 52 to 48 [percent] -- but...when Proposition 22 was voted on [in March 2000], they had a 61-percent margin of victory. So the culture is turning against Christianity and against the pro-family movement primarily because we've allowed our children to be educated in their schools," he adds. "They're converting our children; we're not converting them."

The Call to Dunkirk gets its name from the historical WWII event when the Allied forces of England and France were run out of Europe, but ordinary citizens rallied to their aid and used their own boats to help more than 300,000 soldiers escape safely in order to return again on D-Day.
-- was launched by Dr. Bruce Shortt, author of The Harsh Truth About Public Schools; Rev. Voddie Baucham, author of Family Driven Faith: Doing What It Takes to Raise Sons and Daughters Who Walk with God; and the founder and director of the Exodus Mandate Project, retired U.S. Army Chaplain Lt. Col. E. Ray Moore.

Moore explains the proposal. "The Call to Dunkirk is a special emergency effort to try to get other ministries, churches, pastors, and the major Christian right and pro-family movement to join with us and the other K-12 home-school ministries in rescuing the children from the public schools during the year 2009," he says.

Although Christians have fought other aspects of the culture war such as homosexual "marriage," Moore contends they are losing the fight when it comes to the education of their children.

"The real target of the liberals and the left has always been the children. And we can see in California where the conservatives won Proposition 8 -- the vote [was] 52 to 48 [percent] -- but...when Proposition 22 was voted on [in March 2000], they had a 61-percent margin of victory. So the culture is turning against Christianity and against the pro-family movement primarily because we've allowed our children to be educated in their schools," he adds. "They're converting our children; we're not converting them."

The Call to Dunkirk gets its name from the historical WWII event when the Allied forces of England and France were run out of Europe, but ordinary citizens rallied to their aid and used their own boats to help more than 300,000 soldiers escape safely in order to return again on D-Day.