Baraq Hussein Obama, the Obamantor of U.S. National Security, Muslim born and educated is now showing his traitorous choice of appeasment of Islamic terrorists over the best health and interest of the country he had to swear three times to protect.
ThatS right all you Obamabots, Obambies, Oboobs and Obots! Your man can't sell us out fast enough to his buddies the very Islamofascists that would just as soon as slit yours and your childrens' throats as look at you. AND now for many reasons these barbarian thugs will have a better chance to do so.
1) First press conference given NOT to the American public but to Al Jazeera, the propganda arm of al qaeda! Shows alot of respect for the America people, eh?
2) Obama gives Gitmo terrorists special rights President Obama clearly didn't do his homework before ordering the suspension of military tribunals to try terrorist suspects. We have learned that even his own legal counsel admitted that Mr. Obama erred in discussing details about terrorism with families of victims last week, and that the administration was ignorant of a key point that terrorists exploit to their advantage. In his rush to fulfill a campaign promise to his more fervid anti-war supporters, the president's legal oversights risk the disclosure of some highly classified information to terrorists.
Debra Burlingame, sister of Charles Burlingame III, the pilot of American Airlines Flight 77 that was flown into the Pentagon on 9/11, was present at last Friday's White House meeting of families of terrorism victims. Her impression was that President Obama was saying the right words in general, but when it came to specifics he was uncertain, uninformed, and sometimes just plain mistaken. Ms. Burlingame is an attorney who has followed closely the legal aspects of the terrorism cases, and her detailed, probing questions were met with stammers, stares, and statements that betrayed an understanding of the law that was, she said, "flat out wrong."
Case in point: the president's knowledge of the role of the Classified Information Procedures Act or CIPA. This law governs the way in which classified information is used in trials. The Sixth Amendment guarantees defendants the right to confront their accusers and the evidence against them, but the government has an important interest in cases such as these in keeping sources and methods secret. Under CIPA rules, in cases where classified information is used, the government has the option of sharing the information with the defendant, or not using it.
The Bush administration sought to avoid this potential national security threat by resorting to other procedures in which 6th Amendment issues did not arise. But President Obama believes that the model for terrorism cases is the prosecution of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers. Of course a number of those plotters escaped justice (some were found later hiding in Saddam's Iraq, but that's another story). More important, because of the openness of that process, al Qaeda learned a great deal about how to do a much better job next time - and even the classified information from that trial was in Osama bin Laden's hands within weeks.
The terrorists have learned a great deal about conducting legal guerrilla war, using rules like CIPA to their advantage. Notice that more and more terrorists are dismissing their appointed lawyers and representing themselves. This gives them direct access to the classified documents that will be used in evidence against them. In this way they can learn about U.S. intelligence sources and methods - how they were targeted, what information was collected, and who may have been the traitors in their midst. Even if the names of sources are omitted, for example someone who was present at a key planning meeting, the terrorist defendant will know enough about the circumstances to be able to narrow it down. After all, the terrorist is familiar with every aspect of the events; he knows much more about them than the intelligence community.
3) Is Obama Opening Floodgates To Hamas? From ACT for America - PLEASE SEE LATER POST ON CLARIFICATION OF THIS ISSUE
Two weeks ago President Obama issued a little-noticed presidential memorandum that has profound ramifications for our national security.
Under the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962, President Obama authorized $20.3 million to aid Palestinian refugees in the Gaza Strip, which includes aid to help them “migrate.”
Given that Arab countries in the Middle East don’t want the Palestinians settling in their countries, Obama’s action begs an obvious question: Where will these Palestinian “refugees” migrate to? Since tens of thousands of Muslim refugees have gained expedited entry to the U.S. over the past few years under our refugee acts, it is not unreasonable to assume that at least some of these Palestinians will end up migrating…here.
Who are these people? Let’s not forget that the Palestinians elected the terrorist organization Hamas to govern them. Observers of the culture of the Gaza Strip describe it as a culture of hate and a breeding ground for terrorism. You may recall the video we emailed you last month showing Palestinian children being trained to be terrorists and used as human shields.
The article below asks the question, “What security measures are in place to keep Hamas terrorists from gaining free access into the U.S.?”
We would take that a step further. What security measures could possibly be sufficient to ensure that every Palestinian “refugee” who migrates to the U.S. is not a Hamas terrorist, or at least a Hamas sympathizer?
Obama opening floodgates by inviting Hamas to “migrate” to the U.S.A.?
By Judi McLeod & Michael Travis Thursday, February 5, 2009
On his first official day in the White House, President Barack Obama was on the horn to President Mahmoud Abbas.
“The spokesman for President Abbas revealed that Mr. Obama had told the Palestinian leader that their conversation was his first with a foreign statesman since taking office.” (TimesOnLine, Jan. 22, 2009).
Some thought that first call to the leader of the Palestinian authority was for spite. Others for statesman like reasons, still others for appeasement.
Given that a clip from Al-Jazeera televised Hamas-controlled Palestinians “burning up the phone bank from Gaza” to rally support for his presidential campaign, perhaps the telephone call was made out of gratitude.
Seven days later on January 27, President Obama signed Presidential Determination No. 2009-15, which allocates $20.3 million for Palestinian migration and refugee assistance.
Today a memo sent by President Obama to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seems to invite Hamas to “migrate” into the United States of America.
The presidential determination covers the “Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration Needs Related to Gaza.”
“By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section 2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (the “Act”), as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601), I hereby determine, pursuant to section 2 (c) (1) of the Act, that it is important to the national interest to furnish assistance under the Act in an amount not to exceed $20.3 million from the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund for the purpose of meeting unexpected and urgent refugee and migration needs, including by contributions to international, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations and payment of administrative expenses of Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration of the Department of State, related to humanitarian needs of Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza. (Italics CFP’s).
“You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register,” President Obama instructs the new Secretary of State.
Two days before Obama’s inauguration, Israel began pulling its troops out of Gaza.
One week after his inauguration, President Obama designated $20.3 million to the Palestinians in Gaza.
What security measures are in place to keep Hamas terrorists from gaining free access into the U.S.?
“Is President Obama opening the floodgates and inviting Hamas to “migrate” to the U.S.A.?
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and Glenn Beck.
Michael Travis is an Intelligence analyst who has written for defence journals in the U.K., Europe, and Israel. He is currently a senior analyst for a U.S. based corporation.
4) NOTE: This article is, in fact, a satire piece. While you're here, read other articles, like Obama going on the quarter, how he's genetically superior, and how he took down Blago. And you can also check out Joe's Babe of the Week, which comes out every Friday. And become a fan and return and tell your friends. Word up. Error in reporting and posting pointed out by Alyssa of http://www.alyssaalappen.orgFor those who like this satire, buy my book, The Real History of World War II.
Obama Wants the Military to Pledge Oath to Him, Not to the Constitution? Will you still keep giving Obama "a chance"? Now Obama wants to make the military pledge allegiance to him, overriding, of course, the military's pledge to the Constitution. Check the blog by Michele Chang at the bottom. Notice that, so far, Chang's report is not being aired by anyone else but her. But, after seen all what Obama has done in just one week at the White House, and given his credentials as a Marxist -and, most likely, a Leninist (i.e., a communist on steroids)-- anything is expectable from him. Thus, just in case, we MUST stop this guy --LAWFULLY, of course-- before it is too late. All, absolutely all LAWFUL avenues must be pursued to stop this man before he pushes America to the abyss of no return. It's very credible that Obama wants a Nazi Germany redux with our Armed Forces! When Hitler started flirting with the idea of making the entire German Wehrmacht --that is, der Heer (the Army), der Kriegsmarine (the Navy) and der Luftwaffe (the Air Force)-- pledge allegiance to him and not to the German Constitution, people said "Bah! The German military are the German military; they won't cave in." Alas! Even Field Marshals and Admirals of the finest Prussian tradition did it. There they were, la crème de la crème of the Wehrmacht making the oath to Hitler: Ludwig Beck, Fedor von Bock, Walther von Brauchitsch, Wilhelm Franz Canaris, Karl Dönitz, Heinz Guderian, Franz Halder, Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord, Hermann Hoth, Alfred Jodl, Wilhelm Keitel, Ewald von Kleist, Albert Kesselring, Hans Günther von Kluge, Erich von Manstein, Walter Model, Friedrich Paulus, Erich Raeder, Robert Ritter von Greim, Erwin Rommel, Hans-Jürgen von Arnim, Gerd von Rundstedt, and Erwin von Witzleben. Thousands of Generals followed suit. And then they all dragged behind them the entire Wehrmacht...
...thus helping Hitler cause the horrific worldwide-mayhem where tens of millions died, including 5,533,000 German soldiers. Not that Obama will declare a Fourth Reich and then march on Canada and Mexico; he will use the our Armed Forces as support for his preannounced Cheka-style Civilian National Security Force. "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded..." Obama proclaimed publicly. "People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve..." he added. He will use our glorious Armed Forces to help him subjugate us, his master, us, We the People. Our glorious Armed Forces may end up in the gutter of infamy, pushed by Obama and his hardcore left retinue, and piedpipered by spineless admirals and generals. What purpose is behind Obama's move but to yoke us all with socialism? In vintage Marxist jargon, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, explains the pretended purpose: "The President feels that the military has been too indoctrinated by the old harbingers of hate: nationalism, racism, and classism. By removing an oath to the American society, the soldiers are less likely to commit atrocities like those at Abu Ghraib." Our Armed Forces "...too indoctrinated by the old harbingers of hate: nationalism, racism, and classism..."? Nationalism a vice and not a virtue? Just in the sick mind of doctrinaire Marxists, who pursue a world government! But, would Gibbs criticize Stalin's "Great Patriotic War" to defend "Mother Russia" from Nazi Germany? Our Armed Forces indoctrinated by racism and classism? What a shameless liar, as any typical hardcore leftist, Gibbs is! Our Armed Forces have always been the epitomic paradigm of overall integration. And, atrocities at Abu Ghraib? It was all pubertal hazing by a handful of idiotic, rogue guards. The hazing I received at the military academy for initiation as a plebe makes Abu Ghraib look like kindergarten play. Hardcore-leftist hack Gibbs attempts to make it look like an atrocity...the baleful traitor! That said, the real objective of Obama is to usurp the Armed Forces from their legitimate owners, We the People, and, in the process, attain illegitimate full control of the nation to impose on us sheer socialism. Remember that the President is hired by us, We the People, to run the executive branch of the federal government, and to act as the Commander in Chief of the Armed forces, for us, We the People. Always remember, as well, that ALL sovereignty resides in us, We the People. By hiring a President, senators, representatives, judges, governors, mayors, etc, We the People NEVER, EVER renounce our absolute sovereignty. On the contrary, we assert it, by hiring the government to work for us; the government is not to govern us, but to serve us within the bounds of the Constitution and secondary law. Not in vain the Constitution starts solemnly with the most powerful phrase: We the People. We definitely MUST not only resist, but also stop --LAWFULLY, of course-- this undoer of America, Obama. Fortunately the Great American Resistance is already on the move; A military judge just stopped Obama from suspending hearings at Guantanamo, the Washington Post reported: Military Judge Denies Obama Request to Suspend Hearings at Guantanamo - washingtonpost.com The entire Republican caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives voted against Obama's socialization package (aka "Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Plan"). The U.S. Senate Republican caucus seems to have realized the gravity of the injury that Obama's socialization package will inflict, irrecoverably, on America. They are in turmoil and --except for the usual traitorous RINOs-- the GOP senators will oppose it as well. "Give him a chance" is the mantra that hardcore leftists, with feigned humility, plead; in their crass folly, useful-idiots (aka liberals) beg; and, in their sheer ignorance, throngs of ignoramuses supplicate. "Give him a chance"...to wreck America? Damned those who accede! "Obama is a good man," other deceivers, wishful-thinkers, and fecal-matter-heads argue. Obama, "a good man"? What little trace of goodness could exist in someone who puts us all in danger by closing the mass-murderous Islamofascist-terrorists detention center at Guantanamo? How can someone be called "good" when he has ordered the end of military courts for processing mass-murderous Islamofascist terrorists, thus placing all us in lethal peril? How can anyone be deemed "good" when he orders the reinitiating of the massive first-degree murder of babies in gestation under the gimmick of "choice," the codeword of hardcore leftists and abortionists for abortion on demand? First degree murder??? Absolutely! Abortion on demand is the murder of a baby in gestation in cold blood, with collusive premeditation, malice and full advantage. This hardcore leftist Hun, Obama, prefers to ignore that absolute respect for innocent human life is the most basic foundation of human society, and that a voiceless, defenseless baby in gestation is the epitomic embodiment of innocent human life. This hardcore-leftist vandal, Obama, must be resisted and stopped; again, LAWFULLY. Hurrah for the Great American Resistance! Let's fan it, let's fuel it, let's keep it going on, and let's make it grow into a firestorm. To that end, let's email all conservative talk show radio hosts about Obama's plan to subjugate our Armed Forces; they, conservative pundits, are our only hope, for the "mainstream" media --which are in the hands of the hardcore left as well-- will cover it up. Obama and they, the "mainstream" media, are flour from the same bag; they are hardcore leftist pals. We must make conservative talk show radio hosts report it, comment it and attack it to defeat. Let's email and phone our US senators and representatives DEMANDING that they impede Obama committing such abomination. Let's flood their email inboxes, and let's avalanche their switchboards with DEMANDS from us, who hired them to represent us, to stop Obama's atrocious intentions of bringing our glorious Armed Forces down to servility. And finally, deluge Obama himself with emails and phone calls to the White House DEMANDING to stop even thinking of the nauseating ignominy. Don't forget also to encourage your relatives and acquaintances to do the same. We all must work to stop this fellow, but we must do it LAWFULLY, according to the Constitution, and following the letter and spirit of the Declaration of Independence...to the end, if necessary. Long live America, the land of the Free and the home of the Brave! Now, to Michele's blog:
http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/01/military-to-pledge-oath-to-obama-not.html Wednesday, January 28, 2009 Military to Pledge Oath To Obama, Not Constitution Conservative News and Reporting -- "News for the Rest of Us"Michele ChangSecretary of Defense Robert Gates is extremely frustrated with orders that the White House is contemplating. According to sources at the Pentagon, including all branches of the armed forces, the Obama Administration may break with a centuries-old tradition.A spokesman for General James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, states that the Obama Administration wants to have soldiers and officers pledge a loyalty oath directly to the office of the President, and no longer to the Constitution."The oath to the Constitution is as old as the document itself." the spokesman said, "At no time in American history, not even in the Civil War, did the oath change or the subject of the oath differ. It has always been to the Constitution."The back-and-forth between the White House and the Defense Department was expected as President George W. Bush left office. President Obama has already signed orders to close Guantanamo and to pull combat troops from Iraq. But, this, say many at the Defense Department, goes to far."Technically, we can't talk about it before it becomes official policy." the spokesman continued. "However, the Defense Department, including the Secretary, will not take this laying down. Expect a fight from the bureaucracy and the brass."Sources at the White House had a different point of view. In a circular distributed by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, the rationale for the change was made more clear."The President feels that the military has been too indoctrinated by the old harbingers of hate: nationalism, racism, and classism. By removing an oath to the American society, the soldiers are less likely to commit atrocities like those at Abu Ghraib.""We expect a lot of flak over this," the classified memo continues. "But those that would be most against it are those looking either for attention or control."The time frame for the changes are unknown. However, it is more likely that the changes will be made around the July 4th holiday, in order to dampen any potential backlash. The difference in the oath will actually only be slight. The main differences will be the new phrasing. It is expected that the oath to the Constitution will be entirely phased out within two years.
an ideologically-based supremacist mindset that demands that societies accommodate them, rather than their assimilating into their host societies. This also reflects sharia law’s requirement that human laws must always be subordinate to Islamic law.
This blogsite is not the official blogsite of ACT! for America,
Inc. This blogsite is independently owned and operated by that ACT! for
America chapter named on this site. The statements, positions, opinions
and views expressed in this blogsite, whether written, audible, or video,
are those of the individuals and organizations making them and do
not necessarily represent the positions, views, and opinions of ACT! for
America, Inc., its directors, officers, or agents.
Statements, views, positions and opinions expressed in articles, columns,
commentaries and blog posts, whether written, audible, or video, which
are not the original work of the ACT! for America chapter that operates this
site and is named on this site, are not necessarily the views, positions, and opinions of the ACT! for America chapter that owns and operates this site.
"Free speech is a fundamental right that is the foundation of modern society. Western governments and media outlets cannot allow themselves to be bullied into giving up this precious right due to threats of violence. We must not fool ourselves into believing that we can appease the radical jihadist movement by allowing them to set up parallel societies and separate legal systems, or by granting them special protection from criticism.”
THE RIGHT TO PRACTICE ONE'S FAITH .........WHAT IT DOES NOT INCLUDE
The right to practice one’s faith in a free society does not and cannot include the right to silence other people who disagree with and/or criticize tenets of that faith. For any religious faith to demand that in a free society is tantamount to demanding the beginning of the end of freedom in that society. Which is precisely why ACT! for America’s mission includes rising in defense of our liberty.