Archive
Google report highest ever government censorship requests
obampoint (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
Google report highest ever government censorship requests
Euronews ^ | 4/26/2013Posted on Friday, April 26, 2013 6:55:05 AM by markomalley
Google’s latest data shows the number of requests from governments to remove content from its services is higher than ever before.
Did the Department of Justice Say that the Government Would NOT Assassinate Americans????? | Washington’s Blog
mussobama (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
EXCERPT…..
What Holder is saying, in substantive terms, is that the President does have the supposed authority to use a drone to kill an American who is engaged in “combat,” whether here or abroad.
“Combat” can consist of expressing support for Muslims mounting armed resistance against U.S. military aggression, which was the supposed crime committed by Anwar al-Awlaki, or sharing the surname and DNA of a known enemy of the state, which was the offense committed by Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdel.
gophum (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
Under the rules of engagement used by the Obama Regime in Pakistan, Yemen, and Afghanistan, any “military-age” male found within a targeted “kill zone” is likewise designated a “combatant,” albeit usually after the fact [update: children too]. This is a murderous application of the “Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy,” and it will be used when — not if — Obama or a successor starts conducting domestic drone-killing operations.
Drone Use Poses Unforeseen Dangers to Citizens Across Globe (64 US bases already)
Drone Use Poses Unforeseen Dangers to Citizens Across Globe (64 US bases already)
PolicyMic ^ | March 7, 2013 | Franklin W. Taylor
obampoint (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
Posted on Thursday, March 07, 2013 8:41:17 PM by 2ndDivisionVet
rprprprp (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
For decades, the CIA has been cultivating a reputation for performing extraterritorial assassinations. Drug lords, rebel leaders, and even repressive autocrats have been victims. These targeted killings have generally been uncontroversial, except when bystanders are accidental casualties.
Where is the Left’s Uproar Over Obama’s Secret Warmongering Drone Policy? (“Oliver North made daily headlines and was forced to resign under President Reagan because of the executive branch’s unilateral foreign policy of selling arms to Iran and sending the proceeds to Nicaraguan contras. Obama is not facing the same kind of scrutiny.”)
Where is the Left’s Uproar Over Obama’s Secret Warmongering Drone Policy?
Townhall.com ^ | February 11, 2013 | Rachel Alexander
Posted on Monday, February 11, 2013 9:26:40 AM by Kaslin
mussobama (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
Who would have guessed that one of the most warmongering presidents would be a liberal Democrat who was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize?
Obama has gotten away with a secret escalating drone war because the left and their fifth column in the media have mostly turned a blind eye, just like they have with Obama’s expanded ground war in Afghanistan, not wanting to criticize a fellow leftist in power.
Obama is not the pacifist he pretends to be. The executive branch’s escalating drone strike program has been taking place in secret now for over 10 years, all ostensibly justified by a war on terror that began on 9/11.
All the President’s Drones: Don’t reprove the drone war, improve it.
All the President’s Drones: Don’t reprove the drone war, improve it.
National Review ^ | 02/08/2013 | The Editors
Posted on Friday, February 08, 2013 9:58:04 AM by SeekAndFind
obamadash (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
There are a number of problems with this administration’s conduct of the War on Terror in general, and with its drone campaign in particular. But the elimination of Anwar Al-Awlaki — an al-Qaeda militant with a demonstrated commitment to the destruction of the United States who happened to have been born in New Mexico — is not one of them.
Chertoff Suggests Precrime Solution to Mass Shooting Psychos | EUTimes.net
GyGRet (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
…..Chertoff tried to link the Aurora shooting to Muslim terrorism by mentioning Major Hasan.
“The question there again was how come Major [Nidal Malik] Hasan was not detected earlier before the horrible shootings in Fort Hood,” he said. “It was, in a sense, a failure of imagination.
isdees (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
Here’s somebody who was getting radicalized, who was communicating with a terrorist over the internet and yet the people looking at that somehow they couldn’t get their heads around the assumption that somehow because he was an army officer, he couldn’t be turning in a bad direction. So we need to rethink our approach to this.”
(Col Sellin) How Barack Obama avoids prison – English pravda.ru
isdees (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)
By Lawrence Sellin
47337.jpeg
A political deal will be struck to save the Democrat Party from total collapse and protect the Republican Party from revelations of complicity in the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people.
A growing number of Americans are now learning that Barack Obama, according to Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the U. S. Constitution, is an illegal President. The law requires a candidate for the Presidency to be a “natural born citizen,” that is, a second generation American, a U.S. citizen, whose parents were also U.S. citizens at the time of the candidate’s birth.
Prison Planet.com » Obama re-defined “militant” to mean “all military-age males in a strike zone”
President Barack Obama addresses the House Democratic Caucus Issues Conference in Williamsburg, Virginia. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
This practice continues even though key Obama officials have been caught lying, a term used advisedly, about how many civilians they’re killing. I’ve written and said many times before that in American media discourse, the definition of “militant” is any human being whose life is extinguished when an American missile or bomb detonates (that term was even used when Anwar Awlaki’s 16-year-old American son,
Prison Planet.com » 17-Year-Old Girl Included On Obama’s Secret ‘Kill List’
President Barack Obama addresses the House Democratic Caucus Issues Conference in Williamsburg, Virginia. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
President Barack Obama’s unconstitutional secret ‘kill list’ includes a 17-year-old girl along with several American citizens, according to a New York Times report.
17 Year Old Girl Included On Obamas Secret Kill List 16ss2
“Mr. Obama has placed himself at the helm of a top secret “nominations” process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical. He had vowed to align the fight against Al Qaeda with American values; the chart, introducing people whose deaths he might soon be asked to order, underscored just what a moral and legal conundrum this could be,” reports the NY Times, adding that one of the targets in Yemen is “a girl who looked even younger than her 17 years,” and that “Several were Americans.”
The President’s Private War ~ Judge Andrew Napolitano
The President’s Private War
Townhall.com ^ | May 5, 2012 | Judge Andrew Napolitano
Posted on Saturday, May 05, 2012 5:44:46 AM by Kaslin
Did you know that the United States government is using drones to kill innocent people in Pakistan? Did you know that the Pakistani government has asked President Obama to stop it and he won’t? Did you know that Pakistan is a sovereign country that has nuclear weapons and is an American ally?
Judge recording an episode of at CPAC in . (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Last week, the Obama administration not only acknowledged the use of the drones; it also revealed that it has plans to increase the frequency and ferocity of the attacks. White House counterterrorism adviser John O. Brennan argued that these attacks are “in full accordance with the law” and are not likely to be stopped anytime soon.
Brennan declined to say how many people were killed or just where the killings took place or who is doing it. But we know that Obama has a morbid fascination with his plastic killing machines, and we know that these machines are among the favored tools of the CIA. We also know that if the president had been using the military to do this, he’d be legally compelled to reveal it to Congress and eventually to seek permission.
We know about the need to tell Congress and ask for permission because of the War Powers Act. This law, enacted in 1973 over President Nixon’s veto, permits the president to use the military for 90 days before telling Congress and for 180 days before he needs congressional authorization. Obama must believe that he can bypass this law by using civilian CIA agents, rather than uniformed military, to do his killing.
The Constitution limits the presidential use of war powers to those necessary for an immediate defense of the United States or those exercised pursuant to a valid congressional declaration of war. In this case of Pakistan, the president has neither. And international law prohibits entering a sovereign country without its consent. But Brennan argued that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which Congress enacted in 2001 in the aftermath of 9/11 to enable President Bush to pursue the perpetrators of 9/11, is essentially carte blanche for any president to kill whomever he wants, and that the use of drones, rather than the military or rather than arresting those the government believes have conspired to harm us, is a “surgical” technique that safeguards the innocent.
Attorney General Eric Holder made a similar unconstitutional argument a few months ago when he stated in defense of the president’s using drones to kill Americans in Yemen that the AUMF, plus the careful consideration that the White House gives to the dimensions of each killing and the culpability of each person killed, somehow satisfied the Constitution’s requirements for due process.
What monstrous nonsense all this is. These killings 10,000 miles from here hardly constitute self-defense and are not in pursuit of a declaration of war. So, what has Congress done about this? Nothing. And what have the courts done about this? Nothing.
U.S. to offer legal backing for “targeted killing” (Americans overseas): source
U.S. to offer legal backing for “targeted killing“: source
By Jeremy Pelofsky
WASHINGTON | Sun Mar 4, 2012 7:23pm EST
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Obama administration on Monday plans to outline how U.S. laws empower the government to kill Americans overseas who engage in terrorism against their home country, a source familiar with the matter said, months after a drone strike killed a U.S.-born cleric who plotted attacks from Yemen.
Holder expected to explain rationale for targeting U.S. citizens abroad
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. is expected Monday to provide the most detailed explanation yet of the Obama administration’s secret decision-making leading up to the targeted killing of a U.S. citizen last year in Yemen.
Image via Wikipedia
Holder’s speech Monday afternoon at Northwestern Law School in Chicago is the result of months of internal Obama administration deliberations over how much can be made public about the decisions leading up to the strike.
The Justice Department wrote a still-classified memo that provided the legal rationale for the targeting of American-born Anwar al-Awlaki that also included intelligence material about his operational role within al-Qaeda’s affiliates in Yemen.
Holder is expected to say that the killing of Awlaki was legal under the 2001 congressional authorization of the use of military force and that the United States, acting in self-defense, is not limited to traditional battlefields in pursuit of terrorists who present an imminent threat, including U.S. citizens, according to an official briefed on the speech. The official would only discuss the address on the condition of anonymity because it will not be released until shortly before Holder speaks.
Awlaki, a U.S. citizen born in New Mexico, was the chief of external operations for al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen, which has attempted a number of terrorist attacks on the United States, according to administration officials. He had been placed on “kill lists” compiled by the CIA and and the military’s Joint Special Operations Command. Awlaki was killed in September in Yemen in a joint CIA-JSOC drone operation.
Prison Planet.com » Lawsuit Filed Against Government Over Assassination Of U.S. Citizens
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit this week against the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, and the CIA, demanding the release of any information pertaining to the deaths of three American citizens resulting directly from drone missile strikes in 2011.
Details regarding the deaths of accused Al Qaeda leaders Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Kahn, both American citizens, have been kept under wraps. Both men were reportedly killed in targeted drone attacks last year in Yemen.
The third US citizen to be killed was Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman, who was killed in a drone attack two weeks after al-Awlaki and Kahn.
At the time Obama described the death of Awlaki as a “significant milestone” in the war on terror.
“Our government’s deliberate and premeditated killing of American terrorism suspects raises profound questions that ought to be the subject of public debate,” Nathan Freed Wessler of the ACLU writes.
Prison Planet.com » Obama Administration Demanded Power To Indefinitely Detain U.S. Citizens
White House removed language that would have protected Americans from Section 1031 of NDAA
Paul Joseph Watson
Monday, December 12, 2011
Despite reports that Obama is planning to veto the National Defense Authorization Act, Senator Carl Levin has revealed it was the administration itself that lobbied to remove language from the bill that would have protected American citizens from being detained indefinitely without trial.
“The language which precluded the application of Section 1031 to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved…and the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section,” said Levin, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
“It was the administration that asked us to remove the very language which we had in the bill which passed the committee…we removed it at the request of the administration,” said Levine, emphasizing, “It was the administration which asked us to remove the very language the absence of which is now objected to.”
*Breaking* White House labels the Fort Hood Massacre as simply workplace violence
*Breaking* White House labels the Fort Hood Massacre as simply workplace violence
vainty | Dec 7 2011 | trueblackman
Posted on Wednesday, December 07, 2011 4:57:38 PM by Trueblackman
In my opinion this is a complete slap in the face to all veterans that have worn the uniform and died in it, the Obama Administration has labeled the Fort Hood Massacre as “work place violence” and how the he– could this have been work place violence, when the attacker knew exact the people he was going after and why?
Prison Planet.com » NYC ‘Lone Wolf’ is Just Another Patsy Entrapped by a Paid Informant
Same story, new patsy. A ‘lone wolf’ American citizen becomes radicalized on the Internet, a paid “informant” escorts him to buy bomb-making material, and authorities arrest him in the nick of time to save us from a dangerous terrorist plot.
Reuters reports, “A U.S. citizen born in the Dominican Republic, (Jose) Pimentel was arrested on Saturday in a Manhattan apartment while putting the bomb together, police said. They called him a ‘lone wolf’ who had converted to Islam and became a radical.”
New York City police said that Pimentel has been under surveillance for two-and-a-half years, since May 2009 and was monitored by a paid informant who helped him acquire materials for a bomb.
“The criminal complaint said a police informant recorded meetings with Pimentel over a period of months and accompanied him as he bought materials for the bomb…”
Although the police released the deranged and sordid details of the plot to applaud their investigative work, as usual “the information from the police could not be independently confirmed.”
Once again, counter-terrorism heroes claim this new patsy to be a protege of American Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki who was assassinated by a drone strike without formal charges or evidence provided by the White House.
Remember Fox News and others reported that al-Awlaki himself was a known government patsy who dined at the Pentagon with top military brass only a few months after September 11th. Therefore, it’s fairly easy to assume that every time his name comes up, even postmortem, that the story is pure entrapment and terror propaganda.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Even the cartoonish plot where an Iranian-American was allegedly attempting to assassinate the Saudi ambassador involved an informant on the payroll of the U.S. Government. Attempts to link the car salesman perpetrator to the Iranian government in order to call for war were even more comical than the plot itself.
How many times are we going to read this exact story? The details are seemingly always in short supply and never independently verified, but the rhetoric is identical and half the article always refers to older cases as if to give credence to the same tired plot.
Even those in the mainstream media are calling BS on these staged arrests. Not too long ago, Geraldo Riveraschooled Bill O’Reilly about patsies and fake terror.
Google Censors War Crimes Video…
In the clip below taken from Infowars Nightly News, Alex Jones reveals the hypocrisy of the transnational corporation Google and its popular video asset YouTube.
YouTube has not only blocked the ability to embed the video from the Alex Jones channel, but has used a host of tricks to prevent it from being viewed, including forcing users to register with YouTube to view adult content and include an email address. This works as a delisting to block views and in essence cosigns the video to the dead zone of porn and other questionable content.
The following is a temporary fix to YouTube’s undermining. We are working on hosting a version on our servers and it will be included here soon.
The second half of the Friday night Infowars Nightly News broadcast, however, was not locked down by YouTube because it does not include video footage of a Libyan child with the lower half of his face blown away, a powerful yet disgusting piece of truth information that will further turn the tide of popular opinion against the global elite’s endless wars and slaughter of innocents in much the same way the media in the late 1960s and early 1970s diminished public support for the Vietnam War.
In 2008, YouTube made national headlines when it responded to calls by the government to pull videos that involved “inciting others to violence.” The demand was spearheaded by a notorious warmonger, Sen. Joseph Liberman, who said YouTube was being used by al-Qaeda and affiliated groups as a platform to disseminate propaganda.
Shocking! Obama Apologizes to Slain Terrorist’s Family
Obama’s State Department (run by Hillary Clinton) has contacted the family of al-Qaeda propagandist and recruiter Samir Khan to “express its condolences” to his family. Samir Khan a right hand man to Anwar al-Awlaki, was killed along with his jihadist buddy in an air strike in Yemen that took place on September 30.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotupdate.com …
Murder-by-President Ron Paul on yet another dangerous precedent for dictatorship.
Murder-by-President Ron Paul on yet another dangerous precedent for dictatorship.
Murder-by-President
Ron Paul on yet another dangerous precedent for dictatorship.
***
A Dangerous Precedent
by Ron Paul
Recently by Ron Paul: Against the Financial Power Elite
Listen to Ron Paul
According to the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution, Americans are never to be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The Constitution is not some aspirational statement of values, allowing exceptions when convenient, but rather, it is the law of the land. It is the basis of our Republic and our principal bulwark against tyranny.
Last week’s assassination of two American citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, is an outrage and a criminal act carried out by the President and his administration. If the law protecting us against government-sanctioned assassination can be voided when there is a “really bad American”, is there any meaning left to the rule of law in the United States? If, as we learned last week, a secret government committee, not subject to congressional oversight or judicial review, can now target certain Americans for assassination, under what moral authority do we presume to lecture the rest of the world about protecting human rights?………….
EXCERPT
Bombshell: Underwear Bomber Calls Haskell As Defense Witness
In a shocking development in the trial of the accused underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, Delta Flight 253 eyewitness Kurt Haskell has been called by Abdulmutallab as a witness for the defense, a move that could blow the whole case wide open.
Bombshell: Underwear Bomber Calls Haskell As Defense Witness nigermaitrise 0
Detroit Lawyer Haskell has been a prominent skeptic of the government’s official version of events, having witnessed a well-dressed man help Abdulmutallab clear security before the incident on Christmas Day 2009 despite the fact that the bomber had no passport, in addition to the fact that his own father had warned U.S. intelligence officials of the threat posed by Abdulmutallab a month before the attempted attack.
It later emerged that the State Department was ordered not to revoke Abdulmutallab’s visa by “federal counterterrorism officials” even though the accused bomber had known terrorist ties.
Haskell maintains that Abdulmutallab was carrying a fake bomb and was the unwitting dupe in a case of government entrapment.
“Chambers indicates that I may be the only defense witness called,” writes Haskell on his blog. “How ironic is it that I will have Umar’s life in my hands just as Umar had my life in his hands (or underwear) on Christmas Day 2009? I will be up to the task. I realize that some may not agree with me and may attempt to harm me. Nevertheless, I will speak the truth and not be intimidated. I will do this for the common good of all of the citizens of the United States.”
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Abdulmutallab’s court “outbursts,” in which he shouts clichéd rhetoric about the mujahadeen, Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, suggest that he is being coached on how to behave and what to say, suggests Haskell. The outbursts are in complete contradiction to how he behaved during the Flight 253 incident, Haskell told the Associated Press.
“I saw him before boarding and he never said anything, I’ve seen him in court several times, and I even saw him when he lit his fake bomb and his crotch was burning and he never makes a peep. This is totally out of character for him,” Haskell told AP writer Ed White, although White later edited the quote.
During his interview on the Alex Jones Show today, Haskell pointed out that if Abdulmutallab chooses to reveal what he knows about the entire plot, it could be more damaging to the Obama administration than the Fast and Furious scandal, and would undermine the entire foundation of the war on terror and the TSA grope downs and body scans that were introduced in the aftermath of the event.
Abdulmutallab could reveal which intelligence agents gave him the dud bomb, while also lifting the lid on the role of Anwar al-Awlaki, who as we have documented was clearly a double agent posing as an Al-Qaeda leader while doing the bidding of the US intelligence community.
Aware that his involvement in the case and his assertions of government complicity in the aborted attack could put his life in danger, Haskell made it clear on air that he was not planning on committing suicide.
*********************
via Prison Planet.com » Bombshell: Underwear Bomber Calls Haskell As Defense Witness.
The Killing of al-Awlaki and the Death of the Fifth Amendment
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is unequivocal: no American shall “be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” No amount of ducking and diving will evade the inescapable fact that, for the first time, U.S. military officials in an aggressive overreach of constitutional authority deliberately targeted an American citizen for killing. And no amount of legalistic wordplay will alter the reality that al-Awlaki was denied due process.
(No, Mr Gingrich, the signing of a death warrant by an American President does not constitute “due process,” except perhaps in North Korea or Iran. Our Founding Fathers taught us better than that.)
Al-Awlaki was an acknowledged “bad guy” who incited, trained, and prepared others to commit heinous terrorist crimes designed to inflict death and injury upon his fellow countrymen. He was, assuredly, our self-confessed enemy, and he fully deserved to die — but not without due process. We don’t sanction the use of government hit squads to assassinate U.S. citizens who are responsible for the most unspeakable crimes. We don’t do it even when they admit to those crimes. Instead we invoke the moral authority of Constitution to insist on their right to due process, even in cases where the accused is unwilling to offer any defense. Only when due process has been exhausted and the accused is found guilty do we have the moral authority to invoke the ultimate punishment.
The reason for this important Constitutional safeguard is self-evident. In the words of Jameel Jaffer, the deputy legal director of the ACLU:
The government’s power to use lethal force against its own citizens should be strictly limited to circumstances in which the threat of life is concrete and specific, and also imminent.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com …
via The Killing of al-Awlaki and the Death of the Fifth Amendment.
Secret U.S. Memo Made Legal Case to Kill a Citizen
The Obama administration’s secret legal memorandum that opened the door to the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, the American-born radical Muslim cleric hiding in Yemen, found that it would be lawful only if it were not feasible to take him alive, according to people who have read the document.
The memo, written last year, followed months of extensive interagency deliberations and offers a glimpse into the legal debate that led to one of the most significant decisions made by President Obama — to move ahead with the killing of an American citizen without a trial.
The secret document provided the justification for acting despite an executive order banning assassinations, a federal law against murder, protections in the Bill of Rights and various strictures of the international laws of war, according to people familiar with the analysis. The memo, however, was narrowly drawn to the specifics of Mr. Awlaki’s case and did not establish a broad new legal doctrine to permit the targeted killing of any Americans believed to pose a terrorist threat.
The Obama administration has refused to acknowledge or discuss its role in the drone strike that killed Mr. Awlaki last month and that technically remains a covert operation. The government has also resisted growing calls that it provide a detailed public explanation of why officials deemed it lawful to kill an American citizen, setting a precedent that scholars, rights activists and others say has raised concerns about the rule of law and civil liberties.
But the document that laid out the administration’s justification — a roughly 50-page memorandum by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, completed around June 2010 — was described on the condition of anonymity by people who have read it.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com …
The “list” ~ Kill or Capture…
By Doug Hagmann Friday, October 7, 2011
By now, most Americans have learned about the existence of a “kill or capture list,” or a list of people who presumably have sufficiently demonstrated their ill intent or deeds against the United States of America. As normal Americans and civilized people of the West, it is likely that we envision those on such a list as the very faces of evil themselves and deserving of the full weight of ultimate justice that the U.S. has to offer. That justice can be delivered from afar, from a drone that the name on the list will never hear or see, or up close and personal. The method is dictated by circumstances.
The making of “the list”
According to the release of a document by our government with the self-proclaimed most transparent administration at the helm, the list is created and maintained by a secretive panel of unnamed government officials consisting of a subset of the White House National Security Council. There is no public record of the panel’s operations or decisions, nor is there any U.S. law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate……….
EXCERPT…..
via The “list”.
Prison Planet.com » Secret panel can put Americans on ‘kill list’ without any oversight
American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.
There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House’s National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.
The panel was behind the decision to add Awlaki, a U.S.-born militant preacher with alleged al Qaeda connections, to the target list. He was killed by a CIA drone strike in Yemen late last month.
The role of the president in ordering or ratifying a decision to target a citizen is fuzzy. White House spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to discuss anything about the process.
Full article here
via Prison Planet.com » Secret panel can put Americans on ‘kill list’ without any oversight.
White House Won’t Comment on Reuters Story About Secret Panel That Can Put Americans on ‘Kill
White House Won’t Comment on Reuters Story About Secret Panel That Can Put Americans on ‘Kill
White House Won’t Comment on Reuters Story About Secret Panel That Can Put Americans on ‘Kill:
White House Won’t Comment on Reuters Story About Secret Panel That Can Put Americans on ‘Kill
ABC News ^ | 10/6/11 | Jake Tapper
Posted on Thursday, October 06, 2011 8:25:53 PM by Nachum
Reuters’ Mark Hosenball today reported http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/05/us-cia-killlist-idUSTRE79475C20111005 that: “American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.
There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House’s National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.”
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com …
Posted by Gunny G
Due Process With a Bullet…..
Due Process With a Bullet
Due Process With a Bullet:
A GI in the hills of France takes aim through a rifle scope at a German soldier. Snow cakes the ground and a few bare trees cling to the ground like bony fingers. At the last moment, the German soldier sees his attacker. “Wait,” he cries out in a passable accent, “Ich bin an American citizen.”
The scenario isn’t a particularly implausible one. Any number of Germans did leave to fight on behalf of their country in the first and second world wars. And there was no question of due process on the battlefield. Members of enemy forces who fought against the United States were killed and any precedent set in that regard was set long ago.
Critics of drone attacks call them “assassinations”, but there is no difference whatsoever between a soldier sighting an enemy officer through a computer monitor or a rifle scope. There is also no legal distinction between firing a bullet or dropping a bomb or launching a missile. The nature of the projectile or delivery mechanism matters in the tactical and strategic sense, it doesn’t matter in any other way. War is war and dead is dead.
If knowing the identity of your target ahead of time is assassination…………….
MORE…..
via BLOGGER.GUNNY.G.1984+ IS NOW HERE!: Due Process With a Bullet.
Prison Planet.com » Ron Paul Leads Hearing On First Ever Audit Of Fed
“Would it be much of a problem if we were doing this every year?”
Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
October 5, 2011
Ron Paul Leads Hearing On First Ever Audit Of Fed Ron Paul 1
Texas Congressman and 2012 presidential candidate Ron Paul held hearings Tuesday into a recent and rare one off audit of the Federal Reserve’s crisis-response emergency lending programs of 2008.
In his role as chairman of the Domestic Monetary Policy subcommittee, Paul relished the glimmer of transparency that was afforded as part of the Dodd-Frank Act, signed into law last year.
“More people now are starting to realize that the Fed isn’t independent of political independence because indirectly and some times more directly it is involved in political decisions or at least private decisions to serve some political interest.” Paul told those gathered at the hearing.
Along with Paul, Republicans in attendance argued that the audit should pave the way for regular reviews of the Fed’s policies, as well as more complete disclosure of exactly who has received upwards of $27 trillion in bail out funds since 2008.
“Would it be much of a problem if we were doing this every year?” Paul asked.
Robert Auerbach, Professor of Public Affairs at the University of Texas, backed Paul up by putting the case that regular and ongoing audits would not affect the Fed’s independence in any major way.
“The Fed’s mythical flag of independence from politics, a favorite Fed mantra to avoid individual responsibility, is merely a shield intended to protect the institution from being forced to act in a more transparent fashion,” Auerbach testified.
Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, Republican of Missouri, expressed concern that although the GAO’s audit authority is now expired, some banks and firms that “borrowed” from the Fed, and by extension the American taxpaying public, as part of the Bear Sterns and AIG relief packages, have yet to pay back the funds.
Luetkemeyer also noted that the one time GAO audit was extremely limited in its scope.
Nevertheless, the GAO’s report found several instances of conflicts of interest and questionable practices involving Fed officials.
It was also revealed that the Fed made $16.1 trillion in secret loans to Wall Street firms at the height of the crisis.
The full hearing, beginning with Ron Paul’s opening statement, can be viewed below:
Congressman Ron Paul also appeared on Freedom Watch yesterday to discuss the economic situation, urging that politicians in Washington are “not offering a prescription”.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
“We have too much spending and too much debt, so they’re trying to solve the problem with more debt. There’s not a chance that we can get out of the recession this way.” Paul told host Judge Andrew Napolitano.
“The people here don’t want to change because they have been conditioned by Keynesian economics. Where I’m encouraged is that people outside this place are getting the message. The answers are well known but how do you translate this new message that we have of free markets and the constitution, and get the people that are managing the affairs now out of office?” the Congressman stated.
Paul added that as president he would implement some immediate measures that would cut the deficit and reduce spending in a meaningful way.
“Immediately you could bring all our troops home and have them spend money here at home, that would give us some reprieve. We could change our foreign policy and indicate to the world that we are going to get our budget under control.” Paul said.
“We could remove taxation on all the money that is held overseas by our corporations and not double tax them. We could remove the interest paid by the Federal Reserve to the banks. The banks won’t invest their money because it’s too risky, but the Federal Reserve gives them their money, essentially, for free, and then they invest it back into Treasury bills, so they help monetize the debt too.”
“Those are a few things, but sending a signal will be most important, ‘we’re going to quit this spending’. Right now I’m working on a plan where in one year I want to cut a trillion dollars.” Paul revealed.
“The appetite for big government is the problem. The taxes and the Federal Reserve inflating, that is the symptom, and the budget problem is a symptom of the appetite for big government.” Paul continued.
“Too often the leadership is only in the business of preserving power… It’s a shame that despite all this arguing and bickering going on between the two parties, there is no difference. Regardless of which party it is they still don’t change the definition of entitlements, they don’t change the foreign policy and they don’t go after the Fed.”
The Congressman also reiterated comments he made earlier in the week regarding the unconstitutional killing in Yemen of the American born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.
Watch the interview:
——————————————————————
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.
Print Print this page.
via Prison Planet.com » Ron Paul Leads Hearing On First Ever Audit Of Fed.
Obama’s Terrorist Dilemma
I agree with the Obama administration‘s decision to kill the American-born al-Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki. What I can’t fathom is why the administration agrees with me.
Here’s Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta responding to complaints from the ACLU over the “assassination” of an American citizen without due process: “This individual was clearly a terrorist. And yes, he was a citizen, but if you’re a terrorist, you’re a terrorist. And that means that we have the ability to go after those who would threaten to attack the United States and kill Americans.”
I agree with that. The Constitution empowers the president to put down insurrection, and what was Awlaki if not an insurrectionist? From the Whiskey Rebellion to the Civil War to World War II, there have been times when presidents legally and constitutionally treated American citizens as enemy combatants. Awlaki hardly seems deserving of special treatment.
Moreover, the authorization for the use of force passed on Sept. 18, 2001, says the president “is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”
It doesn’t say anything about exempting Americans. If news reports, statements from U.S. officials and Awlaki himself are to be believed, Awlaki was a member of al-Qaeda. Moreover, he helped orchestrate and incite violence aimed at the U.S. He never denied the charges against him but hid outside of U.S. jurisdiction fomenting violence against America.
Case closed.
And yet, I sympathize with critics on the far left and libertarian right who find the whole thing unseemly. Surely when an American is in the crosshairs, there’s a higher political bar, even if there isn’t a higher legal or constitutional one.
ABC’s Jake Tapper asked White House spokesman Jay Carney, “Does the administration not see at all how a president asserting that he has the right to kill an American citizen without due process, and that he’s not going to even explain why he thinks he has that right, is troublesome to some people?”
Carney’s response: “I’m not going to … discuss the circumstances of his death.”
The mind reels to think how people would have responded if President Bush‘s spokesman, Ari Fleischer, had said that.
But here’s where I am confused. According to Attorney General Eric Holder, the administration is committed to treating captured terrorists as criminals, entitled to all of the rights and privileges of a civilian criminal trial.
It seems the Defense Department disagrees, given that some lesser-known prisoners are allegedly kept on ships — call them floating Gitmos — without trials.
Meanwhile, President Obama keeps ordering that the more famous terrorists be killed on sight. That’s fine with me. But as far as I can tell, he’s never disagreed with Holder’s view about the need for civilian trials for terrorists we don’t kill, like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
Hence my confusion. If you believe that even non-American terrorists should be treated like American criminals, with all of the Fifth Amendment rights we grant to our own accused, how can you sanction killing an American without so much as a hearing?
The Fifth Amendment says that no person shall be “deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” A Predator drone strike seems to deprive all three………….
MORE…..
The Awlaki Sanction: Who’s Next on the List? by William Norman Grigg
The links connecting Anwar al-Awlaki to anti-American terrorism were entirely suppositious, forged through unsubstantiated official assertion. He was, at most, a clerical propagandist who never exercised command authority. For that matter, no evidence has been presented that he ever had an operational role in a military force of any kind.
Awlaki – an American-born cleric who was once courted by the Pentagon – was accused of expressing support for armed attacks against U.S. military personnel and government interests. It is not terrorism to employ lethal violence against an invading and occupying army, nor is it a crime to express support for armed self-defense – including armed interposition against the aggressive designs of the U.S. government.
The administration asserted – without providing evidence – that Awlaki had an “operational” role in planning terrorist attacks against U.S. citizens. If evidence supporting that charge existed, the administration had the unconditional constitutional duty to indict Awlaki and put him on trial.
Intelligence officials knew Awlaki’s location. The government of Yemen, which is headed by a pliant thug named Ali Abdullah Saleh, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Washington and would have eagerly cooperated in an effort to track down and extradite Awlaki. But this would not have validated the claim – made by the Bush administration, and embraced by its successor – that the President of the United States isn’t bound by the Constitution, but rather is the Living Constitution.
As a guarantee of individual liberty, a political constitution is about as intrinsically valuable as a paper currency. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are irredeemable unless they are backed by a noble metal – lead, in the form of privately owned ammunition. Nonetheless, and for the record, this must be said:
There is nothing in the Constitution or laws of the United States of America that permits a president to order the summary execution of any human being. Only Congress can declare war. Only a jury can find someone guilty of a crime. Only a judge can impose a death sentence. Or such would be the case, were we still living in a constitutional republic, rather than the militarist empire into which that republic inevitably degenerated.
The vertically integrated murder apparatus that killed Awlaki and fellow U.S. citizen Samir Khan is entirely autonomous – and increasingly automated. Awlaki was………………..
MORE…..
via The Awlaki Sanction: Who’s Next on the List? by William Norman Grigg.
Was Awlaki an American?
Friday morning, Predator drones operated by the CIA and Joint Special Operations Command rendezvoused over Yemen and launched Hellfire missiles that blew to pieces the radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.
A declared enemy in the war on terror was eliminated.
Yet Awlaki was a U.S. citizen.
Reps. Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul denounced the action. Kucinich said President Obama “trampled on the Constitution.” Paul said Awlaki had never been convicted. “Nobody knows if he killed anybody.” Paul described what was done as “assassinating” an American.
Did we have the right to target and kill Awlaki?
According to U.S. intelligence, Awlaki inspired or incited the Fort Hood massacre and Times Square bomber. Intelligence officials say he played a direct role in the attempt to bring down an airliner over Detroit at Christmas 2009. That would make him an accomplice in attempted mass murder.
Indeed, there is more hard evidence tying Awlaki to acts of terror against the United States than there ever was tying Saddam Hussein to acts of terror against us.
Yet it is also true that Awlaki was never convicted of these crimes. What, then, is the legal case for killing him?
Answer: America is at war with al-Qaida — a war authorized and funded by Congress. In that war, Awlaki, hiding in a foreign country, has been inspiring and inciting Muslims to massacre U.S. citizens who are noncombatants — a war crime under the Geneva Conventions. Adds Obama, Awlaki was the “external operations” chief for al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula.
And even if Awlaki were not an operations officer in al-Qaida, only a propagandist, his actions would seem to constitute wartime treason.
When killed, he was traveling with 25-year-old Saudi-born Samir Khan, another American, who edited and wrote Inspire, the English-language magazine of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. Khan, who had proclaimed, “I am proud to be a traitor in America,” was also killed in the drone attack.
Do we have a right to target enemy propagandists who do not carry out acts of mass murder but encourage or instigate them?
Ezra Pound, the American poet and expatriate who made wartime broadcasts from Mussolini’s Italy attacking Jews and FDR, was charged with treason and spent a dozen years in St. Elizabeth’s Hospital for the Insane.
Lord Haw-Haw, the American-born William Joyce, who broadcast from Berlin during World War II, was executed by the British, though like Pound, he killed no one. Mildred Gillars, the American-born “Axis Sally,” was imprisoned for treason in the United States after World War II.
Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, the American woman branded “Tokyo Rose,” was imprisoned for treasonous radio broadcasts, though later pardoned by President Ford.
Would it have been unconstitutional for the U.S. military to target the radio station broadcasting Tokyo Rose?
Alfred Rosenberg, the Nazi ideologist and race theorist, was convicted at Nuremberg and hanged. One does not have to kill in wartime to get the death penalty for war crimes.
Several of the German saboteurs put ashore in Florida and Long Island were U.S. citizens who were tried in secret and executed. Their executions were upheld by the Supreme Court.
As the Obama administration argues, were Japanese-Americans to have been found engaged in support of Japanese forces in wartime, they could have been targeted and killed.
The order to intercept and shoot down the aircraft carrying Adm. Yamamoto, architect of Pearl Harbor, would appear to qualify as wartime assassination. As does Winston Churchill’s decision to drop British-trained Czech and Slovak agents into Czechoslovakia to assassinate Reinhard Heydrich.
That assassination produced severe blowback. The Nazis exacted retribution on the Czech village of Lidice, killing all the males over 16 and sending the women and children to concentration camps.
But the controversy over the Awlaki-Khan killings raises real issues.
The lack of a declaration of war prevents us from charging such individuals with treason, which, under the Constitution, “shall consist only in levying War against” the United States “or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
The issue of dual citizenship also arises. Awlaki was a citizen of the United States, having been born here. But he was also a citizen of Yemen. What was his nationality: American or Yemeni? Was he really one of us?
In the Oath of Allegiance to the United States, the new citizen pledges, “I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen.”
Did not Awlaki’s leadership of al-Qaida contradict any allegiance? Obama did the right thing, but we need clarity in this new kind of war.
Having struck al-Qaida in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen, where else is it permissible to use drones to kill enemies?
If American propagandists for al-Qaida are legitimate targets, who else is? Sympathizers? And for how long can we launch such attacks?
A decent respect for the opinion of mankind would seem to require answers.
Cain willing to consider vice presidency
NEW YORK – ………..The details of Cain‘s 15-minute presentation to 500 or more movers and shakers in the Big Apple were considered “off the record,” but WND can report that after the presentation, Cain received a standing ovation from the assembled crowd.
……Cain drew parallels to former President George H.W. Bush, who in 1980 lost the nomination to Ronald Reagan but signed on to become his vice president:
“If it is the right nominee, someone that I can respect and that I believe I can work with,” Cain said of accepting the vice presidential nomination, “then I would obviously seriously consider it.”
The candidate refused to retract his recent criticism of Texas Gov. Rick Perry over a racial profanity found on property the Perry family often used, but he also dismissed the ensuing controversy:
“I made a statement and I stand by it,” Cain said. “However long that was on that rock was insensitive. I am done with that issue. I am not going to go back and dig it up. I don’t believe that the ‘N’ word on that rock represents in any way how Governor Perry feels about black people. I am not going to fan that flame because I don’t believe there is any fire.”
[snip]
Cain also rejected concerns about the “legal propriety” surrounding the recent killing of al-Qaida leader Anwar al-Awlaki, who was an American citizen:
“If you had a convicted murder in this country who escaped from prison, the fact that he was an American citizen and escaped from prison, would you not shoot him?” Cain asked.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com …
Herman Cain in May: Don’t Kill Anwar al-Awlaki (Get out the Popcorn)
The killing on Friday of Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen described as a powerful al-Qaeda terrorist, has stirred considerable debate about whether it’s appropriate for a president to order an American assassinated.
Evidently, Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain shares those concerns.
The above video was recorded just after the first nationally televised GOP presidential debate of the 2012 campaign cycle, held in Greenville South Carolina on May 5 of this year, according to its YouTube page.
“He should be charged. And since he’s an American citizen, he should be tried in our courts,” Cain said of al-Awlaki. When asked if he considered it legal for President Obama to order al-Awlaki killed, Cain said, “In his case, no, because he’s an American citizen.”
It has been known since early 2010 that the CIA and the U.S. military’s special-operations division maintain kill lists with three to four Americans on them. Al-Awlaki, a U.S.-born cleric, was on the list. He was reportedly killed in Yemen on Friday in a U.S. drone and jet strike. A classified Department of Justice memo authorized the killing, The Washington Post reported.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com …
via Herman Cain in May: Don’t Kill Anwar al-Awlaki (Get out the Popcorn).
The Joint Chiefs of Staff should be worried…| The Post & Email
The Joint Chiefs of Staff should be worried of the dire punishment they will face, when they are one day convicted of treason against the United States of America for siding with the enemy and giving him aide and comfort.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice is quite specific that in such a case even the Joint Chiefs can be punished with death, on order of a military tribunal.
The Uniform Codes of Military Justice, on the crime of treason says under Article 906 — Espionage, section c:
A sentence of death may be adjudged by a court-martial for an offense under this section (article) only if the members unanimously find, beyond a reasonable doubt, one or more of the following aggravating factors:…………….
MORE…..
*****
via The Joint Chiefs of Staff should be worried…| The Post & Email.
Al-Qaeda 100% Pentagon Run
In a special video address, Alex Jones terms the al Qaeda intelligence operation a ‘swiss army knife’ for destabilization. Simply put, it is a tool to foment crisis that allows the globalists to offer up a solution.
The shadowy enemy supposedly run by Osama bin Laden and top jihadists like Anwar al-Awlaki is really run out of U.S. foreign policy and the Pentagon. It is perhaps government’s greatest hoax… and one of the oldest tricks in the book.
For the average person who has lived through the phony ‘War on Terror’, a post-9/11 age of fear that has swirled around the persona of bin Laden, it may be quite confusing to now read headlines like Libya: the West and al-Qaeda on the same side. Indeed the rebel forces trying to topple Gaddafi admittedly include thousands of al Qaeda forces while enjoying total backing– weapons, planes, funding and forces– from the U.S., Britain, NATO and other allies.
Related Reading:
Libyan Rebel Leader Admits Links To “Al Qaeda” Fighters
Libyan Rebel Leader Admits Connection to CIA al-Qaeda Asset in Iraq
9/11 Mastermind Invited to Pentagon
Al Qaeda Leader Dined at the Pentagon Just Months After 9/11
Contrived Propaganda Tapes Reveal War On Terror Fraud
Al-Qaeda Is A Front Group For The US Military-Industrial Complex
Al-Zarqawi Video Is A Pentagon Propaganda Psy-Op
11 Reasons Why The Threat From Al-Qaeda is Not Real
Who is behind “Al Qaeda in Iraq”? Pentagon acknowledges fabricating a “Zarqawi Legend”
Is the Government Exaggerating the Threat of Terror for Political Purposes?
Is the Government Exaggerating the Threat of Terror for Political Purposes?
The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security – Janet Napolitano – just told congress that the U.S. might be facing the greatest threat of terrorist attacks since 9/11.
G. Gordon Liddy: WikiLeaks chief deserves to be on ‘kill list’
WND ExclusiveG. Gordon Liddy:
WikiLeaks chief deserves to be on ‘kill list’Former White House adviser: ‘We’re not playing games here’
Posted: December 01, 20109:05 pm EasternBy Drew Zahn© 2010 WorldNetDailyLONDON, ENGLAND – JULY 26:
Julian Assange of the WikiLeaks website speaks to reporters at The Front Line Club on July 26, 2010 in London, England. The WikiLeaks website has published 90,000 secret US Military records.
The Guardian and The New York Times newspapers and the German Magazine Der Spiegel have also published details today. Photo by Peter Macdiarmid/Getty ImagesSecretary of State Hillary Clinton says his action “puts people’s lives in danger,” and U.S. Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has called for his website to be declared a foreign terrorist organization, but radio host and former White House leaks-stuffer G. Gordon Liddy has a more severe step in mind for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange: kill him.”Julian Assange is a severe national security threat to the U.S., and that then leads to what to do about it,” Liddy told WND.
“This fellow Anwar al-Awlaki – a joint U.S. citizen hiding out in Yemen – is on a ‘kill list’ [for inciting terrorism against the U.S.]. Mr. Assange should be put on the same list.”"I’m not surprised that G. Gordon Liddy wants Julian Assange killed,” commentator Bill Press told WND. “He admits he once tried to figure out how to kill journalist Jack Anderson. Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but I think people should have to commit a crime and be convicted before getting the death penalty. And, so far, Assange has done neither. The best treatment for Julian Assange is to ignore him – and focus on who’s leaking to him.”
Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority : Information Clearing House: ICH
Obama Administration Claims Unchecked AuthorityTo Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones
Federal Court Hears Arguments Today In ACLU And CCR Case Challenging Administration’s Claimed Authority To Assassinate Americans It Designates ThreatsBy ACLUNovember 08, 2010
“Information Clearing House” — – WASHINGTON – The Obama administration today argued before a federal court that it should have unreviewable authority to kill Americans the executive branch has unilaterally determined to pose a threat.
Government lawyers made that claim in response to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights CCR charging that the administration’s asserted targeted killing authority violates the Constitution and international law.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia heard arguments from both sides today…
EXCERPT…
Military wants to scan communications to find internal threats
The Pentagon wants computers to see into the future — and stop crimes before they happen.As the U.S Army considers whether Col. Nidal Hasan, the suspect in last year’s Fort Hood massacre, should face a court-martial, it also is looking at whether the military missed signals that might have indicated what was about to happen.
Now a Pentagon research arm is asking scientists to create a way to scan billions of e-mails to identify suspects in advance so that crimes can be stopped before they are committed.That’s the goal of the latest $35 million project announced by DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is credited with breakthroughs like the internet, GPS and stealth technology.
But this latest idea is already is drawing fire from privacy and security experts.
Full article here
*****
YO, AMERICAN BLOGGERS! THE TIME FOR THE SLUMBERING GIANT TO AWAKEN IS LONG OVERDUE.
1984+PLUS IS UPON US!
AMERICAN BLOGGERS: AWAKEN THE BIG DUMMY -- DO IT NOW! !!!!!
*****
NO AINOs!!!!! "REAL" AMERICANS ONLY!
--Gunny G!
*****
CONTACT INFO:
GUNNYG@GMAIL.COM
*****
'FAIR USE' EXCERPTS
(BACK.LINKED TO SOURCE)
*****
THE "OTHER" GUNNY G BLOG!
(CLICK FLAG)
*****
*****
Stang: The GOP, Red From The Start....
*****
Thomas Dilorenzo...Our Republic Cannot Be Restored Until GOP Destroyed!
*****
COMMIE CHICAGO~ Al Benson
*****
MAD AS HELL AND...
FOOD FOR THOUGHT - Chuck Baldwin Archive
*****
Etc., etc…..
*****
BECAUSE THERE IS
A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND
*****
CLICK BUTTON ABOVE
*****
GREAT SITE!
GREAT ARTICLES!
www.strike-the-root.com/
Click Button Above,Please
*****
MUST READ!
FOR THE THINKING MAN!
Please Click Button Above
*****
THE Gunny G BOOKMARKS/One-Click Posts/Articles--CLICK HERE!!!!! (Diigo)
Gunny G: COUP d’ETAT! ~ BUT WHO’s COUNTING?
THE NEW Gunny "G" SITE!
Gunny "G" @ NETWORK54.com
Gunny G: HISTORY, MILITARY, ETC.
MAD AS HELL - NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!
LEST WE FORGET
"A CONSTITUTION OF GOVERNMENT ONCE CHANGED FROM FREEDOM, CAN NEVER BE RESTORED. LIBERTY, ONCE LOST, IS LOST FOREVER."
~JOHN ADAMS
*****"
"I WOULD REMIND YOU THAT EXTREMISM IN THE DEFENSE OF LIBERTY IS NO VICE! AND LET ME REMIND YOU ALSO THAT MODERATION IN THE PURSUIT OF JUSTICE IS NO VIRTUE!"
~ BARRY GOLDWATER
*****
WHY HAS THIS FLAG BEEN A WORLDWIDE SYMBOL OF OPPOSITION TO STATE TYRANNY?(CLICK-HERE!)
*****
Recent Comments