But as for me and my house ...
As the U.S. government works diligently to remove the Bill of Rights from the Constitution, its modus operandi is becoming blatantly obvious.
To remove the Second Amendment, and a citizen's right to bear arms (any weapon an enemy may possess, especially the government), report more gun violence - 'mass' gun violence. Never report the facts: Justice Department reports gun violence as a whole in the United States is down by over 40% in the past 20 years.
To ensure the Patriot Act and its resulting big government remains intact, permit a bombing in a venue where a drill is coincidentally being performed - including radio-wired men in Navy S.E.A.L.-type clothing. This will also allow the government to practice Martial Law without declaring it - violating the Fourth Amendment - while people submit and cheer.
To infringe upon the Fourth Amendment further, the Cyber-Intelligence and Sharing Act (CISPA) has been proposed and passed by the House, despite its obvious violations of present law, including HIPAA.
If my thesis is correct, and there is something amiss here, there must be at least one cyber-attack that coincidentally mirrors the issue at hand, to underscore the 'need' for CISPA.
And, so it has occurred - as reported in the New York Post yesterday morning:
"It took only about five minutes for the market to tank and rebound after a group hacked the Associated Press’ Twitter feed to put out bogus information — and now the feds are taking a longer look to find out who got rich during the chaos.
"The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission have each opened investigations into the hack that falsely reported “explosions in the White House and Barack Obama is injured” and briefly wiped away $136 billion in market value."
An 'investigation' is underway. Really?
Has the American public been stupefied by our tainted food and water (hormone, fluorine- and chlorine-tainnted water, GMO poisoned foods, etc.), via government deal-making and edict, to the point that we cannot even see the pattern here?
Despite these efforts, more and more people are waking up! It's high time all Americans wake up and smell the sewerage coming from all departments in Washington via mass media. Yes, the most of the media is involved.
Richard Serino, was Chief of the Boston EMS and Assistant Director of the Boston Department of Health when he prepared a report in 2008 entitled 'Marathon: A Tale of Two Cities and Running a Planned Mass Casualty Event. Did he really mean to say 'Event' and not 'Drill'?
In October, 2009, Mr. Serino was appointed Deputy Administrator of - FEMA!
Mr. Serino outlines 'Working with the Media' on page 11 of his report: "Their mission is to get a story. Building a longstanding relationship with journalists and reporters ensures they get the right story and that they serve as a resource when needed." [emphasis added] Reporters are supposed to find and report suspicious government actions not build a relationship with them!
Page 9 of the report states, "Utilize special events and drills as opportunities to plan and train together so that you may institutionalize 'working together'." [emphasis not added]
The 'right' story is what the Government wants you to know and probably not the real story that reporters are supposed to work toward by investigation. Thus, the mass media is lazy. They no longer work with integrity to get the scoop and expose wrong-doing, but are government lackeys, reporting 'a story'. They have a relationship with the government and this relationship jades their views at the very least!
The 'right' story from Boston was they weren't performing a drill. Don't look at any other pictures except those provided by the government. [Their words, not mine.] In essence, ignore the man behind the curtain.
The report can be viewed at www.integratedtrainingsummit.org together with the picture on page 11 showing two men on a motorcycle, placing a camera on the ground behind a marathon runner! The camera was not pointed at the runner.
To make matters worse, Google reported on April 26, 2013, that the Government made a record number of requests (up 26%, or 24,179 pieces) in the second half of 2012 to remove political content. Requests were made to remove YouTube videos, delete blog posts, and remove Google search items, making finding them difficult. All part of citizen stupefying efforts by our Government.
The Constitution and your rights are under attack by your own government! As Mayor Bloomberg alluded, the government wants you to believe this is for your own good. I don't think so! Do you?
Can you see the pattern? Have you woken up yet; or, are you still cattle?
Call your Congressman and tell them you won't stand for this!
The controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) passed by the U.S. House by a vote of 288-127 (18 abstained), and headed to the Senate for a vote (possibly Friday, April 25th). Amendments were passed in secret.
CISPA will allow private companies to share the personal data of every U.S. citizen and resident (sometimes, incorrect data, as I recently discovered and the company refused to correct it), with the U.S. government, its law enforcement agencies, intelligence services, and over 600 other agencies.
Therefore, if you patronize Facebook, Twitter, Google, Verizon, et al, your personal information will be provided to the U.S. Government and law enforcement — for whatever purpose the agencies deem necessary, in violation of the Fourth Amendment contained in the Bill of Rights.
CISPA's purpose is purportedly to prevent cyber-attacks or trace an attack back to its source. The explanation of CISPA's necessity is that cyber-attacks are weapons in the virtual battlefield and could lead to actual war. Seriously?!?
CISPA also amends the National Security Act, allowing U.S. intelligence services to share classified information with anyone, even persons without a security clearance.
An amendment to CISPA was proposed, allowing U.S. companies to retain their privacy policies, but was voted down. These promises made to you, including terms of service, will be unenforceable should the Senate ratify the Bill. Hope you kept a list of companies you do business with!
According to Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO), these companies are "completely exonerated from any risk of liability." Just like Monsanto! Eat our poison - you can't sue us!
The Bill of Rights, Fourth Amendment, of the U.S. Constitution, states:
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
'Probable cause' requires providing evidence of probable criminal activity before the law enforcement agency is allowed to search a citizen's person, home, papers, and effects, specifying the area to be searched.
The Fourth Amendment does not protect against private companies mining for information about you for their own gain. It protects you against the U.S. government unlawfully accessing your data without a search warrant. CISPA, however, will allow the government to acquire all your personal data without a warrant, without probable cause, without your knowledge, and for free.
According to the privacy and civil liberties group, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF),
"As it stands, CISPA is dangerously vague, and should not allow for any expansion of government powers through a series of poorly worded definitions. If the drafters intend to give new powers to the government's already extensive capacity to examine your private information, they should propose clear and specific language so we can have a real debate."
Once information is acquired by the U.S. government, CISPA supposedly only allows the Government to use the information as it pertains to 'cyber-security', rather than 'national security'. However, the poorly defined language in CISPA enables its misuse. As with Obamacare, once it is in effect, it will prove much more intrusive than those who voted in favor, misguidedly intend.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) calls CISPA 'fatally flawed' and 'extreme', stating, "The core problem is that CISPA allows too much sensitive information to be shared with too many people in the first place, including the National Security Agency."
I looked at the main stream media (NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN) to see how this is being reported and the results are as follows:
A sample of ABC headlines:
CNN: (ONLY ONE!)
Has the United States Government conspired to undermine HIPAA and the Fourth Amendment? Yes!
Common sense tells us that health records cannot provide the Government with anything akin to cybersecurity 'threat information'. This is a phishing expedition by the U.S. Government to gain access to your private, personal information. Not only does it violate the Fourth Amendment - it violates HIPAA - it violates U.S. citizens! Have they lost their minds?!?
No - there's a purpose in the seeming madness. To enslave You!
I wrote my Senator - will YOU?
ALL amendments in the Bill of Rights are important to American citizens, NOT just the Second Amendment! They are NOT to be infringed upon and they are not amendable!
Yet, Congress continues to try to undo the Bill of Rights. Therefore, are we to assume a name change for the United States of America is coming soon?
Is Congress going to give authority over to the United Nations, as well?
The CISPA Bill passed by the House violates the Fourth Amendment and, if the Senate passes it, there will be lawsuits filed. If no one else does, I will!
Congress: Stop trying to undo the Bill of Rights!
We are NOT stupid and we know who is behind this! We will fight them and their 'god' tooth and nail, if need be.
The Guard's violation of the Fourth Amendment in the Boston suburbs is disgusting and criminal! This is what the British did to the Colonies! Is this practice for the future? Not all Americans will be so willing to have the government barge into their homes with rifles drawn and no Search Warrant! The center of the country is not like the coasts. You know this.
Because I exercise my right to free speech, the government calls me a 'terrorist'. I am an AMERICAN! I have rights that the government CANNOT take away no matter what 'law' Congress wants to squeak by or executive order Obama wants to pen to give himself power that is also unConstitutional. We will not observe them because they are in violation of our Constitution!
We are becoming GERMANY - and the USSR! This must STOP!
UN Sculpture Reveals Intention
Thank you and your colleagues for upholding the Second Amendment!
Do not believe for a moment that the battle is over!
While background checks may help slightly, those who seek to engage in criminal activity do not obtain weapons through legal means. And, if they do not yet have a criminal record but intend to perpetrate a crime, the person obtains the weapon while still considered to be a law abiding citizen.
Fact: Communities that have more relaxed gun laws have fewer violent crimes.
Where did Adam Lanza get the pistol he used to kill adults and children at Sandy Hook elementary? From his law abiding parents. If a background check was performed, would his record reflect his mental status?
Every effort to make it more difficult for criminals to obtain guns didn't stop Dylan Quick, who has no psychiatric record, from stabbing 14 people at Lone Star Community College last week.
"... a sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand." (Seneca 'the younger').
Law abiding Americans do not wish to use weapons against their fellow citizens - criminals do. When Congress learns how to remove guns and other weapons from the criminals' hands alone, it will have done a noble deed.
Any other legislation is corrupt at its core and empowers the government over the citizens it serves and is contrary to the ideals for which our nation is supposed to stand.
Remember what Benjamin Franklin said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
We will never be 'safe'. It is only an illusion. The government is using this illusion to empower itself over the citizens and it must cease, immediately!
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquent, it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." George Washington
"Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the people's liberty's teeth." George Washington
A Constituent You Serve and For Whom You Took an Oath to Uphold the Constitution ...
A Slate magazine article by Libby Copeland in January, 2012, reported that, according to a ‘new study’, polygamy was not good for society. This despite the promotion of polygamy by The Learning Channel’s show, Sister Wives. Ms. Copeland notes that ‘…some feminists, lefties, and libertarians have wondered aloud whether plural marriage is really so bad. History suggests that it is.’
Ms. Copeland doesn’t name names of those who ‘wonder’ if polygamy is ‘so bad’; however, she does state that, according to a University of British Columbia study, societies have moved away from polygamy because of the social problems it causes. Further, the university’s cultural anthropologist, Joe Henrich (and colleagues), states, ‘Monogamous marriage reduces crime’, according to the article.
On April 15, 2013, Jillian Keenan, wrote an article Slate published stating quite the opposite:
‘While the Supreme Court and the rest of us are all focused on the human right of marriage equality, let’s not forget that the fight doesn’t end with same-sex marriage. We need to legalize polygamy, too. Legalized polygamy in the United States is the constitutional, feminist, and sex-positive choice. More importantly, it would actually help protect, empower, and strengthen women, children, and families.’ [emphases added]
Ms. Keenan argues that forced polygamous unions are wrong, but consenting unions are good for society because polygamists are not forced into hiding by society, therefore, any abuses would be reported. She also states that, 'The case for polygamy is, in fact, a feminist one and shows women the respect we deserve.' And, she states that, 'heterosexual marriage is no better or worse than homosexual marriage....'
Ms. Keenan uses just one portion of the University of British Columbia's study for her argument. There are several other societal (and moral) factors that argue against polygamy. The study states that polygamous societies create large numbers of unmarried men associated with 'increased rape, theft, murder, and substance abuse'. How is that positive in a feminist's mind?!?
To argue that feminism trumps anthropological study of society is ludicrous!
To recognize homosexual marriage as a Constitutional right will truly be the slippery slope the nation was warned against. A friend claimed awhile ago that if homosexual marriage was given approval by the nation's courts, pedophilia and beastiality wouldn't be far behind. She was correct!
Paraphilia: 'a condition characterized by abnormal sexual desires, typically involving extreme or dangerous activities'. By this definition, all of the above sexual anomalies are psychological and not biological and all are dangerous to the body. Human beings were not fashioned in any way, shape or form for anything but heterosexuality! And, human beings were fashioned psychologically for union between one man and one woman (think about the jealousy which permeates polygamy)!
While homosexuals attempt to have their inability to procreate labeled as 'infertility' rather than the fact that it is biologically impossible, peddlers of every disgusting practice, harmful to women, children, and animals is bellying up to the bar to have their abominable carnal desires re-designated as a Constitutional right.
Has the nation totally lost its cumulative mind - or has it been overtaken by evil deception?
Who's an 'extremist'? According to the military's training Powerpoint:
[This list is given in the exact order and with exact spelling and notations.]
Of the 18 groups listed, 6/7 are 'Christian', 3 are Jewish, and 6 are Islam/Muslim. Notice the top three.
Yesterday, Peter Bergen, CNN's national security analyst, suggested twice that "right-wing extremists" could be behind the Boston Marathon bombings. This, despite the fact that more than an hour later, CNN reported that Boston Police still did not have a suspect in custody.
Talk about trying to propagandize the public!
Bergen likened the perpetrator(s) to a 'group' in Oregon (2010).
Mr. Bergen: You, sir, are a propaganda-monger and have the brains of a dip-stick!
Update: Why were the people told to be calm before the bomb went off? See the second video below.
The first family mixes business with pleasure - family vacations that include the President's speaking engagements (campaign) about gun control, global warming, the sequester, budget issues (POTUS has never submitted a budget as required until forced by Congress this year - a bit late), etc.
Plenty of businessman and woman elect to follow business trips with family vacations - but, the office of the President is not a business! It's not the President's money!
March, 2012, marked the first lady's 16th trip (to Aspen) since entering the White House. There have been very expensive trips:
That's just three years' worth!
Malia and Sasha were listed as 'senior staff' on the flight manifest for the South African trip. The 'official' purpose of the trip was to encourage young people to become involved in national affairs, but Michelle and her entourage also visited several tourist venues, historical landmarks and museums, Nelson Mandela, and enjoyed a private safari at a South African game reserve.
In August, 2011, it was reported in the Daily Mail (England) that 'White House sources today claimed that the First Lady has spent $10million of U.S. taxpayers' money on vacations alone in the past year. Branding her 'disgusting' and 'a vacation junkie', they say the 47-year-old mother-of-two has been indulging in five-star hotels, where she splashes out on expensive massages and alcohol.'
Although some of Obama's predecessors took more vacation days, most previous Presidents spent time at their family homes, not galavanting across the nation and globe. And, their families didn't take additional vacations at taxpayer expense.
Looks like the office of the President is becoming quite a boondoggle.
Reported unemployment was 8.1% in February, 2013, and 7.6% in March. However, this rate does not include those who can no longer collect benefits, either because they have stopped looking for work or exhausted available benefits (up to 46 weeks). Actual unemployment is as much as 25.5%.
Don't you think this is getting disgusting?
Science describes the child-mother biologic relationship as semi-allogeneic [al-oh-juh-nee-ik], which refers to tissue or cells that are genetically dissimilar and, thus, immunologically incompatible, even though they are from individuals of the same species. Therefore, from conception, the growing human is an individual, genetically similar to but different enough from it's mother to warrant attack by the mother's immune system, yet unable to subsist on its own. I will expound on this further below.
America Responds to the Murder of Live Babies
In response to recent revelations of abortion clinics actively killing live-born babies, the Florida Congress established a committee to look at proposing legislation that would require medical care presently denied babies born alive during ‘unsuccessful’ abortions.
On March 29, 2013, Alisa LaPolt Snow, a lobbyist with the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified before a committee hearing, stating, "Planned Parenthood condemns any physician who does not follow the law or endangers a woman's or a child's health, but we don't believe that politicians should be the ones who decide what constitutes the best, medically appropriate treatment in any given situation."
Ms. Snow contradicts herself in that this statement declares that the child's health should not be endangered -- but that is exactly what is being done in Planned Parenthood clinics.
Decades' long work by Planned Parenthood to obtain legalization of abortion that culminated in 1973, through the legal system, was proper then, but now it is not? As we know more about embryonic and fetal development and have proof of the true evil nature of man to commit murder, people are questioning where to draw the line.
It is important that you understand the eugenic motivations and progression of the Planned Parenthood program contained in the article on this site: 'The Truth About Planned Parenthood'. (use the search window)
Conflicting Supreme Court Rulings
The Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade that, although states have an interest in protecting fetal life, such interest was not "compelling" until the fetus was viable (placing viability at the start of the third trimester) which was established at six months prenatal. Third trimester abortions were declared legal only if the mother's life or health was threatened.
That same day, the Supreme Court also published its ruling in an another abortion lawsuit that is never discussed: Doe v. Bolton. This is possibly because the verdicts in Doe and Roe conflict in that the Doe ruling defines "health of the mother" in generously broader terms, essentially eliminating any prohibition to third trimester abortions.
According to Justice Harry Blackmun's opinion, a woman's health included her "physical, emotional, psychological, (and) familial" well-being, and should include considerations about the woman's age. "All these factors may relate to health," Blackmun argued, so as to give "the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment." The opinion effectively removes the mother from the equation in that he gives the doctor autonomy in judgment.
The Supreme Court relied on notions of living constitutionalism, invoking the doctrine of “substantive due process” to expand on a Court-created “right” that is nowhere to be found in the text of the Constitution. The Court has never had the privilege of making or expanding law (neither does the President) - only interpreting its meaning. But, that hasn't stopped the modern-day Courts from doing so.
Legalized abortion was established through these conflicting Supreme Court rulings. That alone should cause us pause!
It appears that the Supreme Court purposely paved the road that led us to where we are today. Otherwise, this conflict would have been corrected. After all, it's not as though the same Justices weren't involved in both rulings.
Could it be that the Doe ruling was the law which has been utilized but hidden from the American public that would not have agreed to broad privileges to provide practically limitless abortions? And, the more restrictive, more acceptable, Roe ruling was presented to the public in its place?
It is much easier to understand how Planned Parenthood defends abortion for any reason and at any time up to, and including, full-term birth. And, if the baby is born alive, Planned Parenthood facilities deny medical care or actively murder the infant.
If newborn infants can be murdered because they are not 'wanted', at what point will it become legal to kill children while they are minors under parents’ care?! This may sound incredible, but that is where we are headed should the self-conflicting laws not be quashed immediately.
Dangers to Women's Health from Abortions Evidenced
Contrary to what is revealed by Planned Parenthood (these are their clinics, after all), late-term abortions are dangerous to the mother. Case in point: Mrs. Jennifer Morbelli, who went to a Germantown, Maryland (just outside Washington, D.C.), abortion clinic on a Sunday afternoon for a late-term abortion. The articles' description of events (and reason for the abortion) will make you sick.
A quick search reveals that abortions are now sought for reasons as insignificant as the sex of the baby.
Knitted Together in the Womb
King David eloquently sang, "For you fashioned my inmost being, you knit me together in my mother’s womb." (Psalm 139:13) David praised God for His continued work, creating each new life by 'knitting' the body and embedding the soul (i.e., consciousness) in private - where people could not see.
I submit, and am supported by ‘learned Rabbis’ who were asked the question of when does life begin according to the Tanakh (Old Testament): life begins at the moment of conception.
Proof: Scientific research, unavailable in 1973, has revealed the female body secrets a hormone to prevent the body from rejecting the ‘foreign’ cells of the embryo and fetus. Through the regulation of other biologic processes, the body maintains a welcoming environment until the birth of the baby; even though the body is designed to protect itself from perceived foreign invasion, until the immunological system is exhausted, and the body becomes susceptible to all manner of disease. (reproduction-online.org) In contrast, the average healthy mother practically insusceptible to virus and bacteria.
Reproductive immunologists have discovered that the fetal trophoblast is also responsible for some of the changes in the way the mother's body reacts by regulating maternal immune cells in its vicinity within the womb. Both mother and fetus contribute to developing and maintaining an environment in which the baby can develop, but obviously view each other as foreign threats. The fetus also develops its own blood vessels that are separated from the mother's blood supply by a thin membrane, since the infant has a different blood type in most cases.
All of these factors and many others, support the fact that from conception, the infant is a separate human being.
Life Begins at Birth - Or, Not
Even if you don't want to believe the facts presented, consider this:
Planned Parenthood's stated position for thirty years has been that life began at birth. That stated position is being mitigated to: life only begins at birth -- if the mother wants it to. They now state that the mother and doctor should be at liberty to destroy life post-birth.
To Planned Parenthood this is not a contradiction with their long-held precept because they do not believe in the inviolability of life. (At least, they don't believe in the inviolability of others' lives.) They shed more tears for the death of a stillborn puppy than for the murder of an 'unwanted' newborn.
Where there is no belief in the inviolability of life -- there is no acceptance of God. This is just one part of the deception overtaking mankind. It is the deception being used for Eugenics - not a new ideal - that was utilized by Nazis.
Please Post a Comment or Contact Us Below