The Muslim Brotherhood is taking over in countries that experienced the so called Arab Spring and these people are not peace loving and they do not have tolerance. They follow the Koran’s teachings of murder and they do so without hesitation.

In Cairo speakers from the Muslim Brotherhood talked about the Jews declaring that one day they would kill all of them. This is from the people who want us to believe they are from the religion of peace. Their idea of peace is to be peaceful so long as people agree with them and do what they want (though their peaceful acts toward one another are anything but peaceful to civilized people). They have no tolerance for people who are different and who practice different religions, particularly the Jews.

Israel should be on high alert and ready to strike out at those who mean to do her harm and it should do so with or without the blessing of the Obama Regime.

Obama has been cold toward Israel and his actions border on hatred for the country and its people. He would rather support the murderous Muslims than the Jews who would like nothing more than to live in peace.

So be it. Israel has a right to defend itself and needs to do so regardless of what Obama desires.

I stand with our friends in Israel regardless of what the Obama regime decides to do.

Source:
YNet

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

A man from Idaho named Oscar Ramiro Ortega is in a world of trouble after he fired a weapon at the White House. Barack Obama and his family were not there at the time and ballistic glass prevented any penetration but that does not negate the seriousness of the act. Ortega is being charged with attempted assassination though I think that might be hard to prove. All he has to do is claim he knew Obama was not there (Obama’s travels are in the news) and there can be no intent shown with regard to assassination.

Let me stop here to make it clear. I DO NOT support what this guy did or any act that involves shooting Obama or any other elected person. That is not the proper way to handle things and those kinds of things are not appropriate.

Ortega has been linked to the Occupy DC group, part of the entire Occupy movement which might explain why he was quickly labeled as mentally unstable. Can’t have a left wing radical doing things against the left wing radical Obama.

The question is, since Obama follows Saul Alinsky’s tenets (the ends justify the means) and since he has wholeheartedly supported the Occupy movement, does he support what this guy did?

We already know Obama has no problem with people using violence to get what they want so long as what they want is part of the progressive agenda. Obama is friends with US terrorist Bill Ayers who killed police officers and detonated bombs in this country as part of the progressive movement in the 60s. I know Obama was only a child at that time but one can tell a lot about a person by the company he keeps and Obama kept company with a terrorist. Obama has thrown his support behind the Occupy movement even though they have been committing horrific crimes, vandalizing property and attacking police.

So does Obama support what Ortega did?

Ortega was expressing himself in a manner that is consistent with the Occupy movement, Alinsky and Ayers, all of which Obama supports.

I imagine they charged this guy with the attempted assassination and will push to say he is insane (he might well be) in order to hide him away somewhere to make it easier for the State Run Media to ignore it.

The funny thing about all this is that the Media wing of the Democrat party keeps telling us that the Occupy folks are no different than the TEA Party. Really now? How many TEA Party members ever shot at anyone, politician or otherwise? NONE!

As an aside, how many TEA Party events had public health officials concerned about the spread of disease? Again, NONE!

I am not in support of the act committed by Ortega. I do find it ironic that he is a left wing whack job who committed an act that Big Sis at DHS said would come from right wing extremists.

The only things that would make this story (the association, not the act) sweeter is if Ortega was an illegal alien and the gun he used was traced back to Fast and Furious.

Now that would be funny indeed.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

A few years ago the DHS and Big Sis released their report on potential threats here in the US. Conservative right wing folks were labeled as potential home grown terrorists along with TEA Party members and folks who are opposed to abortion. Yes, Big Sis and the government were worried and they wanted everyone to know that the right was dangerous and that law enforcement across the country should be on alert for these radical right wing madmen.

The report was full of BS and was politically motivated in an attempt to paint the right as radical so as to push the left’s agenda. In all the time since this report was released, no member of the TEA Party has committed a crime while involved in TEA Party protests. There are not large numbers of right wing folks out causing trouble, damaging property, raping women, selling and using drugs or committing any acts of terror whatsoever. That makes no difference because the left has made up its mind. The facts have never gotten in the way of their agenda.

The real terrorists in this country have been the Occupy terrorists. These people have committed the crimes that Big Sis and her DHS said the right would commit. The Occupy folks are out rioting. They are burning things. They are attacking the police and they are disobeying the laws.

In addition, the terrorists in the labor unions are involving themselves in the issues and they are calling for terrorist acts to be committed. Leo Gerard, president of United Steelworkers international has stated that the movement needs more militancy. Gerard, a moron union thug (and terrorist, Big Sis), said that if the Occupy Wall Street movement does not convey the message (if Wall Street does not get it) then a resistance movement is needed that involves more militancy. He thinks people should be blocking bridges and doing “that kind of stuff.” I see this as a call to the union thugs to cause civil disturbance through militant acts. Gerard is calling for militant acts, acts that are combative and aggressive, by definition.

In other words, Gerard is calling for terror. Where is the DHS report labeling the Occupy folks and the labor unions a threat to this nation? Where is the report that labels these people the same way the right wing was labeled? Where is the nationwide alert for law enforcement?

These people are actual threats to this country. They are a threat to other people. They are a threat to our system. They are actual threats that are not labeled as such by Big Sis and her DHS. In fact, the Democrats have praised the Occupy folks and have declared their support for them. Democrats are in support of people committing acts of terror and are proud of that support. The report from Big Sis on the potential for right wing violence is unfounded and has never come to fruition. The left is out terrorizing and Big Sis ignores it.

The left is trying to cause riots. Obama is in favor of rioting. He was a community rabble-rouser and he is a student of Saul Alinsky. The ends justify the means and the left wants riots to get its way. The sock puppets on the left who are easily led are obliging the masters at the top by rioting and Gerard is calling for combative and aggressive acts in order to get things done.

Could someone point out a riot or anything similar to the Occupy movement from the right?

No.

Gerard, if you want combative and aggressive acts you go right ahead. Don’t be surprised when you get driven over by someone fed up with your antics (I want Gerard to block a bridge I am trying to cross).

I guess it would be wise to understand that militancy can go both ways and your right to protest ends when you infringe upon the rights of others.

Or as someone once told me, be careful what you ask for.

Funny thing though. If a right wing person discusses watering the tree of liberty or taking back the country the liberals get their pink panties in a wad and scream about how radical they are and then somehow end up calling it racism because a black guy is occupying the White House.

Let some whack job union thug scream for militancy and the left is in love with him.

Three words folks;

Bring it on…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

I don’t mean strike as in a work stoppage to force a company to give in to demands because that is already happening. Verizon’s landline union workers went on strike after negotiations broke down. Seems the company wants its union employees to help reduce costs while keeping a competitive benefits package. The union bosses and the thugs don’t like that idea because they would rather bankrupt a company than share some of the burden. The union claims Verizon is trying to wipe out 50 years of gains.

Looks like the union thugs are striking in another way (and it is not new for union thugs). Verizon reports that some of its lines have been sabotaged. The sabotage has disrupted service and could cause a dangerous situation should someone need to contact emergency services…

Verizon reports that fiber optic lines were intentionally cut in Tewksbury and that there have been 12 acts of sabotage to the phone lines, internet and television services in Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York since the strike began. Verizon also reports that equipment was stolen in Cedar Grove NJ and a heat system was tampered with in Manhattan. [Boston.com]

Of course the union is saying it has no knowledge of its members doing such things and the union does not condone such actions. I guess it is just a coincidence that all this sabotage took place right after the union went on strike and happened in the same time period across multiple states.

Verizon is offering a $50,000 reward for information that leads to the arrest and conviction of the person or persons committing these crimes.

What do you want to bet that should the criminals be caught (and turn out to be union members) the union bosses that have no knowledge and do not condone such acts will work very hard to keep the offenders from being fired?

This is how unions act when they don’t get what they want. They attack people, they sabotage company equipment, and they commit criminal acts in order to coerce the company to submit to their demands.

Imagine what would happen if Verizon cut (as in cut off service) the phone lines going onto union headquarters or the homes of union employees. Imagine what would happen if Verizon turned off the cellular service of the striking workers (the wireless portion would only affect landline workers with Verizon wireless service). It would be inadvertent, of course…

The union bosses would scream, Eric Holder and the Obama regime would go into overdrive to attack Verizon and the union thugs would cry like babies. And you can bet that the union would not accept any press release from Verizon claiming it had no knowledge of company workers doing such things and does not condone them.

The union should negotiate in good faith with the company and stop holding the company hostage. These union workers are holding a gun to the heads of the company executives and trying to force them to do things that the company can’t afford to do.

Let’s face it, the union workers here are terrorists.

But I bet you will never hear a Democrat say such a thing. They save that for their lies about the TEA Party.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Joe Bite Me Biden and the rest of the limp wristed Democrats would not call Nidal Hasan, the Muslim Terrorist Soldier who shot his fellow soldiers at Fort Hood, a terrorist. We were cautioned not to jump to conclusions. A man screaming Allah Akbar and shooting American soldiers is not considered an act of terror and we were cautioned not to jump but let the elected people of this country oppose the careless spending of the government and they are terrorists. Democrats including Vice President Joe Biden called the TEA Party members of Congress terrorists (Biden denies saying it).

You see, these morons do not want civil discourse and they do not want debate. They want things their way and anyone who disagrees is a terrorist. The folks who had TEA Party support made pledges not to raise taxes and not to increase the debt ceiling unless it was linked to a balanced budget amendment. Those things are not taking place and the TEA Party members of Congress rejected the ideas. This makes them terrorists.

Yes, if you stand on your principles and keep your word then you are a terrorist. The Democrats will demonize Americans and caution us not to jump to conclusions when it concerns our enemies. Is there any doubt where their loyalties lie and that they will put politics before country? If demanding fiscal responsibility and demanding that our country spend less and be more prudent is what makes a terrorist then color me a terrorist but keep in mind that it is the people opposed to the ideas of smaller, more efficient government who are ruining this nation.

The debt limit vote still needs to pass the Senate and I am holding out hope that it will be stopped. The deal will increase taxes in 2012 when the Bush tax cuts expire and the tax increases under Obamacare take effect. The FICA lower taxes will also go back up. These are tax increases and they will hurt us. The CBO would rate extending the Bush tax cuts as costing us 5 trillion in revenue (this is how the goofy math is done in DC) so if the tax cuts expire is that not a 5 trillion dollar tax increase that must be offset by 5 trillion in cuts? And I want the cuts to be immediate and not over ten years. If you can’t spread tax increases and debt increases over ten years then I don’t want the cuts spread over that time.

The liberals said we had to raise the debt limit or we would default, lose our AAA rating and pay higher interest rates. First of all, the only way we could have defaulted is if Obama made a willful decision not to pay the people we borrowed money from. We have the income to do that so there is no way we could have defaulted on the debt. We would have had to cut some spending on programs that the government is not obligated to pay for and can stop at any time so there is no real issue there. We would not have defaulted. In addition, we will likely lose our AAA rating anyway. So we will have trillions more in debt, higher taxes and we will be paying higher interest rates as a result of the debt increase. Way to go Congress. I hope you libs are happy that you gave us the double whammy.

Did I say double whammy? I meant triple whammy. The libs said we could not default (their words, not mine) and that if we did, in addition to losing our credit rating we would also have a double dip recession. One commenter keeps saying it is the double dip I (and other conservatives) kept hoping for. That is not the truth. None of us wanted it to happen but we knew from history and the reckless spending that it likely would. Now it looks as if it is already here (and it took place well before this debt issue festered into what it is now). In other words, the Obama policies caused it and not the debt limit issue.

To top it all off the Republicans broke their pledge to post all legislation online 3 days prior to any vote. The debt limit bill was not posted for an entire day before it was voted upon. The Republican information on that part of the pledge indicates that it pertains to non emergency items but the original Pledge to America they signed contained no such language.

They broke their word and did not post it 3 days in advance. They have not been transparent and have been nothing more than what the Democrats are. Liars.

Well, not the ones who stood their ground and did not vote for this crappy deal.

America is going to suffer greatly and the Republicans gave Obama and the Democrats a way to blame it on the right. The Republicans gave in and will now, at the least, share the responsibility for the coming disaster. That is unless the Democrats find a way to blame it all on the right.

Stick to your principles and vote for what is right and what your constituents want. If you do that then you will be supported. if you don’t then you will be kicked to the curb.

Have the courage of your convictions and keep your word.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Weird Al Franken, the “what were they thinking” Senator from Minnesota was on the floor to discuss the current debt ceiling debate and he had a few charts that were rather disturbing. He borrowed the first chart from the set Obama placed on the southern border. The chart read; Welcome Terrorists. Then he went on to explain that members of the GOP were briefed about what would happen if the debt ceiling was not raised. He showed how much money there was and where it would go and what would not be paid.

Franken listed the following as being paid (all numbers in billions); Service debt-29.0, Social Security-49.2, Medicare/Medicaid-50.0, Defense Vendors-31.7, and Unemployment 12.8.

The next chart shows what would not be paid and it includes Military pay and Veteran’s benefits for a combined 5.8 billion dollars. There are other agencies listed as well including the Department of justice at 1.4 billion dollars.

Franken is trying to scare people into believing that we will invite terrorists in because the military and the DOJ will not be funded. What he is actually pointing out is that Franken (and by extension, his Democrat buddies) would rather pay unemployment benefits to people who are not producing anything (regardless of why they are out of work) and not pay the active military and veterans. He would also rather pay the unemployed than pay the Department of Justice.

So tell me, under this scheme, who is actually inviting the terrorists into the country.

The idea that those who are sitting at home doing nothing would be paid while the men and women who defend this country would not makes my skin boil and the fact that Franken has prioritized it this way is enough to earn him a well deserved butt kicking. They should take him and anyone who tries to implement something like this out back of the Capitol and hang them for treason. I am sure we can make the case they are giving material aid and comfort to our enemies. Welcoming terrorists is an act of treason and if not raising the debt ceiling would invite terrorists then it is Franken and his ilk who would be sending the invitations.

I don’t even think the vendors should be on the list. They get paid when the issue is settled. If they want they can charge interest for carrying the debt load. Or perhaps it would be a good time to review our contracts and eliminate those that are not actually needed.

No matter what, the military should not go without pay. How dare this half baked moron even suggest that the unemployed should keep getting unemployment checks while our brave men and women go without.

This is a scare tactic and it shows that Democrats are either not serious about the issue, don’t understand the issue or actually hate the military.

I bet it is all three.

I wonder what would happen if all those men and women showed up with their weaponry and demanded their paychecks.

I also wonder if Franken includes members of Congress in the federal employees who do not get paid. No member of Congress should ever get paid before a member of the military.

And neither should the unemployed (and if we are lucky most of Congress will be unemployed in 2012).

But if Franken and his colleagues insist on this scheme then we can take the 15 million or so people drawing unemployment and ship them to the borders to keep the terrorists out. We can also send half a million of them to the Middle East and bring our troops home.

Al Franken is an absolute moron who couldn’t pour urine out of a boot if the directions were written on the bottom.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The federal government has lost track of 119,000 aircraft. That is correct, the same government that subjects us to naked body scans and groping pat downs has lost track of over a hundred thousand aircraft. The same government that knows exactly where our genitals are cannot tell us where these planes are and there is concern that they could be used by drug traffickers or terrorists.

Ya think?

How is it that they can lose track of so many airplanes? It might be more palatable if they had lost track of a few but airplanes are not pocket watches and cannot be easily hidden. They are required to be registered so one would think that when it is time to re-register the government would be on top of it.

It appears that this is not the case.

Government cannot keep track of over a hundred thousand airplanes but assures us it will keep accurate records on us once Obamacare fully kicks in.

Right.

But at least they know where our genitals are.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The Arizona law has a lot of people in a snit. The opponents of the law that allows police officers to check the immigration status of anyone who has some interaction with police (a traffic stop, etc) continually mischaracterize the law and spread fear that it might lead to racial profiling.

This is hogwash but it has not stopped groups who advocate illegal activity from spreading the lies and the fear anyway. The Attorney General of the US, Eric Holder, is looking into challenging the Arizona law in court on Constitutional grounds. Holder, who did not read the law before condemning it (a common trait in the Obama regime), believes that enforcement of immigration laws is a federal government job and that states do not have the authority to enforce federal laws. As an aside, Arizona’s laws is a state law that makes it a crime to be in the state illegally. The only way to establish that is to check and see if people are in the country illegally.

This position is somewhat ridiculous. State and local police officers enforce federal laws all the time. Bank robbery is a federal crime but if a bank in any state is robbed the local police respond and have the authority to arrest the bank robbers. Can you imagine what would happen if FBI agents showed up and were told that the criminals were there with the police but they had no authority to enforce federal laws by arresting them so they let them go?

Kidnapping is a federal crime but state and local police respond to that crime. The same holds true for a number of crimes and no one seems to care that local officers are involved. For some reason though, people get uptight when the law deals with securing our borders or illegal immigration.

Surprisingly, Barack Obama has ordered 1200 National Guard troops to the border in Arizona (looks like the law is working) but has ignored a similar request from Texas. I don’t understand why Obama needs to give the order. If he takes charge of them they are not allowed to perform police functions. The NG belongs to the states so the governor of the state is in charge of them. If Texas or Arizona need Guardsmen on the borders then they should just deploy them. States have the right to keep people from crossing their borders illegally and if the governors deployed the NG then the soldiers could perform law enforcement functions. They could detain illegal entrants.

The federal government has been bellowing about the federal functions and how the security of the border is their job blah, blah. But an interesting thing happened today.

Texas was warned about the possibility of terrorists trying to enter the country illegally across the Mexico-Texas border. If stopping these illegal entrants is a federal job and the feds are the ones who should be enforcing their laws, why alert the local police? Why not send federal agents to guard the border and look for the terrorists?

One could make the argument that the state has the right to stop people at the border but that once they are here illegally the states have no authority to check immigration status or to detain people for being here illegally. Immigration being a federal job and all.

So if one of these terrorists crosses the border unseen but two days later an officer recognizes him from a photo, is the officer allowed to confront the guy and ask for identification? Can the officer check the immigration status of the terrorist?

If the answer is no then why alert Texas law enforcement and ask them to be on the lookout? If the answer is yes then why is the Arizona law wrong?

I have been thinking about the Arizona law and even though I have no problem I have a solution that will guarantee that no one is profiled. It will not please the left or any of the illegal immigrant groups who are aiding and abetting the criminals but it will work.

They should have immigration checkpoints. These would be just like sobriety checkpoints, would be random, would move from place to place and would require all people in every car that passes through the checkpoint to provide proof that they are here legally. Children would be considered legal if the adults in the car are legal.

The police could have cruisers set up to look for people who turn around to avoid the checkpoint. That would be probable cause to check their status.

The people who do not like Arizona’s law will not like the checkpoints but the courts have ruled sobriety checkpoints legal so long as they are random or everyone is checked. Illegal immigrant checkpoints are a great way to go. The law says that to check for immigration status the people have to make contact with police for some other reason first. No problem, just say the checkpoints are sobriety checkpoints and then ask everyone, and that is the key, for proof of status.

This could obviously be tweaked to work without violating the law or the Constitution.

The stops could also serve another purpose. Police could hand out literature explaining that there are sanctuary cities not far from Arizona and include a list of those cities and directions to get to them.

Arizona would be happy to send its illegals to California. Hell, the federal government will probably not take any referrals to ICE so Arizona might as well send the illegals where they are wanted.

As for Texas. It should tell the federal government to come look for the terrorist so that the state does not run afoul of federal immigration laws…

Never surrender, never submit.

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) staged a protest at the home of Greg Baer, a Bank of America executive. Five hundred union sponsored thugs arrived at the home, located in Montgomery County, Maryland, escorted by officers from the DC police department. The DC police have no jurisdictional authority in Maryland and were there to ensure the safety of the protesters.

So let’s get this straight, 500 people arrive at a home and trespass on the property. The only person home is a teen aged child of Baer and the DC police are there to protect the protesters. Even if the entire family had been home they would have been outnumbered by about 100:1 so who actually needed protection?

The DC police watched as the protesters trespassed but they did nothing because they do not have jurisdiction. If the protest had gotten more out of hand and turned violent or if they decided to burn the house down, would the DC police officers have been obligated to intervene?

Suppose the homeowner felt threatened and stepped out with a shotgun and told the protesters to leave the property, would the DC police officers, as protectors of the thugs, then had the authority to intervene? If they have no jurisdiction, what kind of protection were they providing. As an aside, who paid their salaries for this protection?

The Montgomery County Police Department arrived after being called by a neighbor and dispersed the crowd but no charges were filed. Perhaps a multi-million dollar lawsuit against SEIU and the DC Police Department is in order here. A teen aged boy was scared to death and locked himself in a bathroom while police officers, the people children are taught to seek for help, watched him be terrorized.

Your right to protest ends when you infringe upon the rights of others and terrorizing people in their homes is an infringement upon them.

SEIU and their protectors in the DC Police Department engaged in terrorist acts against citizens of this country. They should be held accountable.

There had better be a strong stance taken against this kind of terrorism. The last thing the police want to see is homeowners defending themselves though I would not blame any homeowner who did so.

Homegrown terrorists like SEIU and their protectors in the DC Police Department need to be taken to Gitmo.

Since DC is a federal property and the DC police are part of that property it is now clear that our government has become a state sponsor of terrorism.

And they wonder why we say Obama is soft on terror.

Source:
Big Journalism

Never surrender, never submit.

“We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority,”–Barack Obama presidential debate on October 7.

Like him or not one thing can be said for George W. Bush and that is the terrorists feared him. Osama bin Laden, as has been recently discovered, underestimated the response from Bush when planning the attacks of 9/11. Bush unleashed pure hell and bin Laden was not prepared for that. After years of Clinton lobbing Cruise Missiles in response to any act against the US, bin Laden was convinced that America would do nothing more than that after 9/11.

That was a very costly mistake on his part.

There can be no doubt that 9/11 was the result of inaction during the Clinton Administration. Bin Laden has told us as much and his refusal to believe that the response to 9/11 would be brutal shows that the impression he formed during the Clinton years was that we would not respond in any meaningful way.

When George Bush unleashed the hounds of war the terrorists were taken aback and many of them died. Bin Laden went into hiding and we were not able to find him. Barack Obama told us he would find and kill bin Laden but he has not done so and he probably never will.

During Bush’s years there were no attacks on us though many efforts were thwarted. Obama came into office with promises that he would extend his open hand and that the world would love us. We would not be targets because Barry is a man of the world. He understands the Muslim world, we were told, because he spent so much time there.

Unfortunately, reality has reared its ugly head and that head shows us that the terrorists do not fear Obama.

We suffered two terrorists attacks in the US involving our soldiers. One was in Little Rock and the other at Fort Hood. Obama refused to see Fort Hood as a terrorist event and has refused to release the study of the incident. Luck and only luck prevented a disaster on Christmas Day when a terrorist was unable to detonate the explosives in his underwear. The inept Obama regime got very lucky that day. If the underwear bomber had been successful a lot of people would have been killed. Only dumb luck prevented that from happening.

Dumb luck was again responsible for preventing disaster. A vehicle rigged to explode was left in Times Square New York and the only thing that prevented disaster was a vendor who noticed smoke coming from the vehicle and alerted police. Pakistani Taliban have taken credit for the bomb (of course, it could have been a TEA Party member or McVeigh wanna be) and a New York station reported that a 911 call around 4 am informed of the bomb and indicated that it was a diversion for a larger explosion.

This is how the terrorists respond to his weakness. This is how the terrorists to whom Obama would extend that open hand answer his offer of an olive branch.

Terrorists do not respect weakness and they will exploit it. The enemy feared George Bush because he said we would attack them and we did and we did it by raining hell down upon them.

Barack Obama, on the other hand is not feared. He is looked at as a weak man who does not have the courage to engage our enemies in battle. His waffling with regard to Iran has emboldened those who wondered how he would respond to adversity. They now know he sets deadlines but allows them to lapse and they also know that he might talk tough but does not back it up.

And to think Hillary said Bush was all hat and no cattle…

The US has had some dumb luck in recent events but that luck cannot hold out. Luck is not proper mission planning but it has been Obama’s best friend thus far. This will not continue and eventually the terrorists will be successful.

I pray that day never comes but the rational part of me says it is only a matter of time before we get hit again.

The Obama regime practically guarantees it.

Others:
History News Network
KDKA News
WCBSTV

Never surrender, never submit.