Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 10:16 am
You last visited February 27, 2015, 10:14 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

CajunWin4's Blog

  • CajunWin4's Blog has 786 entries (0 private) and has been viewed 518,737 times.
  • Lottery Post members have made 1079 comments in CajunWin4's Blog.
  • CajunWin4 is a Standard member

Yesterday, 5:03 pmEmails prove Hillary 'terror' lie in Benghazi Clinton claimed 'response to inflammatory material po

Emails prove Hillary 'terror' lie in Benghazi

Clinton claimed 'response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet'


  • Text Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

WASHINGTON – State Department emails released through a lawsuit by Judicial Watch show then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knew while the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi was under way that it was being carried out by terrorists.

Clinton blamed the attack on “rage and violence over an awful Internet video” when she spoke at a ceremony at Andrews Air Force Base on Sept. 14, 2014, as the remains of the four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were returned to the United States.

The emails were made public Thursday by the Washington, D.C., legal watchdog group.

“These emails leave no doubt that Hillary Clinton’s closest advisers knew the truth about the Benghazi attack from almost the moment it happened,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

“And it is inescapable that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knowingly lied when she planted the false story about ‘inflammatory material being posted on the Internet,’” Fitton said.

He said the “contempt for the public’s right to know is evidenced not only in these documents, but also in the fact that we had to file a lawsuit in federal court to obtain them.”

“The Obama gang’s cover-up continues to unravel, despite its unlawful secrecy and continued slow-rolling of information,” Fitton said. “Congress, if it ever decides to do its job, cannot act soon enough to put Hillary Clinton, Cheryl Mills and every other official in these emails under oath.”

Fitton criticized the current House Select Committee investigation on Benghazi headed by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R- S.C.

“Never once has Gowdy or the House Select Committee asked Judicial Watch to turn over the many bombshell documents Judicial Watch has obtained from the Obama administration by FOIA request, “ Fitton told WND.

“I would have thought a serious congressional investigation into Benghazi would have started with the documents we had, since Judicial Watch has led in exposing the White House cover-up,” he said.

On Sept. 11, 2012, at 4:07 p.m. Eastern Time, as the Benghazi attack was going on, Maria Sand, then a special assistant to Clinton, forwarded an email from the State Department’s Operations Center titled “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi is Under Attack,” to Cheryl Mills, then chief-of staff to Secretary Clinton, as well as Jacob Sullivan, then-deputy chief-of-staff for policy, Joseph McManus, then-Hillary Clinton’s executive assistance, and other special assistants in Clinton’s office.

The email read:

The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack. Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM [Chief of Mission] personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.

Then, at 4:38 p.m. Eastern, State Department Foreign Service Officer Lawrence Randolph forwarded Mills, Sullivan and McManus an email from Scott Bultrowicz, the former director of the Diplomatic Security Service, one of four senior State Department officials who was ousted in December 2012 after the publication of the State Department’s Advisor Review Board final report of the Benghazi attack.

With the subject line “Attack on Benghazi,” it read:

DSCC [Diplomatic Security Command Center] received a phone call from [REDACTED] in Benghazi, Libya initially stating that 15 armed individuals were attacking the compound and trying to gain entrance. The Ambassador is present in Benghazi and currently is barricaded within the compound. There are no injuries at this time and it is unknown what the intent of the attackers is. At approximately 1600 DSCC received word from Benghazi that individuals had entered the compound. At 1614 RSO advised the Libyans had set fire to various buildings in the area, possibly the building that houses the Ambassador [REDACTED] is responding and taking fire.

Nearly seven hours later, at 12:04 a.m. on Sept. 12, Randolph sent an email with the subject line “FW: Update 3: Benghazi Shelter Location “Also Under Attack,” to Mills, Sullivan and McManus that had several updates about the Benghazi attack:

I just called Ops and they said the DS command center is reporting that the compound is under attack again. I am about to reach out to the DS Command Center.

The email also contains a chain of earlier email updates:

Sept. 11, 2012, at 11:57 p.m. Eastern. Email: “(SBU) DS Command reports the current shelter location for COM personnel in Benghazi is under mortar fire. There are reports of injuries to COM staff.”

Sept. 11, 2012, 6:06 p.m. Eastern. (Subject: “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack (SBU): “(SBU) Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and call for an attack on Embassy Tripoli”

Sept. 11, 2012, 4:54 p.m. Eastern: “Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response team is on site to locate COM personnel.”

The State Department emails released Thursday by Judicial Watch reveal the first official confirmation of the death of Ambassador Stevens.

On Sept. 12, 2012, at 3:22 a.m. Eastern, Senior Watch Officer Andrew Veprek forwarded an email to numerous State Department officials, which was later forwarded to Mills and McManus, with the subject line “Death of Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi.”

It read:

Embassy Tripoli confirms the death of Ambassador John C. (Chris) Stevens in Benghazi. His body has been recovered and is at the airport in Benghazi.

Two hours later, McManus forwarded the news of Ambassador Stevens’ death to officials in the State Department Legislative Affairs office with instructions not to “forward to anyone at this point.”

Despite her three top staff members being informed that a terrorist group had claimed credit for the attack, Clinton, issued an official statement, also produced to Judicial Watch, claiming the attack may have been “a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/02/hillary-knew-emails-during-benghazi-attack-reported-terrorism/#RJ9AgKKPjTgVve57.99
Entry #786
View and Add Comments  (1 Comment)

February 24, 2015, 9:01 pmObama's Pentagon Infected With Jihadi Fervor? NO! It's Infected With OBAMA!

Obama’s Pentagon Infected With Jihadi Fervor? NO! It’s Infected With OBAMA!

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

 

WOAH, WOAH, WOAH! SLOW YOUR ROLL TURBO!

THE PENTAGON ISN’T INFECTED WITH JIHADI FERVOR!NO!

THE PENTAGON IS INFECTED WITH OBAMA’S TREASONOUS @SS!

Evil Within

 

HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO ASK?

WHEN DO WE OWN UP TO WHAT WE’VE DONE?

In a post dated June 20th titled:  OBAMA MUST BE ARRESTED & PROSECUTED FOR IMPERSONATING A PUBLIC OFFICER, the author goes into  GREAT detail about Barack Obama’s status as a  USURPER of the Presidency. As such, the author tells us Obama  CANNOT be impeached, because only a Lawful President can be Impeached. Obama was  NEVER qualified for the office of the President of the United States. Rather, Obama hijacked it. He is an  IMPOSTOR…  a charlatan. Even  OBAMA HIMSELF ADMITS THAT HE WAS BORN IN KENYA, but we’re long passed the point of being able to do anything about it. 

In 1979, an article was uncovered  WRITTEN BY VALERIE JARRETT’S FATHER-IN-LAW ABOUT A MUSLIM PLAN TO PURCHASE THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES.  If you  READ that  HORRIBLY disturbing article (that was written decades ago (and  LONG before the years of the Obama Debacle), does the claim by an Iranian Commander that  THE WHITE HOUSE IS ISIS HEADQUARTERS  really  seem  THAT outlandish?

Perhaps that alone isn’t enough. What about the  OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DOING NOTHING TO STOP KNOWN JIHAD TRAINING CAMPS right here in the United States? What about  FORMER CIA AGENTS COMING OUT AND SAYING OBAMA IS A “RADICAL ISLAMIST” AND ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES?

We have  FOUR STAR ADMIRALS WHO HAVE SAID OBAMA HAS CONSPIRED WITH THE ENEMY, other members of the  CIA CONFIRM OUR WORST FEARS ABOUT BARACK OBAMA, and  OBAMA’S INSISTENCE THAT AMERICAN SOLDIERS BE WILLING TO FIRE ON AMERICANS… does any of that concern you? Even the  NEW ARMY MANUAL DETAILS THE USE OF LETHAL FORCE ON U.S. CITIZENS EVEN THOSE PEACEFULLY PROTESTING!

 

WHEN DO WE REALLY FACE THE FACTS OF WHAT WE’VE DONE?

WHEN DO AMERICANS TAKE OWNERSHIP OF OUR MISTAKE?

READ WHAT SENIOR CHIEF ROSS WRITES ABOUT OBAMA’S SEALED PAST!

MOST VALUABLE PART OF THE POST IS ALWAYS THE LINKS AT THE END!

 

Dempsy

ONCEa nation’s military command is co-opted with anti-nationalist jihadi fervor, it follows (at least it should) that the country is in grave peril.

SO the fact that Obama’s Pentagon has gone over to the Islamic side, well, the fiery depths of hell are not too far behind.

ASSUREDLY, Obama Inc.’s high command demonstrated signs of betrayal at several junctures. However, they are now OPENLYgiving the heads up to ISIS (and their allies) as to their war plans, and herein lies the escalation. O M G!

Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

 

THE “enemy within” is hardly a new phenomenon. Not only isn’t it new, but it has deep roots in the Old Testament. As such, when Jewish self-haters lend succor to the enemy, those whose fervent desire is to destroy Israel, in actuality, their goal is to destroy Judaism. For this “distinction” they are termed Amalekites.

The descendants of Amalek described in the Bible as a cruel people who attacked thechildren of Israel right after they were free from slavery and left Egypt (Exodus 17:8). Hence the children of Israel were commanded to destroy the seed of Amalek (Ex 17:8-16). The Amalekites lived in the south of the land of Israel during the period of the settlement of the children of Israel in the Land of Israel to the period of themonarchy. In the Jewish folklore the Amalekites are considered to be the symbol of evil.

The Biblical relationship between the Hebrew and Amalekite tribes was that the Amalekite tribes without provocation pounced on the Hebrews when they were weak. The Amalekites became associated with ruthlessness and trickery and tyranny, even more so than Pharaoh or the Philistines, and required a ruthless response:

8 Then Amalek came and fought with Israel at Rephidim. 9 So Moses said to Joshua, “Choose for us men, and go out and fight with Amalek. Tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the staff of God in my hand.” 10 So Joshua did as Moses told him, and fought with Amalek, while Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. 11 Whenever Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed, and whenever he lowered his hand, Amalek prevailed. 12 But Moses’ hands grew weary, so they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat on it, while Aaron and Hur held up his hands, one on one side, and the other on the other side. So his hands were steady until the going down of the sun. 13 And Joshua overwhelmed Amalek and his people with the sword.

14 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Write this as a memorial in a book and recite it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.” 15 And Moses built an altar and called the name of it, The Lord is my banner, 16 saying, “A hand upon the throne of the Lord Jacob! The Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.” (Exodus 17)………

UNRESERVEDLY, this investigative journalist also coins them toadying “Jew-boys”…girls too, Herzog and Livni alike. This dangerous twosome (countless in tow, fueled with illegal foreign-funded “helping hands” from Obama Inc.) are aiming to destroy Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, substituting it as a “state for all its people’s”. By grabbing the reins of the premiership, by hook or by crook, they intend to do just that. Tragically, every grouping has their own “cross(es)” to bear, and this Amalekite trait is resonant with a segment of “my people”. Can you hear the guttural sigh from this American-Israeli, others as well, who will cast a vote in the upcoming March election.

Livni-Herzog campaign being financed by ‘Palestinian-Americans’

Jihadi

This should tell you all you need to know about the ideology and financing behind the effort to unseat Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Yes, it’s being run by Barack Hussein Obama’s Presidential campaign. But it’s being paid for by ‘Palestinian-Americans.’ This came by email from Ronn Torossian.

A review of tax filings finds that One Voice paid $96,000 in 2011 toHoward Sumka.

Sumka was instrumental in providing “$1 million in American funding to a Hamas-run university in the Gaza Strip…”when he served as West Bank and Gaza Mission Director for US Aid.

Similarly, by reviewing the organization’s 990 tax filings, there areannual donations to The American Task Force on Palestine.

Very few Israelis would choose shared ideology with the American Task Force On Palestine, whose mission includesAn end to the Israeli occupation and the evacuation of all Israeli settlements”, and “A just solution for the Palestinian refugee problem, in accordance with international legality and the relevant UN resolutions.”

An executive board member of One Voice is Samer Hamadeh, who told Bloomberg in 2008 that “I grew up in Fresno, Calif., I went to Stanford, my parents left Palestine when they were kids and never looked back. I didn’t realize that I was Palestinian until my teens and not really what that meant until after 9/11.…”

Do prospective voters in Israel of “The Zionist Camp” identify with ideological backing from Hamadeh? One thinks that his ideology is most likely not in line with the mainstream voters that Issac Herzog and Tzipi Livni are chasing.

Well, maybe. But Sumka and Hamdeh definitely appear to be in line with Livni’s and Herzog’s ideology.

AND so whenever it becomes clear that leaders (with others in tandem, albeit not elected, oft-named, self-appointed “elitists”) betray the national trust, well, it is quite easy to identify them. Now, this should not be confused with an individual’s mere ideological differences, not at all. But it does have everything to do with their actions – to DIRECTLY undermine the nation’s foundations – regardless of any blathering to the contrary, yes, they too are nationalists! Liars. Reprobates.

ALONG this trajectory of understanding, let’s segue to Benghazigate, a focal point which blows back into Obama Inc’s Pentagon.

IN this regard, after General Ham attempted to save –  via life-saving air support – those trapped in Libya’s illegal war (hidden under the umbrella of Samantha Powers’s R2P…F/B/O the Muslim Brotherhood Mafia, ISIS too), voilà, the Traitor-in-Chief had him summarily removed, and then proceeded to re-shuffle the Pentagon’s top decks. Coinquidink?

What are the odds on this happening? Two flag officers, operating in the same theater (Mideast area) both relieved or reassigned within a matter of days.

Highly-respected Army Gen. Carter Ham, boss at Africa Command the past 18 months, suddenly is brought home after rumors he was outraged when his offer to send in a reaction team to save the besieged Americans at Benghazi was turned down. There are reports that the general had a rapid response team all set to go, but was ordered to“STAND DOWN.”

Sources say the general said “to hell with that” and insisted the rescue attempt be tried. Within two minutes of the order, it is said the general was apprehended and his second-in-command officially relieved him of command.

We might add here, that Obama suck-up, that wretched little gnome, Gen. Martin Dempsey, who is Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has officially denied that report, claiming that Ham was on board with the Pentagon in deciding “against sending in U.S. forces” to attempt a rescue of the Americans in the beleaguered Benghazi compound.

 

ANOTHER FLAG OFFICER PAYS A HEAVY PRICE

If that wasn’t indication of possible dissension at high levels, Navy Rear Admiral, former commander of the USS John Stennis Strike Group, Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette was mysteriously relieved of duty, and all the brass will say is he is “under investigation” for, get this, “inappropriate leadership judgment.”

Just another way of saying that the admiral dared differ with the Administration’s Libya policy and perhaps openly defied Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. It’ll be interesting to see if the good admiral is court-martialed and if his trial would be open to the news media.

Other than the Fox News Channel, the MSM (“mainstream media”) are so far “in the tank” for their hero Obama, his re-election so important to them, the Benghazi lies and cover-up will be downplayed and/or ignored.

The YouTube anti-Muslim video excuse and cover-story has already been exposed for a fraud, but CNN, the Washington POST and New York TIMES have yet to ask the President any embarrassing questions.

SO as the treachery against valiant commanding officers became clear, it was particular sackings which led to a FULL purging. Consequentially, Obama Inc. understood that certain officers would not betray their oaths of leadership – in essence, to serve and protect – unlike their bosses!

ENTER, the unprecendented  purging of Generals, and for more than one reason.

WHEREAS those who were purged took their oaths seriously, on the other hand, Obama and gang have other plans for the U.S. military command (never mind the violation of the Posse Comitatus Act), that which involves targeting citizens on U.S. soil. Resultant, they realized that certain military higher-ups constituted a “liability.

NOW, let’s be very clear: HUSSEIN Obama is not interested in violating the above enshrined Act to save the nation, that would be another whole order of magnitude. However, incontestably, he is seeking to protect jihadis (and their anti-American supporters from the left) who seek to destroy the nation! And for this he needs “go to” officers who will target patriots!

 

 

BE afraid, very afraid….as the Anti-American-in-Chief has the outrageous gall to state: Americans are inviting jihad by criticizing Islam!  Beyond treacherous. Treasonous.

WHICH brings us back, once again, to MORE dire news…proof of his betrayal(s)…yet, his Pentagon mouthpieces (and other surrogates) dodge and weave via this and that spin cycle.

A U.S. military official on Thursday outlined plans to retake the key Iraq city of Mosul from Islamic State terrorists as early as April — an unusual move that immediately drew criticism from two U.S. intelligence officers.

A senior U.S. Central Command official said that the “shaping” for the battle is currently underway. The Iraqi military hopes to begin operations in the “April, May timeframe” and retake the city before Ramadan begins on June 17.

The official, who was not authorized to discuss the operation publicly and spoke with reporters on condition of anonymity, said five Iraqi Army brigades will be used in the fight, as well as several smaller brigades, adding up to a total force of up to 25,000 Iraqi troops.

Three brigades of Kurdish Peshmerga fighters will participate as well.

But two military intelligence officers told Fox News that the decision to publicly announce the plan was counterintuitive because it “TELEGRAPHS”the timing and number of units involved. The officers said it would allow Islamic State, also known as ISIS, or ISIL, to prepare for the battle by laying improvised explosive devices.

Both officers questioned whether political considerations on the part of the Obama administration factored into the decision to announce the offensive.

ISIS militants overtook Mosul last June, as the group marched across large sections of Iraq and Syria, sending Iraqi forces fleeing. At this point, officials estimate there are between 1,000 to 2,000 ISIS insurgents in the city of Mosul. Military leaders have been talking about retaking the city for some time, but they have said they won’t launch the operation until the Iraqi troops are ready.

 

W T F…

ALAS, U.S. soldiers would do well to finally realize that they ARE sitting ducks, and it is no accident. In fact, he ordered (as the so-called Commander-in-Chief)  Marines to “disarm”, as they fled Yemen with their tail between their legs. Said grave breach of the military’s code is of piece with ISIS being able to surround ! 320 Marines at an Iraqi (training) air base, effectively getting the drop on them. Indeed.

THUS, is it any wonder that this immoral pygmy conflated anti-semitism (the incurable hatred of Jews) with anti-Muslim sentiments, all the while Muslims lay waste to innocent people all over the globe! Apparently, targeting Jews, for the “crime” of being Jews and contributing more to humanity than most others, is now on par with ill will towards countless Muslims who slaughter under the banner of Islam!

“We’ve also seen, most recently in Europe, a rise in inexcusable acts of anti-Semitism, or in some cases, anti-Muslim sentiment or anti-immigrant sentiment,”Obama  told a Feb. 19 audience of U.S. and foreign officials and advocates, who met to discuss ways to minimize jihadi violence.

Peaceful criticism of Islamic culture is bad, he suggested. ”When people spew hatred toward others — because of their faith or because they’re immigrants — it feeds into terrorist narratives. … It feeds a cycle of fear and resentment and a sense of injustice upon which extremists prey,” he said.

So “we have to ensure that our diverse societies truly welcome and respect people of all faiths and backgrounds,” said Obama.

He insisted the conflict between Muslim and Western cultures is not caused by fundamentally different attitudes about freedom and religious solidarity.

TO wit, may the Jihadi-in-Chief choke on his own verbal vomit – and worse!

Read the article at Joe of America here:

THE VOICE OF REASON

Treason 4

FOR MORE ON ALLOBAMA’S TREASONOUS ACTS!

Obama-Generals-300x200

ISSUES BETWEEN OBAMA AND THE MILITARY:

HIGH RANKING MILITARY OFFICERS FIRED BY OBAMA:

obama-lawless-president-renegade-antichrist

FOR MORE ON OBAMA’S UTTER LAWLESSNESS:

Entry #785
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)

February 23, 2015, 10:22 amYAHTZEE! Obama & Hillary Charged With Aiding and Abetting Terrorists

YAHTZEE! Obama & Hillary Charged With Aiding and Abetting Terrorists

Monday, February 23, 2015

IT’S ABOUT <snip> TIME…

AND WE HAVEN’T EVEN GOTTEN TO BENGHAZI!

Hmmmm… do you think this was the 400 STINGER MISSILES THAT WERE BEING ILLEGALLY FUNNELED TROUGH THE LIBYAN EMBASSY THE NIGHT OF BENGHAZI that ultimately resulted in Christopher Stevens being killed when he was hung out to dry? Or do you think it might be because those same STINGER MISSILES WERE USED TO SHOOT DOWN AN AMERICAN HELICOPTER?

No… wait… maybe it was aiding and abetting the enemy by GUTTING our military on a STALIN LIKE PURGE OF ITS BEST AND HIGHEST RANKED OFFICERS! Could that be it? Wait, wait, let’s not forget the recent article by Michael Connelly, Constitutional Attorney who wrote about SIXTEEN EXAMPLES OF OBAMA AIDING AND ABETTING THE ENEMY! Of course, they might be referring to ADMIRAL LYONS WHO HAS REPEATEDLY SAID OBAMA CONSPIRED WITH THE ENEMY IN AN ACT OF TREASON! Maybe that’s it. 

 

YOU KNOW WHAT? I DON’T CARE!

ARTICLE III, SECTION 3:

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.”

 

SOMEONE SAVE ME A SEAT IN THE GALLOWS!

Treason

The Egyptian government has charged President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with being accessories to terrorism.

The charges stem from Obama and Clinton working with the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization that Egypt has declared a terrorist group.

WAIT, NOT THE SAME MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD BARACK’S BROTHER MALIK IS THE HEAD OF A TERROR CELL?

NOT THAT MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD RIGHT?

AND 4/10 DEMOCRATS IN A RECENT POLL SAID OBAMA SHOULD BE “KING?”

King

The complaint against Obama names him as “an accessory to crimes committed by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.”

The charges go on to state that Obama, “cooperated, incited, and assisted the armed elements of the Muslim Brotherhood in the commission of crimes.”

STRANGE HUH? THE SAME THING A U.S ADMIRAL HAS SAID LIKE 10 TIMES… AT LEAST THE EGYPTIANS WERE LISTENING EVEN IF THE DEMOCRATS WEREN’T!

 

FOLKS, THIS HAS ALL BEEN IN THE LINKS FOR MONTHS!

READ THE LINKS I PROVIDE BELOW!!!!!

The U.S. State Department does not list the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror organization even though they have known ties to Hamas.

The charges against Clinton include that she worked to overthrow Gen. Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi, the current leader of Egypt.

Clinton is said to have been in contact with Naglaa Mahmood, the wife of Muslim Brotherhood member and Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi.

Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood were ousted by a military coup led by el-Sissi in 2013.

Obama and Clinton are also charged with attempted bribery, stemming from the White House giving the Muslim Brotherhood $8 billion to open up the Sinai Peninsula to Hamas, allowing the terror group to launch attacks on Israel (H/T Joe for America).

The so-called “Arab Spring” that was strongly supported by the Obama White House went from being a showcase of democracy to a foreign policy failure in a matter of months as long-time allies of the United States were ousted from power some of the most radical Muslim extremists on the planet filled the voids.

This, of course, was the direct result of Obama’s naive worldview when it comes to radical Islam and Islamic terror — the same worldview that allowed for the rise of the Islamic State.

The consequences of that worldview are now plain for everyone to see.

 

PLEASE SHARE THIS ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER IF YOU THINK THE UNITED STATES NEEDS TO TRY THEM FOR TRESON!

Entry #784
View and Add Comments  (3 Comments)

February 11, 2015, 1:45 pmBREAKING: Several Admirals and Generals Accusing Obama of Treason!

BREAKING: Several Admirals and Generals Accusing Obama of Treason!

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

OBAMA HAS COMMITTED UNTHINKABLE CRIMES AGAINST THE U.S.

NEEDS TO BE TRIED FOR TREASON, FOUND GUILTY, AND HUNG!

Article III the Constitution states:  “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

Let’s get a few things straight. Obama has committed treason in so many ways and so many times most people jave lost track of the official count. Let’s look at the FACTS for a moment. Forget for a brief moment how quickly a republican would be thrown out of office with this nonsense swirling around all the time, and stop and realize we are letting a COMMUNIST get away with from OUR OWN the Oval Office. 

ALL OF THE MEN SHOWN ON VIDEO BELOW KNOW OBAMA IS A TRAITOR!

WHO BETTER TO KNOW THAN HIS MILITARY GENERALS & ADMIRALS?

 

I have posted at least 4-5 stories where on SEPARATE OCCASIONS where one of the military’s highest decorated officers , Admiral Lons, has come forward and accused Obama of crimes ranging from Treason, to Colluding with the Enemy, to Supplying the enemy with Stinger Missiles. For anyone who wants to get smart with me, and ask who I mean by “the enemy” I am referring to Al Qaeda! Admiral Lyons has been telling anyone who will listen, that Obama has committed TREASON! I myself have said since the DAY WE LEARNED 400 STINGER MISSILES IN ROUTE TO TERRORISTS WOUND UP MISSING FROM THE BENGHAZI EMBASSY, that it would be THOSE events that one day Obama would answer for. I take that back now. I think at this point the only Admiral Lyons has not told to get Obama are the men who used to be under his command. He should have them storm the White House and drag Obama out in cuffs. I pray that day comes soon. 

BEST EFFORTS BY ADMIRALS AND GENERALS TO BRING OBAMA’S CRIMES TO LIGHT:

America has gone SOFT. We are pathetic in SO many ways. I can’t say for sure how things WILL play out, but I can tell you how they WON’T play out. Not if, but WHEN the evidence of Obama’s piles up SO high something HAS to be done, Obama will be long out of office, he’ll flee the country like the Bitch that he is. He may be guilty and run, but he will NEVER see justice. I suspect as I have said since IMMEDIATELY after the Benghazi attack that his final downfall will be the 400 MISSILES HE WAS FUNNELING THROUGH THE EMBASSY IN LIBYA USING CHRIS STEVENS TO GET TO THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD AND AL QAEDA

Where else but America is the Media SO twisted, and SO biased that they let a man with a SEALED past and a MUSLIM BROTHER NAMED MALIK WHO RUNS A MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD TERRORIST GROUP BECOME PRESIDENT? Anyone with an IQ over 6 (sorry liberals, you’re OUT) knew <snip> well Obama was NOT eligible for office back in 2007, and despite piling up MOUNTAINS OF PROOF, no one even looked into it. Now, in SEVEN of the most disturbing pieces you will ever read you too will KNOW Obama is the ENEMY! 

Don’t stop there, the list of Obama’s treasonous acts extends almost as long as there are days he has spent tin the Oval Office. There is a LONG list of people accusing him of TREASON! Lieutenant General Thomas Mcinnerney has declared the government is infected with terrorist cells in every branch. 

10011445_603315889758507_1946368717_n

ACCORDING TO WIKIPEDIA: Thomas G. McInerney (born March 15, 1937) is a retired  United States Air Force  Lieutenant General. He is a command pilot with more than 4,100 flying hours, including 407 combat missions (243 in  O-1s as a forward air controller and 164 in  F-4 C’s, D’s and E’s) during the  Vietnam War. In addition to his Vietnam Service, the McInerney served overseas in  NATO Pacific Air Forces and as commander of  11th Air Force in  Alaska. Currently, he is a  Fox News contributor, and is a member of the  Iran Policy Committee.

McInerney’s Military Awards and Decorations Include: 

 

DOES HE SOUND LIKE SOMEONE CREDIBLE?

YOU BE THE JUDGE!

 

 

 

Conservative Tribune continues: It has long been suspected that President Barack Obama has a more than just friendly relationship with the terrorist-affiliated front group Muslim Brotherhood.

In fact, more than just a few sources have made note of how the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated various levels of the U.S. government, including the highest levels of the White House.

Now the former commander of the Navy’s Pacific Fleet is coming forward and speaking up about the issue as well, stating that all of our nation’s intelligence services have been infiltrated by the terrorist front group.

Retired 4-star Admiral James “Ace” Lyons recently spoke to the National Press Club about Obama’s efforts to “fundamentally transform” America, something he has been doing since he was first elected in 2008.

Lyons pointed to Obama’s recent refusal to join other world leaders in Paris to take a stand for freedom of expression, saying this is just the latest of “many signals” of support he has sent to the Islamic jihadists over the years

“There’s no question we got a hell of a job ahead of us,” Lyons said, “with the Muslim Brotherhood penetration in every one of our national security agencies, including all our intelligence agencies.”

He pointed to the current head of the CIA, John Brennan, who is believed to be a convert to Islam, as proof of his assertions, according to the TPNN.

READ THIS FOR A HORRIBLE REVELATION ABOUT BRENNAN!

He went on to call for more action from the new GOP-led Congress, saying they were elected to “stop the transformation of America, not to see how they could work with the president.”

Unfortunately, the admiral is correct.  The Muslim Brotherhood most certainly does hold undue sway and influence over the Obama administration.

One need only ask the people and government of Egypt how they feel about the Muslim Brotherhood and the connections between the terrorist group and the White House.

Congress most certainly needs to do something to address this problem, as it looks remarkably like treason coming out of this administration.

 

Famous Journalist Drops Bombshell About Benghazi Liars Obama and Rice

 

 

 

Conservative Tribune e Continues: Conservatives have been fed up with the president’s convoluted strategy in the Middle East for years, but now it looks like the mainstream media is also getting tired of President Barack Obama’s indecision.

One of the most well-known journalists in America just criticized Obama and his advisers, including Susan Rice.

Bob Woodward appeared on “Fox News Sunday” and explained his view that the White House has no clear plan for dealing with Islamic terror groups and that the administration was badly micro-managing the military.

Woodward knows a few things about corrupt presidents. He was one of the key reporters responsible for exposing the infamous Watergate scandal during the Nixon administration.

“They (the Obama administration) have not sat down and said, ‘This is where we want to go and this is how we want to do it,’” said Woodward.

He’s exactly right. The Obama administration seems to rely on the backwards strategy of “ready, fire, aim” — if they ever fire at all.

That isn’t leadership, and that isn’t how America should deal with the deep problems of the Islamic State terror group or the Middle East.

 

WHEN DO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GET JUSTICE?

IMG_0602

THE VOICE OF REASON

Treason 4

ISSUES BETWEEN OBAMA AND THE MILITARY:

DON’T KNOW WHO MICHAEL CONNELLY IS?

Connelly

MICHAEL CONNELLY IS AS RESPECTED AS THEY COME IN LEGAL CIRCLES DEALING WITH THE CONSTITUTION. MICHAEL IS BOTH A CONSTITUTIONAL ATTORNEY (A REAL ONE, NOT THE OBAMA VARIETY), AND A UNITED STATES ARMY VETERAN. 

ON HIS WEBSITE HE WRITES:

“I am a U.S. Army veteran, a Constitutional attorney, Executive Director of the United States Justice Foundation, and a published author, freelance writer, and teacher. I am the author of four books,  ”RIDERS IN THE SKY: THE GHOSTS AND LEGENDS OF PHILMONT SCOUT RANCH,” “THE MORTARMEN,” a story about my father’s unit in WW II; my novel, “AMAYEHLI: A STORY OF AMERICA,“ and the newly released “AMERICA’S LIVELIEST GHOSTS.” In addition, I have an affordable, pocket size booklet on the Constitution called “Our Constitution” that is receiving great reviews. You can read more about these books by going to the pages on each book on this website.” You may also want to check out his radio talk show that airs every Wednesday at 4:00 Eastern.

HERE IS THE WEBSITE CONTAINING THE LINK TO THE RADIO SHOW:

 

MICHAEL HAS TRIED TO HAVE OBAMA IMPEACHED SEVERAL TIMES:

Treason 3

FOR MORE ON ALL OBAMA’S TREASONOUS ACTS!

 

Benghazi 1

 

Entry #783
View and Add Comments  (3 Comments)

February 10, 2015, 9:47 pmYour Wages are NOT lawful "income."

Your Wages are NOT lawful “income.”

Monday, February 9, 2015

 

Your wages are NOT lawful “Income!”

The IRS has been under fire in recent months regarding corruption on various levels.  It is bad enough the lamestream media is ignoring the scandals that are exposed, but the single greatest fraud by the IRS that everyone is ignoring is the IRS’ claim that American’s wages, salary and compensation for services is actual lawful “income.”  This is a great lie that has been ongoing for over 100 years.  Original intent of Congress and supported by the U.S. Supreme Court and others, clearly reveal that personal wages and such were NEVER originally intended to be classified as “income” which could be taxed by the Federal Government.

This fraud has cost Americans trillions of dollars over the past 100 years, and is continuing… but many people are waking up to this lie and are taking steps to remove themselves from this system, using the laws and court cases themselves.  The topic of how the IRS is deceiving Americans covers a host of provable lies involving purposely deceptive language in the code itself, and, of course, their usual fearmongering and propaganda tactics.  (In fact, the IRS has NO lawful authority in the States or over private citizens.  That is for another story which will shock you).

This article will address just the element of what income is and is not.  The below material is taken from a U.S. Supreme Court case which was filed as part of Case # No. 12-6169, which they ignored, including their own standing and never overturned cases.  There is a lot of supporting documentation on this, and much greater fraud, which will empower you to begin challenging the IRS as more and more people are doing.  Keep in mind that the IRS and 9 other courts also completely ignored this evidence, and the IRS played their usual unlawful games in responding to the allegations in the other federal courts.

Surprisingly, in the U.S. Supreme Court, the IRS waived its right to respond, which in any court in the country, is a default under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 55.  This was brought to the Supreme Court’s attention, and they stated, “we don’t do that here.”  How convenient.  In any case it is still a lawful  default.  The question one should ask is (why would they waive their right to respond, if they are lawfully right?)

We need more and more people challenging the IRS’ legal standing, and choosing to get out of their corrupt system… of course, through taking the right steps.

U.S. Supreme Court Case # No. 12-6169 challenge question as to “what is income.”

Question 2 discussion:  Over the decades, since the early 1900s, the definition for what is called “income” has been distorted from original intent, and what was well known by the Courts, Congress and the People. Respondent (IRS)has consistently claimed that “income” includes wages, salaries and compensation for services.

However, this “interpretive regulation” is trying to “make income of that which is not income,” according to the 16th Amendment.  Helvering (1).

When challenged with this question, Respondent has provided nothing in response but hearsay and presumption, which is not evidence (A.C. Aukerman (2); Del Vecchio (3); New York (4). Presumption is not “a means of escape from constitutional restrictions” (Heiner (5). “Presumption” does not replace the burden of proof or rebuttal.

Respondent claims that “all that comes in” as wages, salary or compensation for service is “income according to the proper definition” of what it classifies as “gross income” and is subject to its taxation scheme, contrary to Doyle (6) in defining “income.” Originally, “income” was classified as “gains and profits” from “corporate activity” (Merchants (7), unearned wealth or assets arising from the “source” of the lawful “income” (45 Congressional Record. 4420-4423, (8).

Precedent shows that lawful “income” is “the gain derived from or through the sale or conversion of capital assets: from labor or from both combined” (Taft (9). What defines income “must have the essential feature of gain to the recipient” (Conner, (10) ; U.S.C.A. (11).

For Respondent to consider wages as all “gain” or “profit” is to distort the definition of income. This Court stated it did not accept the idea of a tax on occupations and labor (Pollock (12).

Income was clearly classified as “gains and profits,” which “limit the meaning of” income. Income was not “everything that comes in” (Southern Pacific (13). It was understood to be a “tax on the yearly profits arising from property, professions, trades, and offices” (Black’s Law (14). Respondent claims that wages are “income” and that “deriving” income as the 16th Amendment states equals the wages one receives from work, yet the Courts have clearly stated that one does not “derive” income through work (Edwards (15).

In matter of fact, there is “no material difference” between Petitioner’s, or any American’s, labor and what he receives as wages. Thus, there is no lawful “income” (profit). (Material difference is discussed thoroughly in Cottage (16) People’s labor is merely “exchanged” for money (Coppage (17).

Labor is property (Butchers’ Union Co.(18); Slaughter House (19) and is like “a tree; income is the fruit; labour is a tree; income the fruit; capital, the tree; income the fruit” (Waring (20). Selling labor is no different from selling goods (Adkins (21). Wages and salaries for labor represent the conversion of property but realize no gain in that mere conversion. Labor, being “property,” is the tree from which “income” or “gain” can be “derived,” if it is used for that purpose, but for Respondent to claim it can tax the whole “tree” (wages) as “profit” is tantamount to claiming limbs of the tree are always “profit” and removing them, limiting any hope of fruit—true “income,” or “gain,” from those limbs—or more lawful income to government, and not impoverish citizens.

Recognition of the inherent elements of wages and personal costs to produce labor is vital. It is patently unjust, unconscionable and unfair to force people to offer up all their wages as pure “profit” when there are ample “costs” related to the production of labor. “The freedom and right to earn a living through any lawful occupation is exempt from taxation by the federal government.” (Grosjean (22); Coppage (17).

In 1939, “only 3.9% of the population” of the United States were covered by the income tax . . . only a small portion of the population” Treasury Department’s Division of Tax Research (23).

How can that be when far more than 3.9% of Americans in 1939 provided labor or services for wages? That is because wages were not then, and are not today, lawful “income,” and only 3.9% of the population in 1939 were wealthy enough to actually have true “income” (unearned wealth, or a corporate profit) or income “derived
from” their principal, or savings).

The term “income” was never meant to include principal, or what are wages, as there was a clear “distinction between income and principal” (1913 Congressional Record (24).  This Court has also always made a clear distinction between “profit” and “wages.” Wages were not “profit” and could not be taxed. U.S. v. Balard (25).

Income is “not a wage or compensation for any type of labor” (Staples (26). “Reasonable compensation for labor or services rendered is not profit” (Laureldale Cemetery (27).

People of the early 1900s understood that the “new system” of taxation would not involve wages or salaries as “an income” (Gov. A.E. Wilson on the Income Tax (28). The right to work and receive wages for labor “cannot be taxed as privilege” (Jack Cole(29); Coppage (17).

Respondent’s own code (1939) stated in Section 22 GROSS INCOME:

(a) “Gross income includes gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service . . .”

Gains, profit and income are redundant terms and confuse the lawful definition of what a “profit” is because it is the same thing as “gain,” or “income.” They all mean the same thing. Defining it in 1939, Section 22 shows there was a clear difference between “profits” and “wages.”

If “gains, profit and income” are synonymous with “salaries, wages, or compensation,” why state “derived from”? One does not “derive” income “from” a wage if they lawfully mean the same thing. If wages are income already, why use the term “derived from”?

Gross “income” includes gains, profits and income “derived from” salaries, wages or compensation for personal services, and “salaries, wages or compensation for personal service are not to be taxed as an entirety unless in their entirety they are gains, profits and income” (Lucas (30). It should also be noted that “gross income” also includes that which is derived from a corporate profit, or unearned wealth, as elsewhere argued, but something conspicuously missing from the definition.

The wages Petitioner or any American makes cannot be counted in their entirety as a “profit,” for this makes labor worth nothing (zero basis for labor costs to wage earned), which is nothing more than slavery.

A direct tax on wages is a tax that diminishes the source of potential “income” and has been declared unconstitutional. An indirect tax on wages is unconstitutional because an indirect tax is a tax on privilege; i.e., wealth-producing unearned income, or in making a corporate profit, neither of which Petitioner (or most Americans receiving wages) is involved with. Lawful taxation leaves the source (wealth, property or limbs growing from the tree) producing the “income” undiminished, and taps the true income “derived from” the source—the actual fruit coming off the “tree.”

Twice during the debates on the 16th Amendment, Congress rejected the idea of bringing direct taxes within the authority of the 16th Amendment. Then twice more, on July 5, 1909, Congress rejected the idea by direct vote of the Senate (S.J.R. No. 25 and S.J.R. No. 39).

This argument by Respondent was in response to the question put to the Court by Peck (31) as to whether the 16th Amendment created any new taxing power, which the Court stated clearly it did not. Thus, Respondent has clearly distorted and obfuscated the original intended definition of “income.”

Petitioner cannot declare he has “income” when he does not have any, in violation of his conscience and to not present false testimony via the 1040 form under penalty of perjury.

Who is Petitioner to believe and how does he act when confronted with this Court’s and other Courts’ long-standing decisions? (A 64-page brief on “income” is in previously named Court documents for more detail.)

Finally, it must be noted that the law provides for protection from taxes upon income “excluded by law” (Treas. Reg. §1.61-1 (32) and income “not taxable by the Federal Government under the Constitution” (Treas. Reg. §1.312-6[b] (33). It is Petitioner’s contention that these exclusions have not been lawfully determined as yet, and the issue of “income” may fall under these regulations.
______________________________________________________________________________
End Notes

I. Helvering v. Edison Bros. Stores, 133 F2d 575. (1943) “The Treasury cannot by
interpretive regulations, make income of that which is not income within the
meaning of revenue acts of Congress, nor can Congress, without apportionment, tax
as income that which is not income within the meaning of the 16th Amendment.”

2. A.C. Aukerman Co. v. R.L. Chaides Canst. a; 960 F.2d 1020, 1037 (Fed. Cir.
1992) “This court has never treated a presumption as any form of evidence.”

3. Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U.S. 280, 286, 56 S.Ct. 190, 193, 80 L.Ed. 229 (1935 .
“[A] presumption is not evidence.”

4. New York Life Ins. Co. v. Gamer, 303 U.S. 161, 171, 58 S.Ct. 500, 503, 82 L.Ed.
726 (1938) “[A presumption] cannot acquire the attribute of evidence …”)

5. Heiner v. Donnan, 285, US 312 (1932) and New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 US
254 (1964) “The power to create [false] presumptions is not a means of escape from
constitutional restrictions.”

6. Doyle v. Mitchell Brother, Oo., 247 US 179 (1918)
“We must reject in this case . . . the broad contention submitted in behalf of the
Government that all receipts-everything that comes in-are income within the
proper definition of the term ‘income’ .. .”

7. Merchants Loan & Trust Co. v. Smietanks, 225 U.S. 509, 518, 519. (1923)
“Income, as defined by the Supreme Court means, ‘gains and profits’ as a result of
corporate activity and ‘profit gained through the sale or conversion of capital assets.’
” (Also see 399. Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co. 247 U.S. 179, Eisner v. Macomber 252
U.S. 189, Evans v. Gore 253 U.S. 245, Summers v. Earth Island Institute, No. 07463
tn.s., March 3,2009] kiting Bender v. Williamsport Area School Dist., 475 U.
S. 534, 541 {1986}]).

8. 45 Congressional Record, 4420 (1909)
“Mr. Heflin. ‘An income tax seeks to reach the unearned wealth of the country and
to make it pay its share.’ 4423 Mr. Heflin. ‘But sir, when you tax a man on his
income, it is because his property is productive. He pays out of his abundance
because he has got the abundance.’ “

9. Taft v. Bowers, N.Y. 1929, 49 S.Ct. 199, 278 U.S. 470, 73 L.Ed. 460
“The meaning of ‘income’ in this amendment is the gain derived from or through the
sale or conversion of capital assets: from labor or from both combined; not a gain
accruing to capital or growth or increment of value in the investment, but a gain,
a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property, severed
from the capital however employed and coming in or being ‘derived,’ that is,
received or drawn by the recipient for his separate use , benefit, and disposal.”

10. Conner v. United States, 303 F. Supp. 1187 (1969) p. 1191: 47 C.J.S. InternalRevenue 98, p. 226
“[2] Whatever may constitute income, therefore, must have the essential feature of
gain to the recipient. This was true when the 16th amendment became effective, it
was true at the time of the decision in Eisner v. Macomber, it was true under
section 22(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, and it is true under section
6I(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. If there is no gain, there is no income.”
“[1] … It [income] is not synonymous with receipts. Simply put, pay from a job is a
‘wage,’ and wages are not taxable. Congress has taxed income, not compensation.”

11. u.s. G.A. Const. Am 16
“There must be gain before there is ‘income’ within the 16th Amendment.”

12. Pollock, 158 U.S. at 635 -637
“We have considered the act only in respect of the tax on income derived from real
estate, and from invested personal property, and have not commented on so much of
it as bears on gains or profits from business, privileges, or employments, in view of
the instances in which taxation on business, privileges, or employments has
assumed the guise of an excise tax and been sustained as such. It is evident that the
income from realty formed a vital part of the scheme for taxation embodied therein.
If that be stricken out, and also the income from all investments of all kinds, it is obvious that by far the largest part of the anticipated revenue would be eliminated,
and this would leave the burden of the tax to be borne by professionals, trades,
employments, or vocations; and in that way what was intended as a tax on capital
would remain in substance as a tax on occupations and labor. We cannot believe
that such was the intention of Congress. We do not mean to say that an act laying
by apportionment a direct tax on all real estate and personal property , or the
income thereof, might not lay excise taxes on business, privileges, employments and
vocations. But this is not such an act; and the scheme must be considered as a
whole.”

13. Southern Pacific v. Lowe, U.S. 247 F. 330. (1918)
“… [Ilncorne: as used in the statute should be given a meaning so as not to include
everything that comes in. The true function of the words 'gains' and 'profit s' is to
limit the meaning of the word 'income.' "

14. Black's LawDictionary, 2nd Edition, "Income Tax"
" 'A tax on the yearly profits arising from property, professions, trades and offices.'
See also 2 Staph. Comm 573. Levi v. Louisville, 97 Ky. 394,

15. Edwards v. Keith, 231 F. 110 (2nd Cir. 1916)
"The statute and the statute alone determines what is income to be taxed. It taxes
only income 'derived' from many different sources; one does not 'derive income' by
rendering services and charging for them."

16. Cottage Savings Assn. v. Commissioner, 499 Ll .S. 554 (1991)

17. Coppage v. Kansas, 236 U.S. 1, at 14, 23, 24 (1915)
"Included in the right of personal liberty and the right of private property are
taking of the nature of each is the right to make contracts for the acquisition of
property. The chief among such contracts instead of personal employment, by which
in labor and other services are exchanged for money or other forms of property. If
this right be struck down or arbitrarily interfered with, there is a substantial
impairment ofliberty in the long established constitutional sense. The right is as
essential to the laborer as to the capitalist, to the poor as to the rich; for the vast
majority of persons have no other artists away to begin to acquire property, save by
working for money... The right to follow any lawful vocation and to make contracts
is as completely within the protection of the Constitution as the right to hold
property free from unwarranted seizure, or the liberty to go when and where one
will . One of the ways of obtaining property is by contract. The right, therefore, to
contract cannot be infringed by the legislature without violating the letter and
spirit of the Constitution. Every citizen is protected in his right to work where and
for whom he will. He may select not only his employer, but also his associates."

18. Butchers' Union Co. v. Crescent City, Colorado, 111 U.S. 746, 757 (1883)
"It has been well said that, the property which every man has in his own labor, as it
is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and
inviolable . . ."

19. Slaughter House, 83 U.S. 36, at 127 (1873)
"Property is everything which has an exchangeable value, in the right of property
includes the power to dispose of that according to the will of the owner. Labor is
property, and as such merits protection. The right to make it available is next in
importance to the rights of life and liberty. It lives to a large extend the foundation
of most other forms of property, and of all solid individual and national prosperity."

20. Waring v. City of Savannah, 60 Ga . 93, 100 (1878)
"So that, perhaps, the true question is this: is income property, in the sense of t he
constitution, and must it be taxed at the same rate as other property? The fact is,
property is a tree; income is the fruit; labour is a tree; income the fruit; capital,
the tree; income the fruit. The fruit, if not consumed (severed) as fast as it ripens,
will germinate from the seed .. . and will produce other trees and grow into more
property; but so long as it is fruit merely, and plucked (severed) to eat .. . it is no
tree, and will produce itself no fruit."

21. Adkins v. Children's Hospital, 261 U.S. at 558
"In principle, there can be no difference between the case of selling labor and the
case of selling goods."

22. Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233 (1936); Jones v. Opelika, 316 U.S.
584, 56 S.Ct. 444 (1943). (See also Follett v. McCormick, 321 U.S. 573 64 S.Ct. 717
[1944]; Harper v. Virginia Bd ofElections, 383 U.S. 663, 86 S.Ct. 1079 [1966])
“The freedom and right to earn a living through any lawful occupation is exempt
from taxation by t he federal government !” (emphasis added) .

23. Treasury Department’s Division of Tax Research publication, “Collection at
Source of the Individual Normal Income Tax,” 1941
“For 1936, taxable income tax returns filed represented only 3.9% of the population
. . . [Olnly a small proportion of the population of the United States is covered by
the income tax."

24. 1913 Congressional Record, p. 3843, 3844; Senator
Albert B. Cummins "The word 'income' has a well defined meaning before the
amendment of the Constitution was adopted. It has been defined in all of t he
courts of t his country . .. If we could call anything that we pleased income, we could
obliterate all the distinction between income and principal. The Congress can not
affect the meaning of the word 'income' by any legislation whatsoever .. .

Obviously the people of this country did not intend to give to Congress the power to
levy a direct tax upon all the property of this country without apportionment."

25. u.s. v. Balsrd, 535, 575 F. 2D 400 (1976); (see also Oliver v. Halstead, 196 VA
992; 86 S.E. Rep. 2D 858)
"Gross income and not 'gross receipts' is the foundation of income tax liability . . .
The general term 'income' is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code . . . 'gross
income' means the total sales, less the cost of goods sold, plus any income from
investments and from incidental or outside operations or sources. 575 There is a
clear distinction between 'profit' and 'wages' or 'compensat ion for labor.'
Compensation for labor cannot be regarded as profit within the meaning of the law .
. . The word profit is a different thing altogether from mere compensation for labor .
. . The claim that salaries, wages and compensation for personal services are to be
taxed as an entirety and therefore must be returned by the individual who
performed the services ... is without support either in the language of the Act or in
the decisions of the courts construing it and is directly opposed to provisions of the
Act and to Regulations of the Treasury Department ..."

26. Staples v. us; 21 F Supp 737 U.S. Dist. Ct. ED PA, 1937]
“Income within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment and Revenue Act, means
‘gains’ . . . and in such connection ‘gain’ means profit … proceeding from property,
severed from capital, however invested or employed and coming in, received or
drawn by the taxpayer, for his separate use , benefit and disposal … Income is not a
wage or compensation for any type of labor.”

27. Laureldale Cemetery Assn. v. Matthews, 47 Atlantic 2d. 277 (1946)
“. .. Reasonable compensation for labor or services rendered is not profit …”

28. Gov. A.E. Wilson on the Income Tax (16) Amendment, New York Times, Part 5,
p. 13, February 26, 1911
“The poor man or the man in moderate circumstances does not regard his wages or
salary as an income that would have to pay its proportionate tax under this new
system.”

29. Jack Cole Company v. Alfred T, MacFarland, Commissioner, 206 Tenn. 694, 337
S.W.2d 453 Sup. Court of Tennessee (1960)
“Since the right to receive income or earnings is a right belonging to every persons,
this right cannot be taxed as privilege.” (See also Jerome H. Sheip Co. v. Amos, 100
Fla. 863, 130 So. 699, 705 [1930]; Redfield v. Fisher, 135 Or. 180, 292 P. 813,
819 [Ore. 1930]; Sims v. Ahrens, 167 Ark. 557, 271 S.W. 720, 733 [1925]; O’KeeJe v.
CityofSomerville, 190 Mass. 110,76 N.E. 457, 458 [1906]).

30. Lucas v. Earl, 281 U.S. 111 (1930)
“The claim that salaries, wages, and compensation for personal services are to be
taxed as an entirety and therefore must be returned by the individual who has
performed the services . . . is without support, either in the language of the Act
or in the decisions of the courts construing it. Not only this, but it is directly
opposed to provisions of the Act and to regulations of the U.S. Treasury
Department, which either prescribed or permits that compensations for personal
services not be taxed as a entirety and not be returned by the individual performing
the services. It has to be noted that, by the language of the Act, it is not salaries,
wages or compensation for personal services that are to be included in gross income.
That which is to be included is gains, profits, and income derived from salaries,
wages, or compensation for personal services.”

31. Peck & Co. v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 165 (1917) Brief for the Appellant at 11, 14-15
“The Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution has not enlarged the taxing power
of Congress or affected the prohibition against its burdening exports. (11) This is
brought out clearly by this court in Brushaber v. Union Pscitic Railroad Co., 240
U.S. 1, and Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., 240 U.S. 103. In the former case it was
pointed out that the all-embracing power of taxation conferred upon Congress by
the Constitution included two great classes, one indirect taxes or excises, and the
other direct taxes, and that of apportionment with regard to direct taxes. It was
held that the income tax in its nature is an excise; that is, it is a tax upon a person
measured by his income . .. It was further held that the effect of the Sixteenth
Amendment was not to change the nature of this tax or to take it out of the class of
excises to which it belonged, but merely to make it impossible by any sort of
reasoning thereafter to treat it as a direct tax because of the sources from which the
income was derived. ([14-15] Peck & Co. v; Lowe, 247 U.S. 165 [1917]. Not in the
ruling itself).”

32. Treas. Reg. §1.61-1
“Gross income means all income from whatever source derived, unless excluded by
law.”

33. Treas. Reg. §1.312-6(b)
“Among the items entering into the computation of corporate earnings and profits
for a particular period are all income exempted by statute, income not taxable by
the Federal Government under the Constitution, as well as all items includable
in gross income under section 61 or corresponding provisions of prior revenue acts.”

____________________________________________________________________

What can you do now with this information?  Research the web sites mentioned below.  Knowledge of the actual laws, or lack thereof, and the Constitution and court cases is vital to defending against this domestic terrorist organization all America hates, but believe they are powerless against it.  YOU ARE NOT.

Educate yourself, then exercise your rights under the law. http://www.foundationfortruthinlaw.org/Files/11-IRS-Documents/. 
                                         
You can also go to http://thematrixhasyou.org/no-tax.html for more information, and examples of actual letters to the IRS which ask basic questions.  Keep it simple… two or three questions to begin with, like what is the lawful definition of income (it isn’t in the code), what type of tax is income tax, direct or indirect, and where in the code does it make YOU personally liable to file a 1040 form.

They will likely send one of their form letters saying they are not going to answer such questions and will not in the future, despite their own code stating they are supposed to answer.  The problem is, they can’t answer with the truth or law, so they ignore us.  So much for transparent public servants, right?  Time to remove 150 million of us from this fraud and let our reps know about the lies.  The IRS will cease to exist once that happens.

Remember, the 1040 form is self-assessing.  If it were an actual constitutional law that authorizes the government to tax our wages, they could simply calculate the tax and send us a bill, but that is unconstitutional, so they trick us all into playing their game, under threat of course, and we assess ourselves.  They view this money volunteered, under law, as a “gift” to the government.  Nice racket, right?

The People created the government.  WE are their bosses, so start acting like it.

Entry #782
View and Add Comments  (1 Comment)

February 10, 2015, 12:52 pmBarack Obama's Lawyer Admits Birth Certificate Is Forged



Barack Obama’s Lawyer Admits Birth Certificate Is Forged

Tuesday, February 10, 2015

 

ONLY SO MANY TIMES I CAN ASK…

WHEN DO WE OWN UP TO WHAT WE’VE DONE?

Sure, It’s an older story, but it goes hand in hand with my post yesterday titled: THE SMOKING GUN IN THE OBAMA ELIGIBILITY CASE: STANLEY ANN DUNHAM’S PASSPORT. In a post dated June 20th titled:  OBAMA MUST BE ARRESTED & PROSECUTED FOR IMPERSONATING A PUBLIC OFFICER, the author goes into  GREAT detail about Barack Obama’s status as a  USURPER of the Presidency. As such, the author tells us Obama  CANNOT be impeached, because only a Lawful President can be Impeached. Obama was  NEVER qualified for the office of the President of the United States. Rather, Obama hijacked it. He is an  IMPOSTOR…  a charlatan. Even  OBAMA HIMSELF ADMITS THAT HE WAS BORN IN KENYA, but we’re long passed the point of being able to do anything about it. 

In 1979, an article was uncovered  WRITTEN BY VALERIE JARRETT’S FATHER-IN-LAW ABOUT A MUSLIM PLAN TO PURCHASE THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES.  If you  READ that  HORRIBLY disturbing article (that was written decades ago (and  LONG before the years of the Obama Debacle), does the claim by an Iranian Commander that  THE WHITE HOUSE IS ISIS HEADQUARTERS  really  seem  THAT outlandish?

Perhaps that alone isn’t enough. What about the  OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DOING NOTHING TO STOP KNOWN JIHAD TRAINING CAMPS right here in the United States? What about  FORMER CIA AGENTS COMING OUT AND SAYING OBAMA IS A “RADICAL ISLAMIST” AND ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES? 

We have  FOUR STAR ADMIRALS WHO HAVE SAID OBAMA HAS CONSPIRED WITH THE ENEMY, other members of the  CIA CONFIRM OUR WORST FEARS ABOUT BARACK OBAMA, and  OBAMA’S INSISTENCE THAT AMERICAN SOLDIERS BE WILLING TO FIRE ON AMERICANS… does any of that concern you? Even the  NEW ARMY MANUAL DETAILS THE USE OF LETHAL FORCE ON U.S. CITIZENS EVEN THOSE PEACEFULLY PROTESTING! 

AT WHAT POINT DO WE REALLY FACE THE FACTS OF WHAT WE’VE DONE?

WHEN DO AMERICANS TAKE OWNERSHIP OF OUR MISTAKE?

READ WHAT SENIOR CHIEF GEOFF ROSS WRITES ABOUT OBAMA’S SEALED PAST!

Treason(1)

 

WHAT’S HEARTBREAKING…

 IS THIS WILL NEVER MAKE THE EVENING NEWS….

We were right about EVERYTHING!  Pick a subject, something liberals had a derogatory name for, and something they called us crazy about in 2008… pick anything… we were right on ALL of it. We have the most successful TERRORIST of all time sitting in the Oval Office. Hijack a plane? Heck, he took a country… and now, whether liberal or conservative, smart enough to see it coming, or probably not so much if you’re a liberal, YOUR kids and YOUR grandkids will pay for YOUR mistake. 

 

WHAT’S WORSE? 

WE’LL READ THIS, NOD, AND GO ABOUT OUR DAY…

It appears the web is a buzz with information concerning the New Jersey court contest in regards to Barack Obama’s eligibility to be on the state’s ballot. At the center of the controversy now is the fact that Barack Obama’s own lawyer has apparently conceded the fact that the document is a forgery.

 

According to TeaPartyTribune.com, attorney Alexandra Hill, of the Newark-based law firm Genova, Burn and Giantomasi, admitted that the image of Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery and made the absurd claim that, therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status. She concluded her analysis of the online birth certificate arguing that it is “irrelevant to his placement on the ballot.”

She then went on to try and establish his eligibility by speaking of his political popularity, not legal qualification, in order to be a candidate!

Penbrook Johannson, editor for The Daily Pen wrote:

“Sadly, regardless of her moral deficiency, Hill is legally justified. Obama’s eligibility is a separate matter than the charges of forgery and fraud. Of course, we have evidence that he is not eligible. But, evidence of forgery by as yet unidentified counterfeiters working on behalf of Obama is not what legally excludes Obama from appearing on a ballot, by itself, until some authority is willing to consider this as evidence of forgery on its merit as an indication of actual ineligibility in a court of legal authority. Until some court of competent jurisdiction is willing to hear evidence of forgery and fraud, you can’t legally punish a political candidate for that crime which has not been proven that they committed. However, since Obama is not eligible because of a lack of authenticated evidence to the contrary, he could be held off the ballot for that reason.”

So what this comes down to is legal tip toeing around the issue. Let me put it simply. Obama’s own lawyer admits that the birth certificate which was put out by the White House is irrelevant to his placement on th e ballot. The birth certificate does not prove Obama is not a “natural born” citizen since it is a forgery. Therefore, the plaintiffs have not made their case and Barack Obama should be left on the ballot. I’ll bet Mr. Bill “It depends on what is, is” Clinton was behind this bit of legal wrangling.

As far as I can see that makes it a bigger issue than just that of the State of New Jersey. This is most definitely a national issue. The President of the United States’ own lawyer has just stated unequivocally that the President knowingly put out a forged document and claimed it was his birth certificate. Ladies and gentlemen, why in the world then, is there no immediate cries for impeachment and more than that, charges of treason brought against Barack Hussein Obama?

Treason 3

Entry #781
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)

February 9, 2015, 10:53 amEnemy in the White House

Enemy in the White House

 

tyrannocide05


Obama's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast Thursday continues to send shockwaves through this country.

Obama's statement has quickly become notorious: "Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the crusades and the inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ." Not yesterday, President Obama. Centuries ago. Not yesterday.

People committed terrible deeds in the cause of Allah yesterday, and the day before and the day before – but Obama refuses to say that.

Contrary to his claims that Christians were slaughtering in the name of Christ, we see none of that. Nowhere do you see Christians beheading, setting alight or crucifying non-Christians while screaming, "Christ is greatest!" Obama had the unmitigated gall to bring up the Spanish Inquisition and what was done at the end of that 800-year-old war, as well as the Crusades (which Obama mentioned as well), which was against the Muslim hordes close to 1,000 years ago. Had it not been for Charles Martel beating back the Muslim armies, Europe would look like the hellhole that much of the Middle East looks like today.

Obama insists that "the future does not belong to those that slander the prophet of Islam," but insults Jesus Christ? He's all in.

Obama freely brought up Christianity's ancient history, but did not mention Islam's 1,400-year bloody history of jihadi war, land appropriations, cultural annihilations, and enslavements. He failed to mention the 1,400 jihad against the Jews raging still today against Israel and Jews across the world. And, of course, he did not discuss the religion's bloody jihad now. On the contrary, he falsely claimed that Islam was being "hijacked."

Hijacked, how? Jihadists are citing the Quran, chapter and verse. They are using Muhammad as their "perfect example." Obama never said Christianity had been hijacked a thousand years ago. But he did make the outrageous claim that Jim Crow and slavery were sanctioned in the name of Christ.

Jim Crow was not in the name of Christ. Slavery was not in the name of Christ. These are despicable statements from the leader of the free world. But jihad is in the cause of Allah, and this he will not say.

Jesus did not behead, kill, rape, or steal from conquered people, calling the theft righteous booty. Jesus did not marry a six-year-old. Muhammad did. And he slaughtered untold numbers, with his mujahadeen raping and pillaging every bloody step of the way.

Those of us who saw this coming back in 2008 and 2009 were excoriated, ridiculed and marginalized for speaking the truth about Obama's past. In 2007, I wrote a commentary for Israel National News titled, "Obama, the Muslim Thing, And Why It Matters." Before Obama's election, anyone who used his middle name, Hussein, was labeled a racist-anti-Muslim-Islamophobic-bigot. And yet the first call he made to a foreign "leader" after he was inaugurated was to terror leader Mahmoud Abbas. The first interview he gave was with al Arabiya television. His first world tour was an apology tour to the Muslim world, culminating in a speech from the leading Islamic university in Cairo, Al Azhar. He invited the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group to his speech in Cairo, despite the fact that it had been banned for decades. Then President Mubarak and his cabinet, America's 30-year ally in that troubled region, could not attend Obama's speech because of the terror presence.

It's why I wrote my 2010 book, "The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America."

And now, five years later, with the global jihad roiling the world thanks to Obama's support and sanction, he deigns to tell us what our religion is.

President Dawah. The more jihad rages, the more Obama proselytizes for Islam. Muslim countries like Jordan are taking a much harder line than the U.S. It's outrageous.

The question isn't whether Obama is or isn't a Muslim. The question is, if he were a Muslim, what would he be doing differently? In a word: nothing.

Source

Pamela Geller's commitment to freedom from jihad and Shariah shines forth in her books

 

 


Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/02/enemy-white-house/#JF5Q12Om6kauOF5A.99
Entry #780
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)

February 8, 2015, 5:49 pmSamsung: Don't discuss personal info in front of TV

LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER

Samsung: Don't discuss personal info in front of TV

Warns of voice captures being shared with 3rd party


brainwash_TV

Your SmartTV just might be smarter than you think.

Did you know someone might be listening on the other end of your TV?

Would you have guessed that many someones are indeed listening if you are using a voice-recognition SmartTV?

Convenience may come at the expense of privacy and security in the expanding world of interconnected devices and voice control recognition, cautions Samsung, which issues this warning on its SmartTVs: “Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition.”

But how many are reading the fine print?

More such products are coming online every day – like Amazon’s connected speaker with a Siri-style assistant that can perform a variety of tasks including adding items to your e-commerce shopping basket.

“The potential privacy intrusion of voice-activated services is massive,” reports TechCrunch.com.

Electronic privacy activists are apoplectic about what’s already here and what’s on the horizon – comparing it to George Orwell’s Big Brother world of “1984.”

Where does this all lead?

The TechCrunch report concludes with this question: “When all the objects in your home have networked ears that are fine-tuned for commercial intelligence gathering, where will you go to talk about ‘personal’ or ‘sensitive’ stuff?”

 

 


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/02/samsung-dont-discuss-personal-info-in-front-of-tv/#PR0LieaIZoB1ljhx.99
Entry #779
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)

February 8, 2015, 1:55 pmTHE SMOKING GUN in the Obama Eligibility Case: Stanley Ann Dunham's Passpor

THE SMOKING GUN in the Obama Eligibility Case: Stanley Ann Dunham’s Passport

Sunday, February 8, 2015

WHAT’S HEARTBREAKING…

 IS THIS WILL NEVER MAKE THE EVENING NEWS….

We were right about EVERYTHING! Pick a subject, something liberals had a derogatory name for, and something they called us crazy about in 2008… pick anything… we were right on ALL of it. We have the most successful TERRORIST of all time sitting in the Oval Office. Hijack a plane? Heck, he took a country… and now, whether liberal or conservative, smart enough to see it coming, or probably not so much if you’re a liberal, YOUR kids and YOUR grandkids will pay for YOUR mistake. 

WHAT’S WORSE? 

WE’LL READ THIS, NOD, AND GO ABOUT OUR DAY…

I BET EVERYONE KNOWS WHO’S STILL LEFT ON THE BACHELOR…

OR AMERICAN IDOL… “BUT YOU DON’T HAVE TIME FOR THIS….”

THIS SHOULD BE THE PRICE!

1380607_236114249878877_752749417_n

WHEN DO WE OWN UP TO WHAT WE’VE DONE?

In a post dated June 20th titled:  OBAMA MUST BE ARRESTED & PROSECUTED FOR IMPERSONATING A PUBLIC OFFICER, the author goes into  GREAT detail about Barack Obama’s status as a  USURPER of the Presidency. As such, the author tells us Obama  CANNOT be impeached, because only a Lawful President can be Impeached. Obama was  NEVER qualified for the office of the President of the United States. Rather, Obama hijacked it. He is an  IMPOSTOR…  a charlatan. Even  OBAMA HIMSELF ADMITS THAT HE WAS BORN IN KENYA, but we’re long passed the point of being able to do anything about it. 

In 1979, an article was uncovered  WRITTEN BY VALERIE JARRETT’S FATHER-IN-LAW ABOUT A MUSLIM PLAN TO PURCHASE THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES.  If you  READ that  HORRIBLY disturbing article (that was written decades ago (and  LONG before the years of the Obama Debacle), does the claim by an Iranian Commander that  THE WHITE HOUSE IS ISIS HEADQUARTERS  really  seem  THAT outlandish?

Perhaps that alone isn’t enough. What about the  OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DOING NOTHING TO STOP KNOWN JIHAD TRAINING CAMPS right here in the United States? What about  FORMER CIA AGENTS COMING OUT AND SAYING OBAMA IS A “RADICAL ISLAMIST” AND ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES?

We have  FOUR STAR ADMIRALS WHO HAVE SAID OBAMA HAS CONSPIRED WITH THE ENEMY, other members of the  CIA CONFIRM OUR WORST FEARS ABOUT BARACK OBAMA, and  OBAMA’S INSISTENCE THAT AMERICAN SOLDIERS BE WILLING TO FIRE ON AMERICANS… does any of that concern you? Even the  NEW ARMY MANUAL DETAILS THE USE OF LETHAL FORCE ON U.S. CITIZENS EVEN THOSE PEACEFULLY PROTESTING!

AT WHAT POINT DO WE REALLY FACE THE FACTS OF WHAT WE’VE DONE?

WHEN DO AMERICANS TAKE OWNERSHIP OF OUR MISTAKE?

READ WHAT SENIOR CHIEF GEOFF ROSS WRITES ABOUT OBAMA’S SEALED PAST!

AS ALWAYS, THE MOST VALUABLE PART OF THE POST IS THE LINKS AT THE END!

Treason 5

While Barack Obama has taken numerous and expensive steps to keep his past secret (and yes, other presidents have did the same), one thing that cannot be missed is what may be the smoking gun in the eligibility case: The passport information of Stanley Ann Dunham, Barack Obama’s mother. It has been said that young Barry went to Indonesia with his mother to live with Lolo Soetoro and in doing so, because of his age, he was placed on his mother’s passport. According to the documents obtained from the US State Department, under the Freedom of Information Act, Barack Hussein Obama’s name was stricken from the original application. According to the State Department, they “could not locate a 1965 passport application referenced in an application for amendment of passport that is included in the released documents.”

Why are these documents so important? Under US Passport laws, in order to add a child to one’s passport, they would simply have to have the child’s birth certificate and a photo of one’s self and the child so that they could be matched when boarding a plane for their destination.

Upon the release of Dunham’s passport files, they were examined and in her renewal application, dated August 13, 1968, she lists Barack Hussein Obama (Soebarkah). Obama would have been eight years old at the time, just about to turn nine.

However, if you take a look at the application, young Barry’s name is scratched out on page two of the application, which means he was not in the application for his mother’s passport renewal in 1967.

 

obama-passport-2

 

SO WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? CONSIDER A BREIF TIMELINE:

  • Stanley Ann Dunham allegedly married Barack Obama, Sr. in 1961.
  • Barack Obama, Jr. was allegedly born on August 4, 1961 to Stanley Ann Dunham
  • Later in August of the same year, Dunham moved to Washington to attend University of Washington
  • Obama, Sr. continued studies in Hawaii until June 1962 and then went to Harvard.
  • Dunham met Lolo Soetoro in 1963
  • Obama and Dunham divorced in March 1964
  • Soetoro and Dunham married in 1965 in Hawaii (according to P3 in the files obtained, but 1964 in P5)
  • Soetoro leaves Hawaii for Indonesia in 1966, leaving behind Dunham and little Barry
  • Dunham and Barry would travel to Indonesia in 1967
  • From ages 6-10 Obama was in school in Indonesia; first at a Catholic School where he was registered as a Muslim and then at Besuki School, one of the three best public schools in Indonesia. (Consider that Obama was labeled a citizen of Indonesia at the time and that it is extremely rare for non-Indonesians to go to Indonesian public school.)
  • Obama returned to Hawaii to live with grandparents in 1971

 

So, first let’s be honest here. Dunham had a passport that was valid at the time Obama took his first trip to Indonesia (1967). However, when she chose to renew the application (August 1968), she listed Obama and then scratched him out. Since records are not available for her initial passport application due to them being destroyed, one wonders if Obama was listed on the passport. For the sake of argument, I’ll assume he was. He’s in Indonesia for four years.

He then returned to Hawaii and attended Punahou School and meets his alleged father Barack Obama, Sr. for the only time in his life (by the way, they look nothing alike). Here’s where it seems there is a problem. Who did Obama travel with when he came back to the states? If it was his mother, consider that she had not properly listed him in her 1968 renewal application. She would have had to do this in order for Barry to travel with her to Indonesia.

The real kicker comes in her application dated June 1971. There is no listing for Barack Obama as her son on her passport. How is Barry getting from Indonesia to Hawaii now?

According to the man I was named after, who was a Christian missionary for decades to various parts of Indonesia beginning in 1967, he told me that he always had to list his children on his passport until they were 18. Then they could get their own passports. So why is Barack Obama, the son of Stanley Ann Dunham not listed on any of her passport applications? How was he able to travel to and from Indonesia?

The convenience of the 1965 passport records being destroyed is curious. For one might make the claim that there is a coverup (albeit circumstantial) regarding Obama’s presence in his younger days. Age 5-6 is when kids normally began school in the US. I assume it would be similar overseas, such as in Indonesia.

But the question remains that Soetoro never listed him as her son on future applications, even when he was ten years old, which would have been when he came to Hawaii and stayed.

Perhaps there is an explanation, but without previous travel records for Obama, we may never be able to get a definite answer.

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) theorizes:

Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro-Passport Application File-Strunk v Dept of State-FOIA Release-FINAL-7-29-10. This file indicates via the 1967 passport amendment application (document marked P3) that Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama had a passport for certain issued to her 1965 and she was applying to amend it. Thus, she had one for sure in 1965. Since a passport was good for 5 years, that means if the 1965 issued passport was a renewal that she likely got her first passport possibly as early as late 1960 or early 1961. How does that fit the narrative to explain the information coming out of Kenya that Obama was born there? Why did she need a passport at age 18? She would not need it to have a baby in Hawaii or to go to college in Seattle Washington. What was the real reason this pregnant teenager got a passport in late 1960 or early in 1961? I believe it was likely to be able to  travel to Kenya to have the baby over there where it was her intent to leave the baby there to be raised by the paternal family in Kenya. She was to then return to re-start her life as a young teenager going to college in Seattle Washington. And then when Stanley Ann did not follow the plan because maternal instincts kicked in and she returned to college in Seattle WITH the new baby, grandma Dunham had to take action and filed the fraudulent action in Hawaii to falsely register the baby as born at home there in Hawaii, with no witnesses, to get her newborn grandson U.S. Citizenship … because it was very easy to do this in Hawaii in 1961. Listen to the Bill Cunningham Radio Show for how it was likely done [continued below video]:

 

I grant that CDR Kerchner’s assumption that Dunham’s passport was obtained at eighteen is just that, an assumption. However, it is interesting that he links to a story with similar documentation that we have provided documentation in a  previous article as it relates to the Kenyan Parliament and the acknowledgment that Barack Obama was born in Kenya.

Too many things don’t add up with Barack Hussein Obama: his selective service form, his social security number, his lack of being able to be verified to hold a job in the US and his birth certificate all point to a man who is a fraud and an illegal president.

So, I ask you, is this passport information the smoking gun in the Obama eligibility case? If so, what are people like Markwayne Mullins and a host of other elected officials doing by not pursuing this to verify the truth? I’ll tell you what they are doing. They are being complicit in this and looking out for what they perceive as their political futures, plain and simple. Demand your congressmen pursue this and present the truth to the American people.

Read the article at Freedom Outpost here:

 

THE VOICE OF REASON

Blank American Social Security Card

FOR LINKS ON OBAMA’S LACK OF ELIGIBILITY FOR PRESIDENT:

voteonce

FOR MORE ON OBAMA’S VOTER FRAUD:

Repair Kit

FOR MORE ON ALL OBAMA’S TREASONOUS ACTS!

Entry #778
View and Add Comments  (2 Comments)

February 6, 2015, 3:05 pmBreaking News! Obama Loses Texas Amnesty Courtcase (MSNBC)

Breaking News! Obama Loses Texas Amnesty Courtcase (MSNBC)

Friday, February 6, 2015

 

Obama’s toast.

Breaking news this morning: MSNBC admits the Judge of Texas Andrew Hanen will suspend Amnesty and Obama is defeated.

Spread the good news that all the little Obama bots have lost and their six year stand against the truth and law is over. 

The Bots can crawl back under the rock they crawled out from under.

Famous network MSNBC says the chances are slim of winning the courtcase in Texas where Judge Andrew Hanen will certainly suspend Obama’s Amnesty and infict a lethal blow to Obama’s already shaky hold on power.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/activists-prepare-the-worst-lawsuit-block-immigration-actions

Entry #777
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)

February 6, 2015, 2:49 pmAG nominee eyed in massive Obama cover-up

AG nominee eyed in massive Obama cover-up

Loretta Lynch tied to world's biggest banking scandal


Loretta Lynch

Loretta Lynch

NEW YORK – Attorney general nominee Loretta Lynch could be facing new confirmation problems in the U.S. Senate after being tied to the world’s biggest banking scandal, involving HSBC, which used its power to temporarily shut down WND.com as the news site was breaking a series of stories of the mega-bank’s money-laundering practices.

According to court papers filed Wednesday, Eric Holder’s Department of Justice appears to be stonewalling the release of documents that could implicate Lynch in a massive cover-up of Obama administration involvement in international money-laundering of Mexican cartel drug money.

 

John Cruz in interview with WND’s Jerome Corsi

In 2012, Lynch, as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, oversaw the investigation of drug-related international money laundering allegations against London-based HSBC Holdings LLC.

WND published a series articles documenting charges HSBC laundered billions of dollars that traced back to the Mexican drug cartels, culminating with a $1.256 billion fine paid to the U.S. government to end the investigation and avoid the filing of criminal charges.

The federal government’s unwillingness to prosecute HSBC was exposed by a former HSBC vice president and relationship manager in New York, John Cruz, who called the bank a “criminal enterprise.” Cruz was ignored by law enforcement authorities until he brought to WND 1,000 pages of customer account records that document his claims.

Cruz called the $1.92 billion fine the U.S. government imposed on HSBC “a joke” and filed a $10 million lawsuit for “retaliation and wrongful termination.” Whistleblowers in India and London joined Cruz in charging the HSBC settlement amounted to a massive cover up.

In response to WND’s reporting of Cruz’s evidence, HSBC lodged a complaint that blocked Internet access to one of the WND stories, and senior reporter Jerome Corsi was fired by the New York City investment firm he had worked with for two years as a senior managing director, Gilford Securities.

WND also reported evidence Holder’s Justice Department did not investigate money-laundering charges in deference to bank clients of his Washington-based law firm, where he was a partner prior to joining the Obama administration.

In addition, WND reported HSBC was engaged in a systematic scheme to defraud citizens of India who live abroad out of billion of dollars in investment accounts.

‘Continuing to cover up’

In a telephone interview Friday, Cruz said the Obama administration “is continuing to cover up its role in the HSBC money laundering scandal.”

“The IRS has blocked every legal effort I have made to be credited as a whistleblower in the HSBC billion-dollar settlement,” Cruz said. “It is impossible that the Obama administration did not know HSBC was laundering drug money for the Mexican cartels, because the documentation I had showed the laundered money passed through the federal wire-transfer services.”

Cruz charged the 1,000 pages of customer account records show HSBC relied on identity theft, capturing legitimate Social Security numbers that were then used to create bogus retail and commercial bank accounts. Through the accounts, HSBC employees systematically deposited and withdrew hundreds of millions of dollars on a daily basis, apparently without the knowledge of the identity-theft victims.

“When an individual finds out they got a loan they never knew about, 5 percent of that loan went to the accounting firm that made up the phony tax returns and the other 95 percent of that loan went to the manager,” he explained.

“One manager was involved in the transaction, another manager was involved in notarizing the transaction, and senior management was involved where they signed off permission to give the loans even when the loans get rejected by underwriting.”

In an attempt to make his charges public, Cruz in 2011 published a book titled “World Banking World Fraud: Using Your Identity.”

On July 17, 2012, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, released a majority and minority 330-page staff report titled “U.S. Vulnerabilities to Money Laundering, Drugs, and Terrorist Financing: HSBC Case History.” It documented HSBC’s role in illegally laundering hundreds of billions of dollars of drug money for the Mexican cartels and for terrorist-affiliated Middle Eastern groups.

“In an age of international terrorism, drug violence in our streets and on our borders, and organized crime, stopping illicit money flows that support those atrocities is a national security imperative,” said the committee’s chairman at the time, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.

Levin said HSBC “used its U.S. bank as a gateway into the U.S. financial system for some HSBC affiliates around the world to provide U.S. dollar services to clients while playing fast and loose with U.S. banking rules.”

HSBC paid the $1.256 billion fine in December 2012 in an deferred prosecution agreement with the Justice Department for violations of the Bank Secrecy Act, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the Trading with the Enemy Act.

 

Last Edited: February 6, 2015, 2:50 pm

Entry #776
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)

February 1, 2015, 8:58 pmFINALLY: Obama Implicated In MAJOR Scandal And The GOP Says There's Proof

FINALLY: Obama Implicated In MAJOR Scandal And The GOP Says There’s Proof

Sunday, February 2015

I’VE SAID SINCE 2012 I THINK OBAMA IS GOING DOWN…

I STAND BY THAT STATEMENT!

I am on record right after the whole Benghazi scandal went public as saying that I believe Barack Obama will not see the end of his second term in office. On my personal Facebook profile, I had been ranting and raving throughout a whole series of posts spanning about a week, and as more new information became available on Benghazi, my cursing increased along with the large number of inappropriate comments. Finally after about 10 days, someone close to me convinced me it was time to remove politics from my personal profile page and start a totally separate site for that. That was when the Last Great Stand came into being. At the time, due to the sheer vulgarity of the posts, I was watching my number of friends drop by like 10 friends an hour it seemed. It was definitely time to stop posting on my personal profile. 

I ended up making the prediction Obama would not finish a second term right after it came out that 400 STINGER MISSILES WERE DISCOVERED TO BE “MISSING” AFTER BEING “SECRETLY” MOVED THROUGH OUR EMBASSY IN BENGHAZI. Why the HELL were 400 STINGER MISSILES BEING FUNNELED THROUGH OUR EMBASSY ANYWAY? Even though our media BARELY covered the story, they did gloss over it once or twice, and that was what pushed me over the edge to predict that if Obama hasn’t already fled the country like the total bitch that he is, then by the time his second term should be ending, he will be sitting in a prison cell awaiting trial for TREASON.

Keep in mind that news broke before the other 97 Obama scandals broke later on that year, so the overall mood in Washington D.C. was if you question Obama, you’re a racist. Take a look at the flip attitude Hillary had in the video below with Senator Paul over Benghazi. PAY PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO RAND PAUL ASKING HILLARY A VERY SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT MISSILES BEING FUNNELED THROUGH THE EMBASSY. 

Allow me to go on record here: When Hillary goes back before Trey Gowdy’s panel in the near future, she’s going to wish she had a take back on the drivel she offered in this clip about the missiles. Time will tell right? For a quick reminder of the times… 

I can’t say for absolute certain what is going to be the final blow that sinks the S.S. Obama, but I do stick by my statement he’s going down before he finishes his second term. Ironically enough, this article has nothing to do with Benghazi. This is all about Obama deciding to WEAPONIZE the I.R.S. to ensure his victory in 2012, because otherwise he would have lost the election. If you need to have details on that, there are plenty in the links at the bottom. I think two things should have made it PAINFULLY obvious LONG before now that Obama was the one orchestrating the whole I.R.S. thing… but it requires a “smidgen” of common sense… something all liberals lack. 

The first thing that should have given it away the I.R.S. scandal came right from Obama was when we learned OBAMA’S CHIEF COUNSEL WAS DIRECTLY INVOLVED WITH THE TARGETING! HELLO! You’d have to be a special kind of imbecile to think the Chief Counsel to the U.S. President sneezes without asking first, but there never is a shortage of imbeciles in the liberal ranks are there? Uh, DUH! Of course it was Obama, but there was never a smoking gun. The other event that should have had people working on an investigation much more thoroughly before now, was when OBAMA HIRED A TOP NOTCH CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER. 

To a liberal: He was still the Messiah then. Facts weren’t about to get in the way of their plains. 

Obama Ship

Remember when Barack Obama said in an interview that there wasn’t “even a smidgen of corruption” within the IRS? Turns out that may not be entirely true (go figure) as the GOP has begun poking serious holes in the story of Obama and his administration regarding IRS corruption.

The dots have been outlined for anyone to connect them when it comes to Obama’s flagrantly illegal use of the IRS on multiple fronts. Not only did Obama use the IRS during campaign season to shut down several Conservative organizations by delaying their tax-exempt status, now the IRS is being accused of willingly handing over private taxpayer information at his request.

Lucky for Americans, we may just get some answers as the new GOP majority in the House has led to the investigation heating up once again and Obama being put in the hot seat. As reported by the Washington Times, an email has been sent to Obama demanding all communications between his administration and the IRS since 2010.

Last Edited: February 1, 2015, 9:01 pm

Entry #775
View and Add Comments  (1 Comment)

February 1, 2015, 2:28 pmRevealed: Bill Clinton, Mick Jagger and Donald Trump in black book of Prince Andrew's sex abuser fri

Revealed: Bill Clinton, Mick Jagger and Donald Trump in black book of Prince Andrew’s sex abuser friend Jeffrey Epstein

 

 

Saturday, Jan 31st 2015

Revealed: Bill Clinton, Mick Jagger and Donald Trump were in black book of Prince Andrew’s sex abuser friend Jeffrey Epstein

Court document reveals pages and pages of telephone numbers, home addresses and emails held by Epstein - including The Queen's residences

Address book includes string of other politicians - among them Kennedys, former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert and ex-new York mayor Michael Bloomberg

Epstein's former employee Alfredo Rodriguez discovered book - and called it 'The Holy Grail'

He kept it as security, fearing Epstein would make him 'disappear'

Epstein admitted he was a sex abuser and served 18 month sentence after plead deal to avoid full-scale criminal trial

Prince Andrew has been accused by victim of Epstein of having sex with her when she was underage and vehemently denies the allegation

No suggestion of any wrongdoing by any of the names in the book

By Sara Nathan for DailyMail.com and Martin Gould in Florida for DailyMail.com

Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire child abuser friend of Prince Andrew , cultivated an extraordinary range of contacts - from President Bill Clinton to Mick Jagger - it is revealed today.

Court documents obtained by MailOnline disclose how Epstein kept multiple phone numbers, email and home addresses for the great and the good on both sides of the Atlantic.

The document was presented as an exhibit as lawyers sought a court's permission to take evidence from Bill Clinton and his staff, for whom Epstein had 21 numbers, all under the name of his former advisor Doug Band.

Epstein also had multiple contact details for a string of celebrities, including the Rolling Stones frontman Sir Mick Jagger; Donald Trump's ex-wife Ivana and their daughter Ivanka; and a series of women recorded under 'massage' in the document, nicknamed 'The Holy Grail' by a former employee.

The contents of the document are disclosed by MailOnline as Prince Andrew, the Queen's second son, fights back against allegations that he had sex with Virginia Roberts - who claims she was kept by Epstein as a 'sex slave' - when she was a 17-year-old minor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Entry #774
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)

January 31, 2015, 8:37 pmTexans Make A Stand Against Muslims And Sharia Law In Texas

Texans Make A Stand Against Muslims And Sharia Law In Texas

Saturday, January 31, 2015

 

B4INREMOTE-aHR0cDovLzEuYnAuYmxvZ3Nwb3QuY29tLy0yQTlnNENqajJUQS9WTTE2VnFwbVdnSS9BQUFBQUFBQUJycy9WQnZld3RQdG1yWS9zMTYwMC9zaGFyaWElMkJsYXclMkJndW4ucG5n
 

Christian’s Stand in Texas against Muslim Fundraiser

 
 

It is astonishing how little the mainstream media is talking about the backlash Muslim events are receiving in Texas. God fearing Texans are protesting the use of public buildings for Muslim events. This was fueled by the Sharia-law board or tribunal that was convened in Breitbart, Texas.

This was reported by sonsoflibertymedia.com

Breitbart Texas confirmed Tuesday that “an Islamic Tribunal using Sharia law” is indeed operating in Texas. But not to worry: an attorney for the tribunal assures us that participation is “voluntary.” This is how it starts. This is how it started in the United Kingdom. When Sharia courts were instituted there, Muslim and non-Muslim officials alike all assured the British public and the world that they would be voluntary, restricted to matters involving non-criminal matters, and subject to the British courts. Any areas in which British law and Sharia law conflicted would be referred not to the Sharia courts, but to the British courts.

Then there was the event that took place in Austin, Texas. The 11th annual Muslim Capital Day. There were protestors there as well. But one woman went further.

Tim Brownreported:

A Christian woman took over the podium at the 11th annual Texas Muslim Capitol Day event on Thursday and declared, “Islam will never dominate the United States and, by the grace of God, it will never dominate Texas.” You already know this bold and brave woman from an earlier stand she took at the National Cathedral in Washington. Her name is Christine Weick.
 
The 50-year-old approached the podium, grabbed the microphone and said, “I proclaim the name of the Lord Jesus Christ over the Capitol of Texas. I stand against Islam and the false prophet Mohammad. Islam will never dominate the United States and by the grace of God, it will not dominate Texas.” The woman then walked away and joined the other protester.

Now christiannews.net has reported another Muslim event was disrupted.

Hundreds protested on Saturday outside of a Muslim conference in Garland, Texas that was intended to combat American “Islamophobia.”
“Stand With the Prophet Against Terror and Hate” was held at the Curtis Culwell Center on Saturday and was reportedly a sold out event.

This event was touted as an effort to raise money to defend the faith. Their website read:

“Prophet Muhammad inspires love and devotion in the hearts of Muslims (??!!), peace be upon him; unfortunately, Islamophobes have turned him into an object of hate,” it continues. “Hate groups in the U.S. have invested at least $160 million to attack our prophet and Islam. Isn’t it time we invested in defending our faith?” (Invest in WHAT?  More guns, scimitars and black hoods to hide behind like the cowards you are?)

I have said for years that this problem would continue to get worse. And though the Muslim believes that all the world will be Muslim, the media ignores such events. The Muslims are seeking peaceful and non-peaceful means of seeing this achieved, and the liberals want to separate them. We must stand like Christians in Texas have done. These protesters have not closed their eyes to the work the Islamists are doing. They have sought to stop the advance of Islam and Sharia law in Texas.

Christiannews.net further reports:

Tim Lee, who also is a Vietnam veteran, also told the publication that he feared what might become of the nation in light of the insurgency of Islam.
“America was built upon God and the word of God, not Allah, not Muhammad.” He said. “The Muslim religion is a religion of death. They kill people, innocent people, little children, chop heads off, and we are going to bring this to Garland, Texas?”

With the violence these kind of events have led to in Europe, how is these observations not apparent to all people? How do you explain the media’s blindness, except willful blindness?  Why, in an effort to be pluralistic (fools), do we have to accept those who will lead to our destruction? How do we not see that peace in Islam only comes through submission to Islam? (And even then they cannot get along even among themselves, dicing and slicing each other like cucumbers.)
 
COMMENTS
 
- Hooray for Molly White and hooray for these defenders of our U.S. Constitution!

“..“an Islamic Tribunal using Sharia law” is indeed operating in Texas.” WHY? And where is the law of Texas? Where are the leaders to protect and defend our Constitution and our citizens of the United States?
 
- If we were defending our Country and living according to the Constitution……this tyranny would not exist and yet…..IT DOES. Shame on you for our blindness and funding this TYRANNY! http://www.texemarrs.com/082012/sayanim_everywhere.htm
 
- It happens when you have a ‘president’ who doesn’t care about our country. His true colors are now showing true to most people. He has been against America from the day he was inaugurated.  Michel even said a while back, she was ashamed to be an American.  Impeach this thug and send both of them back to Kenya where he belongs.
 
- It happens when you have a ‘president’ who is a foreigner, a communist, a muslim. He has no allegiance to America because he is not an American.
 
- We ALL need to be well informed and vigilant before we succumb to the demands of Shariah law!
 
- We should NEVER succumb to Shariah Law !!!
 
- Sharia must never be allowed in America. In fact, it would be a blessing to the world if it were expunged completely. We must never, never succumb!
 
- This daesh that calls himself muslam in chief has lied, killed our wild life, put America’s wild horses in storage. They are stock piled so America is footing the bill to round them up to send them to slaughter silently.  The numbers don’t add up to what the BLM is telling us. obozo has turned the ‘Dept. of  Interior’ into acting like his own little killing mafia. They (BLM) are killing predators by heaping piles by having killing contests. One deserter for 5 taliban leaders. For the horses alone is 1 million + per round-up.  In prison 750,000 per month in care for these animals.  The cattlemen complained about the horses eating all thhe forage.  Now that cattle and sheep at 1.35 per cow, calf pair or 5 sheep same price. Take up more than 3/4 of the public lands – the places cattle and sheep go are turning to dust.  And get this - the cattle are on the same grounds the horses just vacated. Fracking has become out of control.  The air strikes that have been taking place - 1 million + per airstrike.  Every thing our military fought and lost their lives for was turned over by the cowards we trained to stay the course. i really don’t know what is wrong with our congressmen or senators, but this has to stop. I don’t give a <snip> about the color of his skin. Our law makers need to quit going over past wrongs and show this piece of s–t what Americans are made of and what it means to be an American.
 
- Well it starts at the top. Get rid of him first.
 
- I will spit on the muslim. They are an evil religion with hate in their hearts for anyone who is not islam. They DO NOT want to be your friend like they want you to think. They will get you to be their friend and then turn around and slit your throat. They kill all religions. There is only one way to them and that is by a false prophet. All enclaves, holes or parts of America that you find them coming together, we must fight them so there is NO SHARIA LAW (LAWS OF EVIL AND TERRORISM) or - where they take over like Dearborn, MI. - we Americans will fight you, for we hate you and what you stand for.
 
http://freedomforce.com/1341/christians-stand-texas-muslim-fundraiser/

Entry #773
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)

January 31, 2015, 7:42 amOpen Jihad Declared in Egypt Following State Dept. Meeting

Open Jihad Declared in Egypt Following State Dept. Meeting with Muslim Brotherhood-Aligned Leaders

Muslim Brotherhood call for ‘long, uncompromising jihad’
AP

AP

BY: Adam Kredo
January 30, 2015

The Muslim Brotherhood called for “a long, uncompromising jihad” in Egypt just days after a delegation of the Islamist group’s key leaders and allies met with the State Department, according to an official statement released this week.

Just days after a delegation that included two top Brotherhood leaders was hosted at the State Department, the organization released an official statement calling on its supporters to “prepare” for jihad, according to an independent translation of the statement first posted on Tuesday.

The State Department meeting was attended by a deputy assistant secretary for democracy, human rights, and labor and other State Department officials.

The Muslim Brotherhood statement also was issued just two days before a major terror attack Thursday in Egypt’s lawless Sinai region that killed at least 25.

“It is incumbent upon everyone to be aware that we are in the process of a new phase, where we summon what is latent in our strength, where we recall the meanings of jihad and prepare ourselves, our wives, our sons, our daughters, and whoever marched on our path to a long, uncompromising jihad, and during this stage we ask for martyrdom,” it states.

Preparation for jihad is a key theme of the Brotherhood’s latest call for jihad.

An image posted with the statement shows two crossing swords and the word “prepare!” between them. Below the swords it reads, “the voice of truth, strength, and freedom.” According to the statement, “that is the motto of the Dawa of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

The statement also invokes the well-known Muslim cleric Imam al-Bana, who founded the Brotherhood and has called for the death of Jews.

Imam al-Bana prepared the jihad brigades that he sent to Palestine to kill the Zionist usurpers and the second [Supreme] Guide Hassan al-Hudaybi reconstructed the ‘secret apparatus’ to bleed the British occupiers,” the statement says.

The Brotherhood’s renewed call for jihad comes at a time when current Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi is cracking down on the group and imprisoning many of its supporters, who notoriously engaged in violence following the ouster of Brotherhood-ally Mohamed Morsi.

Egypt experts said the timing of this declaration is an embarrassment for the State Department.

“The fact that the Brotherhood issued its call to jihad two days after its meeting at the State Department will be grist for endless anti-American conspiracy theories about a supposed partnership between Washington and the Brotherhood,” said Eric Trager, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). “The State Department should have foreseen what an embarrassment this would be.”

One member of that U.S. delegation, a Brotherhood-aligned judge in Egypt, posed for a picture while at Foggy Bottom in which he held up the Islamic group’s notorious four-finger Rabia symbol, according to his Facebook page.

“Now in the U.S. State Department. Your steadfastness impresses everyone,” reads an Arabic caption posted along with the photo.

Other members of that group included Gamal Heshmat, a leading member of the Brotherhood, and Abdel Mawgoud al-Dardery, a Brotherhood member who served as a parliamentarian from Luxor.

When asked on Tuesday evening to comment on the meeting, a State Department official told the Washington Free Beacon, “We meet with representatives from across the political spectrum in Egypt.”

The official declined to elaborate on who may have been hosted or on any details about the timing and substance of any talks.

The meeting was described by a member of the delegation, Maha Azzam as “fruitful,” according to one person who attended a public event in Washington earlier this week hosted by the group.

The call for jihad, while surprising in light of the Brotherhood’s attempts to appear moderate, is part and parcel of organization’s longstanding beliefs, Trager said.

“Muslim Brothers have been committing violent acts for a very long time,” Trager explained. “Under Morsi, Muslim Brothers tortured protesters outside the presidential palace. After Morsi’s ouster, they have frequently attacked security forces and state property. “

“But until now, the official line from the Brotherhood was to support this implicitly by justifying its causes, without justifying the acts themselves,” he added. “ So the Brotherhood’s open call to jihad doesn’t necessarily mean a tactical shift, but a rhetorical one.”

Terrorism expert and national security reporter Patrick Poole said he was struck by the clarity of the Brotherhood’s call.

“It invokes the Muslim Brotherhood’s terrorist past, specifically mentioning the ‘special apparatus’ that waged terror in the 1940s and 1950s until the Nasser government cracked down on the group, as well as the troops sent by founder Hassan al-Banna to fight against Israel in 1948,” he said.

“It concludes saying that the Brotherhood has entered a new stage, warns of a long jihad ahead, and to prepare for martyrdom,” Poole said. “Not sure how much more clear they could be.”

Poole wondered if the call for jihad would convince Brotherhood apologists that the group still backs violence.

“What remains to be seen is how this announcement will be received inside the Beltway, where the vast majority of the ‘experts’ have repeatedly said that the Brotherhood had abandoned its terrorist past, which it is now clearly reviving, and had renounced violence,” Poole said. “Will this development be met with contrition, or silence? And what says the State Department who met with these guys this week?”

The State Department did not respond to a request for comment before press time.

Entry #772
View and Add Comments  (1 Comment)
Previous Page  Page  of 53  Next Page