Monthly Archives: November 2015

11/30/15

Listen Live – Another Lawfare Loss for CAIR “Muslim-Free Zone” Declaration Can Not Be Suppressed

CAIR1

Robert Muise, Co-Founder & Senior Counsel of the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC), will be interviewed by John McCulloch on Tuesday December 1st at 6 PM EASTERN

CAIR2CAIR3

regarding another Lawfare loss by the Council on American Islam Relations (CAIR). This time a Federal Court granted the AFLC’s Motion to Dismiss CAIR’s law suit against a Florida gun shop’s declaration of its premises as a “Muslim Free Zone”.

“This dismissal was yet another AFLC victory against CAIR and its jihadi lawfare against patriotic Americans across the country.  This victory follows on the heels of a recent victory against CAIR in a Michigan federal court where CAIR’s subpoenas were quashed and CAIR’s nefarious client sanctioned for abusive practices.  CAIR was born from a jihadi terrorist conspiracy, and it has done little to distance itself from those bona fides.  CAIR is on notice: if you attempt to use the courts to conduct your civilizational jihad, AFLC will be there to defend law-abiding, patriotic Americans and our nation’s national security.  We will match and defeat your civilization jihad with our constitutional lawfare in every courtroom across the nation.”

Listen Live online – http://saleminteractivemedia.com/ListenLive/player/WDTKAM

Call-in to talk with Robert and John – 800-923-9385

11/29/15

Treason, Cowardice, and the Islamic Invasion: Why States Must Revitalize The Militia

By Publius Huldah

To All State Governors and State Legislators:

War is coming to America.  Obama is importing young able-bodied males to make civilizational jihad on us; and Congress can’t summon up the moral courage to stop him.

To see what is ahead for us, watch this 20 minute video.  It depicts the Islamic takeover which is right now going on throughout Europe as European countries are being repopulated by millions of young able-bodied Muslim males (euphemistically called “refugees”) who are explicit about their intention to breed the native Europeans out of existence, and replace the European cultures with Islamic culture.

And Obama is bringing it here.

This paper discusses the two courses of action set forth in Federalist Paper No. 46 for situations such as this: (1) The States must refuse to cooperate with the federal government; but if that doesn’t solve the problem, (2) The States must use their State Militia to defend their State and Citizens.

Invaders are not “Refugees” or “Immigrants”

Those pushing for an Islamic takeover of Europe and North America are referring to these able-bodied young Muslim males as “refugees”.  The use of that term brings the Muslims who are brought into the United States within the federal Refugee Resettlement Act.  And since the Constitution delegates power over immigration to Congress, and Congress re-delegated refugee policy to the President, the States must submit to Obama’s Will and accept the “refugees” he forces on them. Thus goes the specious argument recently made by Ian Millhiser.

But we will look at the Truth.

What does our Constitution say about Immigration and Naturalization?

Immigration (or migration) pertains to new people coming to this Country to live.1 Naturalization refers to the process by which an immigrant becomes a Citizen.

Our Constitution does delegate power over immigration and naturalization to Congress.  Article I, §9, clause 1, delegates to Congress (commencing January 1808) power to control migration. 2 Article I, §8, clause 4, delegates to Congress power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.

But what is going on now with the importation of large numbers of able-bodied young Muslim males is not “immigration” as contemplated by our Constitution.  It is an act of war being committed against the People of the United States by their President.  The plan is to overthrow our Constitutional Republic and set up an Islamic Caliphate over America. 3

That is Treason – it is Insurrection.  It is not “immigration”, and it is not “refugee resettlement”.

The States must refuse to cooperate

Michael Boldin’s recent informative article explains how the federal resettlement program works: The federal government coordinates resettlement of “refugees” with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) located within the States, and thus circumvents state and local governments.  Accordingly, the States should promptly stop all such NGO involvement; take control of the programs themselves; and then refuse to cooperate with the federal government.

James Madison, Father of our Constitution, spells this out in Federalist No. 46 (7th para).  Respecting  unpopular acts of the federal government:

“…the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps, refusal to co-operate with the officers of the Union; the frowns of the executive magistracy of the State; the embarrassments created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any State, difficulties not to be despised; would form, in a large State, very serious impediments;  and where the sentiments of several adjoining States happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.”

But if the federal government persists, then the States must move to the next Step.

Our Constitution Imposes the Duty on the Federal Government to protect us from Invasion

Article IV, §4, requires The United States to protect each of the States against Invasion:

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion…” [emphasis mine]

In Federalist No. 43 (3rd para under 6.), Madison says of this provision:

“A protection against invasion is due from every society to the parts composing it…” [emphasis mine]

Article I, §8, clause 15 delegates to Congress the power:

“to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.

Article 1, §8, clause 16 delegates to Congress the power to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia. The States retain the power to appoint the Officers and conduct the training.

Article II, §2, clause 1 makes the President Commander in Chief of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.  [But remember:  the federal government may call forth the Militia only for the three purposes listed in Art. I, §8, cl. 15].

But the federal government hasn’t called forth the Militia to protect the States from the Islamic invasion. To the contrary, the President is importing the invaders and foisting them on the States.

So! What are States and The People to do?  Because the President is aligned with the invaders, and Congress filled with moral cowards,  must we passively submit to having ourselves and our Christian and Jewish children killed, and then let our surviving burka dressed daughters and granddaughters be handed over to the clitoris cutters?

No!  The People have the Natural Right of self-defense; and the States have the reserved Power to defend their Citizens.  With the State Militia, The People and the States have the means to exercise this Natural Right and reserved Power.

The States must Revitalize their State Militia

What is the Militia?  As Dr. Edwin Vieira’s excellent series 4 on the Militia and how it guarantees the right to keep and bear arms shows, the Militia has a long history in America.  That history began with the English settlements in the early 1600s.  Every free male was expected to be armed and prepared at all times to protect himself, his family, and his community.  Laws in the Colonies gave effect to this requirement.  So at the time of the drafting of our Constitution in 1787, everyone knew of this 150 year long history of free American males being required to be armed, trained, and ready at a moment’s notice to answer the call of Duty.

Accordingly, the above identified “militia clauses” were written into our Constitution of 1787.

In 1792, Congress implemented these militia clauses and passed “An Act more effectually to provide for the National Defense by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States”.  This Act required all able-bodied male citizens (with a few exceptions) between the ages of 18 and 45 to enroll in their State Militia, get a rifle and ammunition pouch, and train.

As Section 1 of the Act shows, the adult able-bodied male Citizens of a State are The Members of their State Militia.  So, continuing the long-standing colonial tradition, Members of Congress in 1792 thought it such a fine idea that all male citizens be armed and trained and members of their State Militia, they required it by federal law!

So! As Art. I, §8, cl. 15 shows, Congress is authorized to provide for calling the Militia into national service to “execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.  But what if the federal government refuses to act?

Alexander Hamilton provides the answer in Federalist No. 29. Hamilton shows that one of the purposes of the Militia is to protect the Citizens of the States from threats to their liberties posed by the federal government (7th & 12th paras); and that the States’ reservation of power to appoint the Officers secures to them an influence over the Militia greater than that of the federal government (9th para).

And on the use of the Militia to repel Invasions, Hamilton says (13th para):

“In times of insurrection, or invasion, it would be natural and proper that the militia of a neighboring State should be marched into another, to resist a common enemy, or to guard the republic against the violence of faction or sedition…”

True, it was contemplated that the “United States” would be the entity which protects the States against Invasion (Art. IV, §4).  But when the federal government has demonstrated its determination that the States ARE TO BE OVERRUN BY INVADERS, then the People have the natural right to defend themselves, and their States have the retained Power to employ the Militia to defend them from those into whose hands the federal government has demonstrated its determination to deliver them.

The States are within their retained Sovereign Power to call up their State Militia to fend off invaders.  Article I, §10, last clause, is an expression of this retained sovereign Power of States of self-Defense:

“No State shall … engage in War, unless actually invaded…”

Clearly, the States may use their State Militia to engage in War to defend the States from Invasion.5

James Madison spoke to the same effect as Hamilton respecting federal tyranny.  In Federalist No. 46 (9th para), Madison speaks of a federal government so consumed with madness that it sends its regular army against the States:

“…Let a regular army … be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. … [To the regular army] would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence.  It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. …  Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms [an insurmountable] barrier against the enterprises of ambition…” [boldface mine]

Look to Your State Constitution for Provisions re Your State Militia

Article VIII of the Constitution for the State of Tennessee provides for Tennessee’s Militia.  Consistent with the tradition which has existed in this Country since the early 1600s, all Tennessee Citizens are members of this Militia.  Article I, §28, TN Constitution says:

“That no citizen of the state shall be compelled to bear arms, provided he will pay an equivalent, to be ascertained by law.”

Read your State Constitution.  What does it say about the Militia?  What do the implementing State Statutes say?  Is your State Militia active?  Why not?  For information on revitalizing your State Militia, see Dr. Vieira’s three part series, “Are You Doing Your Constitutional Duty For “Homeland Security”?

Conclusion

Madison closes his magnificent 9th paragraph in Federalist No. 46 with this:

“…Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.” [emphasis mine]

But we became “debased subjects of arbitrary power”.  So now, will we lay down before the Invaders and Insurrectionists and those in our federal government who aid and abet them?  Or we will man up, revitalize our State Militia, and show the world that we still have some “free and gallant Citizens of America” in this land?

Endnotes:

1 Our Framers contemplated that immigration would be restricted to people who shared our culture and values – e.g., Federalist No. 2, 5th para.

But Americans got conned into believing that an ideal culture is multicultural.  Thus, with Teddy Kennedy’s immigration reform act of 1965, our borders were opened to all.  We congratulated ourselves on our new virtues of “tolerance” and “diversity”.  But the goal of the multiculturalists was to eradicate our unique Culture – we were too gullible to see it.  So now, the enemy is inside the gates, and more are coming in.  And Islam doesn’t tolerate multiculturalism.

2 “Open borders” adherents bristle at the assertion that Congress has constitutional authority to restrict immigration.  They insist that Art. I, §9, cl. 1 addresses only the importation of slaves and says nothing about free immigrants.  But the text distinguishes between “migrations” and “importations”, and the Duty is levied on “importations”, not “migrations”.  Slaves, being “property”, were “imported”.  Free Europeans “migrated”.   The power of the States to determine such persons as it was proper to admit, expired January 1808. There are various letters and speeches from our early days confirming this.  I’ll write it up when I get time (if this doesn’t turn on the light).  For now, see Federalist No. 42 (6th para):

“…Attempts have been made to pervert this clause [Art. I, §9, cl. 1] into an objection against the Constitution, by representing it on one side as a criminal toleration of an illicit practice [slavery], and on another as calculated to prevent voluntary and beneficial emigrations from Europe to America. I mention these misconstructions, not with a view to give them an answer, for they deserve none, but as specimens of the manner and spirit in which some have thought fit to conduct their opposition to the proposed government.” [boldface mine]

Our Framers understood that the national government must be able to determine who is allowed to come here. That’s why Art. I, §9, cl. 1 delegates to Congress power to control immigration, commencing January 1808.  And isn’t one of your complaints against the federal government that it has refused for so long to control our Borders?

3 See the website for The Center for Security Policy (Frank J. Gaffney) HERE.   There you can read The Plan of the Muslim Brotherhood to infiltrate and take over all American Institutions. They are working to make this Country part of a global Islamic caliphate.  Open your eyes NOW.

4 Do read all 8 of Dr. Vieira’s papers in this series.  They get very moving.

5 “Troops” as in Art. I, §10, last clause, are professional full-time soldiers.  States may not keep “Troops” absent consent of Congress.  But the States’ Militia is a permanent State institution.  The States retain their pre-constitutional powers over their Militia, subject only to the federal government’s limited supremacy set forth in the 3 Militia clauses [See Part 2 of Dr. Vieira’s paper HERE.] PH

11/29/15

The Curious Case of Black Advocates and MSM Hatred for Dr Ben Carson

By: Lloyd Marcus

Ben Carson

To you remaining black members of my family who take issue with me being an outspoken black conservative Republican, I ask you ponder the following. Comedian Arsenio Hall was known for his comedic bit, “Things That Make You Go Hmmm…” Well, here are a few facts regarding self proclaimed black advocates and the mainstream media’s disdain for Dr Ben Carson that make you go hmmm.

Summarizing, Dr Carson’s life is remarkable and inspirational. He grew up fatherless in the hood with his hardworking single mom. She turned off the TV and ordered Ben to read and give her written book reports. Though illiterate, Carson’s mom pretended to read his book reports. This troubled black kid from the hood overcame his demons and grew up to become a world renowned neurosurgeon. A movie was made about Dr Carson’s life titled, “Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story” starring Oscar winner Cuba Gooding Jr as Dr Carson. http://bit.ly/1SnKzLB

If Dr Martin Luther King, Jr were alive today, Dr Carson would epitomize his dream of blacks (Negros) being proud dignified contributors to society in America. So why does Black Lives Matter, the mainstream media, the NAACP and the Democratic Party despise and seek to destroy Dr Carson? Since entering the race for the White House, self-proclaimed black advocates and media launched an all-out no-tactic-or-lie-is-too-low campaign to knock Dr Carson out of the race for president. http://bit.ly/1MVpfJK

But guess who supposed advocates for black empowerment rallied behind and transformed into heroic icons of civil rights? The answer is black criminals; Treyvon Martin, Michael Brown and Freddie Gray. Keep in mind that the supposed advocates for blacks that I mentioned hate Dr Carson. Shouldn’t that make a thinking black person go hmmm?

The Black Lives Matter movement was founded on the lie that a white cop shot Michael Brown while surrendering with his hands up. Based on the evidence, Brown robbed a convenience store, assaulted the clerk http://bit.ly/1PSbIsj and was shot attacking a cop inside his police car. Brown was trying to take the officer’s gun. http://bit.ly/1NymQKy

And yet, the mainstream media and Democrats ignored the grand jury’s report and continues to promote the lie that Brown was gunned down by a racist white cop while on his way to his grandma’s house. Black Lives Matter, mainstream media and other so-called black advocates persist in ignoring facts; such as in only 35 years 324,000 blacks have been killed by fellow blacks. As a matter of fact, 93% of blacks are killed by other blacks. http://bit.ly/1NSDXRE Racist white cops “ain’t” the problem y’all.

Drug dealer Freddie Gray had a record as long as your arm. http://bit.ly/1lOh0bM Treyvon Martin was also a prolific thug. http://bit.ly/1NgbZmG So again I ask, why would so-called advocates for black empowerment make saints of black criminals while relentlessly attempting to demonize Dr Carson?

Dr Carson’s path of education, hard work, Christian faith and right choices led him to extraordinary success and possibly even the Oval Office. Martin, Brown and Gray’s criminal choices made them menaces to society and led to their early deaths. Wouldn’t true black advocates encourage black youths to mimic Dr Carson rather that elevating criminals Martin, Brown and Gray to black superstar status?

Common sense tells us that self proclaimed black advocates and the mainstream media obviously have another agenda other than their stated justice/empowerment for blacks.

The truth is these slime-ball so-called black advocates and media hacks do not give a rats’ derriere about blacks. If they did, they would honestly deal with the self-induced issues plaguing the black community; epidemic school dropouts, drug abuse, black on black crime and out-of-wedlock births. But no, black advocates and media would rather blame conservatives, Republicans and white America.

Black Lives Matter, mainstream media and Democrats want blacks to conclude that Martin, Brown and Gray were the products of being victimized by racist white America; particularly conservatives and Republicans. That is a lie. Life is about choices. Circumstances tend to reveal who you are inside.

My 87 year old black dad also grew up poor and fatherless in the Baltimore hood. As a little boy, Dad chose to earn money shining shoes on weekends at the Greyhound Bus Station. One of his buddies chose crime; two kids in similar circumstances making different choices. Dad was taught responsibility at an early age. I could hear the pride in dad’s voice as he told me how he spent his first earnings. Out of $1.25 he made one weekend, dad paid rent to Aunt Nee, took in a movie with candy and popcorn and purchased a t-shirt. Dad bragged to a friend, “Yeah man, I’m buyin’ my own clothes now.”

I heard through the family grapevine that some relatives are embarrassed by me publicly proclaiming that blacks are not victims of racist America. To them I say, “Sorry guys, but we are not.” My goodness, all one has to do is look around.

Racism along with every other sin will exist until Jesus returns. However, the notion that blacks are suffering, held back, routinely murdered by cops and victimized by “white privilege” is absurd. These narratives are manipulative tools to keep blacks voting for Democrats. Suckered blacks believe voting for Democrats will keep racist white America and Republicans at bay. After 50 years of voting for Democrats, black life continues to spiral downward in cites controlled by Democrats. http://bit.ly/1jnIsey

Blacks from the hood like my dad and Dr Carson who achieve their American dreams contradict the Democrats’ and mainstream media’s it-sucks-to-be-black-in-America story line. The undeniable truth is the American dream is alive and well for all who choose to go for it. The only real stumbling block for blacks is Obama’s economy. http://nws.mx/1Pg3mup

So why has the mainstream media sacrificed its journalistic principles to help Democrats win black votes? The answer is the media and Democrats are on the same page; socialist/progressive – both desire an America in which the majority is dependent upon and controlled by a tyrannical big government. Oh and both have a bug up their derriere about Christians. Democrats and mainstream media will vehemently deny it, but it is true.

In essence, elitist mainstream media and Democrats want George Orwell’s novel “1984” – a nation of supplicants subservient to Big Brother. These truths should make logical thinkers go hmmm.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
LloydMarcus.com

11/28/15

The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results – 11/28/15

The Watcher’s Council

Ted Cruz Thanksgiving

Republican presidential candidate, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, left, speaks during the Presidential Family Forum as Ben Carson listens, Friday, Nov. 20, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

Republican presidential candidate, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, left, speaks during the Presidential Family Forum as Ben Carson listens, Friday, Nov. 20, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match-up.

I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left. – Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher

I have neither curiosity, interest, pain nor pleasure, in anything, good or evil, they can say of me. I feel only a slight disgust, and a sort of wonder that they presume to write my name. – Percy Bysshe Shelley

The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses. – Malcolm X

Republicans and Democrats are obsessed with making sure that illegal aliens are granted citizenship. The American people are not. They’re concerned about jobs, the economy, debt. They’re concerned about a plundering country. They’re concerned about a decaying, dying country. – Rush Limbaugh

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1ndmEdQX3AM/Tv04FWJ3kTI/AAAAAAAAAzg/P-WNaJRST6Q/s400/Bookworm%2B3.jpg

This week’s winning essay, Bookworm Room’s The Wall Street Journal’s hatchet job on Ted Cruz, is pretty much about what the title implies it is. As Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz continues to rise in the polls, like Donald Trump he becomes a target for character assassination and trial by media… not just for his conservative principles, but in particular for his positions on illegal migration. That’s an issue dear to the heart of both Leftist Democrats and as we see here, the GOP establishment. Bookworm takes this effort by Kim Strassel apart in her usually erudite fashion. Here’s a slice:

I’ve made no secret of the fact that I support Ted Cruz. I realize he’s not perfect, but no candidate is. What matters to me is that his political values most closely align with mine, that he’s not scared of a fight (and, especially, he’s not scared of the media), and that he is truly smarter than just about everyone else out there. I learned yesterday, though, that Kimberley Strassel at the Wall Street Journal most definitely does not like Cruz. She wrote a savage hit piece on him essentially blaming him for ISIS’s ability to spread throughout the United States. (That spread, of course, has nothing to do with Obama’s open borders policy and the contempt he shows for every person and idea that suggests that Islam might have a problem.)

But before honing in on her perception about Cruz’s alleged security failures, Strassel first lambastes him as a rank opportunist who cares only about self-aggrandizement and refuses to take care of the GOP’s needs:

The senator’s supporters adore him because they see him in those moments when he has positioned himself as the hero. To them he is the stalwart forcing a government shutdown over ObamaCare. He’s the brave soul calling to filibuster in defense of gun rights. He’s the one keeping the Senate in lame-duck session to protest Mr. Obama’s unlawful immigration orders.

Mr. Cruz’s detractors see a man who engineers moments to aggrandize himself at the expense of fellow conservatives. And they see the consequences. They wonder what, exactly, Mr. Cruz has accomplished.

ObamaCare is still on the books. It took the GOP a year to recover its approval ratings after the shutdown, which helped deny Senate seats to Ed Gillespie in Virginia and Scott Brown in New Hampshire. Mr. Obama’s immigration orders are still on the books. The courts gained a dozen liberal judges, all with lifetime tenure, because the lame-duck maneuver gave Democrats time to cram confirmation votes through. Mr. Cruz’s opportunism tends to benefit one cause: Mr. Cruz.

So it’s Cruz’s fault we have Obamacare and it’s his fault because . . . he took a principled stand against it? (I admired that stand when he took it and I still do.) The fact is that Cruz is one of the few Republicans in Congress who actually stood by the party planks and actual promises he and other alleged conservatives made to voters since 2008. He is the only one in Congress on the right who shows the slightest bit of spine. So when Strassel writes, “but Obamacare is still on the books,” the real question shouldn’t be “How do we blame Ted Cruz?” Instead, the real question should be “How did this happen when Republicans control Congress and the purse strings?”

Strassel’s claim that, following Cruz’s principled stand, it took Republicans “a year to recover,” is patently ridiculous. Republicans have enjoyed greater electoral success in the past six years than the party ever has — and she is going to blame defeats in Virginia and Massachusetts on Cruz. That is infuriating.

The above insults are just throat-clearing for Strassel’s real issue: Ted Cruz has made us less safe than we should be because he refuses to authorize the government to turn America into even more of a police state with endless spying on citizens:

Mr. Cruz regaled the crowd about how he had opposed a proposal to intervene in Syria and how he doesn’t support “nation building.” To this he could add a few others: He has consistently voted against defense reauthorization bills that enable troop funding. And this spring he ginned up support to pass a law that undercuts the National Security Agency’s ability to use metadata to root out terror plots. Mr. Cruz, citing “privacy rights,” co-sponsored the bill, along with Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Al Franken and Barbara Boxer.

[snip]

It may have seemed like a good idea to Mr. Cruz at the time. But after Paris, he finds himself with a national security agenda that is increasingly at odds with the public will. Florida’s Marco Rubio (who opposed the NSA bill) had fun this week reminding Americans of the stark foreign-policy differences between himself and the Texan, noting that Mr. Cruz has supported laws that “weaken U.S. intelligence.” Mr. Rubio, who has delivered at least 10 major foreign-policy addresses in the past few years, is running as the unabashed hawk, calling for robust new U.S. world leadership. Mr. Cruz may have walked himself into playing the counterpoint—a Rand Paul stand-in.

Strassel is snide — and she is wrong. Cruz is absolutely right to place limits on the NSA and meta-data. As is developed at some length my post about a talk by Mary Theroux of the Independent Institute, all of us should be deeply suspicious about our government at this point — a government that hoards people’s information like a miser and that is becoming ever more out of control and the master, not the servant, in this country:

The government’s spying on American citizens is so enormous we literally cannot comprehend its scope. The data collection (which is in the multiple zetabytes) grossly violates our inherent Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. NSA employees before Snowden tried to blow the whistle on this beginning around the year 2000, and got ferociously persecuted by the government because of their efforts. Snowden’s spectacular leak broke that log jam.

But here’s the really important thing that Theroux said: The government gets so much data, it’s useless for the stated purpose of crime and terrorism prevention. As it comes in, it’s simply so much white noise. It certainly didn’t stop 9/11 or the Boston bombing. In this regard, think of England, which has more CCTVs per capita than any other country in the 1st world, and maybe in any world. Nevertheless, these cameras do nothing to prevent crime. As the number of cameras has increased, so has the crime rate. The data is useful only after the fact, to help (sometimes) apprehend the criminal.

Well, one can argue that ex post facto apprehension is a good thing — but it’s a good thing only if there’s been a clear violation of a pretty well known law (e.g., don’t beat people to death or don’t rob a jewelry store). We’re looking at something much more sinister here. Think of the volume of law in America and, worse, think of the staggering volumes of rules interpreting those laws.

As Theroux noted, Stalin’s chief of police famously said (and I’m paraphrasing) give me the man and I can find the crime. We Americans have a government that’s sitting on data that can be used to criminalize us after the fact the current government (Republican or Democrat or Third Party) doesn’t like us. It’s like a landmine under every American.

No thinking citizen should trust a government that produces a Lois Lerner and then protects her from indictment, even though at least one of the charges against her is that she released private data the IRS held to Democrats for partisan purposes. Nor are abusive employees the only problem. Don’t forget that the government is so dysfunctional that the Office of Personnel Management allowed personal information for millions of employees (including social security numbers and security check information) to get into hackers’ hands. Our government has proven itself to be both corrupt and incompetent, yet Strassel excoriates Cruz for refusing to give it an even longer leash.

Here’s the reality: All that meta-data the government collected has yet to be used to stop a single terrorist incident. All it does is collect more and more information that our government can use against us. It is an Orwellian nightmare that Stalin and other authoritarians of whatever stripe could only dream of having. If it had stopped the Tsarnaev brothers, or any of the other attacks on our soil, perhaps we should feel differently, but there is no evidence that it has made any real difference.

Our Founding Fathers had several guiding principles, one of which is that the good intentions of a benevolent government could not be trusted in perpetuity. The Founders loved George Washington and would have elected him King, but they were worried that a George Washington III might prefer to be a tyrant.

Much more good stuff at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Victor Davis Hanson with Obama Has Just Begun, submitted by Fausta’s Blog. Hanson, a classist and historian as well as a stunning writer tells us baldly that this last year of Barack Hussein Obama’s presidency is likely to be the most dangerous for the country – and why. This is a must read.

Here are this week’s full results. A number of our members – Fausta, GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD, Nice Deb, The Noisy Room and Puma By Design were unable to vote this week, but were not subject to the 2/3 vote penalty:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning when we reveal the weeks’ nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it… or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

11/28/15

USA TransNational Report 11-28-2015

USA Transnational Report USA-based, Worldwide Coverage and Analysis

Interview with Sheriff Marcus Kohan! 8 AM EST THIS SATURDAY (11/28) MORNING!

Topics to be addressed:

The “New Order” in the Middle East – post shooting down of Russian war plane U.S. State Department – Iran never signed the nuclear deal! What now? How are so-called “refugees” being brought to the United States? Who are they? New Oathkeepers efforts in Pennsylvania to organize local communities for safety in perilous times & Obama’s undermining of U.S. and international security…

11/28/15

Media Bias That Makes You Sick

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

On Thanksgiving Day, it is appropriate to say thank you for Accuracy in Media and the rise of conservative media.

The cause of “media activism,” now popular at some American colleges and universities, is taking an ominous and interesting turn. If this trend continues, the moderators of the stacked anti-Republican CNBC presidential debate will look like moderates.

Quite literally, the purpose of this new kind of “media activism” is to make you sick.

A so-called “Media Activism Research Conference” is being held next year in Canada to expand even further the “progressive” causes available to journalists. The event is described as a “Gathering for Grassroots and Transformative Media” at Lakehead University and “an opportunity to develop collaborations and networks among anti-capitalist, feminist, anti-racist, trans, queer and Indigenous alternative media activists and activist-researchers by sharing knowledge, skills and experiences on grassroots and transformative alternative media.”

Brace yourselves for one of the seminars, which concerns “Queer anarchist autonomous zones and publics: Direct action vomiting against homonormative consumerism.”

According to my research, and I may not have gotten to the bottom of this, it seems as if media activists in Canada are exploring vomiting as a form of social protest against capitalism. The concept of “social justice” is taking on very strange and bizarre adventures in academia.

One member of the Anarchist Studies Network defines vomit itself “as emblematic of the unsustainable contradictions inherent in capitalism, and of the body’s rebellion.”

A Lakehead University professor, Dr. Sandra Jeppesen, actually wrote an article entitled, “Projectile: stories about puking.” Apparently, to vomit is to reject the capitalist system.

Jeppesen is the point of contact for this field of study. Identified as a professor in media studies, cultural studies and anarchist theory, she was awarded almost $500,000 in research funding from the federal government of Canada two years ago, in order to “study how social activists are using ‘cutting-edge’ digital technologies to further social causes around the world and what the rest of us can learn from them.”

In fact, this forthcoming media conference is underwritten by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of the government of Canada.

If you are as curious as I am, you may find it interesting that “anti-consumerist vomiting” is described in a broader context, and that “Global anarchist movements and queer politics are integrating in mutually informing ways. The characteristics of this synthesis include liberatory theories and practices of embodied genders and sexualities in private and public, direct actions to visibilize and extend queer publics, and queer intersections with capitalism, the environment, race, disability, public space, private property and citizenship, among others.”

I don’t know how to precisely translate this material, except I did discover that “liberatory pedagogy” refers to “educational theories and practices intended to raise learners’ critical consciousness concerning oppressive social conditions.”

A paper on the topic explains, “As students and educators join the struggles to recognize oppression and domination within the sphere of popular culture, individuals whose voices were once silenced will become heard. For this reason, liberatory pedagogy seeks to empower individuals and encourage them to formulate reflective communities in and outside of the classroom that highlight social justice.”

An entire paper by Jeppesen, entitled, “Queer anarchist autonomous zones and publics: Direct action vomiting against homonormative consumerism,” goes into detail on this. I almost got sick reading it.

Meanwhile, here in the United States, things aren’t too much better. Some of our “progressive” journalists are still recognizing—and being recognized by—Playboy founder and publisher Hugh Hefner, whose Playboy Mansion was a notorious hangout for such personalities as accused serial sex abuser Bill Cosby.

Some “progressives” consider Hefner a champion of the First Amendment.

Malkia Cyril, Executive Director of the Center for Media Justice, was just given a 2015 Hugh M. Hefner Foundation First Amendment Award. We are told that during her acceptance speech, “In a small ceremony that took place beside the Playboy mansion’s infamous grotto, Malkia started off by thanking her mother, a former Black Panther who passed away in 2005, and the nearly 200 organizations that make up the Media Action Grassroots Network.”

In the Playboy Mansion and its “infamous grotto,” a place known for sexual orgies, it appears that the notorious Bill Cosby exercised a lot of power over women, some of whom may have been drugged.

Nevertheless, Cyril seemed proud of the award and proclaimed, “My mother was a member of the Black Panther Party in New York City. She ran the Party’s Breakfast Program and was editor of their national newspaper, but she was my first teacher. I sat on my mother’s shoulders at rallies for undocumented migrants, queer youth rights, women’s reproductive freedom. And I sit on her shoulders today.”

The Black Panther Party was notorious for targeting police officers as “pigs.”

The so-called “grassroots organizations” of the Media Action Grassroots Network include the George Soros-funded Ella Baker Center, formerly headed by Van Jones, the Obama Green Jobs Czar who lost his job when his communist background came to light. He is now a CNN commentator.

The Hefner awards are determined by “judges” from the media, who in the past have included Margaret Carlson, a journalist at Bloomberg News; Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU’s Washington Legislative Office, and Katrina vanden Heuvel, Editor and Publisher, The Nation.

Each award includes $5,000 and a commemorative plaque. The awards represent just some of the millions of dollars over the years that Hugh Hefner has paid to the media and various “progressive groups.”

Taking money from a pornographer and vomiting to protest capitalism are some of the current “progressive” trends in the media.

And you thought media bias couldn’t get any worse?

11/27/15

Oil Jobs Lost: 250,000 And Counting, Texas Likely To See Massive Layoffs Soon

Crude oil just capped off a third straight week of declines, as WTI nears the $40 per barrel threshold. Goldman Sachs is once again raising the possibility of oil dipping into the $20s per barrel.

That spells more pain for the energy sector. Many companies have already slashed spending and culled their payrolls, but the total number of job losses continues to climb.

According to Graves & Co., an industry consultant, oil and gas companies have laid off more than 250,000 workers around the world, a tally that will rise if oil prices remain in the dumps.

“I was surprised it’s gotten this far,” Graves & Co.’s John Graves told Bloomberg in an interview. In an eye-catching statistic that highlights who exactly is bearing the brunt of the downturn, Graves says that oilfield service companies account for 79 percent of the job losses.

Still, upstream E&P companies are also being substantially squeezed by another plunge in oil prices. According to an analysis by the Texas Alliance of Energy Producers, a new round of layoffs could be underway in Texas, for example. The Texas Alliance predicted that the first drop in oil prices last year would lead to 40,000 to 50,000 layoffs in Texas. But the renewed drop since the end of the summer could force many more cuts. Right now, the group is putting a conservative estimate at 56,000 job cuts so far, but they say the real tally is probably higher.

Beyond oilfield services and E&Ps are not the only ones feeling the heat. Pipeline companies are also starting to lay off workers as well. Last week Enbridge confirmed that it was laying off 500 workers and leaving 100 positions unfilled, according to the Financial Post. The job losses account for about 5 percent of Enbridge’s North American workforce.

Fellow Canadian pipeline company TransCanada says that it will be issuing pink slips as well. While TransCanada confirmed that it would cut payroll, it declined to put an exact number on how many people would lose their jobs. TransCanada, reeling from the rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline, is struggling to get several major pipeline projects through the permitting phase, although it just won the go-ahead to build a large natural gas pipeline in Mexico.

Article Source: http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Oil-Jobs-Lost-250000-And-Counting-Texas-Likely-To-See-Massive-Layoffs-Soon.html

By Charles Kennedy of Oilprice.com

11/26/15

Giving Thanks for the Republican Establishment

Doug Ross @ Journal

Today I give thanks for my family, my friends, my colleagues and our great country, especially those who serve in our military, intelligence, law enforcement and first responder communities to protect us. I give thanks that I was fortunate enough to be born in this wonderful nation, the most magnificent society on the face of the Earth.

Today I also give thanks to the Republican Party, its leaders, and its media. I give thanks to the party’s agenda — in the wake of the Mississippi Senate primary and numerous derogatory remarks — as it made clear it sought to wage war against us. It is a fact that the Republican establishment seeks to expel conservatives from the party.

Did you drop your Republican registration to express your disgust? Awesome — you did exactly what the establishment wanted, so you couldn’t vote for an insurgent candidate like Donald Trump in your state primary.

Are you a ‘Cruz Birther’? Super, you’re burning calories on an issue that no legal expert — on the left or the right — believes has any validity.

Do you think a President Rubio would lift a finger to seal the border? Pretty cool; but may I suggest that you lay off the psychedelic mushrooms?

Do you believe a President Fiorina, Christie, Kasich or Paul would be any different than Jeb!when it comes to illegal immigration or reducing the size of government? Excellent: I have some land in Whitewater, Arkansas I’d like to sell you — it’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity!

My friends, there are only three candidates left in the race who operate outside of the GOP establishment: they are Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump.

It’s important to understand one, simple fact: should one of these three outsiders become President, they will also become the de facto head of the Republican Party.

That’s right: in one fell swoop, an anti-establishment candidate could take over and control the GOP leadership structure, by dint of the bully pulpit and a massive fundraising capability.

As the leader of the party, an outsider President could eviscerate the leadership structure and reorganize the entire, defective mess that is the GOP establishment.

That is what they fear most — losing their cushy jobs and consultancies and actually having to work for a living. Oh, the humanity!

That’s why I’m staying a registered Republican and supporting Cruz, Trump or Carson — who ever I deem most likely to win at the time.

It’s not just to save the Republic from the fiscal and national security timebombs that Obama has bequeathed to us. It’s also to shred the entire GOP establishment and lay the foundation for a new Republican Party. A conservative Republican Party that can restore the rule of law, honor the Constitution, and begin flaying the lard off the federal leviathan.

I give thanks to the Republican establishment for declaring war on us. It makes our mission all the more clear; they must be removed from the halls of power.

President Carson, President Cruz, or President Trump could make that appealing vision a reality.

Make sure your Republican registration is up-to-date, so you can support an insurgent candidate. It’s the only way to stop these corrupt and feckless boobs who today falsely claim the mantle of “Republicans”.

All the best to you and yours on this wonderful holiday. Thank you for patronizing my humble journal and may this season be a blessed one for all of us.

Read more at BadBlue News.

11/26/15

Blocked: Facebook removes damning Bernie Sanders article

By: Renee Nal
New Zeal

One of the many pages where the Examiner article was removed by Facebook

One of the many pages where the Examiner article was removed by Facebook

The social media site Facebook inexplicably blocked an Examiner news article which discussed the undeniable Marxist associations of Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Author and speaker Trevor Loudon revealed Sanders’ radical ties in a short film he released Wednesday in anticipation of his upcoming political documentary The Enemies Within which seeks to expose the anti-American radicals in the federal government.

After several prominent Facebook pages posted the article, the link was blocked at numerous pages (See here and here for just two examples) and Facebook “likes” on the actual article became “stuck” at 572.

It is pure speculation at this point as to why Facebook blocked the article. At the time of this writing, Facebook has not replied to requests for clarification.

Watch the video that Facebook evidently does not want you to see HERE.

HELP SUPPORT THIS IMPORTANT PROJECT HERE!