One Month of Islam and Multiculturalism in Sweden

The reason why such evil is occurring by Muslims in Sweden is two fold: (1) Islamic ideology fosters such behavior and deems it normal; (2) Sweden has surrendered to Islamic control.

Such is America’s future unless true Americans stop the Islamic invasion of America, through out America’s worthless leadership, and then take control of this nation and live for good.

Gideon

Please Don’t Vote for Trump!

Donald Trump would be a disaster.

He’s a liar. He said the other day that he didn’t know who David Duke is, and he didn’t know anything about white supremacy (WHAT???), but in an interview with Matt Lauer in 2000 he denounced David Duke as a bigot.

Also in 2000, he was for banning “assault weapons.”

He wants universal health coverage, or in his own words, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. He said he wants to repeal and replace obamacare – and he would cover everyone. When asked who would pay for it, he answered, “THE GOVERNMENT.” He said this in Sept. 2015. Five months ago.

We all know he’s a bully based on how he responds to criticism. (It’s a campaign, Donald. Time to put on your big boy pants.)

Plus, he’s just a nasty guy. Do you want someone in the White House who uses foul language in front of children? I don’t. Even if he “disavows” it, he’s already shown his character by doing it in the first place and I think the character of the president of the US should be above reproach.

Please vote YOUR values, and I hope they don’t match his.

 

 

 

Correction to Jade Helm Post

I understand there are not 15 states “participating,” but either 7 or 9 depending on which source you read. My apologies.

-YouKnowI’mRight

Grover Norquist “Sell Out America” Update

Greetings, Everyone.

The Center for Security  Policy has updated its material on Grover Norquist. Click here to access this information.

If you do not know about Norquist, and care at all about the future of this country, he is one person to bring under federal charges for acions against the United States. He has sold America out to her enemies. Norquist should face trial and prison.

Thankfully, the NRA recently announced it would investigate Norquist, who is currently on the board of directors of the NRA.

Here are some other resources pertaining to the same subject which you should become familiar with. Get others to look at this as well. Wake up the American people!

Gideon

Resources:

One – 10 part series on the Muslim Brotherhood , which includes good coverage of Norquist and others working to destroy this country.

Two – March 14, 2015 Security Summit recording..

Reblog: “To The WA State Governor From Liberty For All”

This was in my inbox this morning. Let Freedom Ring!  -YouKnowI’mRight

via To The WA State Governor From Liberty For All.

“To The WA State Governor From Liberty For All

“by Kit Lange | Mar 9, 2015 | Editorials, The Battle for Washington State

“Governor,

“When you took the office of governor of the State of Washington, you held up your hand and took an oath to uphold the Constitution of our great state.  Included in that is the protection of citizens and their rights.  In short, you took an oath to stand for the liberty secured by the WA State Constitution.

“Article I of that document states that ‘All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.’  That consent is and always has been contingent upon the willingness of said government to protect and guard the rights of the people, because that is the entire purpose of government.

“Currently the state and federal governments are seeking to control and enslave the people through denial of their rights.  You are doing nothing to stop it.

“Article II of that document reaffirms the Constitution of the United States as the supreme law of the land.  Your oath to uphold the State constitution includes adherence to that statement.  You are not upholding this oath.

“Article III of the WA State Constitution states that ‘No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.’  Recently a WA state citizen was illegally arrested by the federal government and denied his liberty.  His property was taken from him and has not been returned.  Every single one of his rights secured by both the federal and state constitutions was violated. You have done nothing.

“As governor of the state of Washington, it is your duty and your calling to serve the people of this state and protect their rights, whether you agree with their politics or not, whether you like them as people or not.  Anthony Bosworth’s arrest was illegal, as evidenced by the rules being (illegally) changed after his arrest to reflect what the federal government originally arrested him for.  His property was confiscated.  He was kept in a steel cage for hours with no access to an attorney as promised by the Constitution, and interrogated for hours by federal agents, who laughed at his assertion of his rights.

“It does not matter what your position is on guns, or whether you like Anthony Bosworth as a person.  His rights were violated, and this happened on your watch.  The Constitutions that you swore to uphold were violated before your very eyes by the federal government, and nothing has been done.

“After the peaceful and calm protest of these violations at the federal courthouse in Spokane last week, the Southern Poverty Law Center—which has partnered with the Department of Homeland Security to help decide who’s an ‘extremist’—wrote an article predicting the arrest of Liberty for All members, including Anthony Bosworth, his wife Maria, Sam Wilson, and myself.

“What is our crime?  The exercise of rights protected—not granted—by the WA State Constitution and that of the United States of America.  The exercise of rights you promised to uphold when you took office.  We dare to speak of liberty, we dare to stand against tyranny, and now we are being threatened with the same fate that Anthony has already undergone once.

“We, the patriots of Washington, appeal to you now.  We want no fight.  We want no conflict.  We wish to be left alone in peace, to raise our families and live in liberty.  We ask that you stand with us and stop this violation of our rights, as is your duty.  Under no circumstances do we seek violence, nor will we start violence.  We are not, in any way, ‘anti-government’ as the SPLC claims.  We simply demand that the government adhere to its Constitutional limits, protecting and maintaining the rights of the governed.

“Please understand this: We will not comply with these continued infringements.  We will no longer be controlled and have our rights violated.  There is no more compromise.  If an inch of liberty is taken from us, we will take back a mile.  Because of this, we face persecution, arrest, and even death.

“You can stop this from happening.  It is your job to stop this from happening, by upholding your oath to the Constitution.

“If you do not stand up now, patriots in your state will be arrested by an out of control federal government seeking to quash the liberty movement.  If that happens, there will be a reaction among We the People that will have a ripple effect far outside Washington State.  At that point, you will be complicit in the beginning of a civil war.  That is not something any of us want.

“We appeal to you as a father, a husband, as a man who has taken a solemn oath to protect and defend the rights of the people of Washington.  You govern by our consent.  If you would like to keep that consent, then we ask you to stand up for the people you serve.  Regardless of your political position, the people have rights that must be protected.

“We await and expect your public reply within 3 days.  If we have not heard from you by that time, we will accept that your position is in agreement with those who wish to criminally enslave the people of Washington State.

“Signed,

“Kit Lange

“Anthony Bosworth

“Maria Bosworth

“Sam Wilson

“and the patriots of Liberty for All”

DeMint’s SCF Expands to House! Take That, McConnell!

From Townhall.com: Mitch McConnell recently said this about Senator DeMint’s Senate Conservatives Fund:

“I’ve always been and continue to be a big supporter of the Tea Party and the conservative change it’s bringing to Washington. One of the biggest obstacles to that change, however, is the Senate Conservatives Fund, a rogue political operation that has co-opted the Liberty movement for its own enrichment to the detriment of the conservative cause. This is a point that I have been making repeatedly and energetically over the past several months, because in my view this group has deceived a lot of good people. They claim to share our goals but undermine them at every turn. I think they should be stopped, and I don’t mind saying so.”

Today I was delighted and encouraged to receive email notice that, in response to popular requests, the Senate Conservatives Fund has now endorsed five conservative House candidates. Senator DeMint is obviously shrugging off these attacks and even countering them by going full speed ahead with his focus on electing more true conservatives to replace RINOs like McConnell.

And, as Rush Limbaugh says, enemies of liberty will tell us who they fear with their attacks; and the more vicious the attack, the greater the fear.

Good going, Senator, and Godspeed!

Article from Clash Daily

Joe Goebbels, Move Over — The Alarming FCC Incursion
By Marilyn Assenheim / 21 February 2014 / 9 Comments

The Federal Communications Commission is an “independent government agency” and was born when Congress signed theCommunications Act of 1934. Its purpose, as reported by AllGov.com, was to prevent a monopoly of the airwaves: “Concerned over the growing power of large corporations and conglomerates…President Franklin Roosevelt wanted the FCC to make sure the country’s budding mass communications systems did not fall into the hands of a select few.” Today’s interpretation would add the caveat “unless that monopoly is the government.” Thursday, news broke that the FCC plans to plant “researchers” (read “agents”) in every print newsroom, internet news outlet, television station, radio and cable news network for a “study” they are conducting. The stated purpose of the “research” is “a study of critical information needs.”
These plans have been in the works for some time. Ajit Pai, Commissioner of the FCC, published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journalon February 10 in which he voiced his concerns: “…Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its ‘Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,’ or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring.” Mr. Pai continued by exposing the true agenda of the study: “The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about ‘the process by which stories are selected’ and how often stations cover ‘critical information needs,’ along with ‘perceived station bias’ and ‘perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.’”
Perceived responsiveness to “underserved population?” But who is “underserved” in a nation where network television reaches everyone with a television? Where radio is ubiquitous and skewed to local populations? More important, who is doing the “perceiving?”
In the WSJ, Mr. Pai provides part of the answer: “…the agency selected eight categories of ‘critical information’ such as the ‘environment’ and ‘economic opportunities,’ that it believes local newscasters should cover. It plans to ask station managers, news directors, journalists, television anchors and on-air reporters to tell the government about their ‘news philosophy’ and how the station ensures that the community gets critical information.”
That sounds familiar. Let’s put it this way; those concerns, including the not-so-thinly-veiled racial shibboleths, are the favorite stalking horses, ceaselessly flogged by The Lyin’ King.
The Blaze reports: “The FCC only has jurisdiction over the broadcast industry, not over cable news or print publications.” The latest information reports that a power-drunk FCC is seeking to correct that oversight. The Blaze quoted one concerned party:
Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, a conservative legal group, said he worries it (CIN) could be used to intimidate certain news organizations into covering issues that government officials feel are important. “This is an extremely troubling and dangerous development that represents the latest in an ongoing assault on the Constitution by the Obama administration…We have seen a corrupt IRS unleashed on conservatives. We have seen an imperial president bypass Congress and change the law with executive orders. Now we see the heavy hand of the Obama administration poised to interfere with the First Amendment rights of journalists…It’s clear that the Obama administration is only interested in utilizing intimidation tactics – at the expense of Americans and the Constitution.”
The “Fairness Doctrine” narrowly avoided implementation by court order but this workaround would suit the regime even better. Prospective control of the media in its entirety, in a straightforward blitz on the first amendment. “News” agencies are, belatedly, concerned that Our Beloved Leader is infringing upon their inviolable “rights.” They are, to their amazement, discovering that their rights are as meaningless to The Dictator-In-Chief as is the rest of the Constitution. The “change” that is approaching is neither original nor quite what they might have “hoped” for. What The Lyin’ King is establishing is a redo of historical absolutism. The German National Socialist government could not have aspired to better.
Jay Sekulow stated: “The federal government has no place attempting to control the media, using the unconstitutional actions of repressive regimes to squelch free speech.’” This sentiment was also shared by Ajit Pai, in the WSJ: “…everyone should agree on this: The government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.”
Well, perhaps not but, historically, it still happened. And history, whether or not the willfully ignorant that foisted The Lyin’ King on America understand, always repeats itself.

MY THOUGHTS:

This is the most outrageous attempt to silence free speech in the history of this nation. This is in direct violation of the first amendment. This is exactly what Stalin did with his political commissars to insure nothing was reported that didn’t strictly follow the party line. This is big government completely out of control. This is the result of electing a president who is completely unqualified (legally, morally and intellectually) to lead the greatest nation on the planet. This is a direct assault on American values. This is treason in the purist sense of the word. THIS IS OBAMA!

themerryinfidel

Thanksgiving Disappointment

Dear grocers:

I love Thanksgiving. I love the big meal, the planning, the sights and smells, working for two days on pies and side dishes and dinner rolls. I love the anticipation, the preparations, and having it come out perfect.

And I really love turkey! I love the leftovers, the skin, the dark meat too – it’s really the centerpiece of the holiday meal for me. Everything else is secondary to the turkey.

That is why I am so disappointed, and more so every year. I cannot find a decent turkey in any store. I have bought turkeys at natural stores, warehouse stores, discount stores, and meat stores. I have bought fresh turkeys, frozen turkeys, smoked turkeys, roasted turkeys, turkey breasts, and marinated turkeys. They all disappoint greatly.

Especially the so-called and fraudulently-labled “fresh” turkeys. They are all previously frozen, and if sold as “fresh,” merely thawed before selling. My turkey this year (from Walmart, labeled as “fresh, minimally processed”) had so much blood in the package that it was apparent this was not a “fresh” turkey. It came out dry, and the thigh meat – usually very succulent – was rubbery! It even tasted like it had been sitting around for a while – instead of turkey, it tasted like the inside of the refrigerator. No, the package was not open, nor did it have a hole in it. It just wasn’t fresh.

Next year I’m going to look for a farm and buy one directly from them. To heck with all you grocers who can’t sell, once a year, when you have a year’s notice, a quality turkey.  –You Know I’m Right

Yahoo

California’s Burst of Common Sense on Gun Control
By Paul M. Barrett October 14, 2013
________________________________________

Photograph by Joe Raedle/Getty Images
One casualty of wall-to-wall coverage of Washington shutdown madness has been attention to other noteworthy events. Largely lost in the shuffle, for example, was an unexpected burst of common sense in the gun control debate. Small victories deserve celebration, so here goes:
On Oct. 11, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a package of new gun-control measures, including a curb on large-capacity ammunition magazines. At the same time, though, Brown vetoed measures that would have further restricted ordinary semiautomatic rifles that gun foes like to demonize as “assault weapons.” Brown explained his actions in an eminently sensible veto statement. “The State of California already has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, including bans on military-style assault rifles and high-capacity ammunition magazines,” Mr. Brown wrote. “I don’t believe this bill’s blanket ban on semiautomatic rifles would reduce criminal activity or enhance public safety enough to warrant this infringement on gun owners’ rights.”
Specifically, the vetoed legislation would have prohibited the sort of hunting and target rifles that recreational shooters have used for generations to hunt deer and blast away at paper targets. People who think all firearms are evil may want to deny grandpa his deer rifle; Gov. Brown does not. He and others who actually want to fight crime realize that these are not the weapons typically used to stick up convenience stores. Calling them assault weapons doesn’t make them more dangerous.
STORY: Guns, Children and Accidents: Four Blunt Points
Indeed, one could also ask whether California accomplishes anything by restricting “military-style” rifles, since the cosmetic appearance of those weapons doesn’t make them any more lethal. What makes a rifle more deadly is its ammunition capacity. Focusing the debate on that issue (as I’ve suggested) would add credibility to the advocacy of gun control.
Credibility, sad to say, is not what any of the most vociferous advocates seem to seek. Gun control proponents greeted Brown’s measured action–which, after all, added more restrictions to the California statute book–by telling the governor he would have “blood on his hands.” Criminals and psychotic killers have blood on their hands, not politicians seeking to forge compromise public policy.
Returning fire with equal judiciousness, Sam Paredes of the pro-firearms group Gun Owners of California said it was intolerable that Brown had signed measures that impose new rules to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, require safer storage of handguns, and oblige buyers of rifles and shot guns to pass safety tests. Can you imagine–safety tests! ”We were only shot in the heart six times instead of 12 times, and I guess we should be happy with that,” Paredes said. Excuse me, sir, but requiring safe storage of firearms is not akin to murder.
STORY: Gun Control: Turning to Mental Health Instead of Hopelessness
With both sides employing violent imagery and extremist thinking, it’s no wonder that the gun control debate seems like a futile morass.

MY RESPONSE:

First of all, California, and most other “Liberal” states have proven time and again that they don’t make or pass laws based on common sense. They create laws according to someone’s personal agenda and those laws usually only benefit a select group of people. For some reason, disarming America’s law abiding citizens has become their most recent “Crusade”. Why they have chosen to vilify all things firearm related and virtually ignore all other causes of death and dismemberment is a question that needs to be asked.
Let’s assume that most normal people would like to see a reduction in the number of untimely and premature deaths in our country. If that’s the case, why not focus our efforts on areas that will produce the most results?
According to the Center for Disease Control, the FBI and other government agencies, the top 10 causes of premature death in this country peer year are as follows: (I will try to keep this simple as I realize most liberals get easily confused when confronted with facts and verifiable statistics that don’t support their agenda.) The number one killer in the US is Tobacco with about 529,000 deaths annually. Next, Medical Errors with about 195,000 deaths, followed by Unintentional Injuries (118.021 deaths), Alcohol Abuse (107,400 deaths), Automobile Accidents (34,485 deaths), Accidental Poisoning (31,758 deaths), Drug Abuse (25,500 deaths), Accidental Falls (24,792 deaths), Non Firearms Related Homicides (16,799 deaths which include knives, bats, hammers and poisons), and last and least, Firearms Related Homicides (11,493 deaths).
Banning firearms would be as ridiculous as banning hammers, knives, bats, poisons, drugs, automobiles, alcohol and doctors! The substances and tools are NOT the problem. It’s the people who abuse them. We need to remove the bad apples from society and educate the rest. The Pelosi’s, Reid’s, Bloomberg’s and obama’s of our country need to be replaced with rational individuals who can develop solutions in a reasonable manner and not simply create more laws that erode our freedoms and cause more problems than they solve…

Yahoo

ANIMOSITY TOWARD AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE IS HARD TO FATHOM

Cynthia Tucker
Cynthia Tucker 8 hours ago
.

Rena W. is a 35-year-old small-business owner — the co-owner, actually, of an Atlanta hair salon. She works hard but doesn’t make enough money to purchase health insurance.

A mother of three, Rena has high cholesterol and hypertension. Last month, she suffered a mini-stroke, a calamity that brought confusion, a brief bout of aphasia and a trip to the emergency room. She has recovered, but now owes the hospital $17,000 for her treatment, a debt that she says will take her years to repay.

Rena is just the sort of hardworking American for whom the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act — routinely called “Obamacare” — is designed. She can now purchase a policy that will pay for the medical care she needs and insure against any more medical emergencies. (If only she’d had that insurance a bit sooner, she would not be burdened by debt.)

But for reasons that are hard to grasp, Republicans are apparently willing to throw the American economy over the cliff — and to further destabilize an already-shaky global economy, as well — just to keep Rena from being able to buy affordable health insurance. If the government shutdown doesn’t force President Obama to forsake his signature legislative accomplishment, many Republicans say, they will refuse to lift the debt ceiling, sending the country into default for the first time in history.

Again, this is all to prevent people like Rena from being able to purchase health insurance.

Having listened to the inflammatory, paranoid and highly creative debate over Obamacare since 2009, having witnessed countless tea party rallies and heard numerous critics outline the law’s alleged dangers, I still don’t understand the motives of its most deranged adversaries. I do know that all the other industrialized democracies ensure that the vast majority of their citizens have access to medical care, and none of those nations have gone up in smoke. They endure, with populations who are at least as healthy as Americans and who pay much less for their doctor’s visits and medicines.

Here in the United States, conservatives have railed against an expanding social safety net at least as far back as Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, which birthed the Social Security system to prevent old-age penury. The campaign to create Medicare brought similar warnings of dire consequences, with no less a true-blue conservative than Ronald Reagan insisting that it would put the country on the slippery slope to socialism.

In a recorded message, he told listeners that if they didn’t oppose the creation of government-sponsored health care for retirees, “one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children, and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free.”

As you know, none of those dire predictions came to pass, and both Social Security and Medicare are wildly popular. Still, that hasn’t stopped a certain mind-bending cognitive dissonance: Many in the Republican Party’s tea party camp, where Obamacare is regarded as the devil’s own handiwork, are themselves beneficiaries of Medicare, which is closer to socialism than virtually any other government program. Go figure.

Among conservative intellectuals, it’s popular to pretend that Republicans will eventually replace Obamacare with a much better program that would promote affordable health care without any of the alleged flaws of the current law. But the most honest among them admit that congressional Republicans have no current plan to replace Obamacare, only to repeal it.

Rena had managed, until now, to avoid medical crises by buying her prescriptions from discount pharmacies and paying out-of-pocket for annual checkups. Her children are covered by Medicaid. She is married, but her husband also lacks health insurance — which contradicts the popular notion that single motherhood is to blame for the growing crisis of the have-nots.

She is one of those who play by the rules, working hard and hewing to the American dream. She’s an owner of a genuine small business, not a wealthy law partner or successful online entrepreneur of the sort Republicans tend to point to when they talk about “small-business owners.” Aren’t conservatives big supporters of that commercial sector?

So why, again, are Republicans so furious that she will be able to purchase health insurance?

(Cynthia Tucker, winner of the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, is a visiting professor at the University of Georgia. She can be reached at cynthia@cynthiatucker.com.)

——————————————————————————–

COPYRIGHT 2013 CYNTHIA TUCKER

My response:
Once again, Cynthia, you wear your ignorance on your sleeve. You refer to obamacare as his “Signature Legislative Accomplishment” when in actuality it is his signature legislative Failure. We all agree that there are areas in our current healthcare system that need improvement, but to adopt the philosophy of “Do something, even if it’s wrong” is NOT the answer. The ability of liberals to put on their blinders and ignore the obvious simply amazes me, and it’s painfully obvious that obamacare is, and will continue to be, a miserable failure. Anyone with normal cognitive abilities should recognize this. To imply that Republicans are deliberately attempting to prevent certain people (minorities?) from obtaining affordable health care highlights just how misguided and uninformed you actually are.
For your information, Cynthia, this country is racing towards socialism just as fast as obama can take us there. Your attempt to vilify members of the Tea Party for utilizing Medicare (a socialist program) was feeble at best. Have you ever earned a pay check Cynthia? If not, go talk to a Republican (you will find that most of them work for a living) and look at a pay voucher. You will quickly discover that they are Forced to pay a percentage of their paychecks into Medicare each pay period. Why would they NOT take advantage of the program since it’s their money to begin with? I will certainly try to recoup as much as I possibly can!
One of the biggest problems with obamacare is the government forcing citizens to purchase a product. What ever happened to freedom of choice? What’s next? Your next automobile purchase must be a GM product since GM has been deemed too big to fail? Give me a break! The federal government has no business forcing any citizen to purchase any product, period!
Your comments about Republicans only wanting to repeal obamacare, but having no plan to replace it, were accurate, but only when looked at from a liberal point of view. The first step in treating any disease is to first identify the disease (obamacare) and then develop a treatment plan to eradicate the disease. Once that has been accomplished a comprehensive plan to nurse the patient back to full health can be developed and implemented. Make no mistake about it. obamacare is a disease and if not treated promptly, it will cause irreparable harm to this nation. You call it animosity. I call it preventive medicine. href=’http://www.yahoo.com/’>Yahoo.

%d bloggers like this: