Friday, May 31, 2013

WAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE FREAKING IRS WANTS TO ADMINISTER OBAMCARE BUT THEIR UNION WANTS OUT OF IT. NO FREAKING WAY...
HOW DO YA LIKE THIS BULLSHIT....
THE FREAKING IRS UNION THAT WANTS YOU TO BE SCRUTINIZED, BULLIED AND OBEY THE OBAMACARE LAW.... WANTS OUT OF THE INSURANCE EXCHANGES FOR THEMSELVES... WTF ??? WHAT THE HELL ... AND HELL NO ASSHOLES...
HOW DO YA LIKE THIS BULLSHIT....
THE FREAKING IRS UNION THAT WANTS YOU TO BE SCRUTINIZED, BULLIED AND OBEY THE OBAMACARE LAW.... WANTS OUT OF THE INSURANCE EXCHANGES FOR THEMSELVES...  WTF ??? WHAT THE HELL ... AND HELL NO ASSHOLES...

The National Treasury Employees Union, NTEU, which represents the IRS employees who harassed and delayed tea party and conservative groups, has come out against the proposal to put federal workers into exchange-based health insurance. 

Fancy that: the people in charge of deciding whether you go into an exchange, and who decided it doesn't matter whether your state doesn't want one, don't want to be in one themselves.

As Jeffrey Lord of The American Spectator points out (hat tip, American Thinker),

    With the IRS assuming serious police powers of Obamacare, in effect the members of one left-wing labor union will have access to the private health care records of every single American.

While it's fine to investigate whether President Obama and higher ups at Treasury knew about or even ordered the IRS to harass conservatives and slow-walk their applications, Congress should investigate whether the NTEU members colluded.  

NTEU President Colleen M. Kelley has visited the White House at least 10 times, visiting with the President and First Lady at least once. 

Find more information on the NTEU in a thorough report at Redstate.com.

The union has a handy way for its members to contact their representives in Congress to lobby against the legislation.How you can help

Now, I'm not suggesting that you fill out this form and say you support moving public employees to the exchanges, because that would expose you to IRS audits, harassment, intimidation, threats, and abuse. That's just how our government rolls these days.

But if you should happen to do that, keep in mind that they have no way of knowing whether your email address is legitimate, and this is not a government form. It's just their union thing. Again, I'm not suggesting you take any particular action, nor certainly that you give false information to fill a public sector union email database.

Unions influencing legislators to protect union benefits is just one more reason why public sector unions should not be allowed to exist.

HERE IS THEIR FORM...  YOU CAN SEE IT YOUR SELF ON THIS LINK:

http://capwiz.com/nteu/issues/alert/?alertid=62634726&type=CO
HOW DO YA LIKE THIS BULLSHIT....
THE FREAKING IRS UNION THAT WANTS YOU TO BE SCRUTINIZED, BULLIED AND OBEY THE OBAMACARE LAW.... WANTS OUT OF THE INSURANCE EXCHANGES FOR THEMSELVES... WTF ??? WHAT THE HELL ... AND HELL NO ASSHOLES...

The National Treasury Employees Union, NTEU, which represents the IRS employees who harassed and delayed tea party and conservative groups, has come out against the proposal to put federal workers into exchange-based health insurance.

Fancy that: the people in charge of deciding whether you go into an exchange, and who decided it doesn't matter whether your state doesn't want one, don't want to be in one themselves.

As Jeffrey Lord of The American Spectator points out (hat tip, American Thinker),

With the IRS assuming serious police powers of Obamacare, in effect the members of one left-wing labor union will have access to the private health care records of every single American.

While it's fine to investigate whether President Obama and higher ups at Treasury knew about or even ordered the IRS to harass conservatives and slow-walk their applications, Congress should investigate whether the NTEU members colluded.

NTEU President Colleen M. Kelley has visited the White House at least 10 times, visiting with the President and First Lady at least once.

Find more information on the NTEU in a thorough report at Redstate.com.

The union has a handy way for its members to contact their representives in Congress to lobby against the legislation.How you can help

Now, I'm not suggesting that you fill out this form and say you support moving public employees to the exchanges, because that would expose you to IRS audits, harassment, intimidation, threats, and abuse. That's just how our government rolls these days.

But if you should happen to do that, keep in mind that they have no way of knowing whether your email address is legitimate, and this is not a government form. It's just their union thing. Again, I'm not suggesting you take any particular action, nor certainly that you give false information to fill a public sector union email database.

Unions influencing legislators to protect union benefits is just one more reason why public sector unions should not be allowed to exist.

HERE IS THEIR FORM... YOU CAN SEE IT YOUR SELF ON THIS LINK:

http://capwiz.com/nteu/issues/alert/?alertid=62634726&type=CO
Like · · · 9 minutes ago ·

President Obama: Troops 'fighting on my behalf'

President Obama: Troops 'fighting on my behalf'

Arrogance:  Barack Obama says troops are fighting "on my behalf." Members of the United States military may be surprised to learn that they now serve on President Obama's behalf, instead of protecting the Constitution.
On Wednesday, Obama reverted to his 1996 position supporting gay marriage, but said something that caught the ear of many conservatives.
"[W]hen I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married," Obama said.
"Slip of the tongue, to be sure, but can one think of another president who’d have made it?" Elliot Abrams asked at the Weekly Standard.
Ben Shapiro weighed in on the statement at frontpagemag.com:
The members of the US military fight on behalf of all Americans, not Obama personally. Now, it’s possible that President Obama meant just that – he was expressing individual gratitude for a collective benefit we all receive from the military.
"Or," he wrote, "it’s possible that Obama thinks that the troops are out there carrying out his work."
Shapiro reminded readers that in 2009, Obama said the troops made a “pretty good photo-op” during a visit to South Korea.
"Obama seems to see the troops as his personal plaything," Shapiro added, recalling a statement last week where the President appeared to suggest he would transform the country on their behalf.
He went on to say that our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines "are a prop for Obama."
"They are fighting on behalf of the United States of America of which Obama is, like all his predecessors have been and all his successors will be, temporarily president and commander-in-chief," Michael Barone wrote at the Washington Examiner, adding that Obama could have said they were fighting "at my command," which would have been true.
"But that would conflict with his campaign message that he ends wars rather than wages them," Barone added.
Obama also seems to not understand that U.S. military personnel do not swear allegiance to one man, but rather promise to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution "from all enemies, foreign and domestic."
If the United States were a monarchy, as Barone wrote, or a dictatorship, then the President could say they are fighting on his behalf.
"But we're not a monarchy and he's not royal," Barone added. Nor is the United States a dictatorship.
"FDR, for all his ego, would never have said that soldiers in World War II were fighting on his behalf. Neither would Truman, Ike, JFK, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, or even Carter and Clinton (although Clinton might have thought it)," wrote Newsbusters' Tom Blumer, who added that he doesn't "expect to see a lot of TV air time devoted to this telling, egotistical slip."
"Others have noted that in his spike-the-ball statements on the dispatch of Osama bin Laden, Obama has used first person pronouns in a way that presidents like George W. Bush, Dwight Eisenhower and Franklin Roosevelt were careful to avoid," Barone wrote.
"With Obama, it’s always all about him," he added.

President Obama: Troops 'fighting on my behalf'

Members of the United States military may be surprised to learn that they now serve on President Obama's behalf, instead of protecting the Constitution.
On Wednesday, Obama reverted to his 1996 position supporting gay marriage, but said something that caught the ear of many conservatives.
"[W]hen I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married," Obama said.
"Slip of the tongue, to be sure, but can one think of another president who’d have made it?" Elliot Abrams asked at the Weekly Standard.
Ben Shapiro weighed in on the statement at frontpagemag.com:
The members of the US military fight on behalf of all Americans, not Obama personally. Now, it’s possible that President Obama meant just that – he was expressing individual gratitude for a collective benefit we all receive from the military.
"Or," he wrote, "it’s possible that Obama thinks that the troops are out there carrying out his work."
Shapiro reminded readers that in 2009, Obama said the troops made a “pretty good photo-op” during a visit to South Korea.
"Obama seems to see the troops as his personal plaything," Shapiro added, recalling a statement last week where the President appeared to suggest he would transform the country on their behalf.
He went on to say that our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines "are a prop for Obama."
"They are fighting on behalf of the United States of America of which Obama is, like all his predecessors have been and all his successors will be, temporarily president and commander-in-chief," Michael Barone wrote at the Washington Examiner, adding that Obama could have said they were fighting "at my command," which would have been true.
"But that would conflict with his campaign message that he ends wars rather than wages them," Barone added.
Obama also seems to not understand that U.S. military personnel do not swear allegiance to one man, but rather promise to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution "from all enemies, foreign and domestic."
If the United States were a monarchy, as Barone wrote, or a dictatorship, then the President could say they are fighting on his behalf.
"But we're not a monarchy and he's not royal," Barone added. Nor is the United States a dictatorship.
"FDR, for all his ego, would never have said that soldiers in World War II were fighting on his behalf. Neither would Truman, Ike, JFK, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, or even Carter and Clinton (although Clinton might have thought it)," wrote Newsbusters' Tom Blumer, who added that he doesn't "expect to see a lot of TV air time devoted to this telling, egotistical slip."
"Others have noted that in his spike-the-ball statements on the dispatch of Osama bin Laden, Obama has used first person pronouns in a way that presidents like George W. Bush, Dwight Eisenhower and Franklin Roosevelt were careful to avoid," Barone wrote.
"With Obama, it’s always all about him," he added.

Updates: Boots On Ground; Sheriff Joe's Obama ID Fraud Presentation From CSPOA In Missouri

- arrival at airport in Missouri -
Boots On Ground: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Obama 
ID Fraud Coverage From CSPOA In Missouri

Our reporter arrived at the airport and is headed to the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association Convention (CSPOA) being held in St. Charles, Missouri. He is now headed to the CSPOA Convention location to set up for Sheriff Arpaio's scheduled Obama ID fraud presentation which begins at 4:10 PM Missouri time. Once the presentation is complete he will provide an update and get back to work.

If things roll smooth our reporter will try to provide updates during the actual presentation. He will be recording two camera angles and he is all by himself. So bear with us. We don't have the resources the big dogs have. It is a two man show working from two different states.

UPDATE 1: The Oath Keepers just dropped off our reporter at the convention location. Pics and more coming soon...

UPDATE 2: Video recorders ready to roll...
UPDATE 3: Sheriff Arpaio's lead Obama ID Fraud investigator Mike Zullo...


UPDATE 4: Mike Zullo now at the podium speaking...

UPDATE 5: Here is the audio archive of the Obama SSN presentation - CLICK HERE.

UPDATE 6: Here is the audio archive from Mike Zullo's interview with Carl Gallups - CLICK HERE.

---------------------------------------------

Also, Carl Gallups will have some coverage on his radio show Freedom Fridays starting at 5 PM ET. If you miss the live broadcast Birther Report will provide an archived version shortly after the live broadcast.

OBAMA SSN FRAUD PRESENTATION LIVE STREAM:


RELATED: Breaking: Birther Report Providing Coverage From Sheriff Arpaio Obama ID Fraud Presentation - DETAILS HERE.

RELATED: Team Arpaio: Full Obama Social Security Number Fraud Presentation Live Friday; Here - DETAILS HERE.

RELATED: Latest: Sheriff Joe Obama ID Fraud Investigation Update; Presidential Document Fraud - DETAILS HERE.

RELATED: U.S. Rep. To Witness Sheriff Joe Obama Identity Fraud Presentation At Sheriffs Conference - DETAILS HERE.

RELATED: Sheriff Joe's Lead Obama Identity Fraud Investigator Headed To Sheriff Mack's Conference - DETAILS HERE.

FLASH: Private Investigators Respond To Snopes Article On Obama's CT Social Security Number - DETAILS HERE.






((( This High Definition video was produced in 720P HD – Select the HD quality setting for optimal viewing experience )))

2006: Obama In Kenya: I Am So Proud To Come Back Home - VIDEO HERE. 

2007: Michelle Obama Declares Obama Is Kenyan And America Is Mean - VIDEO HERE. 

2008: Michelle Obama Declares Barack Obama's Home Country Is Kenya - VIDEO HERE. 

FLASHBACK: Obama Is The Original Birther! Obama In 1991 Stated In His Own Bio He Was Born In Kenya. DETAILS HERE. 




WATCH SHERIFF OBAMA INVESTIGATION PRESS CONFERENCE HERE: CLICK HERE.

-ARTICLE II ELIGIBILITY FACTS HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

  • Colleges
  • Online Schools
  • Working at home
  • Social security disability
  • Avatars
  • The

REPORT: FBI hunting for 'sleeper cell' of at least 12 behind Boston bombing...

The FBI was last night hunting a 12-strong terrorist “sleeper cell” linked to the Boston marathon bomb brothers.
Police believe Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were specially trained to carry out the devastating attack.
More than 1,000 FBI operatives were last night working to track down the cell and arrested a man and two women 60 miles from Boston in the hours before Dzhokhar’s dramatic capture after a bloody shootout on Friday.
A source close to the investigation said: “We have no doubt the brothers were not acting alone. The devices used to detonate the two bombs were highly sophisticated and not the kind of thing people learn from Google.
“They were too advanced. Someone gave the brothers the skills and it is now our job to find out just who they were. Agents think the sleeper cell has up to a dozen members and has been waiting several years for their day to come.”
A specialist team of CIA and FBI interrogators was yesterday flown to a Boston hospital to grill wounded Dzhokhar, 19, about the secret group. The University of Massachusetts student was caught on Friday after hiding out in a boat parked in a garden in locked down Watertown the day after a gun battle with police left his 26-year-old brother and a rookie cop dead.
Dzhokhar is said to have run his brother over as he escaped in a stolen car while Tamerlan lay handcuffed on the ground. They were carrying six bombs with them at the time, three of which ­exploded, as well as a handgun and rifle. The devices were thought to be pipe bombs.
Last night Dzhokhar – badly wounded but alive – lay handcuffed to his hospital bed under armed guard. The other three arrested in the port of New Bedford are also believed to be of college age. Read more via The Daily Mirror...

DANGEROUSLY INCOMPETENT: White House forced to admit that Obama made no calls night of Benghazi attack...

President Obama didn’t make any phone calls the night of the Sept. 11 attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the White House said in a letter to Congress released Thursday.
“During the entire attack, the president of the United States never picked up the phone to put the weight of his office in the mix,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, who had held up Mr. Obama’s defense secretary nominee to force the information to be released.
Mr. Graham said that if Mr. Obama had picked up the phone, at least two of the Americans killed in the attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi might still be alive because he might have been able to push U.S. aid to get to the scene faster.
The White House has said Mr. Obama was kept up to date on the attack by his staff, though after being alerted to the attack in a pre-scheduled afternoon meeting he never spoke again with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin E. Dempsey or then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Mr. Panetta told Congress last week that he knew immediately the attacks were a terrorist assault, though the White House downplayed that notion in the first five days after the attack.
Republican senators said they will still push for more information on who changed the talking points given to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, who went on the Sunday talk shows after the attacks and blamed protests against an anti-Islam video.
Mr. Graham said he will block the president’s nominee to head the CIA until he hears more details about what Mr. Obama was doing. Continue reading via The Washington Times...

Obama’s Real Reason He Wants Your Guns

Obama's Real Reason He Wants Your Guns
Christopher Greene examines the “real reason” President Obama wants your guns and while doing that he explicitly claims the following:
In many ways America seems to be making the same mistakes as Germany did prior to the outbreak of World War II. Since taking office in 2008, on the promise of hope and change, president Barak Obama has launched an aggressive assault on America’s liberty.
He has armed America’s enemies, violating his oath of office, by sending money and weapons of war to insurgents in Syria led by Al-Qaeda terrorists.
He has violated federal law by overseeing a cover-up surrounding attorney general Eric Holder’s operation “Fast and Furious”, in the running of guns to Mexican drug cartels.
He has lied to the American people by overseeing a cover-up of the September 11 Benghazi terror attack in Libya which led directly to the deaths of four American citizens.
He has bypassed Congress using executive order prior to the attack on Libya, insisting that congressional approval was not necessary.
He has signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act which includes provisions to permit the abduction and military detention without trial of all US citizens, violating “Habeas corpus” – the right to a fair trial.
And on January 16th 2013, surrounded by children, he has signed twenty three different executive orders for broader gun control in the United States.
Watch the full documentary now - 68 min

PART 6 WHAT OBAMA TOOK FROM US

Muslim Beheads Christians In NJ, Mainstream Media Silent

Yusuf Ibrahim, a Muslim man, targeted and murdered two Coptic Egyptian Christian men who lived and worked in New Jersey. He beheaded them and cut off their hands.
Muslim Beheads Christians In NJ, Mainstream Media Silent http://www.westernjournalism.com/muslim-beheads-christians-in-nj-mainstream-media-silent/ via @WestJournalism

Defying Congress, Obama Sends U.S. Taxes to Russian State Arms Firm

Written by 
Despite a bipartisan federal law prohibiting financial contracts with the Russian government-owned arms giant Rosoboronexport, the Obama administration announced that it would be purchasing another $680 million worth of military helicopters from the state company for the Afghan regime of Hamid Karzai. The contract comes after the Pentagon already spent $411 million with the supplier since May of 2011, bringing the estimated amount of U.S. taxpayer funds funneled to the state-owned behemoth to about $1 billion in recent years.

The latest deal, however, drew furious outrage from across the political spectrum. Critics and lawmakers complained that the controversial scheme would boost Russia’s military-industrial complex even as millions of Americans remain out of work. Other opponents highlighted national security concerns. Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle and human rights groups also expressed opposition to the plan, citing a congressional ban on deals with Rosoboronexport and the fact that the Russian military supplier has been arming rogue regimes around the world. 

Under an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) signed into law by President Obama, the U.S. government is prohibited from sending funds to or entering into contracts with Rosoboronexport, lawmakers noted. The only exception to that prohibition is if the Secretary of Defense deems it to be in the “interest of national security.” Now, a bipartisan coalition of members of Congress led by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) is demanding that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel explain what possible excuse there could be to purchase more military helicopters from the government-owned Russian arms dealer.

“Despite this new law, we learned that the Army intends to enter into a new contract with Rosoboronexport in the coming weeks to procure 20 additional helicopters for the Afghan National Security Forces,” the 10 lawmakers said in a strongly worded March 25 letter sent to Hagel urging him to kill the contract. “This plan runs in direct contravention to both the spirit of the FY13 NDAA and the clear legislative intent of Congress — to ban further business dealings with Rosoboronexport. In our view, any attempt by DoD to utilize prior-year funds would constitute a direct subversion of existing law.”

In the letter, the bipartisan group of U.S. representatives also asked Hagel to prepare a detailed briefing explaining the decision. “What is the national security justification of continuing business with Rosoboronexport?” the lawmakers asked, outraged because the state-owned company has been supplying weapons to the Syrian regime amid a war against Western-backed Islamists. “Relatedly, last year, DoD notified Congress of plans to purchase 33 Mi-17s from Rosoboronexport for the Afghan National Security Forces. What is the national security justification for the additional 20 helicopters this year? ... What steps is DoD taking to ensure that it does not support — financially or otherwise — enablers of mass atrocities?”

Hagel has received the letter and intends to respond, Pentagon spokesman James Gregory was quoted as saying in an e-mail to Russia’s state-run RIA Novosti news agency. “The Department of Defense (DOD) has notified Congress of its intent to contract with Rosoboronexport for 30 additional Mi-17 rotary-wing aircraft to support the Afghanistan National Security Forces (ANSF) Special Mission Wing,” he said. “Given current timelines, the department has determined that Rosoboronexport is the only viable means of meeting ANSF requirements.”

In the Senate, lawmakers are furious as well. Among other concerns expressed by senators was the fact that the Pentagon did not solicit bids from any other company for the helicopters, according to news reports. Speaking to Businessweek, GOP Senator John Cornyn of Texas said that “seems just plain stupid.” Sen. Cornyn is one of 17 senators thus far, including eight Democrats and eight other Republicans, urging the Defense Department to cancel the contract. Experts say there are plenty of helicopter suppliers that could fill the order.

Critics, however, lambasted the decision from all angles. "Aside from throwing almost $700 million to a company owned by the Russian government at a time when Obama has taken a chainsaw to the United States military, subsidizing the Russian defense industry helps it develop more weapons that will be sold to America’s enemies," noted analyst Daniel Greenfield in a piece for FrontPage magazine. "That money will help fund R&D for the next generation of weapons that an American military dismantled by Obama will be facing on the battlefield."

In an analysis offered by the Capitalism Institute, an organization dedicated to advancing free markets and limited government, multiple problems with what it called the "corrupt" deal were highlighted. Among the examples cited in the piece about what was wrong with the contract: giving taxpayer money to Russia, sending more military hardware to the Afghan government, using no-bid contracts, and bypassing Congress. 

"That’s right, this foreign aid is even worse than the aid being given to Egypt, because at least Egypt was buying U.S. hardware," the institute noted, referring to Obama’s controversial decision to send fighter jets and tanks to the Muslim Brotherhood regime. “In the end, like almost all of our foreign policy, this was about power. It’s not about liberty, or security, or the economy. It’s about power brokering. We simply can’t afford this any longer.… People need to know that there’s bipartisan anger over Obama taxing us to give to the Russians."

The John Birch Society, a conservative organization and an affiliate of this magazine, has been sounding the alarm about the Russian government for decades. It also expressed opposition to the latest scheme — not to mention the fact that foreign aid, including arming foreign governments, is not authorized by the Constitution. In a weekly video address, CEO Art Thompson criticized the deal. "Isn't that nice?" he wondered sarcastically. "I guess they didn't inform the generals at the Pentagon who the enemy is."

Thompson also highlighted the fact that the Obama administration was sending advanced military weaponry to the Islamist regime now ruling Egypt after the U.S. government-backed “Arab Spring” overthrew the previous government. Adding insult to injury, the new Muslim Brotherhood-dominated Egyptian government recently announced an “integration” deal with the mass-murdering genocidal regime ruling Sudan, which the U.S. State Department has listed as a state sponsor of terrorism for over two decades.

Other critics of the Rosoboronexport contract pointed to documents released by WikiLeaks suggesting that the Obama campaign had received Russian money. The controversial deal with Russia’s military-industrial complex, however, is not the first time the Pentagon has been embroiled in scandal surrounding its procurement decisions to arm the Afghan regime. The U.S. Air Force, for example, decided to purchase fighter planes from the Brazilian government-controlled company Embraer for the Karzai regime even though the American company Beechcraft said it was willing and able to provide more cost-effective alternatives.

Russia and Brazil, of course, are both members of the so-called “BRICS” — an alliance of socialist and communist-minded regimes that also includes the Communist Party dictatorship ruling mainland China, the African National Congress (ANC)-South African Communist Party (SACP) regime ruling South Africa, and the socialist-oriented Indian government. The BRICS group recently released its latest manifesto calling for a global currency that would eventually displace the increasingly unstable U.S. dollar as the global reserve currency.

The Rosoboronexport contract is also not the first time that the Obama administration has been under fire for cooperating with the Russian military. As The New American reported last year, the administration invited airborne terror troops from Russia to train with U.S. forces on American soil for the first time in history, fueling suspicion and outrage among critics.

“The Russian soldiers are here as invited guests of the U.S. government; this is part of a formal bilateral exchange program between the U.S. and Russia that seeks to develop transparency and promote defense reform,” Cmdr. Wendy L. Snyder, U.S. Defense Press Officer for policy, told The New American in an e-mail. “Aside from typical military training, the exchange will include discussions on the rule of land warfare, developing appropriate rules of engagement, and employing cultural literacy and competency in the tactical environment.”

Analysts are not hopeful, but whether or not the massive public and congressional outcry will end up killing the potentially unlawful contract with Rosoboronexport remains unclear. As Obama told then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev over an open microphone last year before his reelection, “I'll have more flexibility" after winning another term. It appears to critics as though, unless Congress takes serious action, the increased “flexibility” will mean further problems for the United States — at least for the next four years.

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is currently based in Europe. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com.

Related articles:

Russian Troops Coming to U.S. for Terror Drills, DoD Confirms
Obama to Medvedev: "After the Election, I'll Have More Flexibility"
Chuck Hagel a Committed Internationalist
FBI Busts Russian Espionage Network
Chuck Hagel: A Brief Look at Obama's Nominee for Secretary of Defense
Russia's Continued Cold War
Russia Celebrates Victory Day with Military Parade
Russian Red Jihad
Russia Threatens to Kill NATO War in Afghanistan
Decades of Suicidal Policies Vis-à-vis Russia and China
BRICS Regimes Forge New World Bank, Call for Global Currency
Obama-backed Egypt Forging “One Nation” With Sudan Terror Regime

part 5 what obama took from us


Serious Fireworks Are Going Off In The Church Of God In Christ (COGIC) Washington D.C. Jurisdiction–Find Out About The Ugly Lawsuit, Physical Fight, Who Got Arrested, And The Disruption At A Funeral!!!

Posted on August 3, 2012
591


It seems that some very serious fireworks are jumping of in the Church Of God In Christ Washington D.C. Jurisdiction. According to the letter below a very ugly lawsuit is in the works and a physical fight that resulted in Ricky Payton, Jr. Getting arrested.
Allegedly, it has been a great deal of tension between his father, Ricky Payton, Sr., who was the Musical Director at New Bethel Church Of God In Christ and the State Minister of Music for the Washington D.C. Jurisdiction every since it was time for his father to sign his new contract as the musical director for New Bethel.  In the new contact it was stipulated for the church to operate under terms that were not mutually agreed upon.  Payton Sr. refused to sign on the dotted line, and the dissagreement with him and the bishop was on from that point.
It became very diffcult for Ricky Sr to continue his work at the chuch and eventually quit. Also Bishop Coles sent a e-mail that all music duties would be overseen by another person, telling the present Minister of Music his services were no longer needed via email.  The mother of Ricky Sr passed, who was a member of New Bethel the church Bishop Coles aquired after becoming the new bishop after Bishop Howard passed.  It was a great deal of discussion if the funeral would happen at New Bethel, but eventually did even if it was aganist Bishop Coles wishes.
Bishop Coles took issue with Ricky Jr giving any instructions to his new staff and was offended when he entered the sound booth and wanted him to leave.  However Ricky agreed to leave after he played an audio tribute of his grandmother singing “Happy Birthday” to herself .  Interesting how Mrs.Payton funeral landed on her birthday. Bishop Coles son then approached him during the recessional and asked Ricky Jr to keep it moving, then pushed him and Ricky Jr dropped his son and tussled with Kevin, Bishop Coles son. Then Ricky Jr moved him out of his way like you would pick up a piece of furniture that resulted in him getting charges pressed against him.  Due to keep an altercation from happening, Ricky Jr was taken away from the church by family members and missed the graveside services for his beloved grandmother.  Bishop Coles was unaware that Ricky had been taken away and came running out of the church jerking off his ministeral collar and suit jacket looking for Ricky Jr in a manner that was clear he wanted to fight.
Due to Kevin Coles being an attorney and afraid that Ricky Jr was going to come back to do something as a result of the altercation at his grandmother’s funeral, he filed for a restraining order to make sure Ricky Jr could not come back to the church or near him or his father, Bishop Coles. Ricky Jr. was leaving the courthouse for the hearing about the restraining order, Kevin walked up to him with a police officer and said “This man has assaulted me!!”. Ricky Jr was arrested due to the warrant Kevin had taken out for his arrest that Ricky Jr was unaware of at all.
“This situation has not even allowed me or my family the proper time to deal with the death of my grandmother.” Ricky Jr. said.  ”This is all spiritual warfare! “I know exactly what to do to win this battle.”
It seems that Bishop Coles is low down to behave in such manner at a woman’s funeral that was a member of the church of 40 years that he is the new pastor of even if by defalt.
Also Bishop Cole allegedly totally disrupted the funeral, turned off the air, passing out cook out flyers during the funeral. Read all about it in Dr. Leonard Lovett’s letter to Bishop Neavell Anthony Coles below:

Have you seen this letter? I just received this today. I will call you later today. Got to make a run.
August 3, 2012
Bishop Neavelle Anthony. Coles
6440 Piney Branch Road, NW
Washington, DC 20012
Dear Bishop Coles:
I am writing you as a brother in Christ first and as Ecumenical Officer of the Church of God in Christ committed to the task of promoting unity within the Body of Christ. There can never be real unity and a lasting peace without justice. Any such peace is a false peace. I am guided by the ancient word of Scripture in Roman 14: 19 [KJV] “Let us seek after those things that make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.” [LAB] “In this way aim for harmony in the church and try to build each other up.” Be forewarned, this is a word of “tough love.” I am deeply disappointed, burdened and disturbed by your egregious behavior for quite sometime as leader of the Washington D.C. Jurisdiction of the Church of God in Christ. Several of us have expressed our concern through an active case before the Board of Bishops of the Church of God in Christ to which we have pledged due diligence and eternal vigilance. I am writing because I have made a vow to God that I will refuse to be silent anymore in the face of blatant evil in the church whether it be personal or institutional.
For several years you have had the unmitigated gall to stand before the Jurisdiction and repeatedly state that you will lead by the Bible and the Constitution of the Church of God in Christ. None of us regardless to our titles and status are exempt from critique. Sometimes it takes one major crisis to fully expose and unmask who we really are from the inside out. In Proverbs 20: 28ff [KJV] “The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord searching all the inward parts of the belly.” [LAB] “A man’s conscience is the Lord’s search light exposing his inner motives If a king is kind, honest and fair, his kingdom stands secure.” Allow me to paraphrase…If a (Bishop) is kind, honest and fair, his (jurisdiction) stands secure.
The ancient writ further admonishes us that “Pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall.” Proverbs 16: 18v. Bishop Coles when anyone misuses the Scripture, they appear to be breaking God’s law. In reality they will inevitably be broken by God’s law. I am disturbed when you as a reputed leader within the COGIC abuses your authority to intimidate and threaten God’s people for selfish reasons. Bishop Cole, please understand I am not the least bit intimidated by you. How insensitive and indifferent can you be to sit in a funeral service and incite an incident with the grandson of the deceased? Your lack of judgment resulted in an embarrassing altercation as the family processed based on several eyewitness accounts? (During the final rites of Dr. Ricky Payton’s mother, Bishop Cole requested that his son Kevin go up to the broadcast booth and request that Ricky Payton Jr. leave the area. Ricky was there to play a tape of his grandmothers voice singing on her birthday…all a part of the printed program.)
Bishop Coles, your attempt to block a hearse proceeding to the cemetery was not only disrespectful toward the family but despicable toward the saints. We are not only concerned but ashamed of your behavior as a leader. We are also concerned about your son Kevin’s behavior on Friday July 27, 2012 at the entrance of the Washington DC Superior courtyard. Less than one hour after the judge had admonished the three parties named in the law suit [Bishop Cole, his son Kevin and Ricky Payton Jr.] to negotiate, Kevin Cole used his legal knowledge to take advantage of Ricky Jr. by instructing the police to arrest him for having assaulted him under a second citing rule.
Bishop Cole, were you as biblically literate as you portray you would have at least been aware of I Corinthians 6: 1 – 7verse (LAB) admonishing Christians not to use the civil courts to settle adverse issues between them.
“How is it when you have something against another Christian you “go to law.” And ask a heathen court to decide the matter instead of taking it to other Christians to decide which of you is right? 2v – Don’t you know that someday we Christians are going to judge and govern the world? So why can’t you decide these little things among yourselves? 3v.- Don’t you realize that we Christians will judge and reward the very angels in heaven? So you should be able to decide your problems down here on earth easily enough. 4v.- Why then go to outside judges who are not even Christians. 5v.- I am trying to make you ashamed. Isn’t there anyone in all the church who is wise enough to decide these arguments. 6v.- But, instead, one Christian sue another and accuses his Christian brother in front of unbelievers. 7v.- To have such lawsuits at all is a real defeat for you as Christians Why not just accept mistreatment and leave it at that?” It would be far more honoring to the Lord to let yourselves be cheated.”
Bishop Coles, you may win the law suit but you have lost the confidence of many people in the jurisdiction because you have undermined your ability to lead by your callous behavior and poor judgment. This could have been an opportunity to have an open meeting and openly discuss differences. At this stage of your journey you should be leading as a father in the faith. You should be a reconciler rather than a divider. You should be healing rather than wounding. Galatians 6:7 strongly admonishes us to “Be not deceived God is not marked .Whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap.” [JB Phillips translates this verse to “Don’t be under any illusion, you cannot make a fool of God.”
When you were appointed Bishop in 2004, I offered my personal assistance to you, to this day you have never sought advice. However, I am not offended by your arrogance. There is safety in a multitude of counsel. When will you get rid of your foolish pride and false humility. The word of Scripture admonishes us that “judgment must begin at the House of God.” I believe that time has come.
Sincerely for the Cause of the Kingdom,
Dr. Leonard Lovett,
Ecumenical Officer, COGIC
Office of Ecumenical Relations
107 S. West Street Ste. 422 Alexandria, Va. 22314

Ricky Payton, Jr./Music Producer
Wow! What a shocker, but this is developing…
 OBAMA TOOK OUR RIGHTS TO LOVE JESUS

Pentagon Taps Anti-Christian Extremist for Religious Tolerance Policy

 2820
 189
 68K
 

Print Article Send a Tip

“Today, we face incredibly well-funded gangs of fundamentalist Christian monsters who terrorize their fellow Americans by forcing their weaponized and twisted version of Christianity upon their helpless subordinates in our nation’s armed forces.”

Those words were recently written by Mikey Weinstein, founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), in a column he wrote for the Huffington Post. Weinstein will be a consultant to the Pentagon to develop new policies on religious tolerance, including a policy for court-martialing military chaplains who share the Christian Gospel during spiritual counseling of American troops.
Weinstein decries what he calls the “virulent religious oppression” perpetrated by conservative Christians, whom he refers to as “monstrosities” and “pitiable unconstitutional carpetbaggers,” comparing them to “bigots” in the Deep South during the civil rights era.
He cites Dr. James Dobson—the famous Christian founder of Focus on the Family—as “illustrating the extremist, militant nature of these virulently homophobic organizations’ rhetorically-charged propaganda.” Regarding those who teach orthodox Christian beliefs from the Bible, Weinstein concludes, “Let’s call these ignoble actions what they are: the senseless and cowardly squallings of human monsters.”
Weinstein then endorses the ultra-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), who publishes a list of “hate groups.” Alongside truly deplorable organizations like the KKK, the SPLC’s list includes a host of traditional Christian organizations (for their support of traditional marriage) and Tea Party organizations (for supporting limited government). Weinstein says SPLC correctly labels them all as “hate groups.”
Floyd Lee Corkins—the first person ever convicted of domestic terrorism in federal court under the laws of Washington, D.C.—told the FBI that he chose his intended shooting spree targets from the SPLC website's map. Corkins was arrested at the offices of the Family Research Council (FRC) after shooting a security guard in August 2012. His court documents state that Corkins intended to kill as many people as possible.
Weinstein also supports Lt. Col. Jack Rich, the Army officer who wrote to subordinate officers that soldiers who hold traditional Christian beliefs agreeing with organizations on SPLC’s “hate group” list are incompatible with “Army values" and should be carefully watched and excluded from military service.
According to Weinstein, “We should as a nation effusively applaud Lt. Col. Rich.” He adds that the nation should “venture further” than Rich’s recommendations, saying, “We MUST vigorously support the continuing efforts to expose pathologically anti-gay, Islamaphobic, and rabidly intolerant agitators for what they are: die-hard enemies of the United States Constitution. Monsters, one and all. To do anything less would be to roll out a red carpet to those who would usher in a blood-drenched, draconian era of persecutions, nationalistic militarism, and superstitious theocracy.”
Many media outlets are silent on this disturbing new alliance between fanatical secularists and leaders in the Pentagon appointed by President Barack Obama and Secretary Chuck Hagel, under which the U.S. military would officially consult with someone with such foaming-at-the-mouth passionate hostility toward traditional Christians, including Evangelicals and devout Catholics. The military—America’s most heroic and noble institution—includes countless people of faith, and this represents a radical departure from the U.S. military’s warm embrace of people of faith in its ranks.
Yet the little coverage this story is getting is positive, such as this Washington Post column that somehow manages not to carry any of these frightening quotes from Weinstein and instead actually endorses the Pentagon’s meeting with him. Sally Quinn’s Post column also approvingly quotes MRFF Advisory Board member Larry Wilkerson as saying, “Sexual assault and proselytizing, according to Wilkerson, ‘are absolutely destructive of the bonds that keep soldiers together.’”
Did you get that? They say having someone share the Christian gospel with you is akin to being raped. Weinstein makes sure there are no doubts, being quoted by the Post as adding, “This is a national security threat. What is happening [aside from sexual assault] is spiritual rape. And what the Pentagon needs is to understand is that it is sedition and treason. It should be punished.”
Another MRFF Advisory Board member, Ambassador Joe Wilson (the far-left husband of CIA employee Valerie Plame from the Iraq War’s yellow-cake uranium scandal a decade ago), said a military chaplain “is to minister to spiritual needs. You don’t proselytize. It’s a workplace violation.”
In other words, it should be the official policy of the United States to decree what a human being’s spiritual needs are, and punish for violations a military officer who is an ordained clergyman who attempts to share his own personal faith with another service member when discussing religious matters. You cannot imagine such a thing ever happening under any previous president.
Weinstein goes on:
If these fundamentalist Christian monsters of human degradation … and tyranny cannot broker or barter your acceptance of their putrid theology, then they crave for your universal silence in the face of their rapacious reign of theocratic terror. Indeed, they ceaselessly lust, ache, and pine for you to do absolutely nothing to thwart their oppression. Comply, my friends, and you become as monstrously savage as are they. I beg you, do not feed these hideous monsters with your stoic lethargy, callousness and neutrality. Do not lubricate the path of their racism, bigotry, and prejudice. Doing so directly threatens the national security of our beautiful nation.
God help us now when someone with such visceral hatred of conservative Christians—literally tens of millions of Americans—who says sharing this gospel is “spiritual rape” is helping develop policies for how to deal with Christians in the military.
Weinstein says those guilty of this “treason” must be “punished.” Under federal law, the penalty for treason is death. And the Obama administration is sitting down to talk with this man to craft new policies for “religious tolerance” in our military.
Breitbart News legal columnist Ken Klukowski is senior fellow for religious liberty at the Family Research Council and on faculty at Liberty University School of Law. 

obama took our right to a fair vote

Here’s Your “Black Panther at Philadelphia Polling Place” Photo

397 Comments and 0 Reactions
 

This morning, after voting in my own neighborhood, I stopped by the polling place on the 1200 block of Fairmount Avenue, the same location where the New Black Panther Party stirred up controversy during the 2008 election. Sure enough, a uniformed member of the New Black Panther Party stood in the entrance area of the building. I identified myself and told him that I was going to take his picture. “No pictures, please,” he replied. I then asked him if he was there to provide security. “No comment,” was all he had to say.
Would you care if a uniformed Black Panther seemed to be standing guard in front of your polling place?
[PHOTO: Victor Fiorillo for The Philly Post]
 
 

Charges Against 'New Black Panthers' Dropped by Obama Justice Dept.

 Charges brought against three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense under the Bush administration have been dropped by the Obama Justice Department, FOX News has learned.
The charges stemmed from an incident at a Philadelphia polling place on Election Day 2008 when three members of the party were accused of trying to threaten voters and block poll and campaign workers by the threat of force -- one even brandishing what prosecutors call a deadly weapon.
The three black panthers, Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson were charged in a civil complaint in the final days of the Bush administration with violating the voter rights act by using coercion, threats and intimidation. Shabazz allegedly held a nightstick or baton that prosecutors said he pointed at people and menacingly tapped it. Prosecutors also say he "supports racially motivated violence against non-blacks and Jews."
The Obama administration won the case last month, but moved to dismiss the charges on May 15.
Click here to see FOX News video from the scene on election day.
Click to watch the incident on YouTube.
The complaint says the men hurled racial slurs at both blacks and whites.
A poll watcher who provided an affidavit to prosecutors in the case noted that Bartle Bull, who worked as a civil rights lawyer in the south in the 1960's and is a former campaign manager for Robert Kennedy, said it was the most blatant form of voter intimidation he had ever seen.
In his affidavit, obtained by FOX News, Bull wrote "I watched the two uniformed men confront voters and attempt to intimidate voters. They were positioned in a location that forced every voter to pass in close proximity to them. The weapon was openly displayed and brandished in plain sight of voters."
He also said they tried to "interfere with the work of other poll observers ... whom the uniformed men apparently believed did not share their preferences politically," noting that one of the panthers turned toward the white poll observers and said "you are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."
A spokesman for the Department of Justice told FOX News, "The Justice Department was successful in obtaining an injunction that prohibits the defendant who brandished a weapon outside a Philadelphia polling place from doing so again. Claims were dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law. The department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote."