Saturday, May 11, 2013

State Department: Secretary Responsible for Security Failures

 932
 34
 5299
 

Print Article Send a Tip

Today, speaking about the despicable and stomach-wrenching attacks by Islamists on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and our embassy in Cairo, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked: “How could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction?”



That single line is the most damning indictment of Hillary Clinton’s State Department that could ever be penned. It demonstrates her complete lack of knowledge about the region, her failure to anticipate security threats, and worst of all, her willful ignorance about the Islamists that she and President Obama trusted to take over Libya and Egypt.


“How could this happen?”


Clinton, as Secretary of State, should know the answer to that question. That she didn’t anticipate even the remote possibility of the murder of our ambassador to Libya by her erstwhile friends led to his death. The Secretary of State is responsible for ensuring the security of our embassies and consulates and staff, as the State Department website plainly acknowledges:


The Secretary of State, and by extension, the Chief of Mission (COM), are responsible for developing and implementing security policies and programs that provide for the protection of all U.S. Government personnel (including accompanying dependents) on official duty abroad. This mission is executed through the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS). Personal and facility protection are the most critical elements of the DS mission abroad as they directly impact upon the Department’s ability to carry out its foreign policy. With terrorist organizations and coalitions operating across international borders, the threat of terrorism against U.S. interests remains great. Therefore, any U.S. mission overseas can be a target even if identified as being in a low-threat environment.


Even the State Department website acknowledges that the threat in places like Libya and Egypt “remains great,” even if targets are in a “low-threat environment,” which Benghazi and Cairo are certainly not.


Yet the evidence shows that despite ample evidence that Libyan Islamist terrorists were about to take action against US interests – including a taped message from Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri released the day before the attacks, as well as a recent history of multiple attacks on diplomats in Benghazi -- Hillary Clinton did nothing.


Actually, it’s worse than that: the consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed was an “interim facility” with zero Marines. None. Instead, it was staffed by Libyan security officers, who according to CBS News, told Ambassador Stevens to hide in a second building, then promptly directed the Islamist mob to him. He was murdered and dragged through the streets.


And what about Egypt? The Cairo Embassy is under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of State. The Cairo Embassy, of course, was busily tweeting just before it was attacked, condemning “the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.” After the Embassy was breached, they doubled down on the tweet, stating, “This morning’s condemnation still stands.” Then Clinton herself released a statement on the consulate attacks in Libya, in which she stated, “The US deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.”


Hillary Clinton is the Secretary of State. She is responsible for the security of State Department officials abroad, and she is responsible too for their public actions. When it comes to the security threats and the Cairo apologies, the question isn't "How could this happen?" It's the same question she asked of President George W. Bush in 2002, politicizing the September 11 attacks: What did Hillary Clinton know, and when did she know it?

Obama Has Been Indicted For War Crimes! Headline News:

5 rating, 7 votes5 rating, 7 votes (+5 rating, 7 votes, rated)
You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
April 18, 2013 in Activism

image
                                                          Alex Jones: “The Boss” …
This is a clip from “Infowars Nightly News”… 17/04/13…  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axQtAFmtVA 
Please watch it for a concise evaluation of the evidence, what its value is, and how the executive, by law, must be arrested for “War Crimes”… ( Article by Dr Steve Pieczenik with added commentary by Otter Walks on Two Feet… )
Obama is No Longer the President! He No Longer is Commander of U.S. Military Forces!
G. Bush Jr. and Clinton are culpable, as are those Who Conspired against “The Republic” !
You want “The Fed Ended?  You want “The Wars” stopped?  WE DO NOT HAVE A LEGAL STANDING PRESIDENT!!!
“We The People” Must continue our Republic,  by the means invested in the writings of its Foundational documents, we are told… It is our right, “IT IS OUR DUTY” —- “OUR DUTY”—- to Act upon Those, Both FOREIGN and DOMESTIC ! 
Here, Benjamin Franklin is quoted twice:  ”They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”…  
“Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates”…
Commentary by Otter Walks on Two Feet… 18/04/13

Leftist Loons & Pro-Shariah Muslims Protest Proposed Tennesse Shariah Law

Posted by Jim Hoft on Thursday, March 3, 2011, 7:51 PM

 
 

Civil rights activist Victor Abdulla of the Masjid Al-Islam mosque in Nashville, Tenn., speaks at a Tuesday, March 1, 2011, press conference outside the Tennessee Capitol in Nashville in opposition to a legislative proposal to make it a felony to follow some versions of the Islamic code known as Shariah.… Read more »
(AP/Erik Schelzig)
The local Muslim harliners, of course, are outraged that they will not be allowed to follow the Shariah discriminatory code.

Tennessee pro-Shariah Muslims and a group of leftist loons held a protest at the Tennessee Capitol yesterday. They were protesting against the proposed state anti-Shariah law.
Tennessee.com reported, via ROP:
Local Muslim, Jewish and Christian leaders gathered near the Tennessee Capitol on Tuesday to ask that an anti-Shariah law be withdrawn from consideration by the state legislature.
If passed, they fear, the law would make it illegal to be Muslim in Tennessee, although the bill’s supporters say it specifically targets groups that support terrorism.
“All of a sudden, I pray using the Koran or the Sunnas of the Prophet, and it’s a crime,” said Imam Yusuf Abdullah of Masjid Al-Islam in Nashville. “What kind of bill is that?”
But Sen. Bill Ketron, R-Murfreesboro, said Muslims have nothing to fear from the bill he introduced in the state Senate because it targets terrorism, not religion.
“There are different arms of Shariah, and the arm in my bill has nothing to do with their religious practices,” he told the Daily News Journal. “I am a strong constitutionalist, and I believe in the right to worship.”
The bill exempts the peaceful practice of Islam. But it also claims that Shariah law requires its followers to support overthrowing the U.S. and Tennessee constitutions and governments.
“The knowing adherence to sharia and to foreign sharia authorities constitutes a conspiracy to further the legal, political and military doctrine and system which embraces the law of jihad,” the law reads.
That raises concerns, said Jim Blumstein, a constitutional law scholar at Vanderbilt University. Laws can ban crimes, he said. But banning religious beliefs or practices is another matter.
“A law that is focused on anti-social conduct should be taken seriously and examined,” he said. “A law that equates religious exercise with anti-social conduct is very problematic.”
Manifesto of the Muslim Brotherhood in America
Category : Islamization
Published by Snakedoc on 2012/3/9
In 2008, five leaders of the Muslim Charity (The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development) were convicted on 108 criminal counts, including support of terrorism, money laundering and tax fraud. The group was accused of funneling millions of dollars to the Palestinian militant group Hamas, an Islamist organization the government declared to be a terrorist group in 1995. During this trial a document was uncovered that has come to be know as the "Manifesto of the Muslim Brotherhood in America" and provides the “General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America“. This document is titled "An Explanatory Memorandum On the General Strategic Goal for the Group (Brotherhood) In North America" and is dated 5/22/1991. In the introductory letter contained in the Manifesto, Mohamed Akram stated that this was a "long-term plan…approved and adopted" by the Shura Council in 1987.

Some noteworthy quotes from the document are as follows:

Page 4 - The general strategic goal of the Group in America which was approved by the Shura Council and the Organizational Conference for the year [1987] is "Enabled of Islam in North America, meaning: establishing an effective and a stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslum Brotherhood which adopts Muslims' causes domestically and globally, and which works to expand the observant Muslim base, aims at unifying and directing Muslims' efforts, presents Islam as a civilization alternative, and supports the global Islamic State wherever it is".

Page 7 - The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal.

On page 18 of the document there is a list of 29 American based organizations that are connected to and sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood.
These include (but are not limited to) the following:
COUNCIL ON AMERICAN-ISLAMIC RELATIONS.
ISLAMIC SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA.
MUSLIM STUDENTS ASSOCIATION.
MUSLIM BUSINESSMEN ASSOCIATION.
MUSLIM YOUTH OF NORTH AMERICA.
ISLAMIC ASSOCIATION FOR PALESTINE.
ISLAMIC CIRCLE OF NORTH AMERICA.
The Muslim Brotherhood has also been tied to the terror group HAMAS.

If anyone doubts that this process is being successfully used in the United States today please note the following:
1 - Prior to the terrorist attacks of 9-11 there were 1,209 Islamic Centers (Mosques) in the United States. As of the end of 2011 there were 2,106.
2 - According to the PEW Research Center, by 2030 the Muslim population is expected to double in the United States and triple in Canada.

I would highly recommend that everyone download and read the entire Manifesto. A copy of the original document can be found at: http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/PDF/GovtExM.pdf

Richard Catt

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/47815/ ... migrated-under-bushobama/
[/left]]http://www.pewforum.org/future-of-the-global-muslim-population-regional-americas.aspx

Manifesto of the Muslim Brotherhood in America    Bookmark and Share

Published by Snakedoc on 2012/3/9  
In 2008, five leaders of the Muslim Charity (The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development) were convicted on 108 criminal counts, including support of terrorism, money laundering and tax fraud. The group was accused of funneling millions of dollars to the Palestinian militant group Hamas, an Islamist organization the government declared to be a terrorist group in 1995. During this trial a document was uncovered that has come to be know as the "Manifesto of the Muslim Brotherhood in America" and provides the “General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America“. This document is titled "An Explanatory Memorandum On the General Strategic Goal for the Group (Brotherhood) In North America" and is dated 5/22/1991. In the introductory letter contained in the Manifesto, Mohamed Akram stated that this was a "long-term plan…approved and adopted" by the Shura Council in 1987.

Some noteworthy quotes from the document are as follows:

Page 4 - The general strategic goal of the Group in America which was approved by the Shura Council and the Organizational Conference for the year [1987] is "Enabled of Islam in North America, meaning: establishing an effective and a stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslum Brotherhood which adopts Muslims' causes domestically and globally, and which works to expand the observant Muslim base, aims at unifying and directing Muslims' efforts, presents Islam as a civilization alternative, and supports the global Islamic State wherever it is".

Page 7 - The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal.

On page 18 of the document there is a list of 29 American based organizations that are connected to and sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood.
These include (but are not limited to) the following:
COUNCIL ON AMERICAN-ISLAMIC RELATIONS.
ISLAMIC SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA.
MUSLIM STUDENTS ASSOCIATION.
MUSLIM BUSINESSMEN ASSOCIATION.
MUSLIM YOUTH OF NORTH AMERICA.
ISLAMIC ASSOCIATION FOR PALESTINE.
ISLAMIC CIRCLE OF NORTH AMERICA.
The Muslim Brotherhood has also been tied to the terror group HAMAS.

If anyone doubts that this process is being successfully used in the United States today please note the following:
1 - Prior to the terrorist attacks of 9-11 there were 1,209 Islamic Centers (Mosques) in the United States. As of the end of 2011 there were 2,106.
2 - According to the PEW Research Center, by 2030 the Muslim population is expected to double in the United States and triple in Canada.

I would highly recommend that everyone download and read the entire Manifesto. A copy of the original document can be found at: http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/PDF/GovtExM.pdf

Richard Catt

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/47815/ ... migrated-under-bushobama/
[/left]]http://www.pewforum.org/future-of-the-global-muslim-population-regional-americas.aspx

Navigate through the articles
Terrorism

  INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST SYMBOLS DATABASE
  Muslim Brotherhood (1)

back


Other Muslim Brotherhood Symbols:

  Description: A brown square frames a green circle with a white perimeter. Two swords cross inside the circle beneath a red Koran. The cover of the Koran says: "Truly, it is the Generous Koran." The Arabic beneath the sword handles translates as "Be prepared."

Explanation: The swords reinforce the group's militancy and, as traditional weapons, symbolize historic Islam. They also reinforce the group's commitment to jihad. The Koran denotes the group's spiritual foundation. The motto, "Be prepared," is a reference to a Koranic verse that talks of preparing to fight the enemies of God.


| Name Variations | Overview | Focus of Operations | Major Attacks | Leaders | Ideology | Goals | Methods | Sponsors | U.S.- Related Activities |

Name Variations
Society of Muslim Brothers, The Brotherhood, Al-Ikhwan

Overview
The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, an Egyptian seeking to overthrow Egypt's monarchy, expel western influences and establish an Islamic theocracy. Since its founding, the Muslim Brotherhood, a Sunni Islamic movement, has pursued these goals through political activity, ideological influence and acts of violence. The group became known for its extensive terrorist operations, including the failed assassination attempt of Egyptian leader Gamal Abdul Nasser. Its activities led to violent crackdowns by the governments of Egypt and Syria; it is banned in those countries.

While forced to limit its violent activity, the Muslim Brotherhood continues to have a large following throughout the Muslim world, where many of its supporters are politically active. The group has influenced many terrorist leaders – including Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri – and many of its members have engaged in terrorist activities.

Focus of Operations
Headquartered in Egypt; satellite groups throughout the Muslim world

Major Attacks
The Muslim Brotherhood no longer openly conducts terrorist operations; it is primarily a political organization that supports terrorism and terrorist causes. Many of its members, however, have engaged in terrorist activities and the group has spawned numerous terrorist groups, such as Hamas and Egyptian Islamic Jihad.
  • 2002: Suspected in suicide bombing in Grozny.
  • 1979: Suspected in attacking Syrian military academy in Aleppo. 50 Syrian artillery cadets killed
Leaders
  • Leader: Muhammad Mahdi Akef (in Egypt)
  • Founder: Hassan al-Banna (assassinated, February 12, 1949)
  • Ideological influence: Sayyid Qutb (executed by Egypt, August 29, 1966)
Ideology
The Muslim Brotherhood's theology is based on the doctrine of salafiyya: the belief that present-day Muslims have been corrupted and must return to the pristine form of Islam practiced at the time of the Prophet Muhammad. Many Muslim Brotherhood members believe in a radical application of Jihad, which was developed by their ideological leader Sayyid Qutb. Qutb advocated a violent and belligerent approach to the concept of Jihad. This ideology was adopted by terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda, and Hamas. The group motto is: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Koran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope." The Muslim Brotherhood aspires to establish a caliphate unifying all the Muslim nations.

Goals
Establishing theocracy in Egypt, the Middle East, ultimately worldwide.

Methods
Preaching, political agitation and advocating terrorism. The brotherhood participates in elections and attempts to gain influence through the political process. Although it is banned in Egypt, members of the brotherhood have been elected to the legislature there and in Jordan. It also promotes violence against the U.S. and Israel.

Sponsors
Although banned by various governments, the Muslim Brotherhood presence is generally tolerated amongst Middle Eastern countries.

U.S.-Related Activities
A document that has surfaced in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a charity long suspected of supporting terrorists by funneling money to Hamas and its officials, purports to outline a strategic vision of the future of Islamic work in North America.  The document - An Explanatory Memorandum On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America - appears to be the work of the Muslim Brotherhood.  It is written by Mohamed Akram (Adlouni), an alleged Muslim Brotherhood official and one of many unindicted coconspirators in the HLF trial. Some observers suggest that this document identifies a conspiracy by the Muslim Brotherhood to convert the United States to an Islamic nation.  Other observers suggest that the document proves how several Islamic organizations are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and are working together to achieve the goals listed in the document. 
Home | Search | About ADL | Donate | Contact ADL | Privacy Policy |
| Update Your E-mail Preferences |

Help support our work by sending your tax deductible gift to:
ADL, 605 Third Ave., New York, NY 10158, Attn: Development.

To speak to an ADL professional about giving opportunities
Please call 866-FUND-ADL or 866-386-3235
We thank you for your support
© 2013 Anti-Defamation League. All rights reserved. The Anti-Defamation League is a not-for-profit organization recognized as tax-exempt under Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3).
THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD'S "GENERAL STRATEGIC GOAL" FOR NORTH AMERICA


In July 2007, seven key leaders of an Islamic charity known as the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) went on trial for charges that they had: (a) provided "material support and resources" to a foreign terrorist organization (namely Hamas); (b) engaged in money laundering; and (c) breached the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which prohibits transactions that threaten American national security. Along with the seven named defendants, the U.S. government released a list of approximately 300 "unindicted co-conspirators" and "joint venturers." During the course of the HLF trial, many incriminating documents were entered into evidence. Perhaps the most significant of these was "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America," by the Muslim Brotherhood operative Mohamed Akram. Federal investigators found Akram's memo in the home of Ismael Elbarasse, a founder of the Dar Al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, Virginia, during a 2004 search. Elbarasse was a member of the Palestine Committee, which the Muslim Brotherhood had created to support Hamas in the United States.

Written sometime in 1987 but not formally published until May 22, 1991, Akram's 18-page document listed the Brotherhood’s 29 likeminded "organizations of our friends" that shared the common goal of dismantling American institutions and turning the U.S. into a Muslim nation. These "friends" were identified by Akram and the Brotherhood as groups that could help convince Muslims "that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands ... so that ... God's religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions."

Akram was well aware that in the U.S., it would be extremely difficult to promote Islam by means of terror attacks. Thus the “grand jihad” that he and his Brotherhood comrades envisioned was not a violent one involving bombings and shootings, but rather a stealth (or “soft”) jihad aiming to impose Islamic law (Sharia) over every region of the earth by incremental, non-confrontational means, such as working to “expand the observant Muslim base”; to “unif[y] and direc[t] Muslims' efforts”; and to “present Islam as a civilization alternative.” At its heart, Akram's document details a plan to conquer and Islamize the United States – not as an ultimate objective, but merely as a stepping stone toward the larger goal of one day creating “the global Islamic state.”

In line with this objective, Akram and the Brotherhood resolved to "settle" Islam and the Islamic movement within the United States, so that the Muslim religion could be "enabled within the souls, minds and the lives of the people of the country.” Akram explained that this could be accomplished “through the establishment of firmly-rooted organizations on whose bases civilization, structure and testimony are built.” He urged Muslim leaders to make “a shift from the collision mentality to the absorption mentality,” meaning that they should abandon any tactics involving defiance or confrontation, and seek instead to implant into the larger society a host of seemingly benign Islamic groups with ostensibly unobjectionable motives; once those groups had gained a measure of public acceptance, they would be in a position to more effectively promote societal transformation by the old Communist technique of “boring from within.”

“The heart and the core” of this strategy, said Akram, was contingent upon these groups' ability to develop “a mastery of the art of 'coalitions.'” That is, by working synergistically they could complement, augment, and amplify one another's efforts. Added Akram: “The big challenge that is ahead of us is how to turn these seeds or 'scattered' elements into comprehensive, stable, 'settled' organizations that are connected with our Movement and which fly in our orbit and take orders from our guidance.” The ultimate objective was not only an enlarged Muslim presence, but also implementation of the Brotherhood objectives of transforming pluralistic societies, particularly America, into Islamic states, and sweeping away Western notions of legal equality, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech.
Akram and the Brotherhood understood that in order to succeed in this endeavor, they needed to appeal to different strata of the American population in different ways; that whereas some people could be influenced by messages delivered from a religious perspective, others would be more responsive to messages delivered by educators, or bankers, or political figures, or journalists, etc. Thus, Akram's blueprint for the advancement of the Islamic movement stressed the need to form a coalition of groups coming from the worlds of education; religious proselytization; political activism; audio and video production; print media; banking and finance; the physical sciences; the social sciences; professional and business networking; cultural affairs; the publishing and distribution of books; children and teenagers; women's rights; vocational concerns; and jurisprudence.

By promoting the Islamic movement on such a wide variety of fronts, the Brotherhood and its allies could multiply exponentially their influence. Toward that end, the Akram/Brotherhood “Explanatory Memorandum” named the following 29 groups as the organizations they believed could collaborate effectively to destroy America from within – “if they all march according to one plan”:



By setting up these many front groups, the Muslim Brotherhood was emulating the Communist Party tactic of creating interlocking front groups during the Cold War in order to confuse its enemies and make it more difficult to comb

Buried in the more than 800 pages of the bipartisan legislation (.pdf) is language mandating the creation of the innocuously-named “photo tool,” a massive federal database administered by the Department of Homeland Security and containing names, ages, Social Security numbers and photographs of everyone in the country with a driver’s license or other state-issued photo ID.

Buried in the more than 800 pages of the bipartisan legislation (.pdf)  is language mandating the creation of the innocuously-named “photo tool,” a massive federal database administered by the Department of Homeland Security and containing names, ages, Social Security numbers and photographs of everyone in the country with a driver’s license or other state-issued photo ID.

DHS Whistleblower Says War On Terror Is A Charade – Real Targets Are American Patriots


USSA-Nazis-87255267415
Julia Davis, a former Customs and Border Protections Officer, was falsely declared a domestic terrorist and subjected to retaliatory efforts against her by the Department of Homeland Security. Her home was raided by a 27 man “special response team.” She was twice falsely arrested and imprisoned, but later exonerated. She is now a national security expert and has put out a historical documentary titled Top Priority: The Terror Within. She claims that the War On Terror by the Department of Homeland Security is a charade and that the agency seems to be targeting concerned American patriots.
Davis says her documentary is about her time with DHS in dealing with applicants from countries with ties to terrorism, who are seeking to come into the United States.
She says that they had “very specific alerts” that on July 4, 2004 that members of Al-Qaeda would be attempting to cross the border from Mexico into the US. The land port where Ms. Davis worked is the largest and busiest land port in the world, San Ysidro Port. She says that Islamic clerics say this is the best place to breech the US border because of the large number of people coming through.
She says that she began to input the information into the DHS database, which she was required to do as a supervisor, and she noticed that she had a high number of people from terrorist countries set to come through her port on July 4. She says there were 23 people form terrorist countries who were to be admitted into the US on that day. She said the average number of people coming from terrorist countries would normally be 5-10 per month. So to have 23 in a ten hour span was “alarming.”
But it goes further. Davis says that none of these people were subjected to routine checks that were in place for applicants from terrorist countries. According to Davis, “They were supposed to be fingerprinted. They were supposed to be asked why they left the US, why they were coming back, where they were living… all these different procedures that would have taken approximately an hour for each person. None of it was done.”
In fact, in some of the cases, the individuals didn’t fill out the paperwork or provide the documents they were supposed to in order to come into the United States.
Davis indicated that the Port Director was not informed about the situation and that when she went higher up to Intel and she said she “nearly fell down” when she found a “closed door.” The entire Intel office was “given the day off so that they could Bar-B-Q on the Fourth of July.” Ultimately there was no one that she could report her findings to. Coincidence? I think not.
The Port Director wasn’t worried either. He simply told her to put it in their box and they would get to it when they had opportunity. This was in direct opposition to what their manual stated was to happen, according to Ms. Davis. They were to get the information to a joint terrorism task force.
That night, since she was no longer under the Port Director’s orders, she contacted the FBI to inform them of the situation. In her mind, she was simply being patriotic and informing people who should be able to use the information to deal with a very real threat. She simply wanted to make sure that while others were barbequing that nothing was going to be blown up in the United States.
From that time on, every day when she came to work she was being investigated for one thing or another. She says everything they brought up to here was frivolous and ridiculous and she believes it was an attempt to get her fired to discredit anything she would say. All of this was because the FBI knew the information and DHS was embarrassed that the information came to them the way it did.
Within a period of two weeks, Davis was the subject of 19 investigations. By the time she sued Homeland Security there had been 54 investigations! On top of that, she was declared a domestic terrorist! My fellow Americans, this is a woman that sought to ensure the safety of our border! She was vigilant at her job and according to what she is saying, our government, if the allegations are true, has acted not only negligently against the American people, but criminally against her.
Davis’ home was raided by a 27 man SWAT team in a Blackhawk helicopter. She said they spent more time and utilized more man power raiding her home without a warrant than the government used to raid the alleged compound of Osama bin Laden.
Davis believes that no one dealt with the issue she brought forward because either they were derelict of duty or, more likely, there was corruption. She said that the Customs Department is historically one of the most corrupt agencies, especially the land port where she worked. In fact, she said that her border crossing had a Port Director who was caught taking bribes to allow people to come across. She also said there were intel reports that came up later which indicated that Arab nationals were offering $5,000 per person to allow individuals across the border without facing any scrutiny.
When asked what she thought about DHS and their priorities, Davis said:
“It makes me think that he so-called ‘War on Terror’ is more of a charade and that the priority of the agency seems to be to target concerned citizens and whistleblowers because in my case… they sent an airplane to follow me… they had eight agents at a time following me… they used airplanes, vehicles, helicopters… they used OnStar to listen to what was being said in our cars.”
As her lawsuit progressed, she says she obtained documentation of why DHS said she was a domestic terrorist. According to the documentation, DHS labeled David a domestic terrorist “for derogatory statements made in her filings and in her articles about the Department of Homeland Security.” Well I guess I know what I’m labeled then, eh?
Davis believes that DHS acts in this way so that they don’t have to follow the laws (something people like Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain agree with) and not have to follow the Constitution. Keep in mind though that we are not talking about the DHS under Barack Obama, but the DHS under George W. Bush.
Since the release of her film, their Fleur De Lis (the producer of the film) family stores have been raided by DHS and they are under continual surveillance. She also has a number of electronic interruptions as well. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) audited them along with their attorneys who assisted her as she prevailed against DHS.
There is more in the video, which you will want to see. However, even after she is exonerated, DHS continues to hound her. This is not freedom. This is not liberty. This is not justice. This is the face of tyranny and yes, it’s here in the US.
Watch the trailer of Top Priority: The Terror Within below:


Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/05/dhs-whistleblower-says-war-on-terror-is-a-charade-real-targets-are-american-patriots/#ixzz2T2l3Szfx

Senator Jim Inhofe Drops Bomb in Radio Interview…Unveils Impeachment Strategy for Obama

Senator James InhofeIn an interview Thursday, on the Rusty Humphries Show, Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) talked about the Benghazi cover-up and officially started the impeachment buzz.
Senator Inhofe proclaimed that ”of all the great cover-ups in history” Benghazi “is going to go down as most serious, most egregious cover-up in American history.”
He later noted that, ”We may be starting to use the I-word before too long.”
“The I-word meaning impeachment?” Humphries asked.
“Yeah,” Inhofe responded.
When Rusty Humphries questioned the wisdom of impeaching Obama now, Inhofe noted it wouldn’t be immediate.
“I’m not talking about it now, this is something that could endure until after the ’14 election — this is not a short story, this is something that was re-discovered after eight months…this is clearly an orchestrated cover-up,” the Senator responded.
Inhofe seemed to confirm what many are thinking. With a Democratic majority in the Senate (officially 53-45 with two independents who caucus with the Democrats) there is not much chance of obtaining a conviction at this point. However, with 35 open seats in 2014, there is a chance to swing that majority.
The House of Representatives impeaches a public official with a simple majority vote, but to obtain a conviction the Senate must concur with a two-thirds majority (67 votes). It is unlikely that 67 votes could be gathered to convict the President of any charges at this time, but it appears that the GOP is looking forward to the 2014 elections to try to gain momentum.
The 2014 class of newly elected Senators will begin their terms on January 3, 2015. Inhofe seems to hint that this is the date that Republicans are looking toward. It seems that impeachment proceedings for political posturing is not the goal, at least not for Senator James Inhofe. He echoes the sentiments of uncounted millions who want Barack Obama removed from office.
We would naturally assume that the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee is representative of other Republican Senators who look to him for leadership.
This is not what conservative Americans want to hear, but it is the only way to get a conviction. Party lines will be drawn and you will not find enough Democratic votes to convict, no matter how overwhelming the evidence may be. Not in 2013.
With new accusations from the families of Seal Team 6 and much to be learned about Benghazi, and other controversies, a little time might just do wonders for the chances of getting that conviction.

Let the impeachment talk begin! Jim Inhofe has just dropped the “I-word.”

If you would like to listen to the entire 15-minute interview please go to “The Rusty Humpries Show.”
You might also enjoy reading an article that we published a couple of days ago. Do Not Ask Your Representatives to Impeach Obama…Not Yet Anyway The article goes through the process of impeachment and explains why moving too quickly may jeopardize the chances of a conviction.
Follow The D.C. Clothesline on Facebook
Meet Dozens of LOCAL Patriotic Americans Today. Join The Patriot Team Forums. It's Time to Organize!!!

DO NOT Ask Your Representatives to Impeach Obama…Not Yet Anyway…

impeach obama billboardThere is a time and place for everything. Do I believe that President Barack Obama should be impeached? Yes. Do I believe it should happen now. Not if we want to actually see him removed from office.
Americans need to understand the best strategy for impeachment and it has nothing to do with justice being served soon. Barack Obama does not want to be impeached, but if he knew that he was going to be impeached, he would rather have it happen now than in 2015. It’s simple mathematics.
January 3, 2015 is a crucial date for freedom-loving Americans. This is the day that the next new crop of U.S. Senators will start their terms. This also happens to be the first chance we truly have with impeachment proceedings that are not doomed to certain failure. I want to break down the process so that people understand it and show you why we can not proceed in 2013. The truth is that in 2013 Obama could quite possibly be “impeached” but he would never be convicted and removed from office. These are two totally separate things and please allow me to explain.
The House of Representatives must first pass “articles of impeachment” with a simple majority vote and with a Republican led House I can see no reason why they could not get that done later this year…if they feel that they have enough evidence. With the Benghazi terrorist attack back in the spotlight I think that most conservatives are at least open to the idea that the evidence may be there. Those of us who have researched it extensively might even have strong opinions that the evidence is definitely already there. So could Obama be “impeached?” Without a doubt in my mind I will tell you 100% that it could happen by the end of this year.
If it does happen you better put on your critical thinking cap, because if the House impeaches Obama soon it is very likely a set up to appease the public. What do I mean?
“Impeachment” is not guilt. An impeachment is like an indictment. Once the House impeaches the President they send the matter to the Senate. Ding, ding, ding…we have a winner.  Do you see where I am going with this?
The Senate then tries the accused and must convict with a two-thirds majority. OK, so let’s do the math. Officially the Democratic majority currently sits at 53-45. The two independents tend to vote lefty on most issues so most political analysts agree that the majority is really 55-45. I prefer to add the RINO (Republican in Name Only) factor into the equation and throw John McCain and Lindsey Graham on the the Democratic side which makes my total 57-43. So here is the question… If we need 67 votes (two-thirds majority) to convict Obama of whatever crimes we accuse him of, do we have a chance? Not likely. You would have to have a piece of evidence so devastating to the psyche of the liberal followers that they would demand their Senators vote to convict. I don’t know what kind of evidence that would be but I would suspect it would have to be something much more substantial than the “he said – she said” stuff we are currently sifting through. Even if all Republicans vote to convict (including Mcain and Graham) you would still have to find 22 more votes and that is not likely to happen.
So if the House charges forward with this I don’t want you to see it as heroic because it is not. The truth is that if House Republicans charge forward now, it is a simply suicide mission and stinks of a set up. They know it. They also think the American people aren’t smart enough to see through it, but we are.
Check out this Young Turks video. It dances around the same point that I am trying to make. Now is not necessarily the time. The impeachment talk starts around the 2:16 mark:
We will see how serious they are about removing Obama through impeachment by the time table of future developments. If House leaders seem eager to push this through quickly then they have absolutely no realistic expectation of success. If they will proceed slowly they do have a chance. None of us want to hear that but it’s true.
The American people have a better chance of removing Obama through armed revolt than the legislature does through impeachment, at least in 2013 and 2014. It’s a fact.
2015 is a different story and I know that no one, including myself, wants to hear that. We have waited too long already and things aren’t getting better. I understand that. I also understand that, if we are counting on the system to get it done for us then, we have no chance before 2014 elections.
Here is a breakdown of open Senate seats for 2014:
  • 35 seats will be contested
  • 21 of those seats are currently held by Democrats, 14 by Republicans
  • 6 Democrat and 2 Republican incumbents have already announced their intent to retire
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2014

How you look at the above numbers depends very much on your level of optimism. We have seen numbers like these before. It looks like the Republicans have a chance to make some progress but it’s an old story that has been beaten into the ground.
With that said, if you truly want to impeach and remove the President from his office, and you want a realistic outlook of what it will take, then you had better be focusing on 2014 elections and marking January 3, 2015 on your calender.
It has almost zero chance of happening before then.
I would like to tell you that we live in a country where justice is served but we are all smarter than that. If impeachment is to happen then party lines will be drawn and very few people in the Senate will be doing any independent thinking.
This is the reality of our American system.
I want you to watch what House Republicans do because if they try to impeach then they will know they can’t win in the Senate. If they do it anyway, and do not look ahead to 2015, then they will not have the country’s best interest at heart. It will nothing more than a political move.
It’s your decision. We can get tough and rally for 2014 elections or we can pursue other alternatives. Calling for impeachment of Obama in 2013 is worthless.
Be careful what you wish for.
Follow The D.C. Clothesline on Facebook
Meet Dozens of LOCAL Patriotic Americans Today. Join The Patriot Team Forums. It's Time to Organize!!!

SHOCK, CORRUPTION EXPOSED: CBS News President About To Fire Reporter For Exposing Benghazi Coverup Is Brother Of Coverup Co-Conspirator



May 11, 2013 7 Comments Pat Dollard 450x300xRhodesMain.jpg.pagespeed.ic.Rn9CsDVKKv
CBS News President David Rhodes

0316RHODESjp-articleLarge
CBS News President’s brother, Obama National Security Advisor and Benghazi coverup co-creator Ben Rhodes
Excerpted from The Daily Caller: The brother of a top Obama administration official is also the president of CBS News, and the network may be days away from dropping one of its top investigative reporters for covering the administration’s scandals too aggressively.
CBS News executives have reportedly expressed frustration with their own reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, who has steadily covered the Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi terrorist attack in Libya since late last year.
“Network sources” told Politico Wednesday that CBS executives feel Attkisson’s Benghazi coverage is bordering on advocacy, and Attkisson “can’t get some of her stories on the air.”
Attkisson, who is in talks to leave the network before her contract expires, has been attempting to figure out who changed the Benghazi talking points for more than five months.
“We still don’t know who changed talking points but have had at least 4 diff explanations so far,” Attkisson tweeted on November 27, 2012.
But on Friday, ABC News reported that the Benghazi talking points went through 12 revisions before they were used on the public. The White House was intimately involved in that process, ABC reported, and the talking points were scrubbed free of their original references to a terror attack.
That reporting revealed that President Obama’s deputy national security advisor, Ben Rhodes — brother of CBS News president David Rhodes — was instrumental in changing the talking points in September 2012.
ABC’s reporting revealed that Ben Rhodes, who has a masters in fiction from NYU, called a meeting to discuss the talking points at the White House on September 15, 2012.
“We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation,” Rhodes wrote to his colleagues in the Obama administration. “We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.”

Top Obama official’s brother is president of CBS News, may drop reporter over Benghazi coverage


The brother of a top Obama administration official is also the president of CBS News, and the network may be days away from dropping one of its top investigative reporters for covering the administration’s scandals too aggressively.
CBS News executives have reportedly expressed frustration with their own reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, who has steadily covered the Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi terrorist attack in Libya since late last year.
“Network sources” told Politico Wednesday that CBS executives feel Attkisson’s Benghazi coverage is bordering on advocacy, and Attkisson “can’t get some of her stories on the air.”
Attkisson, who is in talks to leave the network before her contract expires, has been attempting to figure out who changed the Benghazi talking points for more than five months.
“We still don’t know who changed talking points but have had at least 4 diff explanations so far,” Attkisson tweeted on November 27, 2012.
But on Friday, ABC News reported that the Benghazi talking points went through 12 revisions before they were used on the public. The White House was intimately involved in that process, ABC reported, and the talking points were scrubbed free of their original references to a terror attack.
That reporting revealed that President Obama’s deputy national security advisor, Ben Rhodes — brother of CBS News president David Rhodes — was instrumental in changing the talking points in September 2012.
ABC’s reporting revealed that Ben Rhodes, who has a masters in fiction from NYU, called a meeting to discuss the talking points at the White House on September 15, 2012.
“We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation,” Rhodes wrote to his colleagues in the Obama administration. “We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.”
Ben Rhodes, a 35-year old New York City native and former Giuliani staffer who has worked for Obama since the president’s tenure in the U.S. Senate, has established himself as a hawkish force on the Obama foreign policy team, advocating for military intervention in Libya during the president’s first term and reportedly advocating for intervention in Syria, as well.
But despite his hawkish views, Rhodes identifies himself first and foremost as a strategist and mouthpiece for the president’s agenda.
“My main job, which has always been my job, is to be the person who represents the president’s view on these issues,” Rhodes said in March.
David Rhodes has been the president of CBS News since February 2011.
Neither the White House nor CBS News responded to requests for comment for this report.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/11/top-obama-officials-brother-is-president-of-cbs-news-may-drop-reporter-over-benghazi-coverage/#ixzz2T2Sc0L3I

Dirtbag lies here

Marathon bomber burial angers nabe

  • Last Updated: 4:35 AM, May 11, 2013
  • Posted: 1:18 AM, May 11, 2013
Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev was quietly buried in a Muslim cemetery in a small central Virginia community — stunning locals who had no idea the dead terrorist was there.
Tsarnaev, 26, who was killed in a police shootout on April 19, was interred Wednesday at the Al-Barzakh Cemetery, a Muslim ground in the small community of Doswell, about 15 miles outside of Richmondl, officials said yesterday.
The burial was orchestrated by Virginia resident Martha Mullen, who reached out to the Islamic Society of Greater Richmond and asked the group to facilitate the burial after hearing of Tsarnaev’s body languishing for a week in a funeral home in Worcester, Mass.
SIX FEET UNDER: Killer Tamerlan Tsarnaev (below) was buried in this Doswell, Va., grave this week.
AP
SIX FEET UNDER: Killer Tamerlan Tsarnaev (below) was buried in this Doswell, Va., grave this week.
Photos: AP
Until then, protests had broken out in opposition of having the bomber’s body buried in Massachusetts, and several cities, including Boston and Cambridge, outright refused him.
“Jesus tells us ‘love your enemies’ — not to hate them even after they are dead,” Mullen said.
But the move stunned the local community — from Muslim leaders to elected officials, many who are now questioning whether they should have been consulted.
“The whole Muslim community here is furious,” said Imam Ammar Amonette, of the Islamic Center of Virginia. “It was all done secretly behind our backs. Now everybody who’s buried in that cemetery, their loved ones are going to have to go to that place.”
Local officials in Caroline County, which includes Doswell, yesterday vowed to examine whether any laws were broken in the hush-hush burial — and whether they can send Tsarnaev’s body elsewhere.
But cemetery officials defended their actions., saying, “What Tsarnaev did is between him and God.”
“We strongly disagree with his violent actions, but that does not release us from our obligation to return his body to the earth,” the officials said.
Tsarnaev died in Watertown, Mass., four days after Boston authorities said he and his brother, Dzhokhar, killed three people and injured hundreds near the Boston Marathon finish line.

Colorado Counties Have More Voters Than People

A review of voter registration data for ten counties in Colorado details a pattern of voter bloat inflating registration rolls to numbers larger than the total voting age population. Using publicly available voter data and comparing it to U.S. Census records reveals the ten counties having a total registration ranging between 104 to 140 percent of the respective populations.
Counties such as Gilpin and Hinsdale have 110 percent of their populations registered to vote. Gilpin County has a total population of 5,441 with 17.4% of the population below the voting age, making the highest possible number of registered voters 4,494. Currently Gilpin County has 4909 registered voters. Hinsdale County has a total population of 830 with 20% of the population below the voting age, making the highest possible number of registered voters 664. At 110 percent registration, that means that there are 515 excess voter registrations in Gilpin county and 68 excess registrations for Hinsdale.

When Media Trackers requested comment on the voter bloat in Gilpin county, Chief Deputy Gail Maxwell explained that “This is just a reminder Gilpin is a Gaming Community.  The voters come and go!” While these voters come and go, they manage to turnout to vote. Records show Gilpin County had 61 percent voter turnout in the 2010 election and Hinsdale County had an astounding 92 percent voter turnout. This is far above the Colorado average turnout of 48 percent, and the national average of 41 percent.
All ten counties investigated by Media Trackers reported voter turnout greater than the national average. Nine out of ten also showed voter turnout well above the Colorado average. Mineral and San Juan counties, which have voter registration numbers of 126 percent and 112 percent respectively, had voter turnout of 96 and 83 percent respectively.
Jackson, Summit, Cheyenne, and Elbert counties have 111, 107, 105, and 104 percent of their population registered to vote, while managing 71, 44, 71, and 63 percent voter turnout.
Rounding out the ten counties looked at by Media Trackers are San Miguel county, which topped the list at 140 percent of the population being registered to vote and 52 percent voter turnout, and Ouray county, which had 119 percent of the population registered to vote and a whopping 74 percent voter turnout.
While Ouray County has a total population of 4,356, with 17.8 percent of the population below the voting age, the county has 4,246 people registered to vote. The highest possible number of voting age residents in the county is 3,581, which is 775 less than the actual registered total.
San Miguel County has a total population of 7,359 with 19.2 percent of the population below the voting age, making the highest possible number of registered voters 5,946. If the census numbers are to be trusted, that results in the possibility of up to 2,390 individuals on the voter rolls who should not be.
Kathleen Erie, the Clerk and Recorder for San Miguel County, preemptively excused the voter bloat when responding to the CORA request from Media Trackers, saying “San Miguel County is a resort community.  Many young people come here to work for a season or two and then move on.” Erie continued by explaining some of the voter bloat was due to senior citizens who “leave during large parts of the year, causing a (non-forwardable) mail ballot not to reach them.”
When Media Trackers asked Michelle Nauer, Clerk and Recorder for Ouray County, for an explanation regarding the enlarged voter rolls, she gave an answer similar to Erie’s. “Ouray has a large snow bird population” Nauer stated, “and residents fly south during the snowiest months, January through April.” Nauer went on to dispute the accuracy of the Census numbers, stating that “most of [her] voters were “counted by the census” in warmer climes, likely Arizona or Texas.”
In a separate analysis done by the Franklin Center, it was found that seventeen of Colorado’s sixty four counties have registration greater than 100 percent of the US Census voting age population.

As seen in the chart above detailing the persistent over registration of Ouray County, the Franklin Center analysis found that there are five counties which have reported greater than 100 percent of the voting age population as registered to vote for all years between 2004 and 2012.
Many of the counties contacted by Media Trackers responded with letters detailing the definitions of different voter classifications, i.e. active and inactive, as well as rules relating to the purging of voter data.
This post was originally featured at Media Trackers Colorado.