Thursday, January 9, 2014

I AM SORRY BLOGGER

I WAS TRY IN TO SPAM I WAS TRY IN TO POST THAT ONE POST AND I KEPT GETTING IRON THIS POST I KEPT TRY IN TO POST IT
IT WOULDNT LET ME WHEN I FINALLY GOT THOUGH I DELETED ALL THE OTHER ONES I HATE WHEN IT DOES THAT
PLEASE I AM SO SORRY I EVEN TRYED TO LOG OUT BUT IT PUT ME BACK HERE  SORRY THANK YOU SO MUCH I WASNT TY RY IN TO SPAM

Lawmakers Differ on Middle East Weapons Trafficking

Lawmakers Differ on Middle East Weapons Trafficking

During questioning at Thursday’s Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing, members learned from outgoing defense secretary Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the US military's joint chiefs of staff, that the Obama administration supported a plan to arm Syrian rebels. The committee focused on the deadly attack in Benghazi:

“How many more have to die before you recommend military action?” Mr. McCain asked Mr. Panetta on Thursday, noting that an estimated 60,000 Syrians had been killed in the fighting.
And did the Pentagon, Mr. McCain continued, support the recommendation by Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Petraeus “that we provide weapons to the resistance in Syria? Did you support that?”
“We did,” Mr. Panetta said.
“You did support that,” Mr. McCain said.
“We did,” General Dempsey added.
The revelation showed the deep rift within the Obama administration over whether or not to aid the rebel forces against the Assad regime, when violence broke out in Syria last summer.
Senators John McCain (R – AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R – SC), both members of the armed services committee, have long advocated for the administration to arm the Syrian rebels to help overthrow the Bashar Assad regime.
“I believe there are ways to get weapons to the opposition without direct United States involvement,” McCain told The Hill last year. “The Iranians and the Russians are providing Bashar Assad with weapons. People that are being massacred deserve to have the ability to defend themselves.”
The Obama administration also toyed with the idea of arming rebel forces in Libya when Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi was in the midst of being toppled in 2011.
"I'm not ruling it out. But I'm also not ruling it in," Obama told NBC News in an interview Tuesday evening.
"It's fair to say that if we wanted to get weapons into Libya, we probably could," Obama told ABC.
Gadhafi's forces had been held in abeyance by military strikes, the president said, and the administration was trying to gauge whether the Libyan leader's forces could be "sufficiently degraded" to the point where it was unnecessary to arm the rebels.
"But we're not taking anything off the table at this point," Obama said. "Our primary military goal is to protect civilian populations and to set up the no-fly zone. Our primary strategic goal is for Gadhafi to step down so that the Libyan people have an opportunity to live a decent life."
Lawmakers at the time cautioned that arming Libyan rebels could bring about other problems, however, citing al Qaeda factions had infiltrated Libyan opposition forces.:
"There are al Qaeda elements. But we need to pour it on, we need to stay behind the opposition forces, give them the military support just like we're doing now," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Monday night on CNN. "But when this is over and Gadhafi leaves, it would be a huge mistake not to help the Libyan people ... And if there are al Qaeda elements in that country, we will help the Libyan people take care of them."
Obama said in an interview with CBS that all of the Libyan dissidents with whom U.S. officials have met have been "fully vetted," but that that doesn't mean there might not be some elements within the faction opposed to U.S. interests.
Senator Rand Paul (R –KY) asked Hillary Clinton during her testimony about the Benghazi attack if she was aware about U.S. involvement in the procuring of weapons that were transferred, bought or sold to Turkey out of Libya.
CLINTON: To Turkey? I will have to take that question for the record. Nobody has ever raised that with me.
PAUL: It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that they may have weapons and what I’d like to know is the annex that was close by, were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries, any countries, Turkey included?
CLINTON: Well, Senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex and I will see what information is available.
PAUL: You’re saying you don’t know.
CLINTON: I do not know. I don’t have any information on that.
Senator Paul told reporters on a teleconference call on Thursday that he believes the CIA run annex that was attacked in Benghazi back in September was complicit in “the selling of weapons and that the U.S. was involved in some way with the collecting or distributing [of weapons] in Turkey.”
And it’s going to the rebels and I think that’s wrong that when it’s official stated policy of President Obama’s government that we are not selling arms or giving arms. Technically, the Turks are doing it, but are we complicit with that? I think if they were honest, they are being complicit with it and it may have had something to do with the attack. That’s why I think we were distracted by this movie. Now I think we’re being distracted by whether it’s movie or terrorism, when the real question we should be asking is did it have anything to do with the transmitting of arms out of Libya into Turkish hands.
Senator Paul’s initial questioning about the issue was scoffed at by left wing critics. Paul responded to them saying:
I think there were some articles in the New York Times as well as the London Times, and so I’m a little bit appalled when the left comes forward and says this is a crazy conspiracy theory, because it’s been reported in mainstream newspapers.
In fact, not only has it been reported that the ship with arms had left from Libya, it was a Libyan ship, a week before the ambassador was killed. I read about this after the attack. I know where the ship was and, in fact, the captain they interviewed, he’s detailed what arms were on there.
He’s also detailed that there was a fight among some of the rebels on who was getting which arms. But it also listed grenade launchers as well as other significant weaponry. And I fully do think the annex there was involved somehow with this.
If you look at the answer from Clinton, her response was as if she never heard of the question. She’s not even keeping up with current event news if she’s never even heard of the question, but I still think the U.S. is involved in someway with the selling of weapons.
Senator Paul is not the first lawmaker to talk about the issue. In late January,  Speaker of the House John Boehner (R – OH) discussed it with radio host Laura Ingraham.
“I’m somewhat familiar with the chatter about this and the fact that these arms were moving towards Turkey, but most what I know about this came from a classified source and I really can’t elaborate on it.”
Boehner is one of eight individuals in Congress who would know about such “classified” information. The other seven members who would have access to this information prior the Benghazi attack would be Rep. Mike Rogers (R – MI)--Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D – CA), Rep. Dutch Ruppersberg (D – MD)--Ranking Member House Select Committee on Intelligence, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D – CA)--Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D – NV), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R – KY), and Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R – GA)--Ranking Member on the Select Committee on Intelligence
Senator Chambliss told Breitbart News on Thursday he knew nothing about the Libyan gun running issue that Senator Paul spoke of or that Speaker Boehner referenced.

Fake Twitter emails

Some users may receive fake or suspicious emails that look like they were sent by Twitter. These emails might include malicious attachments or links to spam or phishing websites. Please know that Twitter will never send emails with attachments or request your Twitter password by email.

If you receive a fake email:

  1. Forward the email to spoof@twitter.com.
  2. Delete the email from your inbox. Don't download any attachments from these emails.
Find out more about Twitter Safety on our account security page.

Frequently Asked Questions

What's phishing?
Phishing scammers send fraudulent messages to a large number of people, in an attempt to trick them into revealing private information, like a password. An email or website may be disguised to appear legitimate.
It can be difficult to recognize a spoofed email as they may look very convincing or appear to come from a Twitter email address. You can check the headers of an email to find out more about the source of the message, and you should be suspicious of new or unexpected emails. Twitter doesn't send emails with attachments, and will never ask you to provide your password via email, direct message, or @reply.
What if I'm worried that someone has access to my Twitter username and password?
If you suspect your account has been compromised, you can find out what to do on our compromised accounts help page.
If Twitter believes your account has been hacked, we may reset the account password to prevent the hacker from misusing your account. In this case, we'll email you a secure link to where you can select a new password. Again, this link will always be on the http://twitter.com website, and we never ask you to provide your password via email, direct message, or @reply.
Why am I getting these fake emails?
Twitter doesn't send these emails. The FTC has a help page that describes some ways spammers may find your email address:
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/tech/tec02.shtm
For more information about Twitter's policies on information collection, as well as disclosure and sharing, please visit our privacy page at http://twitter.com/privacy.

Response to Judge Oki-Molway and complaint in USDC in HI were filed yesterday and sent by overnight Fed-Ex, will be docketed today

Posted on | January 9, 2014 | No Comments
Share

U.S. Navy mistakenly sends how-to memo on dodging FOIA requests

U.S. Navy mistakenly sends how-to memo on dodging FOIA requests

Talk about a misstep. The U.S. Navy accidentally sent out a memo that spells out various ways to duck and dodge Freedom of Information Act requests to a local NBC News reporter.
Politico reported that Scott MacFarlane, an NBC 4 reporter who works in Washington, D.C., had asked the Navy for certain documents. But he never expected as part of his FOIA request to receive an internal Navy note that details how to dismiss his request as a “fishing expedition.”
Mr. MacFarlane had sought information related to the Navy Yard shooting in September and had asked that all fees beyond $15 be waived, Politico reported.
The surprise Navy memo said to negotiate with Mr. MacFarlane over his request and characterize it as a waste of time. It also said, Politico reported, to speak about the cost of fulfilling the request as a means of pressuring Mr. MacFarlane to “narrow the scope” of his FOIA. The memo specifically states: “Again, ‘fishing expedition.’ Just because they are media doesn’t mean the memos shed light on specific government activities.”
The U.S. Navy apologized for the memo.
In a tweet, the Navy said: “#USNavy regrets the content of an internal email sent to @nbcwashington cc @politico @Gawker.”
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Benghazi Select Committee

Investigating the Benghazi Terrorist Attack

Over the last year, I have led congressional efforts to create a bipartisan House Select Committee to fully investigate the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate and annex in Benghazi, Libya.  After a year of investigations in five separate House committees, it is clear that the only way the American people will ever learn the truth is through a single Select Committee that will hold public hearing and issue "friendly subpoenas" to the survivors so they may finally be able to tell their stories about the attack and the failure by the U.S. to send assistance that night without fear of reprisal from agencies.  It is inexplicable that after a year of investigations none of the survivors or the administration officials responsible for the decision not to send assistance that night have been compelled to testify under oath before Congress.
My legislation, H. Res. 36, to create the Select Committee has more than 175 cosponsors - a majority of the majority in the House.  It has been endorsed by family members of the victims of the attack, the Special Operations community, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (which represents the DSS agents in Benghazi) and the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal,  among many others.
I have repeatedly written Speaker Boehner urging him to create the Select Committee given the overwhelming support for this effort.  Additionally, this summer I went to the House floor nearly every day for three weeks to ask a question of the day about Benghazi (see box below).
More information about the Select Committee resolution and my efforts to raise awareness of the unanswered questions are available below.
CLICK HERE for a full list of cosponsors of H. Res. 36.
BENGHAZI QUESTION OF THE DAY
Question of the Day #12
Why are these heroes being told not talk?  What is the administration afraid of?
What is it protecting?

Question of the Day #11
Who in the White House knew what was going on in the CIA annex in Benghazi?
Question of the Day #10
Why was there a facility operated by the CIA in Benghazi? 

Question of the Day #9
Who are the anonymous senior administration officials who admitted "mistakes" in their handling of the attack to CBS News?

Question of the Day #8
What happened in Washington on the night of the attack and in the days to follow?

Question of the Day #7
Ambassador Stevens made several calls for help to nearby consulates. Which foreign consulates did he call? How did those consulates respond?
Question of the Day #6
Why did Gen. [Carter] Ham speak publicly about the military's response at a forum in Aspen, Colorado – where tickets start at $1,200 – yet his testimony before Congress was behind closed doors?

Question of the Day #5
Why was the CIA's security team repeatedly ordered to "stand down"  after the attack began?

Question of the Day #4
Why haven't we applied pressure to countries refusing to allow the FBI to access the terrorists responsible for the attack?
Question of the Day #3
How many Benghazi survivors were forced to sign Non-Disclosure agreements?
Question of the Day #2
Which agency was responsible for vetting the Libyan security guards at the U.S. consulate?
Question of the Day #1
Where are the Benghazi survivors?
CLICK HERE for a full list of questions.

Important Documents

-Wolf/McCaul letter to State Department asking to use the Rewards for Justice Program to find the Benghazi suspects
-Wolf/McCaul letter to State Department requesting records about the use of the Rewards for Justice Program to find the Benghazi suspects
-Letter from respected national security leaders urging Speaker Boehner to create a Select Committee
-Letter from American Legion endorsing H.Res. 36

-Reports on the failure of the Benghazi Investigation:
Judicial Watch
OPSEC

More on Benghazi Select Committee

Dec 12, 2013
Thursday December 12, 2013 Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136
Oct 30, 2013
Wednesday October 30, 2013 Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136
Oct 23, 2013
Wednesday October 23, 2013 Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136 Washington, D.C. (October 23, 2013) – A national poll released Tuesday shows that 63 percent of Americans believe the Obama Administration is covering up the facts about last year’s terrorist attack in Benghazi. The poll also showed:
Sep 27, 2013
  Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136 AMERICAN LEGION ENDORSES SELECT COMMITTEE ON BENGHAZI
Sep 26, 2013
Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136 WOLF SAYS THEFT OF U.S. WEAPONS IN LIBYA AND ABANDONED OUTPOSTS POINT TO VITAL NEED FOR SELECT COMMITTEE ON BENGHAZI  
Sep 19, 2013
Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136 WOLF STATEMENT ON BENGHAZI SUBPOENAS
Sep 10, 2013
Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136 WOLF: SUPPORT FOR SELECT COMMITTEE ON BENGHAZI GROWINGWolf Said He Appreciates ‘Unwavering Support’ of Special Ops Community and Grassroots Groups; Resolution to Create Select Committee Continues to Gain Support in Congress
Sep 9, 2013
Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136 WOLF RENEWS CALL TO CREATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON BENGHAZI, NOTES POSSIBLE CONNECTION TO SYRIAN CONFLICTNine Members Signed Onto Resolution Since the House Recessed in August; Total is Now 171
Aug 2, 2013
Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136 WOLF: BENGHAZI QUESTION OF THE DAY #12Last in 12-Part Series of Floor Speeches Raising Questions About Benghazi Attack
Aug 1, 2013
Contact: Jill Shatzen (202) 225-5136 WOLF: BENGHAZI QUESTION OF THE DAY #11 Washington, D.C. (August 1, 2013) – In today’s question about the Benghazi attack, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) asked:

Pages

U.S. Navy mistakenly sends how-to memo on dodging FOIA requests

U.S. Navy mistakenly sends how-to memo on dodging FOIA requests


Story Topics
Talk about a misstep. The U.S. Navy accidentally sent out a memo that spells out various ways to duck and dodge Freedom of Information Act requests to a local NBC News reporter.
Politico reported that Scott MacFarlane, an NBC 4 reporter who works in Washington, D.C., had asked the Navy for certain documents. But he never expected as part of his FOIA request to receive an internal Navy note that details how to dismiss his request as a “fishing expedition.”
Mr. MacFarlane had sought information related to the Navy Yard shooting in September and had asked that all fees beyond $15 be waived, Politico reported.
The surprise Navy memo said to negotiate with Mr. MacFarlane over his request and characterize it as a waste of time. It also said, Politico reported, to speak about the cost of fulfilling the request as a means of pressuring Mr. MacFarlane to “narrow the scope” of his FOIA. The memo specifically states: “Again, ‘fishing expedition.’ Just because they are media doesn’t mean the memos shed light on specific government activities.”
The U.S. Navy apologized for the memo.
In a tweet, the Navy said: “#USNavy regrets the content of an internal email sent to @nbcwashington cc @politico @Gawker.”
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

National parks off-limits

National parks off-limits

U.N.-designated panel calls for increased 'buffer zones'

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger

Last year a United Nations-designated panel, at the behest of the
Clinton administration, called for the creation of uninhabited “buffer
zones” around several U.S. national parks. Since then roughly two dozen
U.S. parks and preserves, covering millions of acres of public land,
have been included in the plan.
Now, however, new plans to expand these zones are in the works, and
the outrage has reached a near fever pitch among experts who say these
U.N.-designated sites are merely attempts to “globalize” huge portions
of the United States — with taxpayers picking up the tab.
Henry Lamb of Eco-Logic — a watchdog
organization that monitors U.N. activities and U.S. sovereignty issues
– told WorldNetDaily that one example — at Yellowstone National Park,
where the creation of a larger buffer zone is well under way — was “just
a sign of things to come.”
“Inside Yellowstone, the U.S. Park Service is shutting down
campgrounds as the park is being prepared to become the core of a huge
biosphere reserve, as part of the United Nations global biodiversity
plan,” he said. “Once established, no human activity will be permitted
in the area,” even though U.S. taxpayers must continue to fund the
maintenance and upkeep of Yellowstone and other popular outdoor tourist
sites.
Lamb said that in order to increase the buffer zone around
Yellowstone, the Park Service drove local businesses away by refusing to
maintain access roads. When the businesses folded as a result of heavy
financial losses, the land was bought with taxpayer money and a larger
zone of inaccessibility was created by default.
“Once they buy the land, the government is obviously not going to
resell it,” he said, thus creating permanently larger buffer zones.
“The purpose of establishing sites as U.S. national parks was to have
people in them enjoying them,” Lamb added. “But the Clinton
administration has completely bought into this U.N. notion that our land
ought to be their land, managed by them. And as such, it ought
to be uninhabited as well.”
He said if most Americans “knew what was going on (with their
national parks), the uproar would be deafening.”
In the case of Yellowstone, Lamb said the government’s acquiescence
to the U.N.’s agenda cost a gold mining company about $30 million and in
the end prevented them from mining one ounce of known gold reserves,
even though the government indicated they initially would have allowed
it.
“The owners of the Crown Butte New World gold mine, which is
outside of Yellowstone National Park,” he said, “were told by the
government to comply with a list of environmental requirements before
they could move in and begin mining.”
But after being threatened with non-stop litigation from
environmental groups funded by U.N. agencies that could have lasted
decades, the mining company finally agreed to a deal that leaves at
least $650 million of known gold reserves in the ground instead. That
deal provided the company with about $65 million dollars for “more
exploration.” Of that amount, the government said about $21 million had
to be used for “environmental clean-up.”
Lamb said that Congress has consistently ignored Clinton
administration orders and directives designed to implement many of the
U.N. mandates. Clinton, he said, is implementing U.N. directives via
executive order and presidential directive “because then he doesn’t have
to worry about getting Senate treaty ratification.”
At present a U.N.-sponsored biodiversity treaty, designed to limit
U.S. public access to so-called “World Heritage Sites” and “Biodiversity
sites” is languishing in the Senate. No action is scheduled on its
ratification.
Lamb added that in the course of the next several years, with no
congressional oversight, the addition of more U.S. parks to the
“Heritage” and “Biodiversity” sites lists will follow.
“It is a well-documented fact that the U.N. is trying to gain control
over vast amounts of U.S. territories to herd more people into cities
where they are more manageable,” Lamb said. “That can’t be done without
at least tacit approval from Congress, regardless of the political
agenda of any administration.”
Lamb said he has “allies” in Congress that are opposed to the
implementation of this, and other, U.N.-mandated land use plans.
“But they’re relatively few and as such equally unsuccessful” in
stopping such initiatives, he added.

Agenda21Today

“From time to time, we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden.”          
 —Ronald Reagan, First Inaugural Address (1981)
_____________________________________________________________
This site is dedicated to Truth, Education, Conversation and Action
STOP FUNDING FRAUD
Man Made Climate Change a wealth redistribution scheme using climate has been called the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on America.  This lie has eaten away at American’s personal private property using fraud science promoted by the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control). These unconstitutional Regional Councils rules and regulations are designed to control the people not the climate – which is controlled by our sun.  Join us in our initiative and demand your legislators:   STOP FUNDING FRAUD
AgEnders in Florida are engaged in action…. Floridians are requesting investigations into Regionalism prompted by the Man Made Global warming schemes.  See letter to AG Pam Bondi   
Support Documentation: Climate Support Docs
Support Docs:  New Frontier of Evil p 1 Regionalism,  
New Frontier of Evil p 2 Greenways and Trails
New Frontier of Evil p 3 BLUEWAYSp3
To add your group in support of this letter contact us: info@agenda21today.com
Florida Appropriations Committee Members: Appropriations
Timeline implementing Agenda 21 in Florida Timeline
……………………………………………………………………………………….
The spirit of 1776 is not dead. It has only been slumbering. The body of the American people is substantially republican. But their virtuous feelings have been played on by some fact with more fiction; they have been the dupes of artful maneuvers, and made for a moment to be willing instruments in forging chains for themselves. But times and truth dissipated the delusion, and opened their eyes.” –Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Lomax, 1799. ME 10:123

Agenda 21 is the 21st Century PLAN for a “New World Order”
through GLOBAL GOVERNANCE.
  Agenda 21 is the UN plan to inventory and control every aspect of human activity.
Regardless of whether you think you understand what is happening in American, you     MUST SEE This VIDEO:            Iron Mountain, Blueprint for Tyranny
Or read this report: Iron Mountain (2607)
Agenda 21 is the ELITIST plan to control your life demanding you, “do as I say, not as I do”. You will be required to give up your individual freedom, your personal property and redistribute your wealth. Gone forever will be American exceptionalism, American nationalism. The western way of life will be  classified as unsustainable.  The ELITISTS will use the government to take your money, exercise more power and to control every aspect of your life.  Agenda 21 is not a Democratic or Republican “plan”, it reaches across the aisle.  The Elite will call us names and make up lies to try and divide us. They use doublespeak as code to reinforce their lies. We will not listen.  We Are Americans, the largest group of FREE people in the world, never to be divided.  Americans will never give up our lives, family, morality or country. Drop the adjectives and join us…
_______________________________________________________________________

Agenda 21 is the plan to inventory and control every aspect of human activity
Read Agenda21
This link used to go to http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/agenda21/res_agenda21_00.shtml
Since we have been reporting on the UN involvement with Agenda 21 they have removed the link. Not to worry, the document is on the next link below. Notice the UN logo on the bottom of the cover page.
PDF Version of UN Agenda 21
In their own words:
•“Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many…who would actively work to defeat any elected official….undertaking Local Agenda 21/Sustainable Development
•So we will call our process something else such as ‘comprehensive planning’, ‘growth management’ or ‘smart growth’
       J Gary Lawrence,      1998 UNEP Conference, UK
In other words folks, they lie…
The 4 “E’s” of Agenda 21 are not what they appear:
  • Education = Indoctrination into believing that nature is more important than man and the group is more important than the individual . The new purpose of education is to learn values not facts. Students must become global, not American citizens
  • Equity = Theft of private property, open borders, remove God, morality and responsibility 
  • Economy = Redistribution of America’s wealth to foreign countries by outsourcing jobs, factories and technology creating massive unemployment
  • Environment = Nature is more important than man.  The new god is Mother Earth. Phony science creates phony regulations destroying energy independence and Industry.    Each policy and regulation is in place to control more and more of your life.
Join us as we learn the truth together.  You are not alone. Become an AgEnder, American against UN Agenda 21.  Sign up for our newsletter and connect with other Americans involved in Operation Paul Revere.
Come to a conference, attend webinars. Learn the truth, educate yourself then educate others. United We Stand.
______________________________________________________________

America belongs to Americans not the United Nations.

________________________________________________________
JFK’s Executive Order 11110 is quite infamous as Jim Marrs, author of the 1989 book Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy, who speculate that there is a link between the John F. Kennedy assassination and E.O. 11110 by arguing that the Federal Reserve Board was involved in the murder to protect its power over the monetary policy of the United States.
President Kennedy was assassinated on 22nd November, 1963 ten days after he made a speech to Columbia University on Nov 12, 1963 stating, “The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American’s freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizens of this plight.”
JFK knew of Iron Mountain
Lee Harvey Oswald renounced his US citizenship to live in Russia.
_________________________________________________________
The UN plans Rio+20 in 2012 for more green regulations to control your life. Did you elect these people?
_________________________________________________________________________
You can not change the future if you do not know the past.  Thank you to all of the brave people who spent years to research and find the truth. We recommend showing this documentary at any gathering for a great introduction to Agenda 21. Thank you, Representative Curtis Bower, for exposing the deliberate destruction of America in   agendadocumentary.com


Never forget our Flag still stands for FREEDOM, God Bless the USA-Lee Greenwood
If the Statue of Liberty could speak she would say,  “My Name Is America” Artist: Todd Allen Herendeen
Remember the price of Freedom with The Rivoli Review’s Tribute to Memorial Day -  Freedom’s Not Free
Listen to Madison Rising and their latest rock version of The Star Spangled Banner
______________________________________________________________
Agenders’ Prayer         
Dear God, You are the sole source of our unalienable rights.  Through Your eternal love, we have the right to life.  Through Your boundless grace, we have the right to liberty. Through Your endless mercy, we have the right to the pursuit of happiness.
We, Your children, humbly come before You, imploring Your continued divine guidance and protection in our battle against the inherent evil that exists in the United Nations and in their plan for a godless one world government.
We beseech You, oh Lord, to make us, once again, a virtuous nation, worthy of Your blessing of freedom.        Amen

U.S. NATIONAL PARKS TO BE OFF LIMITS TO AMERICANS

U.S. NATIONAL PARKS TO BE OFF LIMITS TO AMERICANS

By Patricia Neill
At Yellowstone National Park, United Nations' delegates who surveyed the area last year, called for a "buffer zone" around the Park. So, the Park Service is choking off the local economy by refusing to maintain certain highways and by buying up any property available. Of course, there will be plenty available as more and more owners are denied the use of their own private property which causes businesses to shut down and the economy to show.
Inside Yellowstone, the Park Service is shutting down campgrounds as the park is being prepared to become the core of a huge biosphere reserve, as part of the United Nations global plan. Once established, no human activity will be permitted in the area. This represents fulfillment of plans outlined in the United Nation's Biodiversity Treaty - which, though still unratified by the U.S. Senate, is being implemented by the Clinton Administration.
The way it is done is illustrated by what happened to the owners of the Crown Butte New World gold mine, which is OUTSIDE Yellowstone National Park. After being threatened with non-stop litigation that could have lasted decades, the mining company finally agreed to a deal which leaves at least $650 million of known gold reserves in the ground. In exchange, the mining company was given the right to explore other federal lines for mining purposes and paid $65 million dollars ($21 million of which must be used for "environmental cleanup."
Another recent example was Clinton's declaration of Kaiwoporwits non-polluting coal reserves in Utah a "National Monument" by executive order. This "monument" will cost the Utah Public School system alone $60 BILLION in lost education fees. It will cost the future economy of Utah over a TRILLION dollars. The "monument" consists of 1.5 million acres of Utah land which the people of Utah not only did not KNOW was about to be snatched by Clinton as a key part of a future United Nations "biodiversity" area, but were vehemently opposed to.
Other United Nations designations as "biodiversity" areas include the following National Park Service lands:
Biosphere Reserves:
  • Big Bend National Park, Tx. (801,163 acres)
  • Big Thicket National Preserve, TX (85,750 acres)
  • Congaree Swamp National Monument (SC (22,200 acres)
  • Death Valley National Monument, CA (2,067,628)
  • Denali National Park and Preserve, AK (6,500,000 acres)
  • Everglades National Park and
  • Fort Jefferson National Monument, Fl. (1, 571,199 acres)
  • Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserver, AK (7,523,888 acres)
  • Glacier National Park, Mt (1,013,572 acres)
  • Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve, AK (3,283,168 acres)
  • Great Smoky Mountains National Park, TN/NC (520,269)
  • Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, HI (229,177 acres)
  • Isle Royale National Park, MI (571,790 acres)
  • Joshua Tree National Monument, CA (559,954 acres)
  • Kings Canyon National Park, CA (461,901 acres)
  • Mammoth Cave National Park, KY (52,708 acres)
  • Noatak National Preserve, AK (6,574,481 acres)
  • Olympic National Park, WA (922,651 acres)
  • Organ Pipe National Monument, AZ (330,689 acres)
  • Redwood National Park, CA (110,232 acres)
  • Rocky Mountain National Park (265,727 acres)
  • Sequoia National Park, CA (402,482 acres)
  • Virgin Islands National Park, VI (14,689 acres)
  • Yellowstone National Park, WY (2,219,791 acres)
World Heritage Sites
  • Carlsbad Caverns National Park, NM (46,766 acres)
  • Grand Canyon National Park, AZ (1,217,158 acres)
  • Mesa Verde National Park, CO (52,122 acres)
  • Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve and Preserve, AK (13,188,325 acres)
  • Yosemite National Park, CA. (761,236 acres)

1972 Treaty Grants the United Nations Control Over American Historical Landmarks
by Melissa Wiedbrauk
When our Founding Fathers sparked the American Revolution and signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776, they sought self-government for the American colonies and an escape from the dominance of England.
The Founding Fathers would be shocked to learn that some of their successors have given control of key American sovereign territory to other nations.
Through an international treaty, the United States is allowing the United Nations and its member countries access to and control of American soil - in particular, our historic buildings and treasured wilderness.
In 1972, our government signed the United Nations' World Heritage Treaty, a treaty that creates "World Heritage Sites" and Biosphere Reserves." Selected for their cultural, historical or natural significance, national governments are obligated to protect these landmarks under U.N. mandate.1 Since 1972, 68 percent of all U.S. national parks, monuments and preserves have been designated as World Heritage Sites.2
Twenty important symbols of national pride, along with 51 million acres of our wilderness, are World Heritage Sites or Biosphere Reserves now falling under the control of the U.N. This includes the Statue of Liberty, Thomas Jefferson's home at Monticello, the Washington Monument, the Brooklyn Bridge, Yellowstone National Park, Yosemite, the Florida Everglades and the Grand Canyon - to name just a few.
Most ironic of all is the listing of Philadelphia's Independence Hall. The birthplace of our Republic is now an official World Heritage Site. The very place where our Founding Fathers signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution - the documents that set America apart from other nations and created the world's longest-standing democracy - is no longer fully under the control of our government and the American people.
Protection of our treasured places is a sound undertaking, but doing so by ceding control of our sovereign territory to a foreign power is wrong and threatens our rights and freedoms.
In 1995, Crown Butte Mines in the New World Mining District in Montana was forced to abandon a mine development project after the U.N. listed Yellowstone National Park as a "World Heritage Site in Danger."3 Crown Butte proposed to mine a medium-size underground operation on private property three miles from the boundary of Yellowstone. The project would have employed 280 people and generated $230 million in revenue.4
This mining project was not unique. The area had been mined for 150 years before Yellowstone National Park was established. Crown Butte had worked along with the U.S. Forest Service to ensure that all of the necessary precautions were being taken to ensure that the project would be environmentally responsible. Crown Butte had won an award for excellence in 1992 and was considered to be a "showcase operation."5
None of these factors mattered to the U.N.'s World Heritage Committee. Citing the project as a potential threat, the U.N. exerted its authority to force the abandonment of the project. It did not matter to the U.N. that this violated Crown Butte's exercise of its private property rights under the U.S. Constitution. Nor did the U.N. care that its action also went against U.S. federal law prohibiting the inclusion of non-federal property within a U.S. World Heritage Site without the consent of the property owner.6
Although it has not happened yet, under the World Heritage Treaty the U.N. has the legal right to someday restrict us, as American citizens, from visiting our national treasures.
Many environmentalists believe that the mere presence of humans disturbs the environment. As such, it is not farfetched to wonder when the politically-correct U.N. will ban the American public from Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, the Florida Everglades and other precious natural wonders now visited annually by millions of tourists.
Ironically, banning generations of young people from visiting our natural wonders would undermine the public's appreciation for the spectacular gifts of nature, and undercut support for environmental protection.
Unfortunately, the World Heritage Treaty is just one of a series of government actions that is stripping away the gift of freedom we received from our Founding Fathers.
To stop this erosion of sovereign rights, federal legislation has been introduced to restore the rights of Americans against this threat to freedom. The American Land Sovereignty Protection Act seeks to preserve the sovereignty of the United States over public lands and preserve the private property rights of private citizens. It would require congressional oversight of U.N. land designations within the U.S.7
We should not turn our backs on the Founding Fathers by surrendering the precious gift of sovereignty. We should treasure and protect it.
 

Footnotes:
1 "World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves Fact Sheet," United States House or Representatives Committee on Resources.
2 "American Land Should Be Controlled By Americans," press release, The National Center for Public Policy Research, Washington, D.C., February 24, 1999, available on the Internet at http://www.nationalcenter.org/PRLandSov299.html.
3 Kathleen Benedetto, National Wilderness Institute, testimony before the United States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, D.C., May 26, 1999.
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
7 "American Land Should Be Controlled By Americans."

Melissa Wiedbrauk is a research associate with The National Center for Public Policy Research, a Washington, D.C. think tank.
END

National parks off-limits
U.N.-designated panel calls for increased 'buffer zones'

By Jon E. Dougherty
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com |  July 15, 1999

Last year a United Nations-designated panel, at the behest of the Clinton administration, called for the creation of uninhabited "buffer zones" around several U.S. national parks. Since then roughly two dozen U.S. parks and preserves, covering millions of acres of public land, have been included in the plan. Now, however, new plans to expand these zones are in the works, and the outrage has reached a near fever pitch among experts who say these U.N.-designated sites are merely attempts to "globalize" huge portions of the United States -- with taxpayers picking up the tab.
Henry Lamb of Eco-Logic -- a watchdog organization that monitors U.N. activities and U.S. sovereignty issues -- told WorldNetDaily that one example -- at Yellowstone National Park, where the creation of a larger buffer zone is well underway -- was "just a sign of things to come."
"Inside Yellowstone, the U.S. Park Service is shutting down campgrounds as the park is being prepared to become the core of a huge biosphere reserve, as part of the United Nations global biodiversity plan," he said. "Once established, no human activity will be permitted in the area," even though U.S. taxpayers must continue to fund the maintenance and upkeep of Yellowstone and other popular outdoor tourist sites.
Lamb said that in order to increase the buffer zone around Yellowstone, the Park Service drove local businesses away by refusing to maintain access roads. When the businesses folded as a result of heavy financial losses, the land was bought with taxpayer money and a larger zone of inaccessibility was created by default.
"Once they buy the land, the government is obviously not going to resell it," he said, thus creating permanently larger buffer zones.
"The purpose of establishing sites as U.S. national parks was to have people in them enjoying them," Lamb added. "But the Clinton administration has completely bought into this U.N. notion that our land ought to be their land, managed by them. And as such, it ought to be uninhabited as well."
He said if most Americans "knew what was going on (with their national parks), the uproar would be deafening."
In the case of Yellowstone, Lamb said the government's acquiescence to the U.N.'s agenda cost a gold mining company about $30 million and in the end prevented them from mining one ounce of known gold reserves, even though the government indicated they initially would have allowed it.
"The owners of the Crown Butte New World gold mine, which is outside of Yellowstone National Park," he said, "were told by the government to comply with a list of environmental requirements before they could move in and begin mining."
But after being threatened with non-stop litigation from environmental groups funded by U.N. agencies that could have lasted decades, the mining company finally agreed to a deal that leaves at least $650 million of known gold reserves in the ground instead. That deal provided the company with about $65 million dollars for "more exploration." Of that amount, the government said about $21 million had to be used for "environmental clean-up."
Lamb said that Congress has consistently ignored Clinton administration orders and directives designed to implement many of the U.N. mandates. Clinton, he said, is implementing U.N. directives via executive order and presidential directive "because then he doesn't have to worry about getting Senate treaty ratification."
At present a U.N.-sponsored biodiversity treaty, designed to limit U.S. public access to so-called "World Heritage Sites" and "Biodiversity sites" is languishing in the Senate. No action is scheduled on its ratification.
Lamb added that in the course of the next several years, with no congressional oversight, the addition of more U.S. parks to the "Heritage" and "Biodiversity" sites lists will follow.
"It is a well-documented fact that the U.N. is trying to gain control over vast amounts of U.S. territories to herd more people into cities where they are more manageable," Lamb said. "That can't be done without at least tacit approval from Congress, regardless of the political agenda of any administration."
Lamb said he has "allies" in Congress that are opposed to the implementation of this, and other, U.N.-mandated land use plans.
"But they're relatively few and as such equally unsuccessful" in stopping such initiatives, he added.
SOURCE: National parks off-limits
END


Why Does U.N. Now Control U.S. Parks? (must see video)

As the Obama ‘Regime’ childishly uses our National Parks and Monuments as weapons against it’s own veterans, citizens, and especially to threaten the Tea Party, and it’s values (The Constitution), few people are aware of the fact that we the people, United States citizens, do not control our own treasured landmarks. The United Nations (of which most member countries are our enemies) now controls most of our U.S. National Parks and Monuments including Yellowstone, the Everglades, the Washington Monument, the Statue of Liberty, Thomas Jefferson’s home at Monticello, the Brooklyn Bridge, Yosemite,and the Grand Canyon – to name just a few….while U.S. taxpayers still foot the bill.
Jon Doughtery of WND said, “…if most Americans “knew what was going on (with their national parks), the uproar would be deafening.” Dougherty explains , “…(the U.N.) attempts to “globalize” huge portions of the United States — with taxpayers picking up the tab.”
Watch the above 2 hour documentary on the globalist agenda. One World Government. (Read “When The World Will Be As One” by Tal Brooke).
Agenda 21 is a United Nations document that was signed by Clinton and Bush that will allow the implementation of a one world government by gradually separating American citizens from their private property and “redistributing the wealth” globally. Globalists like Obama, Hilary, international bankers and George Soros are using many means to accomplish this including the implosion of the U.S. economy, the destruction of the U.S. family unit, and the ‘fake science’ of man-caused (anthropomorphic) global-warming/climate change’ endorsed (knowingly and unknowingly) by the environmentalist (earth worship) movement.
“It is a well-documented fact that the U.N. is trying to gain control over vast amounts of U.S. territories to herd more people into cities where they are more manageable,” says Henry Lamb of Eco-Logic — a watchdog organization that monitors U.N. activities and U.S. sovereignty issues.
Patricia Neill lists American soil now off limits to Americans here.
Melissa Wiedbrauk wrote this, in her post, “1972 Treaty Grants the United Nations Control Over American Historical Landmarks”;
“When our Founding Fathers sparked the American Revolution and signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776, they sought self-government for the American colonies and an escape from the dominance of England.
The Founding Fathers would be shocked to learn that some of their successors have given control of key American sovereign territory to other nations.
Through an international treaty, the United States is allowing the United Nations and its member countries access to and control of American soil – in particular, our historic buildings and treasured wilderness.
In 1972, our government signed the United Nations’ World Heritage Treaty, a treaty that creates “World Heritage Sites” and Biosphere Reserves.” Selected for their cultural, historical or natural significance, national governments are obligated to protect these landmarks under U.N. mandate. Since 1972, 68 percent of all U.S. national parks, monuments and preserves have been designated as World Heritage Sites…
Twenty important symbols of national pride, along with 51 million acres of our wilderness, are World Heritage Sites or Biosphere Reserves now falling under the control of the U.N….
In 1995, Crown Butte Mines in the New World Mining District in Montana was forced to abandon a mine development project after the U.N. listed Yellowstone National Park as a “World Heritage Site in Danger.” Crown Butte proposed to mine a medium-size underground operation on private property three miles from the boundary of Yellowstone. The project would have employed 280 people and generated $230 million in revenue.4
This mining project was not unique. The area had been mined for 150 years before Yellowstone National Park was established. Crown Butte had worked along with the U.S. Forest Service to ensure that all of the necessary precautions were being taken to ensure that the project would be environmentally responsible. Crown Butte had won an award for excellence in 1992 and was considered to be a “showcase operation.”
None of these factors mattered to the U.N.’s World Heritage Committee. Citing the project as a potential threat, the U.N. exerted its authority to force the abandonment of the project. It did not matter to the U.N. that this violated Crown Butte’s exercise of its private property rights under the U.S. Constitution. Nor did the U.N. care that its action also went against U.S. federal law prohibiting the inclusion of non-federal property within a U.S. World Heritage Site without the consent of the property owner.
Although it has not happened yet, under the World Heritage Treaty the U.N. has the legal right to someday restrict us, as American citizens, from visiting our national treasures…”
According to Concerned Women for America here are some facts:
Fact: The Clinton administration is implemented United Nations treaties without congressional or voter approval. Already 68% of our national parks and preserves are under U.N. administration.
Fact: U.N. committees are empowered to visit “World Heritage Sites” within the U.S. to judge whether human activity poses an environmental risk and if it need to be curtailed.
Fact: The Clinton administration is transferred tens of millions of acres of land to the federal government to be placed under U.N. control.
Fact: Towns in the Cuyahoga River Valley near Akron, Ohio, have lost much of their population as the National Park Service under U.N. provisions, has condemned and torn down homes, farms, forcing people to leave their land.
Fact: The U.N. Biodiversity Treaty supports the Wildlands Project, which calls for turning 50% of the U.S. into “wildlands” where humans would not be allowed, but animals could roam free.
“A newsletter photo of a sign at the park entrance reads, “Great Smoky Mountains National Park, An International Biosphere Reserve…you and I will continue to pay taxes for the maintenance and upkeep of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. But we no longer own it. Now, the UN has ultimate jurisdiction. This alone is startling evidence that the once independent nation-state known as the United States of America is going out with a whimper and not a bang. Our sovereignty is coming to an end…”
Blogger Northman says, “It would be disengenuous, foolhardy and nonsensical to ignore the trend of United Nations’ vision for their role in the world.
The supra-soverignty role they have invisioned, prepared for and micro-stepped toward for the last fifty years is on a collision course with the Constitution of the United States.
Those of liberal vision have been instrumental in trying to ignore this or minimalize this reality. To further that effort, the UN is allowed by liberals to encroach in hundreds of benign ways. Baby-steps to disaster. each in its own way can be looked at as incidental and unimportant; they are meant to appear this way.
It is only with eternal vigilance that we can keep this tool of the aftermath of WWII (and a useful tool it was) from forever expanding, encroaching and subverting sovereign nations.”
great_smoky_mountains_national_park
 

alamo-best
Wait, What? The Alamo May Soon Fly The Blue United Nations Flag As An Official UN Heritage Site?
October 29, 2013  //  By:   //  Today's News  //  309 Comments



Remember the Alamo… remember when it was an American icon? That may soon change and the United Nations may be the new manager if San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro gets his way.
San Antonio, Texas Mayor Julián Castro is currently negotiating with the United Nations to designate the Alamo as a UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Site, meaning that a blue UN flag may fly above the historic shrine of liberty once it falls under UN control.
UNESCO, a specialized agency within the UN, created the World Heritage Site status out of a 1972 international agreement, which calls for nations to join together to manage historical sites through “collective assistance.”
“San Antonio has the opportunity for its five Spanish Colonial Missions [including the Alamo] to be nominated to be the first UNESCO World Heritage site in the State of Texas and the 22nd World Heritage designation in the United States,” the October 2013 City of San Antonio newsletter reads.
We don’t need “collective assistance” to manage our historical sites. And we certainly don’t need the United Nations in control of the Alamo.

About the Author :
Eric Odom is Managing Director of LibertyNEWS.com, a liberty movement activist and self-described libertarian-minded political consultant.