Reality Check

Hello SUFA! I have found it hard to write articles here that we haven’t already discussed to infinity already. Your a tough crowd to please, and even tougher to convince when it comes to the real tough issues. But that’s what I do, the tough issues. I bring out what is known, documented and factual for all to see. Whether you choose to believe is your mistake, not mine. While I’m generally a fun loving guy, I know when to be serious and hit on the realities that I see, and bring them to you the best I can. I don’t believe everything I hear or read, but I do believe in what people are saying based on the information they are given. Recently, D13 wrote a great article on the Osama bin Laden mission. I believe every word from the good Colonel, his integrity is solid gold in my book. The government, not so much. But when we look back to the past……

Government propaganda is not new to the United States. It was heavily used during WWII and not much has changed since then, or has it? One of the worst mistakes a government can make is to use propaganda to fool it’s own citizens. They will always get caught in this day of information technology. We the people are no longer blind and deaf. The days of three TV channels are long gone, with that, it effectively ended the use of propaganda by our government AGAINST the citizens. They just haven’t figured that out yet!. They have, in fact, tried on numerous occasions, to fool the public into believing false stories of attacks, heroics and rescues that never emulated what the truth really was.

Let me start with the story of Jessica Lynch, a private in the Army, captured by the Iraqies in the first Gulf War. Remember her? The perfect person for government propaganda, attractive, young white female, brutely beaten by the enemy. The first stories that came out made her look like a Rambo figure, standing tall against the enemy, fighting with all she had, only to be overtaken by sheer numbers. For a very long time, the government and the media played this silly game, to provide support for the war at hand. It was all proven to be a huge hoax on the American people. As the truth came out over time, and to the credit of Ms. Lynch, it was all a big hollywood staged propaganda Psy-op aimed at the American people.

Private Lynch, in her own way, told the truth. She is a hero, not because of her actions on the battlefield, but because she told the truth. It was far different from what the government and media told, all to promote war, not to promote individual action. Jessica Lynch went through a period of physical and mental hell, and our government, knowing the truth, lied to the American people. The whole rescue was a preplanned, taped event, done with the help of the producer of “BlackhawkDown”. Yep, you heard correct! When the military got word of her condition and status, they contacted Hollywood! It went over well, knocking down doors that didn’t need knocked down and rescuing the damsel in distress, Hollywood style, for the waiting eyes of the American citizens, eager for good news.

I wish Jessica the very best in life. I hope she can be immune to the many problems that affect veterans these days since returning from the Middle East. One thing I know for sure, Jessica has my respect and admiration for telling the truth. I can’t say that for our government, which pisses me off! I have no respect for what comes out of D.C. or the MSM. Their pathetic lies to the moronic citizens who believe them is sickening, shame on the citizens who do believe them, to everyone’s detriment, as we all end up paying the price.

The next government propaganda lie stems from Afghanistan and Pat Tillman. Pat was an NFL superstar who left his lucrative life for Army duty with the Rangers and the war on terror. Pat Tillman was the perfect patriotic American and the media and government was all over it. The poster boy for the Army and the government ended in tragedy, as he was killed in combat, so the story began. As this mess unfolded, it was later determined that Tillman was killed by friendly fire, after his parents were relentless in finding out the truth. This story has many twists, the worst is what is known.

As time went on, the Tillman family was relentless in their quest for the truth. Thank God for the American family and the tenacity to never let it go until the truth is discovered. AS I have discovered, and is documented, Pat sent letters home that were less than supportive of the war. As he wrote, it was all a lie and bullshit, and had nothing to do with terrorism, but all about money from the opium market. He had little time left before he would come home, ending his enlistment, and was killed. The friendly fire story is hard to believe, with three holes in his head in a one inch area, from an M-16. He was shot at close range after being wounded, you figure it out!

All in all, you can see why I question everything the government says. They lie, constantly, for political purposes that I cannot really understand. But I do understand the truth. It will always come out, all be it far too late to make a difference. Not with me, I believe nothing said in D.C., they can’t be more uncredible, if that’s a word. We can’t fix this until we realize the words of our Founders, and it’s long overdue!

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,[72] that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

We can talk about the lies of Bush II, Clinton (they were priceless), Bush I and on and on. But what is the real purpose of these tall tales and are they intended for the good of the American people? That answer is obviously a big NO. Many Americans have perished because of the many lies coming from D.C.. When will the people see them for what they are and demand they leave? We have entered a time when these questions must be asked. Our government has lists, like the no fly list, the no buy list (guns) and soon the no ride list (trains). The names are put on these lists with no habeas corpus involved. Ask USWeapon how he felt when he found out he was on the no buy list!

The craziness will continue. It is not out of the realm of thinking to believe we will have another 9-11 event in the future. It will be blamed on some boogieman with a towel on his head, people will die, more military action will ensue. After all, Obama needs a good crisis to get four more years in office, and he wouldn’t let a good crisis go to waste, even if he caused it. The question is, where and when will it happen? Everything the D.C. mouthpieces have spewed over the last few months leads to this end. Threats of retaliation by Al Qeida (yes, the same group we’re helping in Libya), a higher threat level and a President with low ratings. The perfect storm. This will be our next reality check.

Live Free!



  1. Buon Giorno, Gman! Hope all is well by you and yours. Now, on to it …

    it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

    Sounds like the “greater good” to me, Gman!

    After all, Obama needs a good crisis to get four more years in office, and he wouldn’t let a good crisis go to waste, even if he caused it.

    Is that more Obama bashing or did you already forget he nailed Bin Laden (and Bush didn’t) and his numbers are very good right now? He’s in, my brother. You wingies on the right will need to start focusing on 2016, I keep telling you.

    Gman … I watched an interesting piece on 60 Minutes last night about Sovereign Citizens. Are you one of those nutjobs, too? I ask with all due respect …:)

    • A Puritan Descendant says:

      Violent nuts can be found anywhere, but I think 60 minutes has just created the latest Boogey Man, and a way to make freedom loving individuals more careful about their own speech.
      But no need to listen to me, I am just floating on a rock through space, 🙂

    • Charlie, You do make me giggle, a good thing in the morning 🙂 We’re doing fine out in the country, hope you and yours are doing just as well.

      UBL’s assassination will be long forgotten by November 2012. It’ll be about the economy, Obama will be beat in a landslide and got down in history as America’s worst one term President, surpassing Carter by a wide margin.

      Don’t know much about the Sovereign Citizens. I have heard of them, but have not researched what they are all about. If 60 minutes made you think they are nutjobs, they are probably the exact opposite. That’s the whole purpose of the article, the government owned media will lie about whatever the government wants them to lie about. You can draw your own conclusions on what they present and how they present it. Peace my French leaning friend 😆

      • Now wait a minute, Gman (for truth or delusion?) … I used to take bets … wanna put one down on the 2012 election? It’s over, my friend. If anything, Mr. Trump’s insanity over the birth certificate issue and the follow-up on Bin Laden’s getting whacked makes it “mission accomplished” …

        • I’m game!!! Trump will not run! He’s out of the picture. Economies always rule an election, if it stays the same or gets worse, Obama is a goner. History will side with this. UBL is a silly anomoly that will be a useless campaign subject. Jobs, gas prices and inflation will rule, if there’s an election at all, as I have written about in the past.

          • I know Trump won’t run … but he did some serious damage to the tiny chance the GOP has to win in 2012 by making a fool of himself and the GOP/tea party birthers … now you have NOBODY to run against Fredo and you think the economy will make a difference when the media you claim is pumping out propoganda to soothe it? You’re contradicting yourself at every turn, Gman (except the no election–that’s just crazy). There will be an election and Obama will win handily.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              Silly Redskie, You predictions that the games over because the One was the sitting Prez when UBL was killed. HAHA! We remember:

              “Let’s be clear on this: OBAMA did NOT kill Bin Laden. An American sailor, who Obama just a few weeks ago was debating on whether or not to receive military PAY, did. In fact, if you remember a little less than two years ago, Obama’s administration actually charged (and attempted to court-martial) 3 Navy Seals from Seal Team Six, when a terrorist suspect they captured, complained they had punched him during the take down…and bloodied his poor little nose. It was Obama’s administration that further commented on how brutal Seal Team Six were. The left were calling them Nazi’s and Baby Killers. Now all of a sudden the very brave men they vilified, are now heros when they make Obama’s administration look good in the eyes of the public. Obama just happened to be the one in office when the CIA finally found the bastard and our sailors took him out. Essentially, Obama only gave an answer…Yes or No, regarding Bin Laden being taken out. Even that is currently being questioned since it’s been reported that Valerie Jarret (Presidential Advisor) opposed the operation and that Leon Panetta (CIA Director) had initiated the plan long before the White House was even briefed.

              This is NOT an Obama victory, but an AMERICAN victory!!

              Thanking Obama for killing Bin Laden is like going into McDonald’s and thanking Ronald McDonald for the hamburger.
              It’s the guy cooking the burger that should get the credit, not the clown.

              • Clinton 0 for 8 on Bin Laden
                Bush: same
                Obama: 2.5 years, Bin Laden is fish food.

                Obama walks across finish line in 2012 …

                What do you have? Romney? Christ, I “almost” feel sorry for you.

                Gingrich? Please.

                It’s over. Start focusing on conspiracy theories for 2016, fellas.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                SUFA, I want to nominate Charlie to the batshit crazies list. I’m lonely and seems to fit right in. How do you vote 😆

  2. Ray Hawkins says:

    @G-Man – from the “City of Brotherly Love”

    This should get some blood boiling a little:

    Man who clashed with cops over legal gun was also armed with audio recorder

    MARK FIORINO’S story has three elements that tend to get people worked up – gun rights, Philly police and YouTube. On a mild February afternoon, Fiorino, 25, decided to walk to an AutoZone on Frankford Avenue in Northeast Philly with the .40-caliber Glock he legally owns holstered in plain view on his left hip. His stroll ended when someone called out from behind: “Yo, Junior, what are you doing?” Fiorino wheeled and saw Sgt. Michael Dougherty aiming a handgun at him. What happened next would be hard to believe, except that Fiorino audio-recorded all of it: a tense, profanity-laced, 40-minute encounter with cops who told him that what he was doing – openly carrying a gun on the city’s streets – was against the law. “Do you know you can’t openly carry here in Philadelphia?” Dougherty asked, according to the YouTube clip.”Yes, you can, if you have a license to carry firearms,” Fiorino said. “It’s Directive 137. It’s your own internal directive.” The cops, department officials later admitted, were wrong. They didn’t know that a person who has a license to carry a firearm can openly carry it in the city.

    But the story doesn’t end there. How could it?

    After Fiorino posted his recordings on YouTube, they went viral. Members of pro-firearms forums on the Web took a particular interest in the incident.The Police Department heard about the YouTube clips. A new investigation was launched, and last month the District Attorney’s Office decided to charge Fiorino with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct because, a spokeswoman said, he refused to cooperate with police. Fiorino said he plans to sue the city whenever his criminal case is resolved. Police spokesman Lt. Ray Evers said the department believes that Fiorino wanted to get into a confrontation with cops, that he wanted to see them lose their cool so he later could file a lawsuit. Or, as one cop was overheard saying on the YouTube recording: “He set us the f— up, that’s what the f— he did.”

    Terrified to be powerless

    Fiorino, an IT worker who lives in Montgomery County, grew up in Feltonville. A handful of his friends fell victim to random crimes over the years – a mugging here, a beatdown there, the kind of stuff that happens all the time in a big city. It was enough to make him think about being able to protect himself if he ever ran into trouble. “It would be terrifying to me to be powerless,” he said. So, about a year ago, Fiorino said, he got a firearms license and began openly carrying his .40-caliber Glock. “I did research for quite a few years leading up to making a decision to carry,” he said. “I was ready to take on the responsibility.” His gun went with him everywhere – to work, to the store, you name it. After he began carrying, Fiorino said, he was stopped a handful of times by cops in Montgomery County and other parts of the state. The encounters were civil and quick, he said, and usually ended when an officer checked out his firearms license. He also had encounters with Philadelphia cops last year near the Philadelphia Museum of Art and on South Street. “Both times they told me what I was doing was illegal,” he said. “They patted me down and said, ‘We don’t care what you consent to.’ “The second time, they did an official confiscation, and it took me five months to get back my gun.” It could be argued that Fiorino should have stopped openly carrying his gun because it invited police scrutiny. But that argument couldn’t be more wrong, said John Pierce, co-founder of

    Pierce, of Minnesota, said his website offers information on gun rights “from a legal perspective, a public-policy perspective, not from a ‘my cold, dead fingers’ viewpoint.” “According to the Pennsylvania and U.S. constitutions, open carry is Mark’s right,” he said. “To say he has to give up that right in order to stop being persecuted by the state, well, that doesn’t sound like the America we want to live in.” Pennsylvania allows citizens to openly carry firearms across the state, but with a simple caveat: A person who carries a weapon openly in Philadelphia also must be in possession of a firearms license. Fiorino said he was following the law on Feb. 13, when he decided to take a walk to AutoZone while he was in the Northeast, visiting his mom. It was a nice day, warm enough for him to head out without a jacket, leaving his holstered Glock fully exposed. Fiorino’s firearms license was in his shirt pocket, he said, along with his driver’s license.

    Oh, and a digital recorder.

    ‘Get down on your knees’

    Fiorino was on Frankford near Placid Street when Sgt. Dougherty spotted him from his police cruiser, stopped and called out to him. An unnerving back-and-forth started to unfold like a bizarre routine. Dougherty would bark an order, and Fiorino would make an alternative suggestion. Fiorino offered to show Dougherty his driver’s and firearms licenses. The cop told him to get on his knees.

    “Excuse me?” Fiorino said. “Get down on your knees. Just obey what I’m saying,” Dougherty said. “Sir,” Fiorino replied, “I’m more than happy to stand here -”

    “If you make a move, I’m going to f—— shoot you,” Dougherty snapped. “I’m telling you right now, you make a move, and you’re going down!”

    “Is this necessary?” Fiorino said.

    It went on like that for a little while, until other officers responded to Dougherty’s calls for backup. Fiorino was forced to the ground and shouted at as he tried to explain that he had a firearms license and was legally allowed to openly carry his weapon.

    “You f—— come here looking for f—— problems? Where do you live?” yelled one officer.

    “I’m sorry, gentlemen,” Fiorino said. “If I’m under arrest, I have nothing left to say.”

    “F—— a——, shut the f— up!” the cop hollered.

    The cops discovered his recorder as they searched his pockets, and unleashed another string of expletives. Fiorino said he sat handcuffed in a police wagon while the officers made numerous phone calls to supervisors, trying to find out if they could lock him up. When they learned that they were in the wrong, they let him go. That might have been the end of the thing, too, if it hadn’t been for the recordings.

    ‘He did it intentionally’

    The weeks passed, but Fiorino couldn’t stop thinking about what had happened to him on Frankford Avenue. “They treated me like a criminal,” he said. “The organization that’s supposed to be the embodiment of the law didn’t even know some of the most important laws at the street level.” He decided to put the recordings on YouTube. “I wanted people to know this is an example of what can happen if you exercise your rights and freedom in Philadelphia,” he said. Fiorino said he didn’t lay a trap for the cops. He regularly carries a recorder with him in case he ever has to use his gun and then offer proof of what transpired, he said. “I’m not trying to set anyone up,” he said. “It was a setup. He’s done this kind of thing before,” said Evers, the police spokesman, referring to Fiorino’s encounters with authorities. “He did it intentionally, and he audiotaped it.” Evers said the department decided to take a second look at the case after learning about the recordings.

    Any number of things could have gone wrong during Fiorino’s confrontation with Dougherty, Evers said. For one thing, Evers said, Fiorino could have been shot. Cops who raced to the scene could have gotten into a car accident or injured pedestrians. Ultimately, the D.A.’s Office decided to charge Fiorino with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct. He’s scheduled for trial in July. Fiorino’s attorney, Joseph Valvo, said the move to file criminal charges against Fiorino was retaliation for his posting the recordings on YouTube. “They’re embarrassed and using creative theories to come up with charges,” he said.

    Up to speed

    If there is a positive to Fiorino’s saga, it is this: The Police Department is trying to make sure none of its officers are ever again caught not knowing basic gun laws. “Our officers weren’t up to speed [because] we never really addressed it,” said Lt. Francis Healy, the department’s lawyer. “In the last several weeks, we’ve done a lot of training and put out a lot of information about what is allowed and what’s not allowed. Right now, our officers are better-versed on the subject matter.” Healy said he emphasized the importance of officers being polite and professional if they have to stop a person who is legally carrying a firearm. “You can use caution, but you don’t need to curse them up and down and put a gun in their face,” he said. At City Hall on Saturday, about 30 gun owners staged a protest of Fiorino’s recent arrest. The protesters and cops got along fine. “These aren’t bad people,” Healy said.

    Here is the online link to the story:

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Here is his You Tube audio

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      While it could be argued the guy was looking for trouble by carrying the audio recorder – given that he had prior run-ins with Philly cops I think he was okay to carry the recorder.

      While not a fan of handguns I support everyone’s 2nd amendment right. And in this case – I support an accurate enforcement of the law.

      • Good Morning Ray, hope you and yours are healthy and happy 🙂

        Good story you posted, sadly, these things go on all the time in the bigger cities. Glad to see the Philly police finally got an education on the subject, maybe they’ll be less like assholes in the future. Good story!

      • His explanation for carrying the recorder seems reasonable.

      • I suspect I’m gonna be disagreed with 🙂 But the guy should have gotten on his knees when he was told too. Mainly because he had a gun pointed at him and his actions only made the situation worse and more dangerous for his self and any other people in the area. But the cop was more to blame for not knowing the law and pulling a gun on a citizen.

        • VH, he would have been safer to have complied. Once the cops started getting heated it is risky to fail to follow any commands they give of a reasonable nature – and an armed man (legally armed or not) ordered to their knees is reasonable. Cops are concerned for their safety. They will shoot you dead on the slightest provocation or impression that you’re ‘going for that gun.”

          But then, in this guys case he choose to risk his life and limb with highly agitated/aggravated cops. I don’t know that I would have been as courageous/stupid.

      • It could also be argued that women who dress in the style-of-the-moment are looking for trouble when some jerk decides that she’s “just asking for it” and gives it to her.

        It’s interesting to note that personal ownership of weapons for the purpose of defending one’s liberties is not a 2nd Amendment issue. Unfortunately, by mis-applying the 2nd Amendment to the discussion of self-defense, one leaves any number of cracks into which talented despotic legal minds can drive a wedge. Not the least of which is the 9th Circus Court in CA. See:

        A fundamental component of liberty is the right to be left alone as long as you’re not infringing upon the liberty of another citizen. Coincident with that right is the idea that honorable citizens have a duty to protect their own liberty or the liberty of others by any means available be it a Glock .40, a golf club, or your bare hands.

        The fact that large numbers of citizens owned firearms in 1780 offered sovereign states a ready-made home defense force. That particular fact is what the 2nd Amendment is all about. But as soon as the citizen joins their personal interest in protection of individual liberty to state’s interest in the protection of communal liberty, the waters get muddied.

        The state has all the money it needs to infringe upon the liberties of folks who pay all the bills. This is how you get hoards of lawyers pleading cases to panels of folk in black robes who in turn produce dozens of pages citing tortured logic and constitutionally blasphemous law.

        Honorable self protection is not a right granted by government or anyone else. Please don’t dilute the significance of this fundamental fact by discussing it in the context of a mis-applied intent of the Constitution.

  3. Ray Hawkins says:

    A takeaway I had from your posting is that given the seemingly increasing depth and breadth of lies – it is increasingly difficult to believe much of anything anymore.


    • It is sad! But until a large majority of people realize this, it will continue and people will believe this muck.

  4. Yo Gman….thanks for the kudos and ya give Charlie a pat on the back. He is good for the soul…but he should chanrge anentertainment tax.

    Litte note: Those of us that have been in command during combat have a report that has to be filed called an AAR. (After Action Report). As a commander, if you do not make a personal copy for yourself, you would be surprised how many times things get changed as it goes “up the chain”. Or how many times, an AAR will be sent back for “corrections”. The corrections are ususally for stupid spelling mistakes (much like my keyboard does here on SUFA – we all know Colonels do not make mistakes). Some of this is to buy time to keep an AAR out of public scrutiny and some of it is (at the request of some staff officer) to make sure OUR facts are correct. (Military jargon for,,,make sure you agree with us even though we were not there). If the AAR is less than shining and could result in a higher ranking officer being ..ummm..disciplined for bad decision making….it often ends in the trash with another version being printed and sent in for signature. This is where the integrity of the person filing the AAR comes into play. So, any smart, competent officer will make sure that all players read and sign it before sending in… As a commander, I would write an AAR and make copies and hand it out to my entire command and ask them to read and make corrections as “they” saw it. If there were significant changes, I would inclure them in the AAR with the name of the contributor. There is no reason not to tell the truth…NONE. Even if the truth will get you in trouble. I have been asked to rewrite AAR’s not to change the facts but to use wording that is less troublesome. I would refuse. (My integrity and ethics is more important to me than medals and fame.) Everytime I walked out onto the battlefield, I wanted my charges to know there would be no lies and cover ups of anything…even if it was me that made a bad decision. My command knew that the truth would be told, no matter the consequences.

    However, once an AAR is sent forward, it is out of my control. Higher command could endorse it, send it back, or write “their” report to send in with mine. I have a copy of every single AAR that I wrote (814 combat and non combat) in my career. My AAR would be watered down sometimes. Again, not the facts, but my choice of words. When asked to endorse the more subtle AAR,I would always…..ALWAYS…refuse to do so and insist that my original was sent it with the more subtle AAR.

    I paid the price in my OER (Officer Evaluation Reports). One line that was written about me was when I was a young Captain….it read ..”Captain (name intentionally left out) exhibits both candor and frankness to subordinates and superiors alike.” ( Military jargon for…he tells it like it is and pulls no punches..even to his superiors). Of course, that was the kiss of death that would follow my career and led directly to being passed over three times of 0-7.

    Not looking for sympathy here, but supporting your examples. I see more and more officers now learning to make copies of everything so if it is changed, you can have a back up. I had my copies always signed the men and women that I commanded. More should do this and stand up.

    • I respect your integrity. Sadly, the people being promoted over those who deserve it, like you, are the ones more willing to play the game and dance along the moral line. It truly is sad that the only way to succeed in government is to be corrupt and immoral…

      I’m sure Black Flag is proud of my continuing disillusionment (or is it enlightenment?).

    • Colonel, I have had many Commanders in my 12 years in the USAF. My favorite was a Lt. Col. that was our Commander at home and in Saudi. He was much like you in his command, straight forward and fair, but always said what needed to be said.

      He let his NCO’s do the job they were trained for, and kept the lower ranking officers mostly out of the field. They were briefed daily in the morning SITREP, that I and few others gave. He never made it past Lt. Col., but he sure deserved it. It seems that politicians don’t care for people who get the job done the right way, not their way.

  5. Interesting article G but I have to say-you are making a pretty big (inferred) accusation about Tillman!- I know nothing about wounds and such-so is there any other plausible explanation for his wounds other than he was assassinated by his own people? Or at least that is the inference I got from your words.

    • My inference is exactly as you say. There has been a lengthy investigation into the Tillman matter. They can’t hide the three bullet holes in close proximaty in the forehead. As the article states, he was not happy with the war and it’s percieved reality, he wrote home about. Had he returned to the states and started talking, it would have been a disaster for the government. And now you know the rest of the story 🙂

  6. G!

    Calm down. “The names are put on these lists with no habeas corpus involved.” Come on, it’s just them looking after our own good. We still have our constitution, and the rights granted by our creator. No one is trying to change that…….

    Indiana Supreme Court Rules That Police Can Enter Anyone’s Home Without a Warrant
    Wait. What?

    Charles Johnson
    US News • Fri May 13, 2011 at 8:47 pm PDT • Views: 25,122

    Our WTF story of the day:

    INDIANAPOLIS— People have no right to resist if police officers illegally enter their home, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in a decision that overturns centuries of common law.

    The court issued its 3-2 ruling on Thursday, contending that allowing residents to resist officers who enter their homes without any right would increase the risk of violent confrontation. If police enter a home illegally, the courts are the proper place to protest it, Justice Steven David said.

    “We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” David said. “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.”

    • PS, Remember, Obama says WTF is Win The Future!
      Change you Believed in was last campaign.

    • There is a huge difference in people coming to the conclusion not to resist because of common sense-it is a whole nother situation for the courts to tell people they have to comply. I call total BS on this travesty.

    • Government propaganda is just another way of describing “education”

      “[Rep. Steny] Hoyer urges schools to teach health care benefits”
      The notion that universities should be teaching the benefits of Obamacare should be rather shocking. It isn’t clear that Hoyer, a powerful Democrat in Congress, understands the point of universities. It is also surprising that the Federal government has already spent money putting together sample flyers for universities to hand out to students. When Hoyer writes that “Another excellent resource for your student body is the non-partisan Young Invincibles online tool kit,” it appears as if he is implicitly acknowledging the obvious that the government information is biased.

      Rep. Steny H. Hoyer is asking colleges and universities in his district to add a new item to their curricula: Information about the benefits of the Democrats’ health care overhaul. . . .

      The letter, which Hoyer’s office said was sent to the University of Maryland, Bowie State University, St. Mary’s College of Maryland and other schools, follows after the jump.

      May 11, 2011

      Dear ——,

      As we approach the graduation season, I wanted to follow up on a letter you should have received from Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan regarding health care coverage for students.

      The recently enacted Affordable Care Act contains a vitally important, immediate improvement in health coverage options for young people under age 26. Thanks to this new law, young people up to age 26 can typically obtain coverage on their parents’ health insurance plan as long as that plan covers dependent children. This option is true regardless of whether they are employed, in school, or living at home. I encourage you to follow up on the secretaries’ advice and ensure that your graduating students – and the entire student body – are aware of this new option for health coverage.

      The Administration provided numerous ways to supply this information to your student body. Listed below are those links for your convenience:

      • Place a “badge” on the home page of your Website that automatically links to information about how students can remain on their parents’ health insurance plan. Download the badge by visiting:

      • Distribute a flyer to students and their parents about this new benefit along with graduation materials. Download a sample flyer by visiting: (all links deleted to allow posting. They can be found at John Lott’s blogspot)

      • Encourage staff to talk to students about other insurance options – for example, if their parents do not have coverage – by visiting:

      • Host a session to explain insurance options to your students. HHS has helpfully offered to assistance in creating this event and you can email them at:
      • Encourage students to visit the Administration’s Facebook page with information for young adults and parents about coverage for individuals under age 26. That can be found at

      Another excellent resource for your student body is the non-partisan Young Invincibles online tool kit: which has information tailored specifically to young people. It is searchable by state and explains exactly what the new law means to young people, including how to get on a parent’s insurance policy, what to do if he or she has a pre-existing condition, and how the new law impacts women and young people with cancer.

      Working together, we can ensure more students and recent alumni obtain the health coverage they need. Please feel free to contact my office at 202-225-4131, should you have any questions. We appreciate your attention to this important matter.

      Wishing you the best during this graduation season and with kindest regards, I am

      Sincerely yours,


  7. 😐

  8. 8)

  9. gmanfortruth says:

    For the guys 🙂

    Men Teaching Classes for Women at

    By Sun, May 8, 2011


    Class 1
    Up in Winter, Down in Summer – How to Adjust a Thermostat
    Step by Step, with Slide Presentation.
    Meets 4 weeks, Monday and Wednesday for 2 hrs beginning at 7:00 PM..

    Class 2
    Which Takes More Energy – Putting the Toilet Seat Down,
    or Bitching About It for 3 Hours?
    Round Table Discussion.
    Meets 2 weeks, Saturday 12:00 for 2 hours.

    Class 3
    Is It Possible To Drive Past a Wal-Mart Without Stopping?–Group Debate.
    Meets 4 weeks, Saturday 10:00 PM for 2 hours.

    Class 4
    Fundamental Differences Between a Purse and a Suitcase–
    Pictures and Explanatory Graphics.
    Meets Saturdays at 2:00 PM for 3 weeks.

    Class 5
    Curling Irons–Can They Levitate and Fly Into The Bathroom Cabinet?
    Examples on Video.
    Meets 4 weeks, Tuesday and Thursday for 2 hours beginning
    At 7:00 PM

    Class 6
    How to Ask Questions During Commercials and Be Quiet During the Program
    Help Line Support and Support Groups.
    Meets 4 Weeks, Friday and Sunday 7:00 PM

    Class 7
    Can a Bath Be Taken Without 14 Different Kinds of Soaps and Shampoos?
    Open Forum .
    Monday at 8:00 PM, 2 hours.

    Class 8
    Health Watch–They Make Medicine for PMS – USE IT!
    Three nights; Monday, Wednesday, Friday at 7:00 PM for 2 hours.

    Class 9
    I Was Wrong and He Was Right!–Real Life Testimonials.
    Tuesdays at 6:00 PM Location to be determined.

    Class 10
    How to Parallel Park In Less Than 20 Minutes Without an Insurance Claim.
    Driving Simulations.
    4 weeks, Saturday’s noon, 2 hours.
    Class 11
    Learning to Live–How to Apply Brakes
    Without Throwing Passengers
    Through the Windshield and without wrecking.
    Tuesdays at 7:00 PM, location to be determined

    Class 12
    How to Shop by Yourself.
    Meets 4 weeks, Tuesday and Thursday for 2 hours beginning at 7:00 PM.

  10. gmanfortruth says:

    For the ladies 🙂

    A Woman was out golfing one day when she hit the ball into the woods.

    She went into the woods to look for it and found a frog in a trap.

    The frog said to her, “If you release me from this trap, I will grant you three wishes.”

    The woman freed the frog, and the frog said, “Thank you, but I failed to mention that there was a condition to your wishes.

    Whatever you wish for, your husband will get times ten!”

    The woman said, “That’s okay.”

    For her first wish, she wanted to be the most beautiful woman in the world.

    The frog warned her, “You do realize that this wish will also make your husband the most handsome man in the world, an Adonis whom women will flock to”.

    The woman replied, “That’s okay, because I will be the most beautiful woman and he will have eyes only for me.”

    So, KAZAM-she’s the most beautiful woman in the world!

    For her second wish, she wanted to be the richest woman in the world.

    The frog said, “That will make your husband the richest man in the world. And he will be ten times richer than you.”

    The woman said, “That’s okay, because what’s mine is his and what’s his is mine.”

    So, KAZAM-she’s the richest woman in the world!

    The frog then inquired about her third wish, and she answered, “I’d like a mild heart attack.”

    Moral of the story: Women are clever. Don’t mess with them

      > The following article is the complete police report on the recent attempted robbery at our local Best Buy.
      > Orville Smith, a store manager for Best Buy in Augusta, Georgia, told police he observed a male customer, later identified as Tyrone Jackson of Augusta, on surveillance cameras putting a laptop computer under his jacket. When confronted the man became irate, knocked down an employee, drew a knife and ran for the door.
      Outside on the sidewalk were four Marines collecting toys for the “Toys for Tots” program. Smith said the Marines stopped the man, but he stabbed one of the Marines, Cpl. Phillip Duggan, in the back; the injury did not appear to be severe.
      After Police and an ambulance arrived at the scene Cpl. Duggan was transported for treatment.
      The subject was also transported to the local hospital with two broken arms, a broken ankle, a broken leg, several missing teeth, possible broken ribs, multiple contusions, assorted lacerations, a broken nose and a broken jaw. . . injuries he sustained when he slipped and fell off of the
      curb after stabbing the Marine.

  11. Just for fun–Can you believe these shoes??? 😆 Cool and pointed clown shoes just doesn’t compute.

    • Kathy needs to add a pair to her shoe collection 🙂

    • Judy Sabatini says:


      Why on earth would anybody want a pair of those?

      How’s everybody doing? Hope you’re all doing well.

    • You talk about being able to kick someone in the ass! You’d feel that all the way up to your armpit!
      I do like those purple/pink pumps next to the guy though.

  12. Judy Sabatini says:

    Check Alex Jones out…

  13. Judy Sabatini says:
  14. Mathius: “My 401K is secure from the government”

    BF: “You are naive”

    …step one…..

    The Obama administration will begin to tap federal retiree programs to help fund operations after the government lost its ability Monday to borrow more money from the public, adding urgency to efforts in Washington to fashion a compromise over the debt.

    • A Puritan Descendant says:

      Federal employee retirement thrift savings plans allow for the employee to borrow about half of the amount accumulated in the plan at a rate of about 3% presently. Failure to repay will be declared a taxable distribution, and probably the 10% early withdrawal penalty.

      Not a very good option, and I wonder if this loan program has been suspended while Geithner raids the accounts.

      • Mathius,

        (1)Take the tax hit and the penalty
        (2) Lose it all.

        • Mathius says:

          A sizable chuck of my 401k is in metals and miners.. it seems to be well on it’s way to zero without any help from the government…

    • A Puritan Descendant says:

      A debt ceiling crises agreement would be a great time for the government to sneak a requirement that 401ks invest a portion in government bonds. With all that will be going on, who will even notice?

      • Mathius says:

        I can beat the return on treasuries even with the tax penalty. Depends on how greedy they are, but I would notice, and I would drain that account faster than you could shake a stick at it.

  15. Mathius says:
  16. What are the odds of getting this passed?

    May 16, 2011
    Against a Balanced Budget Amendment – Come Again?
    By J. Robert Smith
    So, let’s see a show of hands. Who really trusts politicians to do the right thing rather than the self-serving thing? Precisely. An argument being made by a scattering of conservatives against a constitutional amendment mandating a balanced budget is that there’s no need to make any fundamental structural changes to the process of government in Washington; electing right-thinking Congressmen who respect the Constitution as is should suffice in restoring fiscal sanity and limited government. Good luck.

    The argument that the nation can return to the Promised Land of limited government and fiscal prudence by just sending a better caliber of politician to Washington is a tad fanciful, akin to Model U.N. believing. Model U.N.s are staples of high schools and colleges; they’re what students learn the U.N. should be like, rather than what the U.N. is — a nest of vipers, rogues, and the terminally greedy. Sure, it would be splendid if the U.N. was one big, sustained Kumbaya, just like the propaganda claims. But hard reality is hard reality.

    That’s not to say that U.S. Representatives and Senators are vipers, rogues, and greedy – well, not all of them, anyway. But to rely mainly on Congress, which is composed of men and women who, generally speaking, are parochial and self-obsessed, to legislate the national government into boundaries that more closely approximate the pre-FDR era is a reach.

    Even if the planets aligned in 2012 to give Americans a 113th Congress of latter day Jeffersons and Madisons who legislated limited national government and budget-prudence, where is it written that subsequent Congresses, perhaps comprised of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer clones, won’t undo the 113th Congress’ handiwork? What’s wrought by legislation can be un-wrought by the same.

    Look at the budget-busting, government aggrandizing 111th Congress (the Reid-Pelosi Congress), which was aided and abetted by the left’s anti-Reagan, President Barak Obama. The Democrat-dominated 111th Congress set land speed records for driving government spending and borrowing to dizzying, unheard of heights, thereby signaling that Greek profligacy has nothing on American know-how in the profligacy racket.
    The argument can be advanced that virtuous voters would need to keep electing the Jeffersons and Madisons to Congress, but the Republic’s history shows that very human voters don’t always elect the wisest and most public-spirited to populate and helm the Congress, much less fill the presidency. Since the 1930s, the nation has had New Deal, Fair Deal, Great Society, and Obama Society Congresses that have run roughshod over the Constitution, expanding government far beyond the founders’ intent, plundering the federal treasury, pushing credit card government, and setting the stage for the looming crisis in government the nation faces today.

    What good, then, is a constitutional amendment to balance the budget, along the lines that Utah Senator Mike Lee proposes, for example, if Congresses are going to disregard constitutional limits and do as they darn well please?

    First, there are some constitutional restraints that keep Washington from going Hugo Chavez on the nation; in other words, from sliding into squalid statism. There’s certainly more competition than collusion among the branches, which provides a modicum of checks and balances. The states still give some pushback to Uncle Sam. There are electoral checks and balances and free speech and assembly rights that put the brakes on government – somewhat, at least. But thanks to the “living Constitution” heresy long embraced by liberal jurists, federal courts and successive Congresses have blown massive holes through the General Welfare and Commerce Clauses in the Constitution, for instance, enough to sail big government supertankers to ports across the country.

    If Jefferson and Madison could be among their countrymen again, it’s a fair bet that they would see the need to amend the Constitution to explicitly narrow Congress’ range of action concerning the public purse and its power to lay and increase taxes.

    Senator Lee’s proposed constitutional amendment mandates a balanced budget, yes, but it also limits government spending to no more than 18% of the nation’s GDP, unless there are wars or national emergencies. Tax hikes, debt limit increases, and “specific” deficits all would require two-thirds majorities to pass.

    Any legislator in Washington or state capitols can attest to the challenge of mustering a simple majority to pass legislation – it’s usually a tough task. Imagine how much more formidable it would be to reach two-thirds agreement among Members of Congress to bust the debt limit or increase taxes. The two-thirds requirement in Senator Lee’s proposal is a tangible brake on spendthrift government and trigger-happy congressional taxers. Simple legislative majorities are hard to get ordinarily but much easier to obtain than supermajorities.

    How much of Mr. Obama’s spending proposals would have hit the skids had Senator Lee’s balanced budget amendment been the law? Hard to speculate, but Mr. Lee’s balanced budget amendment would have at least greatly complicated matters for spend-happy Democrats and Republican suckerfish.

    Senator Lee’s balanced budget amendment, containing the provisions outlined, is winning the support of conservative Marco Rubio and libertarian-leaning Rand Paul, notably among Senate Republicans.

    Tellingly, there’s no rush among Democrats to co-sponsor Senator Lee’s amendment legislation. Colorado’s Democrat Senator Mark Udall has expressed support for a balanced budget amendment, and some of the usual suspects among the dwindling Blue Dog Caucus have signed onto balanced budget proposals in the House, but not an inkling of support from the liberal ideologues who run the House and Senate Democrat Caucuses.

    Why is that, one wonders? Might it be that liberal congressional leaders fear that Mr. Lee’s proposed amendment, if sent to the states and passed, would, in fact, seriously impede their ability to spend, borrow, and tax? Surely, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid aren’t off the balanced budget band wagon because they share some conservatives’ qualms about violating other provisions of the Constitution. After all, Democrats are the ones who’ve made trampling constitutional limits a thriving cottage industry for decades.

    It’s important to stress that Senator Lee’s balanced budget amendment legislation and facsimiles aren’t panaceas. When it comes to government, human wiliness, and chicanery, no law — constitutional or otherwise — however shrewdly constructed, is foolproof.

    Federal government spending, limited to eighteen percent of the GDP annually, inevitably means that Congresses will routinely spend to the limit, but that’s far better than the threat or reality of Congresses gobbling up ever-higher percentages of GDP to patronize constituencies and special interests to build an Olympus on the Potomac. Campaigns will still be necessary to downsize the federal government by eliminating unconstitutional functions that Washington has assumed over the years or divesting those functions to return them to the states. Federal courts need a plentitude of dedicated originalist appointees.

    But no one should expect Congress to bind itself, session after session, through successive Congresses. Jefferson and Madison were rare birds. Key constitutional amendments, like the balanced budget amendment that Senator Lee is offering, does a more effective job of binding Congress than statutory measures. Clarifying and refining key constitutional provisions are the next major steps in restoring and advancing the founders’ vision of a free people served – not menaced – by government.

  17. Wow-this is wonderful news!!!!! My cousin died of aids-hope this works.

    Apparent Immunity Gene ‘Cures’ Bay Area Man Of AIDS

    May 16, 2011 12:25 PM

    SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5) — A 45-year-old man now living in the Bay Area may be the first person ever cured of the deadly disease AIDS, the result of the discovery of an apparent HIV immunity gene.

    Timothy Ray Brown tested positive for HIV back in 1995, but has now entered scientific journals as the first man in world history to have that HIV virus completely eliminated from his body in what doctors call a “functional cure.”

    Brown was living in Berlin, Germany back in 2007, dealing with HIV and leukemia, when scientists there gave him a bone marrow stem cell transplant that had astounding results.

    “I quit taking my HIV medication the day that I got the transplant and haven’t had to take any since,” said Brown, who has been dubbed “The Berlin Patient” by the medical community.

    Brown’s amazing progress continues to be monitored by doctors at San Francisco General Hospital and at the University of California at San Francisco medical center.

    “I’m cured of HIV. I had HIV but I don’t anymore,” he said, using words that many in the scientific community are cautiously clinging to.

    Scientists said Brown received stem cells from a donor who was immune to HIV. In fact, about one percent of Caucasians are immune to HIV. Some researchers think the immunity gene goes back to the Great Plague: people who survived the plague passed their immunity down and their heirs have it today.

    UCSF’s Dr. Jay Levy, who co-discovered the HIV virus and is one of the most respected AIDS researchers in the world, said this case opens the door to the field of “cure research,” which is now gaining more attention.

    “If you’re able to take the white cells from someone and manipulate them so they’re no longer infected, or infectable, no longer infectable by HIV, and those white cells become the whole immune system of that individual, you’ve got essentially a functional cure,” he explained.

    UCSF’s Dr. Paul Volberding, another pioneering AIDS expert who has studied the disease for all of its 30 years cautioned that while “the Berlin Patient is a fascinating story, it’s not one that can be generalized.”

    Both doctors stressed that Brown’s radical procedure may not be applicable to many other people with HIV, because of the difficulty in doing stem cell transplants, and finding the right donor.

    “You don’t want to go out and get a bone marrow transplant because transplants themselves carry a real risk of mortality,” Volberding said.

    He explained that scientists also still have many unanswered questions involving the success of Brown’s treatment.

    “One element of his treatment, and we don’t know which, allowed apparently the virus to be purged from his body,” he observed. “So it’s going to be an interesting, I think productive area to study.”

    Volberding continued, “Knock on wood, (Brown) hasn’t had any recurrence now for several years of the virus, and that hasn’t happened before in our experience.”

    As a result, at the San Francisco AIDS Foundation some are now using the word “cure” after so many avoided it for decades.

    “You sort of felt like you couldn’t say ‘cure’ for a number of years. Scientists and clinicians and people with HIV alike felt that was a promise that was never going to be realized and it was dangerous to direct a lot of energy toward it,” said Dr. Judy Auerbach. “And now things have shifted.”

    The California Institute of Regenerative Medicine is currently funding stem cell research in the Bay Area based on Brown’s case in the hopes of replicating his success for broader populations of people with HIV.

    The institute said it plans to begin clinical trials next year.

  18. G-man: Braavvooo! Bravo! [Crowd whistling and jeering during the standing ‘O’] Bravo!

    I, like what seems to be everyone here am well-pleased with your writing and story. In particular I enjoyed your word choice, the ease of reading, meter, and pulse of your article. Your article did impress me with a sense of passion; however, folks of our age demographic have seen, heard, and been witnesses to more lies.

    We, as writers, want to stay to the truth at all times which is difficult for some people. Throughout America’s history – or any society, in wherever’s culture or civilization there has always been the exasperation of the truth. Sensationalism – one scorned upon – lately has turned into a profitable enterprise. However, fact remains that these sensationalized pieces of the Enquirer, Globe, or even People Magazine aren’t sued nearly as much as one would have you believe. I know firsthand that the rubbish being ran is vile for most celebs and unfortunately for some lesser disciplined kids, sensationalism leads to more inappropriate behavior.

    I as did so many people admired Ronald Reagan. I believe he was a good president and his leadership style was centered far more towards the truth than any public official I’ve known about. However, having said that, moreover, believing there is no stopping when it comes to propaganda I wonder about other “Hero’s” that our nation has placed within the ranks of demagoguery. How have they held up? I have noticed that FDR is taking a resounding amount of heat lately.

    The Pat Tillman saga is tragic; furthermore, heinous. Insofar as the government officials have hashed and rehashed and bungled-up the raid on UBL is so far amuck in sensationalism that one wonders how much longer is the American public going to put up with this bullshit?


    • JP,

      The People will always put up with the BS to the point they no longer profit from it.

      As long as the the liar, thief and murderer share their take with the Masses, the Masses will come up with all the excuses to accept it.

      But once the check bounces, the Masses will try to find another who will “pay them off” for ignoring evil.

      Pragmatism vs Principle living — and most People’s Principles swing and sway to which ever way the evil wind blows.

      • Funny, BF…..everybody is missing the focus right now on several areas….wonder if anybody has notuced the job loss rate and the unemployment filings of late….back to 8 month levels and climbing.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Dang Colonel, don’t say that. Those who are in love with Obama and think the next election is in the bag because he said the word yes might lose focus on what’s important. That’s not the economy you know, they seem to be oblivious to real life issues. 😆

          • Not to mention that the Chinese currency is about ready to tumble….along with the Euro.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              The fiat ponzi scheme is in big trouble. We won’t be immune to this. 14 trillion + in debt, idiots can only do this.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      JP 🙂

      THank you for you kind critique! I’m learning about this writing stuff, maybe I’m getting soemwhere. 🙂

  19. Strange……there is a pirate ship off the coast of Texas just out of Laguna Madre….Red Bull logo on the deck flag….strange little man wearing a Jack Sparrow hat….and a big “keel aft” sticker that says, “If you can read this, you are too close.”….. going around and around in circles asking all passing boaters ” have you see the white whale?” ….ummmm…has anybody seen DPM lately?

  20. I have to admit … learning this French pervert was a socialist willing to allow the IMF to pay $3,000 a night for a room is a good argument for anarchists … but I say just shoot the SOB in the head as a deterrent and redistribute that wealth pronto.

    • Charlie,

      Do you really believe a man -who is a mulit-millionaire, and one of the most powerful men in the world, who can afford $5,000/hr whores – wants to bonk/rape a chamber maid, chasing her down the hallway????

      Or do you think this is a setup; he is battling Sarkozy for the French Presidency and is leading him by 19% in the first ballot and a staggering 49% in the second (according to polls).

      Inside reports have $1million paid to a number of women trying to get him in a “compromising” situation – to which he has, in the past, been quite susceptible.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        There was also reports that he may have a history of sexual violence that was covered up / dismissed.

        Let’s see what the evidence says.

    • Charlie Stella Says:
      May 17, 2011 at 10:22 am

      Clinton 0 for 8 on Bin Laden
      Bush: same
      Obama: 2.5 years, Bin Laden is fish food.

      Obama walks across finish line in 2012 …

      What do you have? Romney? Christ, I “almost” feel sorry for you.

      Gingrich? Please.

      It’s over. Start focusing on conspiracy theories for 2016, fellas.
      gmanfortruth Says:
      May 17, 2011 at 10:27 am

      SUFA, I want to nominate Charlie to the batshit crazies list. I’m lonely and seems to fit right in. How do you vote 😆

      Aye! I’m surprised Bush wasn’t blamed somehow for the IMF perv…

      • Mathius says:

        Charlie’s point is actually pretty good but he forgets that politics is a game of “what have you done for me lately.” The election is more than a year away and I’ll bet my really cool Captain Jack Sparrow hat that killing Bin Laden won’t really sway many voters.

        People vote with their wallets.

        It’s the economy, stupid.

        Adding, Romney doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting the nod. As governor, he passed a health care law eerily similar to the evil ObamaCare. The primary’s going to be a killing field for anyone with even a hint of moderateness.

  21. May 17, 2011
    20% of new Obamacare waivers are from businesses in Pelosi’s district
    Rick Moran, American Thinker
    There are times when irony is like a warm, sudsy bath, deliciously satisfying and causing one to revel in the glorious feeling of contentment it offers.

    Medai Matters for America featured this headline in January:

    Right-Wing Media Revive Myth That Health Care Waivers Are Political Favors

    I’m afraid we’re going to have to revive that “myth” all over again. Of the 204 waivers to Obamacare granted by HHS in April, “38 are for fancy eateries, hip nightclubs and decadent hotels in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s Northern California district,” according to the Daily Caller.

    That’s in addition to the 27 new waivers for health care or drug companies and the 31 new union waivers Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services approved.

    Pelosi’s district secured almost 20 percent of the latest issuance of waivers nationwide, and the companies that won them didn’t have much in common with companies throughout the rest of the country that have received Obamacare waivers.

    Other common waiver recipients were labor union chapters, large corporations, financial firms and local governments. But Pelosi’s district’s waivers are the first major examples of luxurious, gourmet restaurants and hotels getting a year-long pass from Obamacare.

    Now, I am not a suspicious character by nature. I figure that the world is a truly wondrous place and that coincidences play a large role in the march of history.

    But really now, do these companies really need an Obamacare waiver?

    For instance, Boboquivari’s restaurant in Pelosi’s district in San Francisco got a waiver from Obamacare. Boboquivari’s advertises $59 porterhouse steaks, $39 filet mignons and $35 crab dinners.

    Then, there’s Café des Amis, which describes its eating experience as “a timeless Parisian style brasserie” which is “located on one of San Francisco’s premier shopping and strolling boulevards, Union Street,” according to the restaurant’s Web site.

    “Bacchus Management Group, in partnership with Perry Butler, is bringing you that same warm, inviting feeling, with a distinctive San Francisco spin,” the Web site reads. Somehow, though, the San Francisco upper class eatery earned itself a waiver from Obamacare because it apparently cost them too much to meet the law’s first year requirements.

    Let us weep for the troubles of the wealthy elites in Pelosi’s district. Giving some poor illegal dishwasher health care insurance is just too much to bear, the cost too enormous, the price to high. Why, they may have to raise the price of those porterhouse steaks to $65! Think of the hardship!

    I would tell Media Matters to go hang, but it wouldn’t do any good. They will deny that there is any political favoritism being shown to businesses in Pelosi’s congressional district. Just as they have denied that Democratic- friendly unions and corporations who have contributed to Democratic candidates are getting waivers for political reasons as well.

    Meanwhile, pass the rubber ducky. This irony bath sure feels good.

    • Beyond irony: Nursing homes need waivers from Obamacare

      By: Examiner Editorial 05/16/11 8:05 PM
      According to a New York Times article, many nursing homes and home care agencies, alarmed by the cost of providing health insurance to low-wage workers, have started a lobbying effort seeking an exemption that would relieve them of the obligation.
      According to a New York Times article, many nursing homes and home care agencies, alarmed by the cost of providing health insurance to low-wage workers, have started a lobbying effort seeking an exemption that would relieve them of the obligation.
      Above the fold on the front page of the New York Times is not normally where one expects to find a news article that lays bare the mortal threat posed by Obamacare to a key segment of the health care industry and hundreds of thousands of its workers. But the pro-Obamacare newspaper pulled no punches Monday in a column-one story titled, “Nursing homes seek a reprieve from health law.”

      The focus of the piece was that “many nursing homes and home care agencies, alarmed at the cost of providing health insurance to hundreds of thousands of low-wage workers, have started a lobbying effort seeking an exemption or special treatment that would relieve them of the obligation or help them with the expense.” A little further on in the article, Mark Parkinson, president of the American Health Care Association, explained that his industry has to get a waiver from Obamacare because “we do not have much ability to increase prices because we are so dependent on Medicaid and Medicare” for revenue.

      Neither of these statements should shock anybody. When government controls an industry, the health of firms within it inevitably becomes dependent on their influence in Washington and state capitals. Competition in a regulated industry is typically focused on hiring well-connected K Street lobbying firms, targeting the “right” congressmen on key committees for hefty campaign contributions and knowing which bureaucratic levers to pull in order to ensure a favorable “business environment.” What is best for patients becomes an afterthought when bureaucratic formulas determine what care is provided and how, instead of private firms competing with each other to offer needed services at affordable prices while making enough profit to stay in business.

      Another quote from the Times article points to two more ways in which government regulation of an industry is harmful, usually to the very people it is intended to benefit. Debbie D. Gantz, administrator of a small Oklahoma nursing home, explained that she would offer her employees health insurance but for the fact that “we are a small home. We are not part of a chain. We could not provide health insurance to our employees and still be able to pay all our bills and make the payroll.”

      The result, if Obamacare becomes fully operational, will be that thousands of small nursing homes like Gantz’s will either have to fire employees and restrict services, be bought out by nursing home conglomerates, or both. The result will be fewer jobs for people who want them, and fewer care options available to those who desperately need them. President Reagan put it well in 1981: “Government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem.”

      It still is in 2011.

  22. Mathius says:

    Who thinks this debate will ever happen?

    I’m thinking hell will freeze over first.

    • No interest Matt. Did Obama debate a fifth grader after visiting all 57 states? Everyone makes misstatements, the only difference is the media makes excuses for Obama’s and crucifies conservatives. Now what would be interesting on Bachmann is how she will explain earmarks.
      PS, Rush has the answer at Daily Caller where he doesn’t explain, just gives her a pass saying their is no perfect conservative, so don’t judge on one issue…..

      May 15, 2011
      Michele Bachmann’s record: Earmarks, farm subsidies and pardons?

      When it comes to Minnesota Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann, the Tea Party rhetoric doesn’t always match the record. Should she launch a serious bid for president, Bachmann would likely find herself defending a slew of questionable votes and decisions, including on earmarks, pardons and farm subsidies.

      Bachmann’s penchant for earmarks dates back to her days in the Minnesota state Senate. Despite her reputation as a fiscal conservative, from 2001-2006, then-state Senator Bachmann proposed more than $60 million in earmarks, including a $710,000 “Bond For Centerville Local Improvements Around Highway 14″ and a $40,000,000 “Bond for Lino Lakes And Columbus Township Highway Interchanges.”

      Doug Sachtleben, Bachmann’s communications director, sought to explain the earmarks, arguing that voters resent “taking money from taxpayers in one state to pay for a host of wasteful projects in other states.” He added that voters “also expect that things like road projects should be done at the state level, where voters can have a say through the selling of bonds.” These are not absurd arguments — bridges have to get built somehow — but Tea Party activists may find the argument that earmarks are fine at the state level as appealing as Mitt Romney’s argument that individual health care mandates are fine so long as they are enacted at the state level.

      The federalist argument is also severely undercut by the fact that since joining the U.S. Congress in 2007, Bachmann has appropriated more than $3.7 million in earmarks. What is more, when Republicans sought an earmark moratorium, Bachmann pushed to exclude transportation projects from the ban.

      Read more:

  23. I second my nominee as Batshit Crazy!

    And I’m still waiting for takers (with more than just talk, Gman) for bets on the 2012 election (or are you really going to stick to that batshit theory that there won’t be any election in 2012)? I see that as a way out of putting some hard earned cash down. Look at it this way, if you win, you win back some of the tax dollars that are right now funding my unemployment. If I win, I promise to buy Doc a beer (one) so in honor of spreading the wealth.

    On a different note: That whackjob running the IMF was some socialist … willing to pay $3K a night for a room (or have the IMF pay for it). See, just shoot the SOB and nationalize the hotel (so it can’t rob people for more than, say, $30.00 a night) …

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Your in, welcome to the club! 🙂

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I’m a taker! I’ll wage 2 bottles of my homemade brandy, you put up some of that great homemade Eye-talian red wine! I’ve sent brandy before, it comes out fine!

        Balls in your court my French leaning friend. 🙂

  24. TexasChem says:

    Here are some excerpts from a thread at another site I frequent. Very interesting material…

    Quote: From a Thomas Jefferson letter to John Taylor on May 28th 1816.

    “And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.”

    There is no future New World Order. You are already in it. The World Banking systems revamped themselves after the Great Depression in order to develop a “Well Oiled Machine” that could be in control of technology, create International Governmental dependency on funding, and enslave the masses of world-wide citizens who are subjects of their indebted countries into a false way of living that constantly grows more dependent on finances to survive. Honestly, why do you think that you pay taxes? Why would you imagine that a social security number is imperative to your survival? Each person has a cost attached to them at birth which feeds the needs of those whom own them. If an economy collapses, or, there is a default of that expected cost, you are literally owned by those who can cover the bill which is the very reason why your SSN is essential. TO TRACK YOU DOWN IN CASE OF DEFAULT. Henceforth, Chinese banking literally owns roughly 13% of the United States of America, MEANING, that 13% of American citizens are the property of the Chinese. But, that’s just assuming that the Chinese Banking system isn’t owned by something BIGGER. And it is.

    Imagine a world where money controls EVERYTHING. Its pretty easy, you cannot get goods unless you HAVE IT, and there are many who would kill their own young to collect the insurance on the death. Well, lets extend that principle to international politics.

    Just follow the money. Don’t think of it in terms of your pre-programmed nationalism or else you’re blinded by your “perceived” patriotic duty to be loyal. Don’t think of it in terms of religion because your faith can be the very thing that is used against you and your judgment. This is bigger than Nation V.S. Nation, and its simply the global stage playing out as a result of that which FINANCES it. In order for certain nations, (i.e. Nation leaders) of 3rd world countries to get the money that they need for their greedy little comforts, they will borrow or accept bribes through the banking system; Then, they will allow war on their own soil, and allow their own people to be sacrificed (Afghanistan, Iraq, etc) to create an illusion of an invading force geared towards occupation. This illusion is absolutely necessary to keep the citizens fooled. 3rd world leaders win, and the citizens of that 3rd world nation…lose (Sadaam Hussein anyone???)…until he became a liability of course (how often has the United States employed War Lords to do their bidding) Osama Bin Laden, anyone???

    Alternately, In order for invading nations (i.e. Britian, America) to get the finances that THEY need to fulfill their role, they borrow from the same institutions that sets the rules of winner and loser. Meanwhile, the citizens of each opposing country sit back and debate the politics of who’s God is bigger, which religion is correct, and their inbred nationalism tears the two into polarized opposites causing hate and confusion between them. In the end, its the poor of each nation fighting the poor with the Bankers pulling all of the puppet strings.

    The Federal Reserve Act of 1913
    The establishment of a Central Bank for the United States, this act required all national chartered banks to become a member of the Federal Reserve and established a common fiat currency, a necessary step for the consolidation of power. Of important note here, is that a portion of all bank deposits is required to be transferred to the Federal Reserve Pool, which then, with very little oversight, can be used by the Fed as debt collateral to foreign entities. In simplified terms, money from US citizens is routinely used to fund foreign interests. This goes beyond the contribution to foreign entities that comes from the national budget, which is based on tax revenue. Many, many articles and exposes have been done on the Federal Reserve, just google it if you’re in the dark.

    The Great Depression
    Amongst the many government programs and agencies established during the 1930’s as part of Roosevelt’s New Deal, the major coup for the NWO was the acquisition of over 4000 local banks, which were merged into larger banks, thereby further unifying the banking system and tightening economic controls. Additionally, the 1930’s saw the introduction of significant deficit spending by the U.S. Government, which then allowed the lending bankers to pull the debt-control strings. In 1932, Congressman Louis McFadden presented a speech before Congress, where he warned everyone that the current state of affairs (depression and war) was being facilitated by the Federal Reserve and being funded by American taxpayers. Of particular note are the allegations of gold transfer to Nazi Germany on a weekly basis, amounting to billions of dollars that belonged to the American people.

    “Billions upon billions of our money has been pumped into Germany and money is still being pumped into Germany by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve banks. Her worthless paper is still being negotiated here and renewed here on the public credit of the United States Government and at the expense of the American people. On April 27, 1932, the Federal Reserve outfit sent $750,000, belonging to American bank depositors, in gold to Germany. A week later, another $300,000 in gold was shipped to Germany in the same way. About the middle of May $12,000,000 in gold was shipped to Germany by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve banks. Almost every week there is a shipment of gold to Germany.” – Congressman Louis McFadden

    To make matters worse, in 1933, through Executive Order 6102 […], it became illegal for US citizens to own gold. Everyone was forced to turn their gold over to the Federal Reserve in exchange for Federal Reserve Notes. This development alone should have caused major outrage as a big alarm bell that a power grab was occurring.

    Meanwhile, international bankers had established the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) in 1930, the world’s first international bank, a bank for central banks. Ironically, the two founders were the Governor of The Bank of England, Montague Norman and his German colleague Hjalmar Schacht, later Adolf Hitler’s finance minister. The BIS falls under no jurisdiction, which is to say, it answers to no one. And according to its annual report, it currently has almost 200 tons of gold.

    With billions in gold flowing to Nazi Germany, Hitler was preparing for war, yet the Treaty of Versailles prevented any military buildup. Apparently, this wasn’t a major obstacle when there is money to be made:

    “On March 16, 1935, in clear violation of the Treaty of Versailles, Hitler ordered the remilitarization of Germany, including the reactivation of the Luftwaffe (air force). As the German army grew through conscription, the other European powers voiced minimal protest as they were more concerned with enforcing the economic aspects of the treaty. In a move that tacitly endorsed Hitler’s violation of the treaty, Great Britain signed the Anglo-German Naval Agreement in 1935, which allowed Germany to build a fleet one third the size of the Royal Navy and ended British naval operations in the Baltic.”

    European countries were completely distracted from the Nazi War Machine because they were too interested in the economics. Can anyone else see the puppet strings? Armies cost money. Follow the money and who do you find?

    As we all know, Adolf Hitler is responsible for the holocaust and the murdered over 12 million people be it jews, catholics, gypsies, etc. Without the PROPER financing, war is simply impossible to wage. There’s no question that he was a complete psychopath, however, there is a question as to what role he actually played in global politics.
    Sources and links below: Study them, understand them, and SPREAD them. This is the nature of the beast.

    Rep. Louis T. McFadden’s Federal Reserve Speech from 1932: It is essential that this link comes up twice in the same thread to make the essential point that so many have missed throughout history. This is a very damning article that goes unnoticed by those who have studied history, especially considering the war machine’s dependence on the Federal Reserve and its long history to play and finance both sides of the coin. This article specifically talks about the amount of money and gold being laundered by the Banking system into the German, and then the Nazi Regime. OUCH.

    Remember, the FDIC was made possible under the “guise” of liberalism and equality which took shape only after the financial meltdown that the supposed “Republicans” created. Blacks were looking for equality and citizenship, the poor were looking for someone to lead them out of the instability, and war was brewing from all sides. This is a direct reflection of our recent financial meltdown. The only difference between these two eras is the fact that now Hispanics are looking for rights and citizenship, as opposed to blacks who are now OWNED like the rest of Americans. (We’ll just chalk that up as COINCIDENCE.) However, you might want to start thinking on a whole different level if you want to understand who pulls all of the strings.

    Banking: Prescott Bush
    Here’s a copy of the indictment that seized Prescott Bush’s assets and monetary flow.

    Here’s a wikipedia page talking about the “Trading With The Enemy Act” that was created because of Bush’s direct interaction with the Nazi Regime.…

    Here is a piece written by PHD Leonard G. Horowitz.

    Not only was Bush a Banker, but also a Connecticut Republican finance chairman. Yes, this is Wikipedia, and yes…This page provides REAL SOURCES.…

    Nazi Gold:… (Look at the information about the Vatican…I’m going to address that shortly.)

    THINK CRITICALLY HERE. Adolf Hitler was being funded for the entire duration up until the allies attacked. His TECHNOLOGY has been hailed throughout history as cutting edge, and the most advanced technology of the time. SO ADVANCED, that in fact, after the war had ended, in many cases, it was deemed divine intervention that the allies had prevailed. Incidentally, The United States “acquired” much of Hitler’s technology as well as the scientists that had been working for Hitler’s administration. During this time, the Office of Strategic Services (O.S.S.) literally merged with Nazi intelligence of the S.S. regime to form the C.I.A. This was made possible by a military project named “Operation Paperclip.”……

    Now, Operation Paperclip is a well known fact that occurred and completed itself in 1947. Ironically, this was the same year that we developed the National Security Act.

    Here is what I am proposing, and I know this to be fact. Hitler was paid and financed by American Bankers to not only develop advanced technology, but, to be a branch, or a military force for world policing which would act as a satellite for the World Government. Sound familiar??? Isn’t that what Obama is currently proposing as the leaders in the New International Government??? Isn’t that what we’ve been doing all along???
    Hitler’s Germany was literally supposed to represent what America currently does, and was being built up as such. However, he moved too quickly, expanded his empire too fast, and had so many human rights abuses that it could no longer be hidden from the international community. Henceforth, he created bad press for the people who were financing his activities, and he needed to be stopped before people could piece the puzzle together. Once his actions became too much to contain, the BANKERS financed the world-wide movement to quell him and begin anew.

    So, what happened after the fall of Germany??? Again, The UNITED STATES acquired German technology and scientists which not only advanced our military strength, but, helped us to create NASA. Consequently, just before this, we flattened Japan with 2 bombs which smashed their efforts against the United States into submission. If, there was ever an effort at all. However, most people seem to forget this little detail. Japan became the new headquarters for the development of new and advanced technology which supplied much of the United States with tons of fun little gadgets and bolstered the U.S. economy.

    1948, Israel becomes a state. Interesting isn’t it? Just one year after the National Security Act was developed and right after the fall of Germany. The United States dumped billions into the funding and establishment of Israel, and continues to send gratuitous amounts of money to them to finance their war machine. Now, this may seem inconsequential until you look a little deeper. Who is NOW the strongest military force in the Middle East, and why would such a force be needed? Is this the SAME force that the bankers were trying to develop in Germany as they funded them until they had the best technology in Europe?

    Furthermore, Obama blocked any attempt to hold Israel accountable for their crimes. Interestingly enough…who is Obama in bed with??? That’s right…Goldman and Sachs.…

    Obama and Goldman connections:

    BacPope and Nazi Ties.
    Also, is it a coincidence that the current Pope used to be in the Nazi Youth Movement? Sure, we can just chalk this up as yet, another coincidence.
    This is in HTML but can be viewed differently:… olocaust-Memorial-May-11-VATICAN-NAZI-connection.doc+current+pope,+nazi+ties&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
    How about this one?…
    Now, only in a world completely controlled by EVIL and GREED could someone who was previously associated with the Nazi Party rise to become the World’s most influential religious leader. I wonder why this passed so easily in the press and the international community?

    So, out of curiosity, what does it take to recognize that there might be a problem with our religious institutions especially if they are dependent on the same BANKING SYSTEM that finances wars? Anyone see an inherent problem with this??? Almost everyone on SUFA is skeptical about the Obama Administration, so, doesn’t it seem odd that the Obama Administration would provide amnesty to the revolting act of PEDOPHILIA??? Is that what the world’s leading nation is all about???

    Vatican being protected by Obama Administration for pedophilia cases:

    There was a book that came out some time ago called, “Trance-formation of America.” The ideas were fringe and sounded exaggerated, if not fabricated until…A previously unknown guy who was referred to in this book, would later be knighted as Representative Mark Foley, screwed up and got caught soliciting children. OOPS. She could have lost credence for making such fantastic claims before he was ever known until this guy FOLEY got himself into a mess. Ironically, she was talking about Foley and his penchant for little boys far before he was ever known in the mainstream. Also, not long after this book, it was discovered that her MK-ULTRA claims were REAL. Technically, this was discovered in the 70’s, but no one really took note. OOPS. Just chalk it up as another coincidence. Incidentally, Kathy O’brien also talked about the Vatican and its place in the global economy, and its TRUE purpose for modern existence.……
    If you have the volition, there are stacks of information all over the internet that delve deeply into this world. And obviously, it is a very REAL world of corruption that exists at the highest levels. This is not fiction nor is it conspiracy…it happened.

    Now, lets delve into the recent oil disasters. I am intentionally skipping things like Y2K, 911 and a few other items to get to the beef of the thread. These things are pertinent, but would demand more attention.
    Oil Spill Appears to be INTENTIONAL. Destroy the world for the allmighty DOLLAR

    Halliburton posts a 46% drop in profits due to lack of overseas drilling:

    One of the best ways to increase profits is to make sure that you have work. So, if one were to create a disaster in which they were hired to clean, they immediately are able to replace lost profits by gaining contracts for clean-up.

    Now, take a look at this link:

    At the surface, this looks quite innocent until you start to get to some more serious issues.

    That’s right…the above link suggests that Halliburton was responsible for the cementing that created both oil spills. I am suggesting that this is a NO BRAINER. You would have to be a fool to think otherwise.

    Now you ask…What does that have to do with posting a 46% profit loss??? Well, if you can’t get business through war and oil, which is Halliburton’s bread and butter, what would be the next best way to ensure that you continue to work so that you can boost profits???

    Then we have this little Gem: Halluburton Buys “Boots-N-Coots” Oil clean-up company 8 days before the spill: Who can put two and two together on this ONE???
    Here’s the conspiracy side:
    Here’s the mainstream…

    Gee…why would this occur do you think??? Why on earth did Halliburton need to purchase “Boots-N-Coots” 8 days BEFORE the spill??? Were they just being extra cautious considering their FAILURE in AUSTRALIA?

    Well now…let’s look a little deeper into the profits that can be made by doing such things:
    BP chief sells HIS OWN shares before the spill:

    Here are the exact figures of the profits that were earned during the spill.

    BP’s CEO sells off HIS OWN STOCKS just before the spill.

    Goldman Sachs sells shares as well: Yep, these were the same psychopaths that helped the financial collapse.…

    And here are some reasons why BP keeps lying about the spill…That’s right, it boils down to the almighty DOLLAR: $$$…

    And look here: A faked clean-up response by BP and the government itself. WHY FAKE IT?

    Does everyone here see a BIGGER picture forming??? If not, I could continue playing connect the dots all day, but, for those who critically think, this is another NO-BRAINER.


    Those who think that the Obama Administration did this to profit from the new Carbon Tax that they are proposing into legislation are onto something. Of course the oil spill will benefit them and the Bankers to and bring them billions from the damage that they created, however, this may not be the endgame.

  25. TexasChem says:

    My post is still awaiting moderation…

    • TexasChem says:

      Ahh there it is..

      • gmanfortruth says:

        That’s an article, not a comment! THat’s why it took so long, more than three links. Go to my sit a post a comment, we can work on articles like this and get them online as front page stuff. USW would like that. 🙂

  26. TexasChem says:

    Here’s a reality check for ya…

    Congress To Vote On Declaration of Worldwide Perpetual War
    With No Borders And No Clear Enemies

    Taken from

    “The legislation authorizes the President of the United States to take unilateral military action against all nations, organizations, and persons, both domestically and abroad, who are alleged to be currently or who have in the past supported or engaged in hostilities or who have provided aid in support of hostilities against the Untied States or any of its coalition allies. The legislation removes the requirement of congressional approval for the use of military force and instead gives the President totalitarian dictatorial authority to engage in any and all military actions for an indefinite period of time.

    It even authorizes the President the authority to launch attacks against American Citizens inside the United States with no congressional oversight whatsoever.

    Just to recap, because that was a mouthful:

    Endless War ­ The war will continue until all hostilities are terminated, which will never happen.

    No Borders ­ The president will have the full authority to launch military strikes against any country, organization or person, including against U.S citizens on U.S soil.

    Unilateral Military Action ­ Full authority to invade any nation at any time with no congressional approval required.

    No Clearly Defined Enemy ­ The US can declare or allege anyone a terrorist or allege they are or have been supporting “hostilities” against the US and attack at will.

    Authorization To Invade Several Countries ­ The president would have full authority to invade Iran, Syria, North Korea, along with several other nations in Africa and the Middle East and even Russia and China under the legislation all of which are “known” to have supported and aided hostilities against the United States.” (1)

    Why have you heard nothing at all about his one? For the same reason you heard nothing at all about the USA PATRIOT ACT until it was passed at 4 am without being even read. The way this government works is to keep whatever they do sealed away from the public until AFTER the so-called SECRET Legislation has already been passed: This then is followed by a lot of “patriotic” flag-waving that attempts to ‘justify’ the crime-committed that is always completely “unjustifiable.” This has become Standing Operational Procedure, throughout the government, since George Junior stole the White House. The difference this time is that now the Supreme Court of Indiana and other courts besides, are getting eyeball deep in these horrific rulings that are attempting to legalize home-invasions, by thugs-in-uniform, masquerading as agents of the STATE.

    “Something huge–huge and not good–just happened in Indiana, which will be little more than a blip in the propaganda that passes for national news. The Supreme Court of Indiana just ruled that in Indiana, if a police officer decides to illegallycome into your house, you’re not allowed to do anything to stop him. According to “Justice” Steven David, resisting an admittedly “unlawful police entry into a home” is against “public policy.” Got that? If you live in Indiana, and a cop decides to invade your home without a shred of legal justification, it is considered a crime for you to do anything to stop him.

    Bizarrely, “Justice” David also said that resisting law-breaking cops goes against “modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.” You see, only judges are wise enough to know that when the Fourth Amendment says you have a right to be free from “unreasonable searches and seizures,” it actually means that the cops have the right to commit “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and you have no right to do anything to stop it.”(2)

    This goes nicely with yesterday’s article on America’s Death Squads. That article defines what is transpiring here as an unannounced local-continuation of what is happening throughout the middle-east, right now, wherein no one has any legal right to resist either the illegal-colonial-occupation-forces; while these forces continue to do exactly what that SWAT*TEAM in Tucson did to an ex-marine. Seventy-one bullets were fired to murder Jose Guerena, without charges, or arrest, so that there could be NO TRIAL: It was just another sanctioned US EXECUTION of someone selected at random by the LAWLESS police-forces of the ROGUE POLICE-STATE that USI has created to rule over the former USA. (3)

    Next site…ACLU of all organizations.

    House Gets Ready to Vote on New Worldwide War

    As we blogged last week, a hugely important provision for Congress to authorize a new worldwide war has been tucked away inside the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The bill was marked up by members of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) last Wednesday that poured into Thursday morning (2:45 a.m. to be exact).

    A couple of minutes past midnight, Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.) offered an amendment to strike Sec. 1034 — the new authorization for worldwide war provision — from the NDAA. Visibly angry that such a large sweeping provision had not yet had any public hearing whatsoever, he vigorously characterized it as a very broad declaration of war.

    Rep. Garamendi was very concerned by the limitless geographic boundaries of the provision. Essentially, it would enable the U.S. to use military force anywhere in the world (including within the U.S.) in search of terrorists.

    He also alluded to the idea that the HASC might not have proper jurisdiction over such a provision in the first place, suggesting that it would be an issue for the House Foreign Affairs Committee to take up. Clearly, he was beyond troubled by the fact that this markup was the very first time either committee has discussed the provision.

    Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) was the only member to speak in support of Sec. 1034 of the NDAA. Interestingly enough he didn’t reply to the declaration of war charge by Rep. Garamendi.

    In defense of Sec. 1034, and in opposition of the amendment, Rep. Thornberry said the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) of 2001 was hastily written and it is no longer responsive to the threat Americans face from terrorists today. He said the provision in the NDAA updates the 2001 AUMF and it is an especially good time to address it in light of the capturing and killing of Osama bin Laden.

    Debate on the Rep. Garamendi’s amendment ended when he withdrew it, and declared that he plans to introduce it again on the House floor where he expects a fully engaged debate.

    So, while a new authorization for worldwide war has had its first public debate, it unfortunately only lasted a hair over 10 minutes and occurred after midnight.

    Though it is a very troubling expansion of war authority, it has been lingering for more than three years as a “sleeper provision,” and it is finally getting the attention of some members of Congress. We hope that further debate in Congress in the weeks ahead will allow for a more in-depth examination of unchecked authority to wage worldwide war, and what the outcomes of such a provision will yield.

    Stay engaged — you can help now by telling your representative to oppose any new and expanded war authority. The debate over the NDAA and its multitude of amendments will begin the week of May 23, and we suspect it will be a lively one.

    And finally 3rd site…
    Washingtons Blog
    Tuesday, May 17, 2011
    Congress Proposes Bill to Allow Worldwide War … Including INSIDE the U.S.

    Americans who have been paying attention are outraged that Bush lied us into Iraq by making up false claims about weapons of mass destruction and pretending that Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11.

    Many are disgusted that Obama got us into a war in Libya without Congressional authorization.

    But as the ACLU noted yesterday, Congress is going even further … proposing handing permanent, world-wide war-making powers to the president – including the ability to make war within the United States:

    A hugely important provision for Congress to authorize a new worldwide war has been tucked away inside the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The bill was marked up by members of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) last Wednesday that poured into Thursday morning (2:45 a.m. to be exact).

    A couple of minutes past midnight, Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.) offered an amendment to strike Sec. 1034 — the new authorization for worldwide war provision — from the NDAA. Visibly angry that such a large sweeping provision had not yet had any public hearing whatsoever, he vigorously characterized it as a very broad declaration of war.

    Rep. Garamendi was very concerned by the limitless geographic boundaries of the provision. Essentially, it would enable the U.S. to use military force anywhere in the world (including within the U.S.) in search of terrorists.


    While a new authorization for worldwide war has had its first public debate, it unfortunately only lasted a hair over 10 minutes and occurred after midnight.

    Though it is a very troubling expansion of war authority, it has been lingering for more than three years as a “sleeper provision,” and it is finally getting the attention of some members of Congress. We hope that further debate in Congress in the weeks ahead will allow for a more in-depth examination of unchecked authority to wage worldwide war, and what the outcomes of such a provision will yield.

    As I noted in 2008:

    An article in the Army Times reveals that the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team will be redeployed from Iraq to domestic operations within the United States.

    The unit will soon be under the day-to-day control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. The Army Times reports this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to Northern Command. The paper says the Army unit may be called upon to help with “civil unrest” and “crowd control”.

    The soldiers are learning to use so-called “nonlethal weapons” designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds.

    This violates posse comitatus and the Constitution. But, hey, we’re in a “national emergency”, so who cares, right?

    (We’re still in a declared state of national emergency).

    I noted a couple of months later:

    Everyone knows that deploying 20,000 troops on U.S. soil violates Posse Comitatus and the Constitution.

    And everyone understands that staging troops within the U.S. to “help out with civil unrest and crowd control” increases the danger of overt martial law.

    But no one is asking an obvious question: Does the government’s own excuse for deploying the troops make any sense?

    Other Encroachments On Civil Rights Under Obama

    As bad as Bush was, the truth is that, in many ways, freedom and constitutional rights are under attack even more than during the Bush years.

    For example:

    Obama has presided over the most draconian crackdown on leaks in our history — even more so than Nixon.

    As Marjorie Cohen – professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and past president of the National Lawyers Guild – writes at the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy:

    Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, who is facing court-martial for leaking military reports and diplomatic cables to WikiLeaks, is being held in solitary confinement in Quantico brig in Virginia. Each night, he is forced to strip naked and sleep in a gown made of coarse material. He has been made to stand naked in the morning as other inmates walked by and looked. As journalist Lance Tapley documents in his chapter on torture in the supermax prisons in The United States and Torture, solitary confinement can lead to hallucinations and suicide; it is considered to be torture. Manning’s forced nudity amounts to humiliating and degrading treatment, in violation of U.S. and international law.

    Nevertheless, President Barack Obama defended Manning’s treatment, saying, “I’ve actually asked the Pentagon whether or not the procedures . . . are appropriate. They assured me they are.” Obama’s deference is reminiscent of President George W. Bush, who asked “the most senior legal officers in the U.S. government” to review the interrogation techniques. “They assured me they did not constitute torture,” Bush said.


    After State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley criticized Manning’s conditions of confinement, the White House forced him to resign. Crowley had said the restrictions were “ridiculous, counterproductive and stupid.” It appears that Washington is more intent on sending a message to would-be whistleblowers than on upholding the laws that prohibit torture and abuse.


    Torture is commonplace in countries strongly allied with the United States. Vice President Omar Suleiman, Egypt’s intelligence chief, was the lynchpin for Egyptian torture when the CIA sent prisoners to Egypt in its extraordinary rendition program. A former CIA agent observed, “If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear – never to see them again – you send them to Egypt.” In her chapter in The United States and Torture, New Yorker journalist Jane Mayer cites Egypt as the most common destination for suspects rendered by the United States.

    As I pointed out in March:

    Former constitutional law teacher Glenn Greenwald says that – in his defense of state secrecy, illegal spying, preventative detention, harassment of whistleblowers and other issues of civil liberties – Obama is even worse than Bush.

    Indeed, Obama has authorized “targeted assassinations” against U.S. citizens. Even Bush didn’t openly do something so abhorrent to the rule of law.

    Obama is trying to expand spying well beyond the Bush administration’s programs. Indeed, the Obama administration is arguing that citizens should never be able to sue the government for illegal spying.

    Obama’s indefinite detention policy is an Orwellian nightmare, which will create more terrorists.

    Furthermore – as hard as it is for Democrats to believe – the disinformation and propaganda campaigns launched by Bush have only increased under Obama. See this and this.

    And as I pointed out last year:

    According to Department of Defense training manuals, protest is considered “low-level terrorism”. And see this, this and this.

    An FBI memo also labels peace protesters as “terrorists”.


    A 2003 FBI memo describes protesters’ use of videotaping as an “intimidation” technique, even though – as the ACLU points out – “Most mainstream demonstrators often use videotape during protests to document law enforcement activity and, more importantly, deter police from acting outside the law.” The FBI appears to be objecting to the use of cameras to document unlawful behavior by law enforcement itself.

    The Internet has been labeled as a breeding ground for terrorists, with anyone who questions the government’s versions of history being especially equated with terrorists.

    Government agencies such as FEMA are allegedly teaching that the Founding Fathers should be considered terrorists.

    The government is also using anti-terrorism laws to keep people from learning what pollutants are in their own community. See this, this, this and this.

    Claims of “national security” are also used to keep basic financial information – such as who got bailout money – secret. That might not bode for particularly warm and friendly treatment for someone persistently demanding the release of such information.

    The state of Missouri tried to label as terrorists current Congressman Ron Paul and his supporters, former Congressman Bob Barr, libertarians in general, anyone who holds gold, and a host of other people.

    And according to a law school professor and former president of the National Lawyers Guild, pursuant to the Military Commissions Act:

    Anyone who … speaks out against the government’s policies could be declared an “unlawful enemy combatant” and imprisoned indefinitely. That includes American citizens.
    Obama has refused to reverse these practices.

  27. Okay, this sounds insane to me-BF, anyone else-why would we sell this countries gold-it seems we would be buying more-if we had any money.

    Selling Gold at Fort Knox Emerges as Next Big Question in Debate on Federal Debt Limit
    Congressman Paul Endorses the Idea, Amid Showdown Between Congress, Administration

    By DAVID PIETRUSZA, Special to the Sun | May 17, 2011

    NEW YORK — The next big question on the federal debt limit could be whether to start selling the government’s holdings of gold at Fort Knox — and at least one presidential contender, Ron Paul, has told The New York Sun he thinks it would be a good move.

    The question has been ricocheting around the policy circles today. An analyst at the Heritage Foundation, Ron Utt, told the Washington Post that the gold holdings of the government are “just sort of sitting there.” He added: “Given the high price it is now, and the tremendous debt problem we now have, by all means, sell at the peak.”

    His comment came in the wake of not only the government having reached the statutory debt limit of $14.29 trillion but also the release of a report by the Heritage Foundation of a report on asset sales. The report outlined how a “partial sales of federal properties, real estate, mineral rights, the electromagnetic spectrum, and energy-generation facilities” might garner the federal treasury $260 billion over the course of the next 15 years.

    The report did not mention the possibility of selling the government’s holdings of bullion, which at recent prices of $1,500 an ounce, would be worth about many tens of billions of dollars. But the possibility has not been lost in the policy debate now raging in Washington. The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that a group of Republican congressmen supports the idea of selling gold.

    Officials of the Obama administration have taken notice — and disagree. The assistant Treasury secretary for financial markets, Mary Miller, wrote in a posting on the Treasury Department’s Website May 6 that “fire sale” of the government’s financial assets, including gold, would not be a “viable option.” She urged instead a raising of the debt limit.

    An unnamed senior administration official was quoted by the Washington Post as saying, “Selling off the gold is just one level of crazy away from selling Mount Rushmore.” The Wall Street Journal, in its dispatch Monday, reported that Treasury “could be forced to rethink” their opposition if the budget talks fail.

    A study of gold reserve sales in the late 1990s noted that seven nations — Australia, Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Sweden — had then recently sold off substantial portions of their gold reserves. The sales, which amounted to 48% of those reserves, presaged a 26% devaluation in their nation’s respective currencies. Between 1999 and 2002, in 17 separate auctions, Britain sold off half of its gold reserve, netting $3.5 billion. What Britain sold is now worth $10.5 billion.

    In September 2009 the International Monetary Fund authorized sales from its gold reserves. At the conclusion of its sales, the IMF had disposed of 403.3 tons of gold or 13% of reserves. Over half was purchased by the central banks of India, Sri Lanka, Mauritius, and Bangladesh. In early 2011, Communist China announced plans to increase its gold reserves from to 10,000 tons by decade’s end from the 1,200 tons it currently holds. Mexico has acquired 93.3 tons of gold this year, while Thailand added 9.3 tons to its national reserves this March. Russia added 22.5 tons in January and February.

    In August 2010, a leading figure in the monetary debate in Congress, Ron Paul, a Republican of Texas, called for an audit of the federal government’s gold reserves. “If there was no question, you’d think they would be very anxious to prove to us that the gold is there. . . . ,” Dr. Paul then said, “In the early 1980s when I was on the gold commission, I asked them to recommend to the Congress that they audit the gold reserves – we had 17 members of the commission and 15 voted not to the audit. I think there was only one decent audit done 50 years ago.”

    “If we ever get around to deciding we should use gold in relationship to our currency we ought to know how much is there,” Dr. Paul added, “Our Federal Reserve admits to nothing and they should prove all the gold is there. There is a reason to be suspicious and even if you are not suspicious why wouldn’t you have an audit?” In March 2008 the Times of London quoted a spokesman of the American treasury as saying that American gold holdings “are audited every year by the Department of Treasury’s Office of Inspector General. He confirmed that although independent auditors oversee the process they are not given access to the Fort Knox vault.”

    Dr. Paul told the Sun today that he reckoned the sale of gold reserves would be “a good and moral decision. An individual would have to do the same.” The sentiment is echoed by another big name in the debate on monetary reform, Edwin Vieira Jr., who told the Sun he has little hope of the government moving to sound money and would prefer that it coin its gold holdings in pieces marked with their weight and use them to pay off debts, particularly individuals — who might be owed, say, tax refunds.

    Mr. Vieira is a proponent of what he calls the “absolute separation between currency and debt.” He considers specified weights of gold and silver as the only constitutional currency. “Redeemable currency,” he says, “is an oxymoron.” And given that America is in an era of fiat money with no plans on the government’s part to mount a reform, he says of the government: “They don’t need the gold. They’ve just been sitting on it since Roosevelt stole it.”

    However, one of the most famous advocates of the gold standard, Lewis Lehrman, opposes the sale of the gold holdings of the American government — or any part of them. “Under no circumstances should the United States consider selling a single ounce of gold,” Mr. Lehrman, who runs the internet project, told the Sun. “On the contrary, depending upon the facts and circumstances and the level of prices, the United States might be a gradual buyer.”

    Mr. Lehrman, who had served in the early 1980s with Dr. Paul as a member of the United States Gold Commission, had just been this afternoon interviewed by Diane Rehm of National Public Radio, on which he called for American leadership in restoring a gold standard. He did not suggest that it could be done immediately, but he argued that this is the time to start, saying: “We have all the grounding and the basis for the United States taking the lead in establishing the convertibility of the dollar today.”

%d bloggers like this: