Federalist Press | Defending Liberty — Informing America

Breaking News and Political Commentary

Jimmy Carter Agrees Zimmerman Acquittal Was ‘The Right Decision’

By Leave a Comment

carter_zimmermanFormer President Jimmy Carter broke with many liberal commentators yesterday when he told an NBC television affiliate that the jury’s acquittal of George Zimmerman was “the right decision.”

“I think the jury made the right decision based in the evidence presented. It’s not a moral question, it’s a legal question and the American law requires that the jury listens to the evidence presented.”

When asked if race was at the root of the shooting or of the jury’s decision, Carter elected to speak about the facts of the case, not a private interpretation. He explained that placing current racial tension in historical context, Americans are making good progress in the civil rights arena.

PUBLIUS

 

In 513 Days Between Trayvon Shooting and Zimmerman Verdict, 11,106 Blacks Murdered by OTHER BLACKS

By Leave a Comment

gangs_blacksWith all of the outrage from the black ‘leadership’ in the nation about Trayvon Martin being killed in the act of attacking a neighborhood watch person, the fact remains that 93% of African-American murders are committed by other African-Americans.

In fact, nearly 9,000 African-Americans are murdered each year; 93% of them by other blacks–nearly 8,000–and that doesn’t account for the 1 million black babies that are aborted by ‘pro-black, pro-women’ groups each year.

So where are the black leaders on any given day, when 22 young blacks have been murdered by another young black?

As we reported in our article Zimmerman: The Subtext, July 8, 2013:

The truth is that liberals in America refuse to accept any part of the truth that blacks commit most of the crime in this country. Like Trayvon Martin, many young thugs wearing hoodies and pants below butt cracks terrorize whites and others, at will, threatening and attacking anyone who challenges their criminal or suspicious behavior. Their neighborhoods are virtual war zones, where bullets fly to enforce criminals territories.

Remember, blacks only account for 12% of our population, and young black men account for only about 4% of the US population. According to a report released by the New Century Foundation, The Color of Crime:

  • Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
  • When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.
  • Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.
  • The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic.
  • Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.
  • Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.
  • Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.

These statistics evidence a very serious problem in our country–one that turning a blind eye won’t resolve–that many young black men are violent criminals. If this statement offends you–answer the question, who in America feels safe walking through a predominantly black neighborhood after dark? Do our African-American brothers and sisters feel safe walking though their own neighborhoods at night?

martin-phone-picturesIn fact, the entitlement policies of the left have bred a generation of criminals, and our black brothers and sisters are drowning in a sea of apathy and neglect. (See our article Dems Hurting Minorities, June 8, 2013) The same policies that have created the problem are being escalated annually, and the resulting difficulties of young black men have increased exponentially–nearly to the point where the majority of them have a better chance of going to prison than to college. The only thing that has prevented the escalation of crime rates in America is the abortion policies of the left, which are aimed directly at reducing the black population. (See our article Should GOP Rethink Abortion Policy?, Nov. 29, 2012)

George Zimmerman has given America a wake up call. He refused to turn a blind eye to the truth that skulking young blacks in hoodies and low-rider pants are suspicious in a middle-class neighborhood–a fact that every American knows, but the left has made a social crime to speak out loud. It is our hope that black “leaders” will redirect their feigned outrage to the real issues facing their constituents (the number of blacks that died at the hands of blacks in Chicago over the recent holiday should spark true outrage), and enlist the help of responsible politicians and citizens to begin the arduous process of rehabilitating an entire generation of lost black Americans.

PUBLIUS

Britain: “Rape Jihad” Against Children

By Leave a Comment

muslim-rapeA court in London has sentenced seven members of a Muslim child grooming gang based in Oxford to at least 95 years in prison for raping, torturing and trafficking British girls as young as 11.

The high-profile trial was the latest in a rapidly growing list of grooming cases that are forcing politically correct Britons to confront the previously taboo subject of endemic sexual abuse of children by predatory Muslim paedophile gangs.

The 18-week trial drew unwelcome attention to the sordid reality that police, social workers, teachers, neighbors, politicians and the media have for decades downplayed the severity of the crimes perpetrated against British children because they were afraid of being accused of “Islamophobia” or racism.

The seven members of the Oxford child grooming gang who were found guilty (clockwise from top left): Kamar Jamil, Akhtar Dogar, Anjum Dogar, Assad Hussain, Mohammed Karrar, Bassam Karrar, and Zeeshan Ahmed.

 

According to government estimates that are believed to be “just the tip of the iceberg,” at least 2,500 British children have so far been confirmed to be victims of grooming gangs, and another 20,000 children are at risk of sexual exploitation. At least 27 police forces are currently investigating 54 alleged child grooming gangs across England and Wales.

“As one police officer said to me, ‘There isn’t a town, village or hamlet in which children are not being sexually exploited.’ We should start from the assumption that children are being sexually exploited right the way across the country.” — Sue Berelowitz, Deputy Children’s Commissioner for England

Judge Peter Rook, who presided over the trial that ended on June 27 at the Central Criminal Court of England and Wales (aka the Old Bailey), sentenced five of the men to life in prison and ordered them to serve a minimum of between 12 and 20 years before becoming eligible for parole.

Rook said the severity of the jail terms — which are longer than those in other high-profile grooming cases such as those in Rochdale, Derby and Telford — were meant to send a message to abusers that they would be targeted and brought to justice.

After reading the sentence, Rook said the men — who are from Pakistan and Eritrea (see profiles here) — had committed “a series of sexual crimes of the utmost depravity” and had targeted “young girls because they were vulnerable, underage and out of control.”

The ringleaders of the gang, brothers Akhtar Dogar, 32, and Anjum Dogar, 31, were given life sentences and were told by the judge that they had been found guilty of “exceptionally grave crimes.” They are to remain in prison for a minimum of 17 years before becoming eligible for parole.

A second pair of brothers, Bassam Karrar, 33, and Mohammed Karrar, 38, were also given life sentences. Mohammed Karrar was given a minimum sentence of 20 years for the “dreadful offenses” he committed against the girls, including one child whom he branded with the letter “M” for Mohammed. He began pimping the girl when she was only 11, and forced her to have a backstreet abortion when she was 12.

In graphic testimony, one of the victims told the court that Mohammed Karrar would charge men £500 ($750) to have sex with her. They would take her to homes in High Wycombe where she would be subjected to gang rapes, incidents that she described as “torture sex.” The men would tie her up and gag her mouth with a ball to stop her cries from being heard. The men would play out abuse fantasies; sometimes she was left bleeding for days afterwards.

In one of her few acts of defiance, she threatened Mohammed Karrar with his own lock knife as he was preparing to rape her; he knocked her out with a metal baseball bat.

Mohammed’s younger brother, Bassam Karrar, who was found guilty of brutally raping and attacking a 14-year-old girl while he was high on cocaine, was ordered to serve a minimum of 15 years.

Kamar Jamil, 27, was jailed for life with a minimum term of 12 years. Assad Hussain, 32, and Zeeshan Ahmed, 28, were both jailed for seven years.

islamic_rape_jihadThe six victims who gave evidence were aged between 11 and 15 when the abuse took place. They were plied with drugs and alcohol, repeatedly raped, sold and trafficked as prostitutes, all at a time during which when they were supposedly in the safekeeping of local authorities.

The trial — details of which were so disturbing that jury members were excused from ever having to sit on a jury again — exposed years of failings by Thames Valley police and Oxford social services. The court heard that the girls were abused between 2004 and 2012 and that police were told about the crimes as early as 2006, that they were contacted at least six times by victims, but failed to act.

The mother of Girl “A” said the police and social services had failed to protect the girls and made her and other family members feel as if they were overreacting. She said: “I can recall countless incidents when I have been upset and frustrated by various professional bodies.”

The mother of Girl “C” told the British newspaper The Guardian that she had begged social services staff to rescue her daughter from the rape gang. She said that her daughter’s abusers had threatened to cut the girl’s face off and promised to slit the throats of her family members. She said that they had been forced to leave their home after the men had threatened to decapitate family members.

Despite irrefutable evidence that the girls were being sexually abused, no one — according to a report published by the House of Commons on June 5 — acted to draw all the facts together, apparently due to fears by police and social workers that they would be accused of racism against Muslims.

The report, “Child Sexual Exploitation and the Response to Localized Grooming,” states: “Evidence presented to us suggests that there is a model of localized grooming of Pakistani-heritage men targeting young White girls. This must be acknowledged by official agencies, who we were concerned to hear in some areas of particular community tension, had reportedly been slow to draw attention to the issue for fear of affecting community cohesion. The condemnation from those communities of this vile crime should demonstrate that there is no excuse for tip-toeing around this issue. It is important that police, social workers and others be able to raise their concerns freely, without fear of being labelled racist.”

These allegations have been confirmed by the imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation, Taj Hargey, who says race and religion are inextricably linked to the spate of grooming rings in which Muslim men are targeting under-age white girls.

Writing in the Daily Mail on May 15, Hargey states: “Apart from its sheer depravity, what also depresses me about this case is the widespread refusal to face up to its hard realities. The fact is that the vicious activities of the Oxford ring are bound up with religion and race: religion, because all the perpetrators, though they had different nationalities, were Muslim; and race, because they deliberately targeted vulnerable white girls, whom they appeared to regard as ‘easy meat’, to use one of their revealing, racist phrases.”

“But as so often in fearful, politically correct modern Britain,” Hargey continues, “there is a craven unwillingness to face up to this reality. Commentators and politicians tip-toe around it, hiding behind weasel words. … Part of the reason this scandal happened at all is precisely because of such politically correct thinking. All the agencies of the state, including the police, the social services and the care system, seemed eager to ignore the sickening exploitation that was happening before their eyes. Terrified of accusations of racism, desperate not to undermine the official creed of cultural diversity, they took no action against obvious abuse.”

According to Hargey, “Another sign of the cowardly approach to these horrors is the constant reference to the criminals as ‘Asians’ rather than as ‘Muslims.’ In this context, Asian is a completely meaningless term. The men were not from China, or India or Sri Lanka or even Bangladesh. They were all from either Pakistan or Eritrea, which is, in fact, in East Africa rather than Asia.”

He also says the grooming rings in Britain are actually being promoted by imams who encourage followers to believe that white women deserve to be “punished.” He writes that Muslims in Britain “have been drip-fed for years [with] a far less uplifting doctrine, one that denigrates all women, but treats whites with particular contempt. In the misguided orthodoxy that now prevails in many mosques, including several of those in Oxford, men are unfortunately taught that women are second-class citizens, little more than chattels or possessions over whom they have absolute authority.”

Hargey points to a telling incident in the trial when it was revealed that Mohammed Karrar branded one of the girls with an “M,” as if she were a cow. He writes, “‘Now, if you have sex with someone else, he’ll know that you belong to me,’ said this criminal, highlighting an attitude where women are seen as nothing more than personal property. The view of some Islamic preachers towards white women can be appalling. They encourage their followers to believe that these women are habitually promiscuous, decadent and sleazy — sins which are made all the worse by the fact that they are kaffurs or non-believers. Their dress code, from mini-skirts to sleeveless tops, is deemed to reflect their impure and immoral outlook. According to this mentality, these white women deserve to be punished for their behavior by being exploited and degraded.”

According to the British Children’s Minister, Tim Loughton, “We are only seeing the tip of the iceberg now. For too long it was something of a taboo issue in this country, little spoken about, little appreciated, little acknowledged or dealt with.” He also said the grooming cases raise “very troubling questions about the attitude of the perpetrators, all but one of whom were from Pakistani backgrounds, towards white girls. Nothing is gained by shying away from that.”

During a recent House of Commons hearing on “Child Sexual Exploitation and the Response to Localized Grooming” the Deputy Children’s Commissioner for England, Sue Berelowitz, said: “What I am uncovering is that sexual exploitation of children is happening all over the country. As one police officer who was the lead in a very big investigation in a very lovely, leafy, rural part of the country said to me: ‘There isn’t a town, village or hamlet in which children are not being sexually exploited.’ The evidence that has come to the fore during the course of my inquiry is that that, unfortunately, appears to be the case.”

Berelowitz continued: “We should start from the assumption that children are being sexually exploited right the way across the country. In urban, rural and metropolitan areas, I have hard evidence of children being sexually exploited. That is part of what is going on in some parts of our country. It is very sadistic. It is very violent. It is very ugly.”

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook.

GOP House Can Undo Obama Damage With Purse Strings

By Leave a Comment

boehnerWith the 2012 elections in the  books, the result is that there has been no change in the makeup of America’s government. The Democrats won major advances in 2008, but were rebuked in the 2010 elections with the loss of the House of Representatives.

Now, the status quo prevails, and the government is growing larger and intruding evermore into the lives of Americans and burdening their businesses to the point of closing their doors.

As we look forward to the next 3.5 years of Obama governance, our state of the nation is extremely precarious, as real unemployment rates skyrocket, especially for young minorities, and as we head for the brink of a deadly fiscal and social cliff.

During Obama’s first term Republicans in the House were loathe to exercise the power the Constitution affords the House of Representatives. Now, following disclosures of monumental abuses by the IRS and NSA, House Republicans are finally threatening to cut budgets.

Indeed, the time to step up and enforce the Constitution is long past due, and we call upon House Speaker John Boehner to abandon his tepid leadership practices of the past and begin doing what the American people and Constitution sent him to do–govern.

In fact, not one penny gets spent in this nation without the GOP controlled House consenting to it. This fact gives Boehner and the GOP all power. They don’t have to compromise.

They are the kid with the ball, who is able to take it home and end the game any time the other kids fail to play by the rules. The Democrats stopped playing by the rules of the Constitution generations ago, and their hell-bent march to the left has rendered them enemies of the Constitution.

Obamacare, deficits, spying on citizens, targeting conservative groups, military cuts . . . these are all titillating fantasies of the left, but need not become our reality if the GOP will just exercise its Constitutional mandates and cut the budgets to offending agencies tasked with implementing unconstitutional policies.

Regarding the budget in general, the GOP must simply send a balanced budget with spending appropriated for Constitutionally mandated items to the Senate with instructions: “Pass this budget and send it to the president for signing, because it is the only budget you will get from us.” If they do that, then go to the golf course; GAME OVER.

Will the Democrats in the Senate and White House whine and scream? Yes. Will it do them any good? No. Why? Because without the consent of the House, the government cannot spend any money. Not one thin dime. Not a penny. Not a peso.

Can the Dems do an end run around the House and appropriate money for their programs? No. Will offending government agencies shut down? Perhaps. Is that bad? No.

Will this plan work? YES! It is time for the GOP to show the American people that they are doing the job they were elected to do–govern within a balanced budget and provide the basic services mandated by the Constitution.

PUBLIUS

Zimmerman: The Subtext

By 1 Comment

ZimmermanWith the prosecutors floundering so dramatically in their case against George Zimmerman, who is on trial for the ‘murder’ of Trayvon Martin, one wonders why the case was even brought in the first place. Indeed, the decision by prosecutors was not a matter of law, but a matter of politics.

The ‘black community’ was boisterous in its outcries against the “white” George Zimmerman, who is plainly Hispanic . . . although that inconvenient fact doesn’t stop the misrepresentation, who shot the hoodie-wearing, pot smoking young black man in a middle-class gated community in Florida. As a matter of responding to that public outcry, a special prosecutor was appointed to take on the clear case of self-defense, and punish it as a hate crime.

Facts of the case:

Mr. Martin seemed clearly out of place in a neighborhood that had suffered its share of crimes in recent years, and Mr. Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch person, whose sense of public duty instructed him to keep a keen eye out for suspicious people.

Mr. Zimmerman telephoned police when he saw Mr. Martin walking through the neighborhood, looking suspicious. Mr. Martin confronted Mr. Zimmerman, and attacked him, ending up on top of him slugging him in the face and pounding his head into the concrete, telling him he was going to die. Mr. Zimmerman received a broken nose and split scalp at the hands of Mr. Martin.

Feeling he was in imminent danger of serious injury, Mr. Zimmerman took out his handgun and shot Mr. Martin, who was still on top of him giving him a beating, and who died at the scene.

This is a classic textbook case of self-defense.

The truth is that liberals in America refuse to accept any part of the truth that blacks commit most of the crime in this country. Like Trayvon Martin, many young thugs wearing hoodies and pants below butt cracks terrorize whites and others, at will, threatening and attacking anyone who challenges their criminal or suspicious behavior.

Remember, blacks only account for 12% of our population, and young black men account for only about 4% of the US population. According to a report released by the New Century Foundation, The Color of Crime:

  • Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
  • When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.
  • Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.
  • The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic.
  • Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.
  • Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.
  • Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.

These statistics evidence a very serious problem in our country–one that turning a blind eye won’t resolve–that many young black men are violent criminals. If this statement offends you–answer the question, who in America feels safe walking through a predominantly black neighborhood after dark?

In fact, the entitlement policies of the left have bred a generation of criminals, and our black brothers are drowning in a sea of apathy and neglect. (See our article Dems Hurting Minorities, June 8, 2013) The same policies that have created the problem are being escalated annually, and the problems of young black men have increased exponentially–nearly to the point where the majority of them have a better chance of going to prison than to college. The only thing that has prevented the escalation of crime rates in America is the abortion policies of the left, which are aimed directly at reducing the black population. (See our article Should GOP Rethink Abortion Policy?, Nov. 29, 2012)

George Zimmerman has given America a wake up call. He refused to turn a blind eye to the truth that skulking young blacks in hoodies and low-rider pants are suspicious in a middle-class neighborhood–a fact that every American knows, but the left has made a social crime to speak out loud. It is our hope that black “leaders” will redirect their feigned outrage to the real issues facing their constituents (the number of blacks that died at the hands of blacks in Chicago over the recent holiday should spark true outrage), and enlist the help of responsible politicians and citizens to begin the arduous process of rehabilitating an entire generation of lost black Americans.

PUBLIUS

Gay Activists Demand Capital One Drops Alec Baldwin

By Leave a Comment

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAA coalition of leading gay and straight activists are calling for Capital One to part ways with spokesman Alec Baldwin following his homophobic Twitter rant directed at a reporter.

“We urge all Americans to ask themselves, ‘What’s in your wallet?’ We hope they will reject Alec Baldwin’s homophobia by cutting up those Capital One cards in their wallets,” Jimmy LaSalvia, gay conservative strategist and GOProud co-founder, told Breitbart.com.

Baldwin has apologized for the tweets directed at reporter George Stark who wrote a story claiming the actor’s wife, Hilaria Thomas, was tweeting during the funeral of Soprano’s star James Gandolfini.

“My ill-advised attack…had absolutely nothing to do with issues of anyone’s sexual orientation,” Baldwin said in a statement sent to the gay rights group GLAAD on Friday. “As someone who fights against homophobia, I apologize.”

But an apology from the actor is not enough according to John Hawkins, who works with LaSalvia at RightWingNews.com.

“It’s still a free country and Alec Baldwin can do as much gay bashing as he likes on Twitter, but it’s hard to understand why Capital One would choose to publicly condone his homophobia by keeping Baldwin on as its spokesman,” Hawkins told Breitbart.com. “If Capital One is not going to do the right then, then Capital One doesn’t deserve our business.”

The company, so far, has refused to comment or respond to multiple calls and emails from FOX411 to several press representatives.

Baldwin’s controversial tweets read, “[I’d] put my foot up your f**king ass, George Stark, but I’m sure you’d dig it too much,” and “I’m gonna find you George Stark, you toxic little queen, and I’m gonna f**k you…up.”

The 55-year-old actor sent out the messages from his @ABFoundation Twitter account, according to screen grabs published online. Baldwin disabled the account following the rant but it has since been restored – minus the offensive tweets – and it seems business, for Baldwin is back to normal.

“Liberals and conservatives may not agree on much, but we should certainly be able to agree that Alec Baldwin’s comments were way over-the-line and completely inappropriate,” Hawkins told Brietbart.com.

Some have pointed out that while Baldwin’s homophobic slurs were similar to TV chef Paula Deen’s racial slurs (she admitted to using the N-word 30 years ago), the fallout is not. The 66-year-old chef was dropped by all of her major business partners, including Target, Walmart, the Food Network and Sears, while so far Baldwin seems to be getting off scot free.

“Companies know the media won’t beat them up for keeping Baldwin on board, despite his violent threat and homophobic comments,” explained Dan Gainor, vice president of business and culture at Media Research Center. “Why? Because he’s liberal and the same rules don’t apply.”

Gainor predicted Baldwin likely won’t see any repercussions.

A non-scientific poll taken by Sodahead.com  asked users if they believed Baldwin should lose his endorsement deals following the tweets. More than 80 percent of respondents said yes.
Baldwin’s rep did not immediately return FOX411’s request for additional comment.

FoxNews.com

Dependence Day – The Return of King George

By Leave a Comment

With the level of the federal deficit approaching $17,000,000,000 (trillions), the interest on which costs Americans the first $1,300,000,000 (billion) they make every day, and the recent explosion of federal power over the citizens and the states as handed to U.S. socialists by the Supreme Court and the prolific pen of the Executive Order, the independence from government rule and tyranny sought by our Founders is all but neutralized. We and our children are indebted and imprisoned by design of a leftist attack on our country, and an Orwellian federal government spies on patriotic citizens and treats them like enemies while Islamic terrorists are welcomed into the White House.

A polarization has occurred in the nation—as the left has chipped away at personal liberty and individual sovereignty over the past several decades, those who cherish freedom have finally begun to become more vocal in their resistance. But is it too little, too late?

The left has made tremendous inroads in their quest to replace King George with its own elitist panels, commissions and czars, and within the past year its inches of ground winning have become feet.

. . . even an overtaxed economy like ours has rendered our own 99% the 1% of the world.

In the name of laborer parity and elevating the ethnically or socially disadvantaged, the socialists and communists of the past century have robbed the people of the world of their birthright, established by the labor and sacrifice of their 18th and19th Century Forbearers. In the name of pretended “fairness” leftist forces have lowered the wealth and opportunities of everyone rather than elevate the status of the less fortunate.

Look at any country where socialism and liberalism have penetrated the veil of liberty. Not one of them has improved the quality of life of their working people.

Where do we find the bottom half of earners in America? With all of the talk of the 1% and the 99% in this country, and the mindless chants of brain-dead occupiers in the streets, even an overtaxed economy like ours has rendered our own 99% the 1% of the world. Nearly all of our poor live in good housing, have clean water and food aplenty (many suffer from obesity), a computer of some kind, and cell phones and cable television. They live better than the wealthy of many of the earth’s nations.

Additionally, the tremendous generosity and military might of Americans has been the salvation of billions of people around the world, whose leftist economies have left them with nothing but squalor, want and exposure to dictators and war lords (usually leftists).

big_brother_watchingWe hear of the Tea Party these days, and the name is spoken with disdain by over half of the country, and almost all of the mainstream media. Does any of them actually recall where the term originated? Do they remember how an oppressive monarch imposed taxes that were hard to bear and intruded into the personal liberties of a hardworking people, and that those people finally decided that they would take no more and rose up in rebellion, starting with throwing British tea into the harbor?

No, sadly enough, most young adults these days are the products of a dumbing-down campaign launched by the left and its educational arm, the National Education Association. They have mush for brains and their education consists of nothing more than pop culture and global warming propaganda.

We have nearly come full circle. We have hundreds of millions dependent on government and its handouts, a White House dedicated to the overthrow of the Constitution, and a Supreme Court that has decreed that the people are to be taxed even for services they DO NOT purchase at the government’s command.

King George is back, liberty has been strangled to near enslavement, and this time it will take more than a few muskets to rid us of the burgeoning oppression. America has not seen such dark times since the Civil War. I say the Civil War, because in all other wars the enemy was external. If we fail to immediately change our course, we will be irretrievably carried back under the oppression of dictatorship. We invite all liberty loving Americans to join the revolution, and to regain our independence from oppressive, centralized government.

PUBLIUS

Obama Delays ObamaCare Until After Elections

By Leave a Comment

obama_irsPresident Obama’s decision to push back key provisions of his signature healthcare law amid growing concerns it isn’t ready for prime time could take a key issue away from Republicans in next year’s midterm elections.

The announcement Tuesday night that the mandate for many small businesses to provide health insurance to employees will be delayed by one year was hailed by business leaders and seemed to acknowledge Republican claims the plan would hurt – or at least confuse – business. But it also likely undercuts Republican plans to make ObamaCare the centerpiece of their midterm elections strategy.

Democrats are defending 21 Senate seats to the Republicans’ 14. The GOP had already started to excoriate Senate Democrats who had voted for the health law in 2009. And the House has voted more than 35 times since taking control of the chamber in 2011 to repeal or at least defund all or parts of ObamaCare, most recently in May.

“The president’s health care law is already raising costs and costing jobs,” House Speaker John Boehner said. “This announcement means even the Obama administration knows the ‘train wreck’ will only get worse. … And it underscores the need to repeal the law and replace it with effective, patient-centered reforms.”

The announcement was made late Tuesday by the Treasury Department, at the beginning of the holiday week while Congress was on recess. It came amid reports that the administration is running into roadblocks as it prepares to implement ObamaCare.

The change in the employer mandate also is arguably the most significant concession the administration has made to date to critics of the plan.

“We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively,” Treasury Assistant Secretary Mark Mazur said in a blog post. “We have listened to your feedback and we are taking action.”

Randy Johnson, senior vice president of Labor, Immigration, and Employee Benefits at the Chamber of Commerce, told Fox News the administration’s decision shows it has “finally recognized the obvious.”

“Employers need more time and clarification of the rules of the road before implementing the employer mandate,” he said. “We will continue to work to alleviate this and other problems with ObamaCare.”

Neil Trautwein, a vice president of the National Retail Federation, said: “We commend the administration’s wise move.”

He also said the change “will provide employers and businesses more time to update their health care coverage without threat of arbitrary punishment.”

But the delay could also undermine the law’s main goal of covering the nearly 50 million Americans without health insurance. Already, Republican resistance in the states will deny access to a planned Medicaid expansion — at least for next year — to millions of low-income people.

Under the health law, companies with 50 or more workers must provide affordable coverage to their full-time employees or risk a series of escalating tax penalties if just one worker ends up getting government-subsidized insurance. Originally, that requirement was supposed to take effect Jan. 1. It will now be delayed to 2015.

Most medium-sized and large businesses already offer health insurance and the requirement was expected to have the biggest consequences for major chain hotels, restaurants and retail stores that employ many low-wage workers. Some had threatened to cut workers’ hours, and others said they were putting off hiring.

Business groups complained since the law passed that the provision was too complicated. For instance, the law created a new definition of full-time workers, those putting in 30 hours or more. It also included two separate requirements, one to provide coverage and another that coverage be deemed “affordable” under the law. Violations of either one exposed employers to fines. But such complaints until now seemed to be going unheeded.

There is no coverage mandate — or penalty — for smaller businesses. Also, for businesses of any size, there is no penalty if their workers are poor enough to be eligible for Medicaid.

The delay in the employer requirement does not affect the law’s requirement that individuals carry health insurance starting next year or face fines. That so-called individual mandate was challenged all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled last year that the individual requirement was constitutional, since the penalty would be collected by the Internal Revenue Service and amounted to a tax.

Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., a critic of the law, seized on the delay as a “clear admission” that the law is “unaffordable, unworkable and unpopular,” but conceded delaying implementation could help Democrats.

“It’s also a cynical political ploy to delay the coming train wreck associated with ObamaCare until after the 2014 elections,” he said.

FoxNews.com

Hundreds of Thousands Protest Egypt’s Morsi

By Leave a Comment

Egypt_Morsi_ProtestCAIRO –  Hundreds of thousands thronged the streets of Cairo and cities around the country Sunday and marched on the presidential palace, filling a broad avenue for blocks, in an attempt to force out the Islamist president with the most massive protests Egypt has seen in 2 1/2 years of turmoil.

In a sign of the explosive volatility of the country’s divisions, a hard core of young opponents broke away from the rallies and attacked the main headquarters of President Mohammed Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood, pelting it with stones and firebombs until a raging fire erupted in the walled villa. During clashes, Brotherhood supporters opened fire on the attackers, and activists said three protesters were killed.

Fears were widespread that the two sides could be heading to a violent collision in coming days. Morsi made clear through a spokesman that he would not step down and his Islamist supporters vowed not to allow protesters to remove one of their own, brought to office in a legitimate vote. Thousands of Islamists massed not far from the presidential palace in support of Morsi, some of them prepared for a fight with makeshift armor and sticks.

At least five anti-Morsi protesters were killed Sunday in clashes and shootings in southern Egypt.

The protesters aimed to show by sheer numbers that the country has irrevocably turned against Morsi, a year to the day after he was inaugurated as Egypt’s first freely elected president. But throughout the day and even up to midnight at the main rallying sites, fears of rampant violence did not materialize.

Instead the mood was largely festive as protesters at giant anti-Morsi rallies in Cairo’s central Tahrir Square and outside the Ittihadiya palace spilled into side streets and across boulevards, waving flags, blowing whistles and chanting.

Fireworks went off overhead. Men and women, some with small children on their shoulders, beat drums, danced and sang, “By hook or by crook, we will bring Morsi down.” Residents in nearby homes showered water on marchers below — some carrying tents in preparation to camp outside the palace — to cool them in the summer heat, and blew whistles and waved flags in support.

“Mubarak took only 18 days although he had behind him the security, intelligence and a large sector of Egyptians,” said Amr Tawfeeq, an oil company employee marching toward Ittihadiya with a Christian friend. Morsi “won’t take long. We want him out and we are ready to pay the price.”

The massive outpouring against Morsi raises the question of what is next. Protesters have vowed to stay on the streets until he steps down, and organizers called for widespread labor strikes starting Monday. The president, in turn, appears to be hoping protests wane.

For weeks, Morsi’s supporters have depicted the planned protest as a plot by Mubarak loyalists. But their claims were undermined by the extent of Sunday’s rallies. In Cairo and a string of cities in the Nile Delta and on the Mediterranean coast, the protests topped even the biggest protests of the 2011’s 18-day uprising, including the day Mubarak quit, Feb. 11, when giant crowds marched on Ittihadiya.

It is unclear now whether the opposition, which for months has demanded Morsi form a national unity government, would now accept any concessions short of his removal. The anticipated deadlock raises the question of whether the army, already deployed on the outskirts of cities, will intervene. Protesters believe the military would throw its weight behind them, tipping the balance against Morsi. The country’s police, meanwhile, were hardly to be seen Sunday.

“If the Brothers think that we will give up and leave, they are mistaken,” said lawyer Hossam Muhareb as he sat with a friend on a sidewalk near the presidential palace. “They will give up and leave after seeing our numbers.”

Violence could send the situation spinning into explosive directions.

The fire at the Brotherhood headquarters, located on a plateau overlooking Cairo, sent smoke pouring in the air, even as youths clashed with Brotherhood supporters at the site. Three on the anti-Morsi side were shot to death, and 60 were wounded, an activist who monitored casualties at the hospital, Nazli Hussein, said.

Southern Egypt saw deadly attacks on anti-Morsi protests, and five people were killed. Two protesters were shot to death during clashes outside offices of the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party, one in Beni Suef, the other in Fayoum.

In the city of Assiut, a stronghold of Islamists, gunmen on a motorcycle opened fire on a protest in which tens of thousands were participating,, killing one person, wounding four others and sending the crowd running.

The enraged protesters then marched on the nearby Freedom and Justice offices, where gunmen inside opened fire, killing two more, security officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to talk to the press.  Clashes erupted, with protesters and security forces fighting side by side against Morsi’s supporters.

At least 400 people were injured nationwide, the Health Ministry said.

Morsi, who has three years left in his term, said street protests cannot be used to overturn the results of a free election.

“There is no room for any talk against this constitutional legitimacy,” he told Britain’s The Guardian newspaper in an interview published Sunday, rejecting early elections.

If an elected president is forced out, “there will (be) people or opponents opposing the new president too, and a week or a month later, they will ask him to step down,” he said.

Morsi was not at Ittihadiya as Sunday’s rally took place — he had moved to another nearby palace.

As the crowds massed, Morsi’s spokesman Ihab Fahmi repeated the president’s longstanding offer of dialogue with the opposition to resolve the nation’s political crisis, calling it “the only framework through which we can reach understandings.”

The opposition has repeatedly turned down his offers for dialogue, arguing that they were for show.

The demonstrations are the culmination of polarization and instability that have been building since Morsi’s June 30, 2012, inauguration. The past year has seen multiple political crises, bouts of bloody clashes and a steadily worsening economy, with power outages, fuel shortages, rising prices and persistent lawlessness and crime.

In one camp are the president and his Islamist allies, including the Muslim Brotherhood and more hard-line groups. Morsi supporters accuse Mubarak loyalists of being behind the protests, aiming to overturn last year’s election results, just as they argue that remnants of the old regime have sabotaged Morsi’s attempts to deal with the nation’s woes and bring reforms.

Hard-liners among them have also given the confrontation a sharply religious tone, denouncing Morsi’s opponents as “enemies of God” and infidels.

On the other side is an array of secular and liberal Egyptians, moderate Muslims, Christians — and what the opposition says is a broad sector of the general public that has turned against the Islamists. They say the Islamists have negated their election mandate by trying to monopolize power, infusing government with their supporters, forcing through a constitution they largely wrote and giving religious extremists a free hand, all while failing to manage the country.

“The country is only going backward. He’s embarrassing us and making people hate Islam,” said Donia Rashad, a 24-year-old unemployed woman who wears the conservative Islamic headscarf. “We need someone who can feel the people and is agreeable to the majority.”

As they marched toward the presidential palace, some chanted, “You lied to us in the name of religion.” The crowds, including women, children and elderly people, hoisted long banners in the colors of the Egyptian flag and raised red cards — a sign of expulsion in soccer.

In Tahrir, chants of “erhal!”, or “leave!” thundered around the square. The crowd, which appeared to number some 300,000, waved Egyptian flags and posters of Morsi with a red X over his face. They whistled and waved when military helicopters swooped close overhead, reflecting their belief that the army favors them over Morsi.

Defense Minister Gen. Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi warned a week ago that the military would intervene to prevent the nation from entering a “dark tunnel.” Army troops backed by armored vehicles were deployed Sunday in some of Cairo’s suburbs, with soldiers at traffic lights and major intersections. In the evening, they deployed near the international airport, state TV said.

Similarly sized crowds turned out in the Mediterranean city of Alexandria and the Nile Delta cities of Mansoura, Tanta and Damanhour, with sizeable rallies in cities nationwide.

“Today is the Brotherhood’s last day in power,” Suliman Mohammed, a manager of a seafood company, said in Tahrir.

The protests emerge from a petition campaign by a youth activist group known as Tamarod, Arabic for “Rebel.” For several months, the group has been collecting signatures on a call for Morsi to step down.

On Saturday, the group announced it had more than 22 million signatures — proof, it claims, that a broad sector of the public no longer wants Morsi in office.

It was not possible to verify the claim. If true, it would be nearly twice the some 13 million people who voted for Morsi in last year’s presidential run-off election, which he won with around 52 percent of the vote. Tamarod organizers said they discarded about 100,000 signed forms because they were duplicates.

Morsi’s supporters have questioned the authenticity of the signatures, but have produced no evidence of fraud.

Near Ittihadiya palace, thousands of Islamists gathered in a show of support for Morsi outside the Rabia al-Adawiya mosque. Some Morsi backers wore homemade body armor and construction helmets and carried shields and clubs — precautions, they said, against possible violence.

At the pro-Morsi rally at the Rabia al-Adawiya mosque, the crowd chanted, “God is great,” and some held up copies of Islam’s holy book, the Quran.

“The people hold the legitimacy and we support Dr. Mohamed Morsi,” said Ahmed Ramadan, one of the rally participants. “We would like to tell him not to be affected by the opponents’ protests and not to give up his rights. We are here to support and protect him.”

Associated Press

Supreme Court Sides with Gay Marriage

By Leave a Comment

gay_domaIn a big day for gay-rights advocates, the Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down a federal provision denying benefits to legally married gay couples and issued a separate ruling that paves the way for same-sex marriages to resume in California.

Cheers erupted on the steps of the high court, as the rulings were handed down. The latter decision did not speak to the constitutionality of gay marriage bans in California, or in the country as a whole. The court avoided a broad ruling, and rather, determined that the defenders of California’s Proposition 8 ban on gay marriage did not have the standing to appeal lower court rulings against the ban.

As a result, California is likely to allow same-sex marriages to resume in a matter of weeks.

The more sweeping decision came in relation to the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which the court said was unconstitutional and effectively gutted by ruling against a provision that denied benefits to legally married gay couples.

The 5-4 ruling — a major victory for gay-rights advocates — means those same-sex couples would be eligible for federal benefits.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion.

“DOMA divests married same-sex couples of the duties and responsibilities that are an essential part of married life and that they in most cases would be honored to accept were DOMA not in force,” he wrote.

Kennedy wrote that the law “places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage.”

The ruling prompted tension among the divided court. Multiple dissenting opinions were filed. Justice Antonin Scalia, reading from his dissent, said the components of the majority’s ruling are “wrong.”

“The error in both springs from the same diseased root: an exalted notion of the role of this Court in American democratic society,” he said.

Social conservatives were similarly disappointed.

“They are rejecting the truth. It’s a sad day,” said Frank Page, president of the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee. “Christians have to live in the world in which we live. We will adapt and adjust to the realities of the law change. At the same time we will continue to preach, declare, and live the truth that our God does not get involved in swing votes and cultural change when there is a biblical principle at stake.”

But David Boies, attorney for the plaintiffs in the Prop 8 case, hailed both rulings as a step toward “true equality.” He said that while the California case was not ruled on the merits, the DOMA ruling demonstrates that when the issue of gay marriage returns to the high court, “marriage equality will be the law throughout this land.”

The provision in question defined marriage as between a man and woman and in doing so prevented married gay couples from receiving a range of tax, health and retirement benefits that are generally available to married people.

Same-sex marriage has been adopted by 12 states and the District of Columbia. Another 18,000 couples were married in California during a brief period when same-sex unions were legal there.

“Under DOMA, same-sex married couples have their lives burdened, by reason of government decree, in visible and public ways,” Kennedy said.

“DOMA’s principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal,” he said.

He was joined by the court’s four liberal justices.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.

Scalia said the court should not have decided the case.

FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Part of Voting Rights Act

By Leave a Comment

Supreme-CourtIn a major ruling, the Supreme Court on Tuesday voided a provision of the Voting Rights Act that determines which state and local governments have to seek federal permission to change their voting laws.

The 1960s-era provision largely singled out states and districts in the South — those with a history of discrimination — for special screening by the federal government over changes to their laws. But the court ruled 5-4 that the formula determining which states are affected is unconstitutional, and said Congress could try to draft a new provision.

The justices said that the law Congress most recently renewed in 2006 relies on 40-year-old data that does not reflect racial progress and changes in U.S. society.

“In 2006, the Act was reauthorized for an additional 25 years, but the coverage formula was not changed. Coverage still turned on whether a jurisdiction had a voting test in the 1960s or1970s, and had low voter registration or turnout at that time,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.

He clarified that the provision requiring advance approval of voting law changes — known as Section 5 — was not being struck down. Rather, the court found that the provision pertaining to the formula, known as Section 4, was unconstitutional. The decision, though, challenges the overall practice of federal screening unless and until Congress addresses the formula.

The decision means that a host of state and local laws that have not received Justice Department approval or have not yet been submitted will be able to take effect. Prominent among those are voter identification laws in Alabama and Mississippi.

Going forward, the outcome alters the calculus of passing election-related legislation in the affected states and local jurisdictions. The threat of an objection from Washington has hung over election-related proposals for nearly a half century. At least until Congress acts, that deterrent now is gone.

Roberts argued that these states and the conditions in them have “changed dramatically” over the years.

“The tests and devices that blocked ballot access have been forbidden nationwide for over 40 years. Yet the Act has not eased (Section 5’s) restrictions or narrowed the scope of (Section 4’s) coverage formula along the way. Instead those extraordinary and unprecedented features have been reauthorized as if nothing has changed, and they have grown even stronger,” he wrote.

The decision comes five months after President Obama, the nation’s first black chief executive, started his second term in the White House, re-elected by a diverse coalition of voters.

The high court is in the midst of a broad re-examination of the ongoing necessity of laws and programs aimed at giving racial minorities access to major areas of American life from which they once were systematically excluded. The justices issued a modest ruling Monday that preserved affirmative action in higher education and will take on cases dealing with anti-discrimination sections of a federal housing law and another affirmative action case from Michigan next term.

The court warned of problems with the voting rights law in a similar case heard in 2009. The justices averted a major constitutional ruling at that time, but Congress did nothing to address the issues the court raised. The law’s opponents, sensing its vulnerability, filed several new lawsuits.

The latest decision came in a challenge to the advance approval, or preclearance, requirement, which was brought by Shelby County, Ala., a Birmingham suburb.

The lawsuit acknowledged that the measure’s strong medicine was appropriate and necessary to counteract decades of state-sponsored discrimination in voting, despite the Fifteenth Amendment’s guarantee of the vote for black Americans.

But it asked whether there was any end in sight for a provision that intrudes on states’ rights to conduct elections, an issue the court’s conservative justices also explored at the argument in February. It was considered an emergency response when first enacted in 1965.

The county noted that the 25-year extension approved in 2006 would keep some places under Washington’s oversight until 2031 and seemed not to account for changes that include the elimination of racial disparity in voter registration and turnout or the existence of allegations of race-based discrimination in voting in areas of the country that are not subject to the provision.

The Obama administration and civil rights groups said there is a continuing need for it and pointed to the Justice Department’s efforts to block voter ID laws in South Carolina and Texas last year, as well as a redistricting plan in Texas that a federal court found discriminated against the state’s large and growing Hispanic population.

Advance approval was put into the law to give federal officials a potent tool to defeat persistent efforts to keep blacks from voting.

The provision was a huge success because it shifted the legal burden and required governments that were covered to demonstrate that their proposed changes would not discriminate. Congress periodically has renewed it over the years. The most recent extension was overwhelmingly approved by a Republican-led Congress and signed by President George W. Bush.

The requirement currently applies to the states of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia. It also covers certain counties in California, Florida, New York, North Carolina and South Dakota, and some local jurisdictions in Michigan. Coverage has been triggered by past discrimination not only against blacks, but also against American Indians, Asian-Americans, Alaska Natives and Hispanics.

Towns in New Hampshire that had been covered by the law were freed from the advance approval requirement in March. Supporters of the provision pointed to the ability to bail out of the prior approval provision to argue that the law was flexible enough to accommodate change and that the court should leave the Voting Rights Act intact.

On Monday, the Justice Department announced an agreement that would allow Hanover County, Va., to bail out.

FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Technology Makes Possible the Surveillance State

By Leave a Comment

obama-big-brotherTechnology is making your every move — perhaps even those movements you make in the bathroom — ready for broadcast. The question is, are you ready for it?

Following the revelations about some of what the U.S. National Security Agency has been up to — secretly collecting millions of phone records and innumerable personal online searches and e-mails — government officials have been scrambling to reassure the public that the amount of information it is collecting is negligible, even trivial, and doesn’t impinge on personal freedom. However, the technology itself argues against the idea that what’s being collected about you is harmless.

Consider that phone numbers with time and location information can be easily combined with Web searches (for “anti-depressants,” say) and text message information to form a picture of where you are and what you’re doing. No one needs to listen to the content of a call if they know everything else about you, like the fact that you’ve messaged a therapist several times this week, belong to a gun club, and gave money to a Tea Party candidate.

Furthermore, the government’s Prism program looks positively mundane when you consider the other possible sources of information available through secret government surveillance. It is technically possible to monitor nearly every U.S. citizen — through automated scanning software programs — seven days a week, 24 hours a day.

Video cameras monitor you walking down the sidewalk. Toll tags and on-board connected car systems monitor you behind the wheel, even relaying rabbit starts, severe braking, and excessive speed. Security systems at work oversee cubicles, and employers monitor computer habits with hidden software that tracks keystrokes. At home, smart TVs with streaming services collect information about what you’re watching. Some sets and gaming consoles even include cameras that can tell who is in the room sitting on the couch.

big_brother_watchingWorse, our addiction to smartphones means we’re beaming our location, purchases, banking information, and personal relationships over networks that can be easily tapped — by government officials or by malware from hackers. Indeed, a computer program known as Flame that security experts say was created for espionage purposes has the demonstrated ability to secretly turn on a device’s microphone and record a conversation.

And then there’s Google Glass.

The much anticipated eyewear isn’t even available to the public yet, but when it is people won’t have to hold up a phone to take a picture, they’ll be able to record video in the blink of an eye. At a recent shareholder meeting, Google CEO Larry Page told attendees not to be terrified that people might use Glass in a public bathroom, just as we shouldn’t worry about people using smartphones in the bathroom.

I think there are some choice words folks would have for people who use Google Glass in the bathroom. (Try explaining to the friendly police officer that you were just reading FoxNews.com on the eyepiece, honest.)

The problem, of course, is the surreptitious nature of the technology and the secret monitoring it enables. It means that information — information you might think is innocuous — can be used against you without your knowledge. (Never mind embarrassing videos showing your lack of hygiene in the bathroom.) You may never know why you were rejected for a job or your kid didn’t get into a particular school.

Hypothetically speaking, you might be pulled over on the highway in the middle of the night by an officer who claims you were dallying in the passing lane. Unbeknownst to you, the real reason was that your plate was flagged by a license plate reader (LPR) camera, which was relying on an algorithm that detected that an individual who made phone calls to Eastern Europe and conducted Web searches for gun clubs is associated with that plate number.

The police officer lets you go on your way, but the next week, late at night, the same thing happens. And then the week after that, and, well, you get the picture.

So even if you never do anything wrong, never jaywalk or get a parking ticket, the information collected could be used against you, and you would be none the wiser. Catching terrorists is a laudable aim of such technological surveillance, and you might trust the Obama administration that such surveillance will never be misused. But what about the next administration?

Should people associated with the Tea Party get extra scrutiny from the IRS? Should people who are against gun control be monitored by state police? Should anti-war activists have their search history scrutinized by the NSA?

There are technological ways to limit the intrusion of such technology and prevent it from diminishing our privacy and freedoms, but it requires extra work. Programmers can limit the scope and fine tune communications monitoring software, and government officials could submit to more oversight by courts that are not secret.

But in a society where most of us are scrutinized on camera already — with the bathroom soon to come — it may be too late to put the digital genie back in the bottle.

Egyptian Pres. Morsi Appoints Member of Al Qaeda that Massacred European Tourists in Luxor

By Leave a Comment

AdelLast year Egyptian President Morsi freed one of the monsters behind the Luxor Massacre. Now he has appointed another member of The Islamic Group, Adel Mohammed al-Khayat as the Governor of Luxor.

Egypt’s tourism minister resigned a day after President Mohamed Morsi appointed the new governor to Luxor province.

Hesham Zazou said on Wednesday he “couldn’t continue in the role of tourism minister” after the appointment of Adel al-Khayat.

Following are witness accounts of the day that Adel Mohammed al-Khayat and his Islamic terrorist comrades murdered 58 tourists.

“As they ran past a Japanese tourist, she said, one of the men fired into the woman’s face from a range of about 15 inches.” The gunmen “took all the young women, the girls, and disappeared with them. I don’t know where they went with the women, but they hurt them. We could hear screams of pain,” Dousse said.

Among the horrors, the marauders cut off the ears and noses of several of their victims. A note praising Islam was found inside one disemboweled body.

The foreign dead included 31 Swiss, 10 Japanese, five Germans, four Britons, one child (a Bulgarian), a Colombian and a French citizen. The Japanese victims were four newlywed couples and an elderly couple on their second honeymoon.

Witnesses told how the terrorists methodically executed the European tourists. Some were forced to kneel before being shot, while others were stabbed to death.

Little Shaunnah, her mum and gran, all from Ripponden, West Yorks, died alongside fellow Brits George Wigham, 69, and wife Ivy, 71, of Swanley, Kent, and Londoner Sylvia Wilder, 26.

Shaunnah_Turner

Shaunnah Turner, 5 Years Old, Murdered by Muslim terrorists at Luxor

Shaunnah Turner’ father, ’ Richard, spoke of his murdered daughter  after the horror: “In a crowd she would shine. She was really beautiful. She had an impish charm that could win anybody over.”

A member of the movement whose gunmen killed 58 foreigners at a temple in Luxor in 1997 was sworn in by Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi on Monday as governor of the vital tourist region.

Adel Mohammed al-Khayat, who now represents the Building and Development Party, the political wing of the al-Gamaa al-Islamiya movement.

‘No to the terrorist governor!’ read a placard at a demonstration by dozens of tourism workers who protested outside the governor’s office in Luxor.

Khayat, then in his mid-40s, was a leader of al-Gamaa al-Islamiya in another province when, on Nov. 17, 1997, six young men from the group shot their way into the Temple of Hatshepsut in Luxor’s Valley of the Queens.

The attack was part of a broader campaign by the group, at that time linked to al Qaeda, to cripple tourism revenues for the government of then-president Hosni Mubarak. Of the 62 people killed in the next hour, 58 were foreign tourists, more than half of them Swiss and the rest Japanese, British, German and Colombian.

The gunmen, reported to have trained at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan, committed suicide.

PUBLIUS

White House, IRS Hid Media Requests in Red Tape

By Leave a Comment

obama_irsEven as the freshly minted Obama administration was pledging a “new era of open government” in 2009, officials were quietly adding new rules that had the potential to slow down public requests for documents.

Those rules, detailed in memos reviewed by FoxNews.com, could even trip up present-day efforts to dig into the IRS’ practice of targeting conservative groups. The rules detailed in the memos largely emanated from the Treasury Department and, specifically, the IRS.

“It would seem to repudiate this notion that this is going to be the most transparent government in history,” said Dan Epstein, executive director of Cause of Action, the group that first obtained the memos.

“It would seem to repudiate this notion that this is going to be the most transparent government in history.” – Dan Epstein, director of Cause of Action

The memos follow reports about the administration’s use of private email accounts, and coincide with ongoing debate about government transparency — particularly with recent disclosures about widespread surveillance programs.

Epstein said the document request procedures are “troubling” since the media are “really concerned about the limits of government power.”

According to the documents, the Treasury Department in 2009 set up an additional review for requests involving “sensitive information,” which covered a broad range of items. The White House sometimes got involved, slowing down the process. The IRS also acknowledged having another review process for requests from “major media,” but not for requests from private individuals.

Members of the media often try to obtain documents not readily available by citing a law known as the Freedom of Information Act. The Treasury Department, though, in late 2009 erected speed bumps for some so-called FOIA requests.

The rules were detailed in a November 2010 memo and report sent from the Treasury inspector general to Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.

The documents showed the Treasury Department set up an additional “formal level of review” for requests for “sensitive information.” This category would cover everything from emails to memos to calendars to travel logs for top department officials, legal advisers, senior advisers and others.

Once a request was deemed “sensitive,” it would then go before a “review committee,” made up of officials from several Treasury offices.

Further, the document said a special report would be prepared for IRS requests from “major media.” This covers requests from traditional news media as well as bloggers, and according to the report covered information that “was likely to attract news media or congressional interest, involved large dollar amounts, or involved unique or novel issues.”

This report would then be sent to a higher-up in the division who decided whether the material should be disclosed.

The report repeatedly said that, in most cases, political appointees were not involved in these decisions, and that the agencies have no procedures to allow that.

But Epstein said these rules could cause problems as Congress and the media dig deeper into the origin of the IRS practice of singling out conservative groups for additional scrutiny.

He pointed to another memo, dated April 15, 2009, from then-White House Counsel Greg Craig that urged “executive agencies” to consult with his office “on all document requests that may involve documents with White House equities.” Craig said this pertains to everything from FOIA requests to congressional requests to subpoenas.

This practice apparently dates back to 1993. The Treasury IG memo cited this, and described the White House involvement as “minimal and limited.” However, the report also said the White House involvement “was responsible in several cases for adding a significant processing delay,” which in Treasury’s case slowed them down.

“It actually is heavily ironic in the realm of transparency,” Epstein said.

He pointed to edicts and memos early on in the first term of the administration stressing transparency. Obama issued a January 2009 directive calling for an “unprecedented level of openness.”

Attorney General Eric Holder in March 2009 directed all Executive Branch departments to use a “presumption of openness” when dealing with FOIA requests.

To that end, the administration has instituted several other transparency initiatives. It has followed through on requiring Cabinet secretaries to hold Internet town hall discussions, set up a comprehensive website to track stimulus spending, and set up a national declassification center.

Columbia U. Cons: Ivy League Social Work Program Run by Felons

By Leave a Comment

BoudinIn the hallowed halls of Columbia University, a nest of ex-cons — who have served time for murder, attempted murder, robbery and assault — hold court on their unique brand of social justice for admiring students enrolled in the school’s social work program, a FoxNews.com investigation has found.

The ex-cons work for or with the Criminal Justice Initiative (CJI), co-founded in 2009 by former Weather Underground operative and Columbia adjunct professor Kathy Boudin, who pleaded guilty to felony murder for her role in an infamous 1981 armed robbery that left two police officers and a security guard dead. And while that case was well-publicized, the group is hardly upfront about the “practical experience” of Boudin and others associated with the CJI.

A description on the program’s website says it is “situated inside” Columbia, and a part of the school’s “Social Intervention Group,” a research center within the Columbia University School of Social Work. It lists among its goals helping to forge a solution for “a central social crisis of our time, mass incarceration.” The program holds events and conducts research as part of “an interdisciplinary project built around a model of community collaboration” that “seeks to increase the number of skilled practitioners, policy-makers and researchers who can advance the fields of re-entry and incarceration across all disciplines.”

“It’s terrible that she has murderers working with her at a school.” – John Hanchar, brother-in-law of slain Nyack Police Officer Edward O’ Grady

But students and parents who shell out more than $43,000 in annual tuition and fees might be hard-pressed to uncover the fact that former inmates are running the CJI. Outside of a vague reference to Boudin and Cheryl Wilkins being “part of a community of people who have returned from prison,” there is no information about their criminal pasts. Boudin’s school directory bio, for example, makes no mention of her time in prison. Several other CJI faculty, program members and associates have similarly disturbing backgrounds.

Wilkins, co-director of the CJI, is listed in the Columbia School of Social Work adjunct faculty directory as a “research scientist” and “Associate Director for the Criminal Justice Initiative. She was convicted for her role in a 1996 gunpoint hijacking of a Federal Express truck in Harlem, in which she served as the getaway driver. Wilkins served a 12-year sentence for robbery and assault at Bayview Correctional Facility in Manhattan.

But Wilkins’ school biography page makes no mention of her time in jail. Wilkins is also listed as staff associate at Columbia Law School’s Center for Institutional and Social Change, though that bio also neglects any mention of her prison time. According to the bio, Wilkins works with teens who have incarcerated parents and is an adjunct lecturer at Columbia, where she often discusses topics concerning the “need of families and communities affected by mass incarceration.”

Denise Blackwell, a “research assistant” under the Social Intervention Group, the parent/umbrella group of the Criminal Justice Initiative, was paroled in 2003 after serving 10 years in prison on an attempted second-degree murder conviction for her role in a Brooklyn holdup in which three drug dealers were killed. According to reports of her 1991 arrest, Blackwell knew the three men and “orchestrated” the robbery.

“By prearrangement, she let the boys in to stick up the place,” a New York Police Department lieutenant was quoted as saying at the time. Blackwell’s son, Mack Moton, who was 15 at the time, was tried as an adult and convicted of second-degree murder. He was sentenced to 32 years to life, and is being held in Sing Sing Correctional Facility, in Ossining, N.Y.

Mika’il DeVeaux was one of the keynote speakers for the CJI’s “Removing the Bars” Conference in 2012. But his bio in the conference program failed to mention the 24-year stint he served in Westchester County for second-degree murder and his subsequent parole in 2003, or that he’s co-director of a non-profit with Boudin called Citizens Against Recidivism. Instead, the bio simply says DeVeaux “has more than three decades of experience working with men incarcerated in New York State maximum security prisons and many who have been released following periods of confinement.”

Repeated requests for comment from Boudin placed through Columbia were not returned, but the school responded with a statement.

“There are approximately 1.6 million people in the nation’s prisons and jails and 7 million American children with a parent who is either incarcerated, on parole, or on probation,” read the statement. “The Criminal Justice Initiative focuses on how the social work profession can best address the educational and human needs of individuals, children, families and communities affected by incarceration.”

Requests for comment were also sent to officials at CJI, including Wilkins and Blackwell.

Critics can’t understand why convicted criminals with violent pasts should hold such prestigious positions at the vaunted school.

“I am perplexed by Columbia administrators’ plot to commission notorious villains as mentors to the rising generation of Americans,” Josiah Ryan, editor-in-chief for education advocacy blog Campus Reform, told FoxNews.com. “Columbia administrators should send a letter to parents informing them that many of the professors who will teach their children are unable to pass a basic criminal background check.”

Boudin was a member of radical leftist group the Weather Underground, which was responsible for numerous bombings in the 1960s and 1970s, including ones at the Pentagon, Capitol Building and New York’s police headquarters. The group was co-founded by William Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn, who themselves went on to long careers in academia in Chicago. The couple was appointed the legal guardians of Boudin’s son while she was in prison and has been linked to the early days of President Obama’s political career.

Ayers and his wife were even in attendance for CJI’s “Removing the Bars” conference in 2012.

“Hungout with Angela Davis, Bill and Bernadine Ayers, Kathy Boudin & others! Wow #removingbars #removingthebars We had a great kickoff event,” tweeted Ronin Davis, then head of the Criminal Justice Caucus, a CJI student-leadership group.

The group holds frequent on-campus events, where a common theme is a curious vision of prison reform that seems not to include punishment. Some of the panel discussions at these events include: “How do we DE-carcerate?” and “Society’s Perceptions of the Formerly Incarcerated.”

Last year, CJI held a workshop titled, “No One Wants to Work With Me: Working with Difficult Populations,” where one of the key points discussed was the “misconceptions and judgments of people labeled registered sex offenders.”

The program’s ties to the Weather Underground are deep. In addition to Boudin’s involvement and the visit from Ayers and Dohrn, other former high-level members of the Weather Underground were invited to speak at CJI events. They included Russell Neufeld, who went on to become an anti-death penalty attorney, and Laura Whitehorn, who spoke at an October 2011 called the “Troy Davis Teach-in.”

In 1981, a 38-year-old Boudin, along with several other members of the Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army, attempted to rob a Brink’s armored truck in Nanuet, N.Y. The two police officers and the security guard were killed in a shootout during the attempted heist, and, although Boudin did not fire any weapons, her role as getaway driver earned her a sentence of 20 years to life. She was paroled in August 2003.

Boudin’s work in prison education dates back to her stint at the Bedford Hills Correctional Facility in New York. She took part in a 2001 research study on the subject that also included as participants former Black Panther and one-time FBI most-wanted fugitive Angela Davis and Donna Hylton, who served 25 years in prison for her part in the 1985 torture and murder of a Long Island real-estate broker whose decomposing body was found stuffed in a foot locker. That study, and her previous experience with the Weather Underground, appears to have laid the groundwork for her reinvention as an academic specializing in working for — and with — violent criminals.

John Hanchar, brother-in-law of Nyack Police Officer Edward O’ Grady, who was killed in the Brink’s robbery, told FoxNews.com it is distressing to see Boudin and other violent criminals treated like academic superstars.

“That’s the worst thing I could have heard,” Hanchar said. “My sister had three children and she raised them into good people and what [Boudin] did was take their father from them.

“It’s terrible that she has murderers working with her at a school,” he continued. “I could see if they had someone speak who committed robbery and served their time, but murderers? It’s not right.”

Democrat Senator ‘abandons big government plantation’ to join GOP

By Leave a Comment

Elbert_GulloryLouisiana State Senator Elbert Gullory — formerly a lifelong Democrat — made a surprising and enthusiastic announcement. The African-American Senator is walking away from the Democrats to join the GOP. After making the announcement, Sen. Gullory released this video explaining his unique decision.

“I’m Elbert Lee Guillory, the senator for the 24th district right here in beautiful Louisiana.  Recently I made what many are referring to as a bold decision to switch my party affiliation to the Republican Party.  I wanted to take a moment to explain why I chose to become a Republican and also to explain why I don’t think it was a bold decision at all.  It is the right decision.  Not only for me, but for all my brothers and sisters in the black community.  You see, in recent history, the Democrat Party created the illusion that their agenda and their policies are what’s best for black people.

Somehow it’s been forgotten the Republican Party, founded in 1854 as an abolitionist movement with one simple creed that slavery is a violation of the rights of man.  Fred ache Douglass called Republicans the party of freedom add progress. And the first Republican President was Lincoln, the uh a Thor of the emancipation proclamation.  It was Republicans who offered the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments giving former slaves citizenship, voting rights and drew process of law.  The Democrats, on the other hand, with the party of Jim Crow, it was Democrats who defended the rights of slaves on us. It was the Republican president Dwight Eisenhower who champions the Civil Rights Act of 1957, but it was the Democrats in the Senate who filibustered the bill.

At the heart of liberalism is the idea that only a great and powerful big government can be the benefactor of social justice for all Americans.  But the left is only concerned with one thing:  Control, and they guess guise in control as charity. Programs such as welfare, these programs aren’t designed to lift black Americans out of poverty.  They were always intended as a mechanism for politicians to control the black community.  The idea that blacks or anyone, for that matter, need the government to get ahead in life is despicable.

And even or important, this idea is a failure.  Our communities are just as poor as they have always been.  Our schools continue to fail children, our prisons are filled with young black men, who should be at home, being fathers.  Our self-initiative and our several relicense have been sacrificed in exchange for allegiance to our overseers.  Who control us by making us dependent on them.  Sometime I wonder if the word freedom is tossed around so frequently in our society that it has become a cliche.  The idea of freedom is complex and it’s all-encompassing.  It’s the idea that the economy must remain free of government persuasion.  It’s the idea that the press must operate without government intrusion.  It’s the idea that e-mails and phone records of Americans should remain free from government search and seizure.  It’s the idea that parents must be the decision-makers in regards to their children’s education, not shop government bureaucrat.  But most importantly, it is the idea that the individual must be free to pursue his or her own happiness, free from government dependence and free from government control, because to be truly free is to be reliant on no one, other than the author of our destiny.

These are the ideas at the core of Republican party and it is why I am a Republican.  So my brothers and sisters of the American community, please join with me today in abandoning the government plantation and the party of disappointment.”

PUBLIUS

GOP Strikes Back at Voter ID Ruling

By Leave a Comment

Repuvoter_idblican lawmakers are moving quickly to try and allow states to require proof of citizenship for a voter registration form after the Supreme Court rejected an Arizona law that did just that.

In a blow to Arizona’s efforts to toughen its voter ID standards, the high court on Monday ruled 7-2 that states could not unilaterally require would-be voters to prove citizenship in order to use a federal registration form. The court ruled that because the federal “Motor Voter” registration law — which created the form — doesn’t require that documentation, Arizona could not on its own demand it.

In response, Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and David Vitter, R-La., announced an amendment to the Senate immigration overhaul that would explicitly allow states to impose those requirements.

In a statement, Cruz said the Supreme Court ruling leaves a “hole in federal law” that must be addressed.

“This encourages voter fraud and we must ensure that our elections are fair and accurately reflect the will of our citizens,” he said.

The amendment would adjust the federal law so that states would be able to require proof of citizenship in order to complete any federal voter registration form.

On the House, side, Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., also plans to introduce a separate bill on Tuesday to change the law in a similar fashion. His bill would grant states the authority to ask for additional documents to prove citizenship.

Meanwhile, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is pushing an amendment of his own that would ensure immigrants given visas or legal status under the immigration overhaul cannot vote in federal elections until they become citizens. His amendment would also allow states to check citizenship before allowing them to register to vote.

The high court justices cited the existing federal law in their ruling against Arizona’s voter ID measure.

Federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” Justice Antonia Scalia wrote for the court’s majority.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals earlier said that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which doesn’t require such documentation, trumps Arizona’s Proposition 200 passed in 2004.

Arizona appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, and the high court agreed.

“Today’s decision sends a strong message that states cannot block their citizens from registering to vote by superimposing burdensome paperwork requirements on top of federal law,” said Nina Perales, vice president of litigation for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and lead counsel for the voters who challenged Proposition 200.

“The Supreme Court has affirmed that all U.S. citizens have the right to register to vote using the national postcard, regardless of the state in which they live,” she said.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court’s ruling.

The Constitution “authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied,” Thomas said in his dissent.

The federal “motor voter” law, enacted in 1993 to expand voter registration, requires states to offer voter registration when a resident applies for a driver’s license or certain benefits. Another provision of that law — the one at issue before the court — requires states to allow would-be voters to fill out mail-in registration cards and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but it doesn’t require them to show proof. Under Proposition 200, Arizona officials require an Arizona driver’s license issued after 1996, a U.S. birth certificate, a passport or other similar document, or the state will reject the federal registration application form.

While the court was clear in stating that states cannot add additional identification requirements to the federal forms on their own, it was also clear that the same actions can be taken by state governments if they get the approval of the federal government and the federal courts.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court.  Other states have already done so, Scalia said.

Published June 18, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Supreme Court: Arizona Law Requiring Citizenship Proof for Voters is Illegal

By Leave a Comment

supreme_courtWASHINGTON –  The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states cannot require would-be voters to prove they are U.S. citizens before using a federal registration system designed to make signing up easier.

The justices voted 7-2 to throw out Arizona’s voter-approved requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal “Motor Voter” voter registration law.

Federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” Justice Antonia Scalia wrote for the court’s majority.

The court was considering the legality of Arizona’s requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal “motor voter” registration law. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which doesn’t require such documentation, trumps Arizona’s Proposition 200 passed in 2004.

Arizona appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

The case focuses on Arizona, which has tangled frequently with the federal government over immigration issues involving the Mexican border. But it has broader implications because four other states — Alabama, Georgia, Kansas and Tennessee — have similar requirements, and 12 other states are contemplating such legislation.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court’s ruling.

The Constitution “authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied,” Thomas said in his dissent.

Opponents of Arizona’s law see it as an attack on vulnerable voter groups such as minorities, immigrants and the elderly. They say they’ve counted more than 31,000 potentially legal voters in Arizona who easily could have registered before Proposition 200 but were blocked initially by the law in the 20 months after it passed in 2004. They say about 20 percent of those thwarted were Latino.

But Arizona officials say they should be able to pass laws to stop illegal immigrants and other noncitizens from getting on their voting rolls. The Arizona voting law was part of a package that also denied some government benefits to illegal immigrants and required Arizonans to show identification before voting.

The federal “motor voter” law, enacted in 1993 to expand voter registration, requires states to offer voter registration when a resident applies for a driver’s license or certain benefits. Another provision of that law — the one at issue before the court — requires states to allow would-be voters to fill out mail-in registration cards and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but it doesn’t require them to show proof. Under Proposition 200, Arizona officials require an Arizona driver’s license issued after 1996, a U.S. birth certificate, a passport or other similar document, or the state will reject the federal registration application form.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court.

Published June 17, 2013 / Associated Press

FBI Director Rattled Over IRS, Surveillance and Benghazi Scandals

By Leave a Comment

Robert_MuellerThe country’s top investigator seemed to be in the dark Thursday when pressed to provide details of the IRS investigation into the tax agency’s targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups.Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, seemed to rattle FBI Director Robert Mueller for not knowing the specifics surrounding the IRS probe.“You’ve had a month now to investigate,” Jordan said. “This has been the biggest story in the country and you can’t even tell me who the lead investigator is. You can’t tell me the actions the inspector general took which are not typically how investigations are done. You can’t tell me if that’s appropriate or not. This is not speculation. This is what happened.”

Mueller repeatedly declined to answer Jordan’s questions, saying he couldn’t because the investigation was ongoing or that he’d have to get back to the lawmakers with answers.

When Jordan asked again,” Can you tell me who the lead investigator is?” Mueller responded, “Off the top of my head, no.”

The day didn’t go much better for the outgoing FBI chief. He was grilled for hours by lawmakers on a number of different topics, including the federal government’s surveillance programs, the Benghazi scandal and the Boston Marathon bombings.

Mueller defended the government’s collection of millions of U.S. phone records, emails and other information as vital to the nation’s national security.

Early in the hearing, Mueller tried to make the case for the National Security Agency surveillance programs and said that law enforcement “must stay a step ahead of criminals and terrorists” while still heeding the civil liberties of Americans.

Mueller, who is stepping down from his post in September, said that if the metadata collection program had been in place before the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, they would have identified one of the 9/11 hijackers in San Diego and most likely derailed the plot.

But Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. said he was “not persuaded that the argument makes it OK to collect information on every call,” adding, that by Mueller’s interpretation, it would be “anything and everything goes” situation.

Mueller also testified that the government’s controversial surveillance programs that recently surfaced complied “in full with U.S. law and with basic rights guaranteed under the Constitution.”
The Justice Department revealed last month that it had secretly gathered emails of Fox News correspondent James Rosen and phone records of The Associated Press in an effort to crack down on leakers of classified information.

The department later acknowledged that Attorney General Eric Holder was on board with a search warrant for Rosen’s personal emails, obtained after federal officials accused him in an affidavit of being a likely criminal “co-conspirator” under a wartime law known as the Espionage Act.

Authorities also obtained phone records for Fox News lines, including those for a number that matched the number of Rosen’s parents.

In the past week, a 29-year-old contractor leaked National Security Agency documents on the agency’s collection of millions of U.S. phone records and the NSA’s collection of emails and other information that people transmit online to and from foreign citizens.

That has touched off a national debate over whether the Obama administration, in its efforts to thwart terrorism, has overstepped by using intrusive surveillance methods.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., the committee’s chairman, said when it comes to national security leaks, it’s important to balance the need to protect secrecy with the need to let the news media do its job.

Goodlatte also said the committee planned to find out more about the status of what the congressman called the FBI’s “stalled investigation” into the attack in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador.

As for the Boston Marathon bombings, committee members want to know whether there was a breakdown in information-sharing between federal agencies, preventing the FBI from thwarting the explosions that killed three people and injured more than 260.

Published June 13, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Glenn Beck to Break WhistleBlower Revelation That Will ‘Take Down’ GOP, Dems, ‘Whole Power Structure’

By Leave a Comment

GlennBeckGlenn Beck announced last evening that within the next 24 hours he will be revealing a new whistle-blower whose testimony is so shocking that “It will take down the GOP, it will take down the Democrats, it will take down many members of Congress…pretty much the whole power structure.”

This country is going to be rocked in the next 24 hours with some things that have been going on in Washington.  You are going to witness things in American history that have never been witnessed before. – Glenn Beck

Beck said, “This guy is so afraid for his life that he has said he will only tell his story on live television in front of Congress…
The one document from the source that our team has seen would take down pretty much the whole power structure, pretty much everything. It will take down the GOP, it will take down the Democrats, it will take down many members of Congress…
The American people, you haven’t even begun to be outraged.”


PUBLIUS

Economy

Elections

Foreign

Crime

Science Tech

Reader Responses