Tuesday, June 19, 2012


Posted By Woody Pendleton


The Queen's Riddle

Barack Obama met with the Queen of England.

He asked her, "Your Majesty, how do you run such an efficient

Government? Are there any tips you can give to me?"

"Well," said the Queen, "the most important thing is to surround

yourself with intelligent people."

Obama frowned, and then asked, "But how do I know the people around

Are really intelligent?"

The Queen took a sip of tea. "Oh, that's easy; you just ask them to

Answer an intelligent riddle."

The Queen pushed a button on her intercom. "Please send Tony Blair

In here, would you?"

Tony Blair walked into the room and said, "Yes, Your Majesty?"

The Queen smiled and said, "Answer me this please, Tony, your mother

And father have a child.

It is not your brother and it is not your sister. Who is it?"

Without pausing for a moment, Tony Blair answered, "That would be me."

"Yes! Very good," said the Queen.

Obama went back home to ask Joe Biden, his vice presidential choice

The same question. "Joe, answer this for me.

Your mother and your father have a child. It's not your brother and

it's not your sister. Who is it?"

"I'm not sure," said Biden. "Let me get back to you on that one."

He went to his advisors and asked every one, but none could give him

An answer.

Finally, Biden ran into Newt Gingrich out eating one night. Biden

Asked, "Newt, can you answer this for me?

Your mother and father have a child and it's not your brother or

Your sister. Who is it?"

Gingrich answered right back, "That's easy, it's me!"

Biden smiled, and said, "Thanks!" Then, he went back to speak with

Obama. "Say, I did some research and

I have the answer to that riddle. It's Newt Gingrich!"

Obama got up, stomped over to Biden, and angrily yelled into his

Face, "No! You idiot! It's Tony Blair!"



Posted By The Circuit Rider


Former Revolutionary Guard member describes the crackdown on Christians in Iran

The Iranian government is said to be launching a new wave of persecution against Christians.
CBN -- According to the Daily Caller, the regime has ordered Iranian intelligence to infiltrate church groups in major Iranian cities.
Agents are identifying pastors and other Christians, targeting them for arrest and torture in prison.
Former member of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Reza Kahlili, verified the crackdown. He said Iran's ayatollahs are frustrated with the large number of Muslims who are now embracing Christianity.
Kahlili is author of A Time to Betray. He wore a disguise to protect his identity as he talked to CBN News. Below you read the transcription of the interview:
Q: Reza Thanks for joining us. What can you tell us about this latest crackdown? How extensive is it?
A: It’s been an order to the Iranian intelligence apparatus specifically the guard’s intelligence to monitor the activities of Iranians for converting to Christianity, to suppress them, make arrests, terrify them and finally to torture them. And according to a source within the guard’s intelligence, they have tens of thousands of files for Iranians for converting to Christianity. This is a big concern for the government. They don’t know how to handle it. In one city, just the city of Shiraz with over one million population, according to the source, they have thirty thousand files of Iranians who they have confirmed that they have converted to Christianity. But the source says that tens of thousands more are unknown to the intelligence apparatus.
Q: How is this recent effort different from the ongoing attacks that Christians have faced from the Iranian government over the years?
Well, let me make one thing clear. Before the Islamic revolution, many in Iran, the youth, the elderly, though they did not adhere to the Islamic rules or practice Islam, they respected Islam. But today, that respect is visibly gone and they oppose the religion and what it prescribes. They are very outspoken about it. People are joining the move to convert to the Christianity.
Q: Give us some examples; can you say specifically what is happening against the Christians there?
A: Well, according to this source, who himself was in the intelligence unit, and he saw and he witnessed some of the tortures being done. What they do they raid homes where teachings are taking place, they arrest them, they are taken and sometimes they beat their wives in front of their eyes to break them down, to force them to come before television and make false confessions. The source says that one of those arrested, a male, after three months in total darkness, and then he was all of a sudden brought to the courtyard, where he immediately lost his eye-sights. So, it is unimaginable what they do with the Christian converts. Khamenei, the Iranian supreme leader ordered the guards to burn ten thousand of confiscated Bibles, saying that it is not a holy book and therefore, it is legal to burn them in order to stop the conversion.
- Regime’s authorities anxious
Mohabat News believes, the above interview indicates the anxiety of the Iranian security organization and government officials about the increasing growth of Christianity among the people of Iran. The issue has become so serious that some prominent clerics complained about this increasing tendency toward Christianity and warned their fellow Mullahs about the significant trend of the youth toward Christianity in Qom which is recognized as the spiritual capital of the Islamic Republic.
This anxiety, as well as the enormous growth of house churches, impacted Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, to the extent that in his nine day trip to Qom on October 19, 2010, he reluctantly acknowledged this growth and spoke about the regime’s decision to deal with false mysticisms and house churches./ Farsi


Posted by BH

Monday, June 18, 2012




Someone has written these beautiful words. They are like the ten
commandments to follow in life all the time.

1. Prayer is not a "spare wheel" that you pull out when in trouble, but it
is a "steering wheel" that directs the right path throughout.
2. A Car's WINDSHIELD is so large & the Rear view Mirror is so small?
Because our PAST is not as important as our FUTURE. So, Look Ahead and Move
3. Friendship is like a BOOK. It takes few seconds to burn, but it takes
years to write.
4. All things in life are temporary. If going well, enjoy it, they will not
last forever. If going wrong, don't worry, they can't last long either.
5. Old Friends are Gold! New Friends are Diamond! If you get a Diamond,
don't forget the Gold! Because to hold a Diamond, you always need a Base of
6. Often when we lose hope and think this is the end, GOD smiles from above
and says, "Relax, it's just a bend, not the end!
7. When GOD solves your problems, you have faith in HIS abilities; when GOD
doesn't solve your problems HE has faith in your abilities.
8. A blind person asked St. Anthony: "Can there be anything worse than
losing eye sight?" He replied: "Yes, losing your vision!"
9. When you pray for others, God listens to you and blesses them, and
sometimes, when you are safe and happy, remember that someone has prayed
for you.
10. WORRYING does not take away tomorrow's TROUBLES, it takes away today's


Posted by BH


Video Of Florida Eligibility Hearing

Posted by BH


Posted by BH


The following short quiz consists of 4 questions and will tell you if you are qualified to be a professional. Scroll down for each answer. The questions are NOT that difficult. But don't scroll down UNTIL you have answered the question! 
1. How do you put a giraffe into a refrigerator?

The correct answer is:
Open the refrigerator, put in the giraffe, and close the door.
This question tested whether you tend to do simple things
In an overly complicated way.

2. How do you put an elephant into a refrigerator?



Did you say, Open the refrigerator,
Put in the elephant,
And close the
Wrong Answer.

Correct Answer: Open the refrigerator, take out the giraffe,
Put in the elephant and close the door.
This tested your ability to think through the repercussions of your previous actions.

3. The Lion King is hosting an animal conference. All the animals attend....except one.
Which animal does not attend?



Correct Answer: The Elephant.

The elephant is in the refrigerator.
You just put him in there.

This tested your memory.

Okay, even if you did not answer the first three questions correctly,
You still have one more chance to show your true abilities.
4. There is a river you must cross but it is used by crocodiles, and you do not have a boat. How do you manage?



Correct Answer: You jump into the river and swim across.
Have you not been listening?
All the crocodiles are attending the animal conference.

This tested whether you learn quickly from your mistakes.

According to Anderson Consulting Worldwide, around 90% of the professionals they tested got all questions wrong, but many preschoolers got several correct answers. AndersonConsulting says this conclusively disproves the theory that most professionals have the brains of a four-year-old.


Obama’s Former Law Professor & 2008 Adviser: ‘Obama Must be Defeated in the Coming Election’

Posted by BH

President Barack Obama once had the full support of Roberto Unger, one of his renowned Harvard law professors, but the educator and Brazilian politician is now publicly urging Americans not to vote for the president. It’s a bizarre about-face for a man who often advised Obama during his 2008 campaign. Today, Unger believes the president is undeserving of a second term in the White House.
Much like many of the angst-ridden individuals The Blaze spoke with at Netroots, an annual progressive conference, Unger believes that Obama has failed to live up to the promises he made in 2008. In essence, this corroborates that, in the opinion of many liberals — Unger included — the president hasn’t been far-left enough in his governance.
“President Obama must be defeated in the coming election. He has failed to advance the progressive cause in the United States,” the Harvard Law professor and Brazilian politician announced in a video published on YouTube.
“He has spent trillions of dollars to rescue the moneyed interests and left workers and homeowners to their own devices,” Unger added, also saying that Obama’s policies amount to “financial confidence and food stamps.”
The Daily Mail has more:
…some [of Unger's comments] would doubtless strike a chord with the President’s GOP opponents, including the academic‘s attacks on Mr Obama’s efforts to reform healthcare.
Mr Unger argues: ‘He has subordinated the broadening of economic and educational opportunity to the important but secondary issue of access to health care in the mistaken belief that he would be spared a fight.’
He also suggests that, despite their fierce rivalry, the Democrats’ agenda is little different to that of the Republicans, saying the party aims ‘to put a human face on the programme of its adversaries’.
Watch the scathing video, below

While at Harvard, Obama studied jurisprudence and reinventing democracy with Unger.

The tyranny of the Obama presidency

Posted by BH
FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER WFZR FZTV conservatives ever needed a reason to remember why defeating President

Barack Obama is imperative  this fall, we received it last week.
Obama illegally and unilaterally announced he would not enforce immigration 
laws, at least as they apply
 to certain illegal immigrants.
This is political pandering at its worst. It also is a sign of even greater troubles 
ahead if Obama is somehow 
allowed to have a second term.
Our Founding Fathers feared not only a powerful central government, but a
 powerful president as well.
 That is why the Constitution very specifically limits the powers of the president.
Time and again, Obama has ignored those limits. He started early on with his 
czars, whose appointments
 sidestepped Senate approval. The Republicans complained but the Democrats 
controlled Congress, so little 
 could be done. The Republicans took over in 2011 but still did nothing about
 Obama's czars. At that point,
 Obama understood they would not act.
Obama then decided that the Defense of Marriage act was unconstitutional. 
 He ordered Attorney General 
Eric Holder not to defend the law against legal challenges. This is a law that was 
passed by Congress and 
signed into law by Bill Clinton. Instead of going to Congress to get it repealed, 
Obama decided he wanted to
 act by fiat.
Now, he has done the same with immigration.
The president is crossing the line and daring the Republicans to do something.
 When they do nothing, he is 
ready to take another step.
What will he be like if he gets a second term?
Last year, while addressing the group La Raza, Obama said that if he had his way,
 he would "bypass
 Congress and change laws on my own." He added, "The idea of doing things on 
my own is very tempting." 

If Obama gets a second term, he will transform the presidency into something 
unrecognizable and 
something we have never seen. It will be an American dictatorship.
With no more constraints on him, what will Obama do? Will the Republicans try to 
stop him? So far the
 Republicans in Congress have shown the same willingness to fight as the French 
What is the difference between the French Army and the congressional Republicans?
 The French Army  has only surrendered once.
Many of us are not thrilled with Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee. At this point,
 it is too bad.
 Barack  Obama must be voted out of office in November. This is not negotiable.
If we do not vote Obama out this fall, we will see the lamp of FREEDOM DIM TOTALLY.FREE

 liberty extinguished in America.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


Obama Seeks to Nullify our Immigration Laws

The making of a constitutional crisis
King Barack Hussein Kardashian Obama thinks that he gets to invent laws where they don’t exists and disregard the ones that are already on the books.
In yet another demonstration of contempt for the rule of law and the separation of powers, the Obama administration has announced that it will no longer enforce our immigration laws (not that he’s been enforcing them until now). The Washington Times broke the story this morning about a secret memo from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that establishes new policies advising agents to release some illegals caught crossing the border. The new policy will encourage agents to suspend deportation proceedings and grant amnesty to those who ostensibly fit the criteria of the Dream Act a bill that was defeated with overwhelming bipartisan support of Congress. Hence, the administration is publicly declaring that federal agents will ensure our laws are not executed faithfully.
The AP has more details:
The policy change, described to The Associated Press by two senior administration officials, will affect as many as 800,000 immigrants who have lived in fear of deportation. It also bypasses Congress and partially achieves the goals of the so-called DREAM Act, a long-sought but never enacted plan to establish a path toward citizenship for young people who came to the United States illegally but who have attended college or served in the military.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was to announce the new policy Friday, one week before President Barack Obama plans to address the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials’ annual conference in Orlando, Fla. Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney is scheduled to speak to the group on Thursday.
Under the administration plan, illegal immigrants will be immune from deportation if they were brought to the United States before they turned 16 and are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or earned a GED, or served in the military. They also can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on how many times it can be renewed. The officials who described the plan spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss it in advance of the official announcement.
There’s one problem: we have a legislative body that passes laws, not a president or a king. The Senate defeated the DREAM Act in 2009, even though Democrats had a supermajority.
What happened to the Constitution?

The real question here is that if the president is above the law, then why should any of us be compelled to adhere to laws that we regard as imprudent or unfair? If Obama can refuse to execute his core constitutional duties, why can’t we disregard his individual insurance mandate – a law that is an anathema to the Constitution?
What if citizens would stop paying taxes, or refuse to participate in Social Security? If the executive branch can countermand a law of Congress, why can’t the voters – those who grant Congress its authority – do the same?
This administration is setting a dangerous precedent.
Congress must reassert its constitutional authority over immigration law. They should hold public hearings and shed some light on the darkest corners of this administrative power grab. Moreover, they must refuse funding for any program that grants administrative amnesty.
Obama is clearly trying to preempt the humiliation that he will suffer when the Supreme Court slaps down his lawsuit against Arizona next week.
This is not the time for Republicans to reward Obama for violating the law with their own version of amnesty. This is the time for them to stand and fight an extreme president who is beneath contempt. Even those who subscribe to a different view on immigration must be alarmed by this president’s usurpation of power.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


The White House Is Not Enough

Consider this Wall Street Journal editorial your must read of the day. It highlights why adding conservatives to the United States Senate is so important.
This past week, Republican in the Senate, including Mitch McConnell’s leadership picks, sat idly by saying nothing while the Senate Democrats pushed forward the nomination of Andrew Hurwitz, who helped formulate the reasoning behind Roe v. Wade while a law clerk. Hurwitz is quite fond of that bit of his legacy.
Andrew Hurwitz’s nomination could have been blocked from consideration had just one more Republican voted no.
John McCain, Jon Kyl, and Lamar Alexander all voted for cloture. Most troubling, Harry Reid slid Hurwitz’s nomination to the floor with the unexpected request of a voice vote and the Republicans present did not object. It’s a technical issue, but I will put it to you this way: both Senators and outside groups who were trying to stop Hurwitz understand that Hurwitz’s confirmation was part of a deal struck by Republican and Democrat leaders in the Senate. The GOP Senators were too scared of the “war on women” angle to pick a fight over Hurwitz. I’m sure we’ll see the GOP’s payoff in the farm bill.
Only after Hurwitz had secured the confirmation hurtle did Mitch McConnell boldly and bravely declare the GOP would shut down further judicial confirmations for the year. Leadership staff would have you believe the Hurwitz mess was just a run of the mill loss and there was no back room whispering involved and timing of the shutdown of confirmations occurring after Hurwitz was just coincidental.
Likewise, Marco Rubio helped round up votes to get Mari Carmen Aponte confirmed as ambassador to El Salvador. Ms. Aponte dated a Cuban spy for 20 years, was a director of La Raza, and she has incensed Catholics in El Salvador with her political activism in support of gay rights.
Now sixteen Senate Republican have managed to keep sugar prices high to help corporate interests, though in a time of economic recession doing so hurts American consumers and keeps prices artificially high — not to mention keeps us from having coca-cola made with real sugar unless we get the kosher or Mexican varieties.
This is why we must continue supporting Ted Cruz. Between David Dewhurst and Ted Cruz, there is no doubt Cruz will side with Jim DeMint and Dewhurst with Mitch McConnell. It’s not enough to get a Republican in the White House if we don’t have conservatives in the Senate to both help and guide a conservative agenda for America.


Posted By Woody Pendleton


We’ve Reached the Penultimate Jimmy Carter Moment of the Obama Presidency

Queue the Iranians and Killer Rabbit. We're Almost There.
Chris Cillizza made me laugh out loud last evening when I read his column, which opens with a question: “Is it possible for a president — any president — to succeed in the modern world of politics?”
There is nothing new under the sun, including this question.
On January 19, 2010, I wrote about the ungovernability of the American Republic. At that time, Barack Obama lamented the filibuster was making the nation ungovernable. Liberal commentators were up in arms over how ungovernable the nation was.
Liberal blogger Andrew Sullivan noted at the time, “[I]f America cannot grapple with its deep and real problems after electing a new president with two majorities, then America’s problems are too great for Americans to tackle.”
In this morning’s ever indefatigable Transom, Ben Domenech points out this Jonah Goldberg prediction from February 1, 2010, that is even more precise: “So here’s my additional prediction: Liberals will blame the new media climate.”
The fact of the matter is, the last time liberals and traditional media sources were asking the question, they were asking it while Jimmy Carter was President. It was the penultimate moment of the Carter Presidency when, breaking out of the echo chamber, liberals in the media began to openly ponder the ungovernability of the American Republic and whether the Presidency was too big for one man.
Turns out the Republic was just fine. It wasn’t that the Presidency was too big for one man. It was that the particular occupant of the office was too small for the job. When Reagan became President, the question was rendered moot.
As my friend Josh Trevino has pointed out, this question has been raised throughout the history of our Republic in one form or another. That it is being raised again shows a lack of appreciation for our history, a misunderstanding of our constitutional order, and a constrained sense of exactly what governing success looks like.
The dirty little secret of our American Republic is that our ungovernability at the national level is a feature, not a bug. The founders intended it to be extremely difficult to pass legislation having just fought, bled, and seen friends die for a liberty they thought they already had only to see their government, of both a king and a Parliament, barter away their freedoms.
The difficulty in “good” governance is one of the last in a series of resistors designed to protect the citizens from the “good” government intentions of those they sent to Washington. It is a powerful reminder, should we pay close attention to this difficulty and resistance, that the federal government is supposed to be a government of limited powers. The difficulty and resistance reduce and largely go away when the President, for example, deals with foreign affairs. In that area, unlike the implementation of a domestic agenda, the President has much more constitutional power because his operations are not directed at the American citizens, but at other sovereign powers. At such time as his foreign policy powers might come to restrict the rights of citizens via treaty, again we see the resistors in operation with a two-thirds vote in the Senate required to approve at treaty.
In a conversation between Josh Trevino and Chris Cillizza on twitter last night, Cillizza asked , “Did the last century have the fracturing of media and social networking sites we have now?” As a matter of fact, newspapers in the eighteenth and nineteenth century were even more openly partisan than they are now. The “social networking sites” of the times were patronage positions, secret societies, and pamphleteers.
There really is nothing new under the sun, including looking at our time from the conventional wisdom of our time, ignoring ages past. Compared to our founding and the subsequent decades of expansion when, by the way, the President had fewer executive powers than he does now, the Civil War, the two world wars, and the cold war, we live in relatively inconsequential times. That anyone could look at our 236th year of existence and ask if the President can succeed in the “modern world of politics” raises a better question — have we become so shallow and vain as to think our generation and our time is more consequential than that which came before us?
It also begs one question more: if, in the “modern world of politics” the President of the United States cannot succeed because of the system our founders put in place to restrain the majority and prevent tyranny — a real concept to those who have lived or do live under it — what then shall we come to, a tyrant?
[UPDATE:] In this morning’s Transom, which you should be subscribed to, Ben Domenech adds some thoughts of his own:
What Cilizza is really posing is a conventionally posed question about the nature of power and how you define success. President Obama has met with success in an enormous number of areas if you define it as “getting the thing he wants” – in foreign policy he’s gotten his way on every major question; in domestic policy, he had two full years of getting virtually everything he wanted (more than many presidents do); and beyond stimulus and bailouts, he succeeded where Bill Clinton failed in passing the most sweeping reform of the health care system since LBJ created Medicare and Medicaid.
The problem: all that success has turned out to be pretty unpopular. Virtually every poll shows a majority of people in his own party think the crux of his health care law is unconstitutional. The real question Cilizza’s posing isn’t whether it’s possible for a president to succeed in the modern world of politics, it’s whether he can succeed having to deal with that pesky little thing: the American people. This is the classic Wilsonian approach to the executive, a belief that the president can only succeed if he operates removed from the filthy ignoramuses in the populace. It’s one of the reasons Obama lectures us so much more now that he’s had to put up with us from the White House for three and a half years: “Can’t you see all this great stuff I’ve done? It’s for your own good!”
One of the most irritating aspects of the media elite and the establishment in both parties is fueled by this view. These tend to be the same folks who think third parties can be formed around the principles of Simpson-Bowles, the reforms of Norm Ornstein, and the nanny statism of Michael Bloomberg. It always comes down to the idea that politics would be a lot better off if not for elections, if politicians operated independent of those pesky voters with their fickle whims and ideologies. This strong man theory of governance is a long-running historical tradition – just not an American one. Thus: it’s time once again to dissolve the people and elect another.OBAMA TOO LITTLE FOR PRESIDENCY


Posted By Woody Pendleton


Fusion Centers Closed to Freedom of Information Act Requests

Written by Gary North on June 18, 2012

Print Friendly
If you don’t know what a fusion center is, read the Wikipedia article. They are government-run regional centers that collect information on American citizens. Quite simply, they are domestic spying operations.
A fusion center is an information sharing center, many of which were created under a joint project between the Department of Homeland Security and the US Department of Justice‘s Office of Justice Programs between 2003 and 2007.
They are designed to promote information sharing at the federal level between agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Justice, US Military, and state and local level government. As of July 2009, the Department of Homeland Security recognized at least seventy-two fusion centersTemplate:PBS Frontline Report: Are We Safer?, season 29 mentions that the DHS created 72 fusion centers. Fusion centers may also be affiliated with an Emergency Operations Center that responds in the event of a disaster.
The fusion process is an overarching method of managing the flow of information and intelligence across levels and sectors of government to integrate information for analysis. That is, the process relies on the active involvement of state, local, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies—and sometimes on non–law enforcement agencies (e.g., private sector) to provide the input of raw information for intelligence analysis. As the array of diverse information sources increases, there will be more accurate and robust analysis that can be disseminated as intelligence.
Although the phrase fusion center has been used widely, there are often misconceptions about the function of the center. Perhaps the most common is that the center is a large room full of work stations where the staff are constantly responding to inquiries from officers, investigators, and agents. This vision is more accurately a watch center or an investigative support center — not an intelligence fusion center. Another common misconception is that the fusion center is minimally staffed until there is some type of crisis wherein representatives from different public safety agencies converge to staff workstations to manage the crisis. This is an emergency operations center, not an intelligence fusion center. The fusion center is not an operational center but a support center. It is analysis driven.
On its own authority, the Department of Homeland Security has announced that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) does not apply to these fusion centers.
The DHS has in effect said that the transparency law does not apply to it. It is exempt.
Specifically, the Department exempts portions of the system of records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil, and administrative enforcement requirements.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective June 7, 2012.
It originally announced this policy in November 2010. It waited for comments. There were only six. Congress was silent, as it usually is. Therefore, the DHS has now decided to go ahead with its 2010 policy.
After careful consideration of public comments, the Department will implement the rulemaking as proposed, additionally the Department will not update the Systems of Records Notice.
On what basis did the DHS decide to ignore the FOIA? Here is its official statement.
DHS’ decision to take exemptions to the Privacy Act (point 4) are appropriate given the law enforcement nature of the collection and the concern that providing access may give individuals the ability to contravene legitimate law enforcement activities.
So, because it enforces the law, it does not need to obey the law.
But what if your name goes into the file? What if the information is inaccurate? What can you do about this?
Nothing. You will never find out.
But inaccurate information can get in, you argue.
Nonsense, says the DHS. There are lots of internal safeguards. The agency polices itself. The National Operations Center (NOC) is reliable. The DHS assures us of this. There is nothing to worry about unless you are a criminal or a terrorist.
So, there is no need for outside access.
With regards to the comments concerns regarding exemptions from the ‘‘relevant and necessary’’ standard (point 5), sufficient means do exist to verify the accuracy of the data and ensure that incorrect data is not used against an individual. System users are trained to verify information obtained from the NOC before including it in any analytical reports. Verification procedures include direct queries to the source databases from which the information was originally obtained, queries of commercial or other government databases when appropriate, and interviews with individuals or others who are in a position to confirm the data. These procedures mitigate the risk posed by inaccurate data in the system and raise the probability that such data will be identified and corrected before any action is taken against an individual. In addition, the source systems from which the NOC obtains information may, themselves, have mechanisms in place to ensure the accuracy of the data prior to the information being shared, as outlined in the ISE.
You must stop worrying, unless you are a criminal or a terrorist.
Anyone who continues yo worry is presumed to be a criminal or a terrorist.
You will therefore stop worrying. Now. Do you understand?
Continue Reading on www.gpo.gov


Posted By Woody Pendleton


Subject: FW: Low-life cheatin' Republican!

*The Presidential election 2012 was too close to call. Neither Mitt Romney nor
Obama had enough votes to win. There was much talk about ballot recounting,
court challenges, etc., but a week-long ice fishing competition seemed the
sportsmanlike way to settle things. The candidate that caught the most fish
at the end of the week would win the election.
After much of back and forth discussion, it was decided that the contest would take
place on a remote frozen lake in northern Wisconsin . There were to be no observers
present, and both men were to be sent out separately on this isolated lake and return
at 5 P.M. with their catch for counting and verification by a team of neutral parties.
At the end of the first day, Mitt Romney returned to the starting line and he had 10 fish.
Soon, Obama returned and had no fish. Well, everyone assumed he was just having a bad
day or something and hopefully, he would catch up the next day.
At the end of the 2nd day Mitt came in with 20 fish and Obama came in again with none.
That evening, the democrats got together secretly and said, "I think that Mitt Romney
is a low-life, cheatin' son-of-a-gun. Tomorrow don't bother fishing. Just spy on him and
see just how he is cheating.'
The next night (after Mitt returns with 50 fish), the democrats got together for the
report of how the republicans were cheating.
Obama said, "You are not going to believe this, he's cutting holes in the ice!"


Posted By Woody Pendleton


In a stunning move, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has called for Fethullah Gülen, the reclusive imam of arguably the most powerful Islamist movement in the world, to return home to Turkey from his self-imposed exile in rural Pennsylvania.
Erdoğan’s appeal to Gülen came after he received an award during the closing ceremony of the Turkish Olympics.

“We want this yearning to come to an end,” the prime minister said. “We want to see those who are abroad and longing for the homeland to be among us. … Absence from home is loneliness. We have no tolerance for loneliness. We are saying that this absence from home [of Gülen] should end. To be honest, I understand that this is also what you all expect. So, let’s say the absence should be ended. As the child of an ancient civilization, I am extending my thanks to the ones who call on us and the entire world tonight in Turkish, the language of a rich culture. This is what I am saying, let’s put absence from home and longing for the homeland to one side.”
Although Erdoğan did not use Gülen’s name, his comments were widely understood by the Turkish audience and media to refer to Fethullah Gülen. This invitation represents the first time that Erdoğan has ever publicly reached out to the man that many consider to be Erdoğan’s spiritual mentor and the most dangerous Islamist in the world.
But according to the Turkish media, Erdoğan’s comments “received a lengthy standing ovation from the huge crowd that had jam-packed the over 50,000-seat Türk Telekom Arena.”
Others prominent Turkish leader’s joined in Erdoğan’s calls.
Bülent Arınç, a deputy prime minister, said, “I am one of the many people in Turkey who know that Gülen misses his country. I hope it is finally time for him to return. … At least Gülen may visit Turkey from some time to time. We want him to return to his country after over 10 years and reunite with people who love him. I hope our prime minister’s wish [for Gülen to return to Turkey] will come true soon. We will be happy to see Gülen in Turkey.”
Gülen’s response was almost immediate. With tear-filled eyes, Gülen praised both the rise of Islamism and the vibrant economy of Turkey, while indicating that for now, he may prefer to stay in the U.S.
“If [my return] halts positive developments in Turkey, [I prefer] staying here, if my lifespan allows, and I will not return not to damage my country, my nation and those [positive] things in my country,” Gülen said.
Gülen also added that he wishes to be buried in Turkey near his mother, a sign that he may not plan on staying in the U.S. indefinitely.
Fethullah Gülen is the highly controversial leader of a global Islamist movement, which oversees a vast network of over 1,000 schools in over 140 countries, with nearly 150 in the United States alone. While the schools’ official claims are that their goals are to merely help youth in poorer countries, a mountain of evidence has accrued over the years suggesting that their underlying secret agenda is the spread of Gülen’s unique brand of Turkish Islamism.
Read Joel Richardson’s “Mideast Beast: The Scriptural Case for an Islamic Antichrist,” from WND Books!
According to analysts, unlike the Islamism of al-Qaeda, the Turkish Islamism of Gülen, as well as his Islamist predecessor, Said Al-Nursi, uses a veneer of moderation along with the Western concepts of democracy, interfaith dialogue and tolerance as a cover while it works to achieve its goals of Turkish Islamic dominance and a return to the glories of the Ottoman Empire.
After fleeing to the United States in March of 1999, Gülen was put on trial and prosecuted in absentia for attempting to overthrow the Turkish government and Constitution. Turkish television broadcast footage of Gülen telling his followers to spread his Islamist ideas secretly in order to conquer the Turkish secular state from within. The footage was eminently damning.
Yet in 2008, after receiving 29 letters of support from prominent American political and educational figures, including Graham E. Fuller, the former Station Chief for the CIA in Afghanistan, former Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman and former Ambassador to Turkey Morton Abramowitz, Gülen won on appeal and was acquitted of all charges by the ruling Islamist AK party of Prime Minister Erdoğan.
Since that time, Gülen has remained in Pennsylvania, accruing numerous awards and endless accolades from American and other Western educational and religious entities.
Imam Gülen and his movement are also reported to be wildly wealthy. According to the testimony of Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator, the Gülen movement receives much of its funding directly from the CIA. According to Edmonds, for years, the U.S. has allowed the free-flow of money from the Afghanistan opium and heroin trade to reach the Gülenists. According to some accounts, Gülen is worth more than $25 billion.
According to investigative journalist Paul Williams, “This scenario serves to explain why U.S.-led coalition troops in Afghanistan are forbidden to firebomb the fields or fumigate the poppies with a chemical herbicide, such as glyphosate.”
Gülen and his movement also own the Today’s Zaman, one of Turkey’s largest newspapers, as well as numerous television networks, banks, universities, construction and manufacturing companies throughout the country.
The Gülen movement has allegedly even used its vast fortunes and influence to virtually create the ruling Islamist AK Party and protect its continued successes in Turkey.
But despite the fact that Gülen has been filmed encouraging the spread of Islamism through deception, numerous American politicians, educators and universities vehemently defend him as a paragon of virtue, a modernist scholar dedicated only to peace, charity and tolerance.
According to Mustafa Yesil, a leading figure within the Gulen movement and chairman of the Journalists and Writers Foundation in Istanbul, the movement is “faith-based, pacifist, pluralist, colorful and pro-democratic.”
Gülen was most recently honored with the EastWest Institute’s 2011 EWI Peace Building Award for his contribution to world peace. Such superlative awards and accolades are not uncommon for Gülen.
Critics of Gülen and his movement however, including Ahmet Sik, the Turkish author of the book “The Imam’s Army” (“Imamin Ordusu”), claim that the group has thoroughly infiltrated every arena of Turkish government, including the police force. Sik’s book was banned by Turkish prosecutors, and Sik was arrested and charged with involvement in a secret coup plot. After 13 months in jail, Sik was only recently released, with a trial still pending.
Sik’s case is far from unique. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists in New York, despite its claims to represent an open, free and democratic nation, Turkey now leads the world in the number of journalists in prison. While China has 27 journalists in prison, Iran has 42 and Turkey presently has 94.
For years, many secular Turks have claimed the Gülen movement has so infiltrated Turkish government that it effectively now represents a type of Islamist shadow government, whose spidery fingers reach into every arena of Turkish government. The present imprisonment of so many journalists opposed to the Gülen movement is but one example of the movement’s power.
There is also a mountain of evidence that the ruling Turkish government shares the Turkish nationalism and expansionist goals of Imam Gülen. Only a few weeks ago, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu made the following grandiose statement:
We will manage the wave of change in the Middle East. Just as the ideal we have in our minds about Turkey, we have an ideal of a new Middle East. We will be the leader and the spokesperson of a new peaceful order, no matter what they say.
But despite the clear and present danger represented by Turkey’s ruling Islamist party, the Obama administration has openly pursued a partnership with Prime Minister Erdoğan.
At a fund raising event for the Obama reelection campaign, Vice President Joe Biden recently addressed a group of roughly 200 influential members of the Turkish-American community.
In speaking of the Obama administration’s view of Turkey’s reassertion of power in the region, Biden said, “We’re looking for Turkish leadership in the rest of that entire region.”
Biden continued to speak of what a wonderful “model” Turkey is for other Islamic nations: “It’s a model as to how you can have an Islamic population, an Islamic state and a democracy, something the rest of the region is groping to figure out how to do.”
And speaking of American cooperation with Turkey in the region, Biden said, “There’s nothing we do that we don’t coordinate.”
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...