Is America Prepared to defend our soil from Internal terrorist threats?

In Hancock, NY an Islamic community that sits on 80 acres of land has decided to form its own government.  They call their community: The Town of Islamberg.  They have their own mayor, deputy mayor and five town council members.  None of them are elected, of course.

They even boast that their “town” provides departments of education, medical, finance and land development services.

This Islamic compound has truly become a city-state.  Though not recognized as a legitimate township by the City of Hancock, this Islamic community nevertheless enforces its own laws on the “citizens” within its borders.  They do so by using the iron fist of Sharia law.

I interviewed a member of this camp, which sits deep in the Catskills Mountains of upstate New York.  The Islamic group that has established this camp is part a network known as Muslims of the Americas (MOA), which has documented links to Al Qaeda.

MOA has established similar villages in nearly three-dozen locations nationwide, with other prominent camps found in Texas, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, California and Tennessee.

The man I interviewed, Ali Aziz, painted a shocking picture of what life is like to live inside these camps and how many of their members engage in terrorist training activities. Aziz, an Egyptian Muslim, worked as an undercover informant for eight years for the New York Police Department (NYPD). During that time, he lived on MOA camps and worked closely with MOA leadership, all the time supplying the NYPD with information about illegal activity on the camps—including guerilla combat training.

Aziz was drawn into the life of an informant after police arrested him years ago on a passport violation. Aziz was fluent in both English and Arabic, and he had been an Olympic Judo athlete.

“I knew the martial arts,” he said, “which (MOA) liked. I could teach them Arabic. I could teach them how to read the Quran.”  He was welcome with open arms by MOA members and its leaders.

I have visited the outside of the Hancock compound a couple times and flown over it once. It’s typical of virtually every other MOA camp. It’s in a heavily wooded area off the beaten path, with mostly battered trailers and homes and a couple of newly constructed buildings thrown into the mix. It has dirt roads lined with old cars, new cars and junk cars. Wooded debris, discarded scrapings and demolished buildings can be seen throughout the area, giving it an unsightly appearance from above.

It has its own graveyard, similar to those found on other camps. And the property has a couple of small lakes which have been used as “open areas” to shoot their weapons across. Not surprisingly, Hancock also has a guard shack to intercept unwanted visitors.

By all accounts, Hancock—which now calls itself “The Town of Islamberg”—is the camp that houses the leaders of MOA and makes decisions for the rest of the camps throughout the United States.

Aziz provided this shocking information: MOA has created a secret jihadist army, similar to a guerilla-trained militia, that is ready to attack American citizens “at one word” from their leader, Sheikh Gilani.

One of the main purposes of the camps is to provide guerilla training for the young men—and in some cases the women—to be prepared for jihad. A videotape that I obtained exclusively shows MOA members being trained on the Hancock camp, shooting guns, pretending to attack with knives, practicing slitting throats, and strangling victims. This chilling video is proof that MOA compounds have been used to train Islamic terrorists for combat.

Aziz confirmed that the camps have stockpiles of illegal weapons.

Aziz also confirmed what my research had already shown: That the MOA’s policy was to encourage members to collect as much public assistance as possible, and the more children they had the more assistance they received, much of which is returned to Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan.

Aziz explained that the residents of the MOA believe that their top leader, Sheikh Gilani, is able to travel through space and time, and that he spies on them at all times. This fear helps keep them from disobeying the strict laws of MOA and the “town” leaders.

“They think Gilani will turn them into a monkey,” he said.

MOA members are to follow Gilani’s orders blindly and without questioning. Gilani teaches his followers that “jihad” is their purpose in life. Aziz confirms that four generations of MOA members have been brought up on these camps—taught from birth to distrust Americans and to prepare for jihad. The young men are trained to be criminals. Aziz calls them “modern warrior slaves.”

For some in the MOA camps, they’ve never known any other life, said Aziz. Their schooling, where there is schooling, is laughable, possibly even criminal. In the York, South Carolina, MOA compound children are taught in a storage shed. Local authorities are fearful of even discussing how these children are taught and what they are being taught.

Drug dealing is also common and is used as a source of income for MOA. “The drug money goes back to Gilani,” Aziz said, referring to their terrorist leader who rules them from Pakistan.

But he left no question about the goal of MOA and their city-states that they are forming across America.

“The ultimate purpose,” Ali said, “is to be ready when the time is right.”

“You walk up to them and ask them, ‘What do you want to do?’ ‘I want to fight for Gilani.’  That’s what they want,” Ali said.  “It’s not good.”

Check out this Youtube video and you will see the real truth behind this group.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpmVpdK5CHI

Credit

Martin Mawyer

OLD GUARD REPUBLICAN FORMER REP. STEVE LATOURETTE RESORTS TO CHILDISH NAME CALLING 

This is the transcript from the Chris Wallace show to day on Fox News.

WALLACE: The Conservative Political Action Conference held its annual meeting this eke and if you can believe it, a presidential straw poll for 2016.

Here are the results -- Tea Party favorite, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, won with 25 percent. Senator Marco Rubio was a close second at 23 percent. And former presidential candidate Rick Santorum, a distant third, at 8 percent.

The CPAC meeting highlighted the disagreement over the best way for the party to broaden its base.

Matt Kibbe is president of FreedomWorks, a leader of the Tea Party movement.

Former Congressman Steve LaTourette is head of the Republican Main Street Partnership.

And, gentlemen, welcome to "Fox News Sunday."

LATOURETTE: Thanks.

MATT KIBBE, FREEDOMWORKS: Thanks for having me.

WALLACE: Congressman LaTourette, during the lame duck session in December, you talked about the 40 to 50 chuckleheads -- your phrase -- in the House, who are blocking senator -- rather, Speaker Boehner, from making a budget deal with the president.

What is it about the Tea Party freshmen that make them chuckleheads?

FORMER REP. STEVE LATOURETTE: I don't think I would say it's all of Tea Party freshmen. I'd say it's 40 or 50 in 112th Congress that seemed more interested in voting no and going home than governing and that comment was made after "Plan B." And you have to recognize, Chris --

WALLACE: And "Plan B" was to just raise taxes on people making over a million dollars.

LATOURETTE: Yes. And it was the opening gambit and would have given the speaker the opportunity to go to the White House and over to the Senate and say, "Here, I have a package, and, let's continue our negotiations."

When you take it down, as the speaker said in our meeting after that, you send him to the White House naked. He's got no armor. He's got no tools.

WALLACE: Well, looking forward, Mr. Kibbe, what is it about the Tea Party and its views on spending and taxes that members of the Republican establishment, like Congressman LaTourette, don't get?

KIBBE: Well, you have to take a step back and understand the only reason we are talking about a balanced budget, the only reason that we're having a serious debate about $16-plus trillion in debt, is because of the Tea Party class in 2010 and, the folks we had in 2012. You have to stop this process, this bipartisan process, of just kicking the can down the road, creating these artificial crises on New Year's Eve and say, let's put ideas on the table, let's stop playing this game.

And that's what we have done.

And we're never going to fix the problem just by pretending that the process of bipartisanship somehow gets to real problems, because that's how we got here. This crisis was created by both Republicans and Democrats not willing to make tough choices.

LATOURETTE: I'll tell you, that flies in the face of what we did in the 1990s, Bill Clinton was the president, John Kasich was the budget chair, and, Newt Gingrich was the speaker, and we created the Balanced Budget Act in 1997.

And quite frankly, it was during the Bush years of spending, multiplied now by the Obama years that we have this mess.

And at the end of the day, my difficulty with the Tea Party freshmen is not the true passion that they bring to this. They are an important part of the Republican Party. My difficulty is at the end of the day, you have to govern. Just saying no doesn't get you anything, and it creates these false crises.

And you can get past the false crises if you work something out. And it doesn't mean surrendering principle. It doesn't mean becoming a Democrat or a RINO or a DINO. It means working together in a way you get 60 percent of what you want.    KIBBE: Well, you've got to go back, because I don't think the Tea Party has created the budget crisis. We came in with our members, and tried to do something about it. I remember a day when April 15th is when the House and Senate had to pass the budget resolution.

I remember when they had to reconcile the 13 appropriations bills, I remember a day when the president actually had to introduce his budget, and today we don't do any of that stuff. And that's how we got to the $16 trillion.

And there is something rational about standing on the tracks and saying, you know, we can't do it this way anymore, we have to do it some other way.

LATOURETTE: Listen, if that was -- if that was the way these guys were operating, I'd be all for that.

But for instance, we couldn't get even -- I was an appropriator. We couldn't get our labor, health and human services bill, the biggest of the bills besides defense out, because three of our members would not support the chairman's mark. Now, that's not trying to solve the problem.

KIBBE: We'll get too weeds in here.

LATOURETTE: Sorry. But I'm telling you, you can't get it done. And, just voting no and then holding your nose and saying, boy, if it passes, then I can go home to my local Tea Party groups and say, "I voted no," that's ridiculous. That's what makes them chuckleheads.

WALLACE: Let me switch to another subject.

Mr. Kibbe, one of the recent splits in the party -- and we saw it in the last week, has been over national security. You backed Rand Paul's filibuster of the president's drone policy in the Senate. You also backed the sequester of across the board cuts even in the Pentagon.

But isn't one of the GOP's strengths with the American people that it's tough on national security?

KIBBE: Well, you can be fiscally responsible and tough on national security. I think it would be --

WALLACE: Well, the drone has nothing to do with fiscal issues. That's a --

(CROSSTALK)

KIBBE: Certainly. So there's two issues. One is about basic civil liberties and I think the new GOP reflected by Rand Paul's willingness to challenge the status quo in both the Republican and Democratic Parties, that's a healthy thing.

And, young people in particular, they are looking for leadership that's willing to challenge the idea that the government is always right. I think that's where we are, as well.

But on defense, and on, frankly, any budget, any program, any department of the federal government, let's all acknowledge that there is waste and things that need to be eliminated. And, a trimming of defense would be a very healthy thing.

And you have to put everything on the table. You can't say that this sacred cow cannot be touched. I think the GOP has made that mistake.

WALLACE: Congressman LaTourette, Rand Paul in his speech at CPAC talked about defense hawks like John McCain and Lindsey Graham, as stale and moss-covered. There is a war-weariness in the country. Should the Republican Party, and it's trying to grow the party and appeal to new voters, should it be pulling back on national defense?

LATOURETTE: Well, you know, I grew up in the era of the $800 hammer and $600 toilet seat. So, yes, there are efficiencies there.

But if you're looking to the Constitution for something that government is supposed to be involved in, it is defending the country.

And the sequestration was the most ham-handed way of dealing with things and we only got there because of the dysfunctions that exist, because the Democrats won't give an inch, and, you know, it's incumbent upon us to find the sweet spot. Boehner tried to do it with the president and the president isn't willing. But, we've got to find that sweet spot that includes the Pentagon.

WALLACE: But you said dysfunction and you kind of motioned in Mr. Kibbe's direction. Do you think the Tea Party is adding to the dysfunction in Washington?

LATOURETTE: No, not at all. I think the Tea Party is an important part of the coalition that is the Republican Party. But my difficulty with not necessarily Mr. Kibbe's group but others like his, is that there is some -- now some kind of litmus test what makes a good Republican or a bad Republican.

And the reason that we don't have a Republican president, today, in my opinion, is that we don't represent the whole country. We don't have one member of congress who is a Republican from the entire eastern sea coast. You get down to the Carolinas and Virginia. You can't govern the country unless you look like the country.

And so, I think they are an important part of the coalition but they are not the Republican Party. They are part of the Republican Party.

WALLACE: How do you respond to that? In a sense you may have energized the party, but you've also narrowed it?

KIBBE: Oh, I don't think so. If you look at CPAC, you look at the rock stars of the GOP, the next generation, the people we are excited about, these are Tea Party freshmen -- Rand Paul, Ron Johnson from a very purple, maybe blue state.

WALLACE: Ron Johnson?

KIBBE: Pat Toomey from Pennsylvania and, of course, Marco Rubio. We have brought diversity, we have brought energy and, most important, I think we brought ideas because we are color blind about all of this stuff.

But if you want to come to the Senate, come to the Congress and offer a plan to balance the budget, we're going to support you. Put your ideas on the table. That's what's lacking in the whole debate.

LATOURETTE: Well, I've got to say, that sadly what they've also got is Harry Reid as the majority leader continuing in the Senate. If you look at the Nevada race, Sharron Angle, if you look at Richard Mourdock in Indiana, if you look at -- I forget her name, the witch in Delaware.

WALLACE: Christine O'Donnell.

LATOURETTE: Thank you.

You -- we can have functional today, but for this litmus test that exists today --

WALLACE: There were a lot of establishment candidates, Republican candidates, who went down in this last election, too.

LATOURETTE: But they went down from the standpoint that they lost to Democrats. Unlike some of these -- Mr. Mourdock, for instance. I mean, we are supposed to wonder --

WALLACE: Richard Murdoch in Indiana.

LATOURETTE: Indiana. Why we don't have the women's vote in this country when we have a candidate suggesting that a child born as a result of rape is a gift from God? I'm not wondering why we don't have more women voting for Republicans.

WALLACE: But let me ask you about that and that's the last thing we're going to get into here, Karl Rove -- and he's going to be on the panel -- started something called the Conservative Victory Project to try to get into the primaries, to make sure that there are more electable Republicans, people that can win the primaries and that go on and win the general election.

Congressman LaTourette, you're about to start your own super PAC to promote electable candidates in Republican primaries.

LATOURETTE: Right.

WALLACE: Do you have any problem with that because I -- well, what do you -- first of all, why do you think that's wrong?

KIBBE: Well, I think the definition of electable is what we're debating and you look at who has been winning elections, it's been interesting, exciting, young, energetic people like Ted Cruz, like Marco Rubio. And I think if you apply this sort of establishment litmus test which tends to be biased for people that are already in office, you're not going to get that new energy. Would we have gotten Pat Toomey?

Remember, Karl Rove supported Arlen Specter as far back as 2004, against Pat Toomey, because the logic was Pat Toomey can't possibly win. Arlen Specter later flips party when it was convenient for him and became the 60th vote for Obamacare. So, I think we need to be careful about what it means to be electable.

Certainly, the Tea Party doesn't bat a thousand, but at least we're winning elections. We're bringing new people into the party. And we're not in a position where the Democrats can jam something through 60 votes in the Senate because of the Tea Party.

LATOURETTE: So, I've got to tell you, there is no litmus test at the Republican mainstream. I'm happy to have anybody who labels him or herself as a Republican and wants to represent the entire country.

We're not talking about electing the governor of South Carolina, or the governor of Texas, the governor of Utah. If we want to be a national party, we have to look like America. Today, we look like a bunch of we were a bunch of guys, white guys, from below the Mason- Dixon line.

WALLACE: So, how do you look more like America?

LATOURETTE: You have to begin to talk about issues in the way that I have to talk about issues.

For instance, I never read anything in my Republican playbook and I have been a Republican since the day I was born, that says that Republicans and trade unionists can't get along together, the carpenter, the operating engineer. But, somehow, this whole war on prevailing wages is now become a plank of the Republican Party? No, it's not.

And the same thing with the environment. I live on Lake Erie, we don't have to be opposed to everything that helps us get clean air and clean water. That's not a Republican test.

But if you look at the key votes that some of these groups are scoring, and 18 votes was scored by Mr. Kibbe's group out of a thousand that took place, last year. It's not -- you can make -- it's like a poll, you can make it look any way you want to.

WALLACE: All right. You get the last word.

KIBBE: I think if you look at the new Republican Party, the party that stands for something, you look at names like Tim Scott, and Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio and Raul Labrador and Justin Amash. Mia Love almost got through.

This is the new future and it's based on ideas. We don't care about the color of your skin.

WALLACE: We're going to have to leave it there. But, to be continued.

Mr. Kibbe, Congressman LaTourette, thank you both for coming in.

We'll stay on top of this debate. And, in addition, up next, we'll continue this conversation with our Sunday group. What does the GOP need to do to attract more voters?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, R-ARIZ.: If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously, he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorms.

SEN. RAND PAUL, R-KY.: The GOP of old has grown stale and moss-covered.

Dr. Ben Carson Scolds Obama about his failings as president

With a father in the hospital dying, the first thought on my mind walking into a high school ROTC class for the first time was not to hear the sharp commands of the cadet colonel Ben Carson. Yet, this was the tail end of the 1960’s and the nation had a new president, and the soldiers in Vietnam were welcoming new army recruits by the thousands who had to be prepared.

But in the city of Detroit at Southwestern High School, in 1969, there was another war occurring. It was a war of ideology based on anger as the city was recovering from riots still smoldering in its inner core from two years earlier. The community and the high schools had a Black Panther Party that was rising as an ideology being embraced by young black teens and older as the correct revolutionary pathway to social justice.

Yet, that morning as the young ROTC cadets looked on at this tall slender ROTC Commandant of Cadets, it was clear by his clear crisp commands there was a better way. His firm but calm demeanor had a different type of leadership that veered away from violent bellicose leftist overthrow demagoguery offered by the Black Panther Party leaders in the school and the neighborhood.

At this first cadet formation , Cadet Colonel Ben Carson spelled out a litany of expectations and goals that he insisted were not his goals but were to be our goals, if we were to ever leave school and go further and higher. His words were planted as nourishing seeds in the minds of those willing to accept and to create their own pathway toward a freedom from the street to the freedom of the ideals created and tested in the mind.

So as Dr. Ben Carson stood before the annual National Prayer Breakfast to speak to a different audience, he reminded them about the higher aspirations of America and an American Dream. This was a dream not built upon scapegoating, and blame and class division and warfare, but on the higher principles of life which are biblically based. It is easy for America to see; his words were not just his principles and beliefs but belonged to the nation as well.

Yet, there were those including Obama who were upset or outraged. Some stated how dare this doctor scold the president, who had just sat in his quiet surliness and listened to Dr. Ben Carson remind him of the fierce urgency of now and Obama’s own failings.

Dr. Carson responded to those critical of his speech by stating, “Well, when did this become a monarchy? You know, we are the people. The president works for us and, you know, we need to remember that. This is a country that is for of and by the people, not for of and by the government and that is the big battle that we are in right now.”

( click to read more )

For those patriots who might not have received the memo on June 25, 2012 Usurper Obama sent a letter to the Speaker of the House and Head of the Senate advising them that he has issued an E.O. declaring a state of National Emergency. To view his E.O. click here!

For more information click here!

Based on the content of his "National Defense Resources Preparedness a.k.a. Peacetime Martial Law E.O." by executing the above letter to Congress he has activated the NDRP E.O.!

U.N. to seize Jerusalem from Israel on July 26th. Take Action!

The United Nations Security Council has scheduled July 26th in New York, for open "debate" about whether or not they will seize Israeli land in September, and divide Jerusalem by establishing a Palestinian state, without negotiation or approval from Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he feared a "surprise" move after the Quartet of the United Nations, EU, USA, and Russia met last Monday in DC, to endorse President Obama's plan to enforce 1967 borders, and divide Jerusalem and seize Israeli land to form an independent Palestine, on either July 26th or in Sept. at the U.N.

Haaretz newspaper reported Quartet members "are expected to release a statement endorsing U.S. President Barack Obama's May 19 speech on the Middle East, which called for...the borders of a future state based on


U.N. to seize Jerusalem from Israel on July 26th. Take Action!

The United Nations Security Council has scheduled July 26th in New York, for open "debate" about whether or not they will seize Israeli land in September, and divide Jerusalem by establishing a Palestinian state, without negotiation or approval from Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he feared a "surprise" move after the Quartet of the United Nations, EU, USA, and Russia met last Monday in DC, to endorse President Obama's plan to enforce 1967 borders, and divide Jerusalem and seize Israeli land to form an independent Palestine, on either July 26th or in Sept. at the U.N.

Haaretz newspaper reported Quartet members "are expected to release a statement endorsing U.S. President Barack Obama's May 19 speech on the Middle East, which called for...the borders of a future state based on pre

http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/hostedemail/email.htm?h=5e045ab01a40fcbdb6cae7249a9ec38c&CID=9383059585&ch=0A526AB98095BC664D2BFF272B3E85C9

I just want to take an informal survey of my peers.  Answer the following questions yes or no and we'll go from there.

• Do you believe that you will be a recipient of the Social Security funds that you have paid into the system?
• Do you believe that the government will in any way give you financial support in your old age?
• Do you believe that you will have subsidized medical care in old age in the form of Medicare?
• Do you believe that you will be able to retire at the age of 65?
• Do you believe that the current social models of retirement homes, assisted living facilities and extended-care medical institutions will be available to you in your late years?
• Do you believe that you will have to depend upon your family or faith congregation to meet your old age needs?
• Do you believe you will have the means to live independently in your old age?
• Do you believe that the current debt crisis and addiction to spending on the part of the federal government will turn upside down the entitlement programs that have been available to elderly Americans since FDR? 

This is not a test.  And I don't really care how you answered these questions.  But I hope that I have caused you to reflect upon the future for Americans just now entering their 50s and 60s.

I am a late Boomer, born in 1961.  I have had the gut feeling (knowledge) since about 1989 that I would not be a part of the Social Security generation.  I frankly don't believe the projections that Medicare will become insolvent in 2024 and Social Security in 2036.  I think it is around the corner.  There will be an upheaval in the immediate future, whether gradual or sudden, that will completely alter the lives and expectations of the American aging class.

I put a post on Twitter yesterday that said "Are you ready to be part of the generation who disengages from government dependence?"  The next tweets followed: "Are you ready to become the generation who will be self-reliant in old age? Are you prepared to work as long as you can? Are you prepared to find support in old age the old fashioned way, through family and church?"

This to some is horrifying. No safety net? No government to care for those who have no church or willing family to help them as they age and contend with illness and impending death?

This is the reality check of the century and our thinking and approach to life as elderly people will require a drastic reset if we are to survive past this point.  

The victories of Socialism via Obama, and decades of a burgeoning government and the dependence of individuals thereon, are made downright tragic by the effect of the assault on families and churches that have left so many of the Boomer generation alone, and faithless.  In the 1960s couples started to shrink their families and chose to bear few or no children. Children are traditionally the most reliable form of security to aging parents.  Many have chosen not to marry and as families of origin die out, they are left alone.  Churches and strong congregations remain, but many individuals have abandoned the faiths of their childhood and lack the essential ties to a church family that are often a compassionate and effective source of support for the elderly and lonely.

Our children have a little time to adjust to a life style of total self-reliance.  As far as they're concerned, the sooner the reset occurs, the better. But for the Boomers and those entering their 40s, we are in for some pain.  

My plan is simply to:

• Stay healthy and be in charge of my own wellness
• Keep working indefinitely or until illness or accident takes away my ability to do so
• Always have a little savings in the bank
• Have home storage which includes food and other essentials sufficient for at least 6 months
• Live each day with the understanding that I will have to take care of my own needs now and throughout my old age and when I am unable to care for myself I will have to lean on my children and on my church

What is your plan?

Joela wrote: Is it me or will the Liberals destroy America instead of cutting the spending? 

The math is simple. When your 'out-go', exceeds your 'income', then your 'up-keep' is your down fall!

Are Congressmen smarted than a 6th grader?

Amid the latest speculation about Mr. Rick Perry running for the Republican nomination, we must be skeptical.  Perry is a globalist, implying that he wants to continue what the Bushes started via NAFTA.  In other words, he would have on his agenda the continued planning and implementation of the proposed super highway connecting Mexico, the U.S., and Canada.  If this were to occur, the area of the highway would become international territory, thus destroying our national sovereignty.  Furthermore, this position by Mr. Perry would require that he continue to allow illegal immigrants come in from Mexico.  In other words, he would not enforce illegal immigration law, even though he gives the appearance now that he would enforce illegal immigration, but again, this may very well be another ruse by the liberal elite to help get him nominated and elected. 

Furthermore, infowars.com reports that Mr. Perry was invited and attended the annual Bilderberg Group Meeting in 2007.  His speech topic was on the relationship of federal to state government relations.  To prove the kind of people invited, Comrade Obama has also been a Bilderberg invitee and attendee.  For those of you who do not know, the Bilderberg is a highly secretive international group of the upper crust of liberal elite who think it is their job to shape events in order to bring in the "New World Order".  Why would they invite the Texas Governor and why would he attend, rubbing shoulders with corporate and international Marxists?  Any New World Order, by definition, will require the destruction of all national sovereignties, and that includes our own.

I am a native Texan and love my state, but L.B.J. was a Texan too.  We must not allow our state loyalty or personal charisma of any candidate to blind us from nominating a true patriotic, constitutional loyalist with courage this time.  The enemy's primary tool is deception.  Like McCain, if the enemy can get us to put forward a wolf in sheep's clothing, we will have been defeated yet again.  Never forget that my friends!

Author: Brian D. Hill

Source: USWGO Alternative News

It has been discovered on September 26 2010 at both the Northwest New Mexico Visitor Center, and El Malpais information center that now theNational Park Service (NPS) aka the Department of the Interior has beenshilling for the H1N1 Vaccine scare by the World Health Foundation andalso by Big Pharma.

Luckily I bring my camera bag almost everywhere I go so when nobody was in the restroom I took a quick shot to send to the Internet to leteverybody know what the NPS is doing in response to the H1N1 Vaccinescare, they want you to get your H1N1 Vaccine shot.

Also according to a cropped image copied from another shot taken of the propaganda vaccine poster it says that the National Park Service nowhas a Office of Public Health. Now since when does the NPS and allgovernment agencies need to have their own Health Department to makesure that everybody gets the inoculation to receive toxic chemicals,live viruses, cancer viruses, and even future health problems at thevictims expense, that means that they have to pay for the damage totheir own bodies they receive from the vaccination shot they were toldthey have to have for public safety.

Also this is a closeup again from the other shot not being shown on here because of the JPEG Compression makes it hard to read the photo.

The image states "Get the H1N1 vaccine when it becomes available" by the National Park Service Office of Public Health also by theDepartment of the interior.

When you see conservation government organizations which the whole goal was to protect the Nations most valuable monuments and mostbeautiful lands of nature, being owned by the UN aka United Nations orbeing used as a tool of mass indoctrination, mass murder, and eugenics,then it is no longer recognized as a conservation organization butanother hammer given to Big Pharma to squash those that resist havingmore health problems which generates billions of dollars to thepharmaceutical industry.

People need to do plenty of research and ask opinions of many different doctors on whether the vaccine shot will actually help or hurtbecause what people don't know about the vaccines may hurt them.Vaccinations have been reported to having chemicals, cancer viruses, andother live viruses.

What the National Park Service has done is indoctrination and propaganda for Big Pharma because they are not asking people to doresearch and make a choice on whether vaccines are good or not, theposter says to just get it no matter happens to your body you must getit for the guise of protecting the Health of others.

Hitler told various lies just like Obama, and Bush about how serving under a youth corps, serving fascism, and abolishing the Constitutionis a good thing for the security and safety of the German people.Safety, having good health, saving the environment, and even Securityare being used to indoctrinate the whole Nation into fear and slavery.

Also now why would New Mexico National Parks be the only area to have vaccine propaganda and H1N1 fear mongering?

Well take a look at who is friends with the globalist created marketing puppet.

The New Mexico Governor that's in charge of New Mexicos state affairs is best friends and even endorces Obama according to theGuardian. These people don't care about your health they just wantto pose for the camera and then work with their globalist masters fortheir next orders and then they will both be rewarded with being ableto lead us all into a Eugenic New World Order where the science ofTyranny is law, where populations have to be reduced from the billionsto five-hundred million, and where all of human activity is monitoredby super computers where no activity is private.

The globalists want Obama to lead us into scientific tyranny with a little fascism on then side. For those who won't be sacrificed for theagenda of World Governance, will become slaves that will comply to everywish and order provided by the worlds top elite.

The National Park Service needs to remember that they are not suppose to indoctrinate people to vaccine, and that they are suppose to beprotecting National Landmarks as their job is intended by the taxpayers. Now they only shill for the agenda creators and that instead ofgetting rid of chronic illnesses and diseases, we will have even morehealth problems that will put us under dozens of more prescriptionmedications till the day we die.

I hope American Patriots and truthers will stand up against the NPS Propaganda and that it is not just a waste of tax payers dollars butalso makes the National Park Service another indoctrination center forthe World Health Organization, Big Pharma, and the New World Order.

After a week in which the White House achieved a $20 Billion Gulf reparations fund and in which Obama blamed Republicans for the joblessness in America, the pollsters at Gallup show a firm majority of Americans right now oppose the 2012 re-election of Barack Obama. 51% of Americans think Mr. Obama should NOT be re-elected while only 46% say he should. Among Democrats 77% want to re-elect while 87% of Republicans oppose. Independents show 53% in opposition to re-election and 43% in favor. Today’s Rasmussen polls showed that among “probable voters” 45% strongly DISapprove of Mr. Obama’s job performance while only 25% strongly approve giving the president a -20 overall Presidential Index rating (Mr. Obama began with a +30 Presidential Index rating in January, 2009).

6-18-10 Arizona is a good example of the leftist movement in our federal government. That state is trying desperately to defend itself and its citizens from criminals, drug runners, human traffickers, gun smugglers, drug cartels, financial ruin, and the failure of our federal government to do its job. They passed State Senate Bill 1070 to be able to implement some of the protections the federal government has failed to provide.

We have been invaded, but the federal government does nothing of any substance to stop the invasion. No, I am not referring to the estimated 12 to 14 million criminal aliens known to be here. I am referring to the flow of paramilitary groups and other heavily armed foreigners who have already come across an 80 mile stretch of the U.S. / Mexican border including the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge which is right on the border. These people commit crimes against U.S. Citizens and law enforcement officers. The crimes have increased in the last four months to where the situation is out of control according to Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu. The invaders have taken over to the extent that our federal government has closed the wildlife refuge to U.S. citizens. So this part of the United States has been taken over by foreign nationals and is off limits to U.S. Citizens. And all our federal government has seen fit to do is to erect signs telling U.S. citizens they may not enter this area of U.S. sovereign territory. They have not sent troops to rout these foreign invaders. They have not even thought that doing so is a reasonable idea.

So let me see if I understand the situation. Mr. Obama refuses to protect this country; but in stead, he believes the right thing to do is to allow invaders to take over our land. He also believes that when Arizona passes a law to protect itself from such failings of our President and our federal government, that the state should be sued for usurping the federal government’s powers regarding immigration. Arizona doesn’t want to control legal immigration - it wants to halt illegal entry into the state. However, the reason the state passed 1070 was because the all-powerful federal government is not using its power to protect its citizens.

The most important thing here is that the President is refusing to protect the this country. If I remember right, he took an oath to protect this country. I guess he just failed and the country is giving him a pass on it. If he were a Republican President, the Democrats would be calling for his impeachment. But I guess the Republicans are just blind to the situation…………..or they are gutless…………..or something.

Where is the citizenry’s cry for the impeachment of a President who refuses to honor his oath?

Foxnews.com carried the article on which this writing is based. It can be found at: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/16/closes-park-land-mexico-border-americans/?test=latestnews.

If the public reads this blog and the Fox News article and understands that our own President is making part of this country off limits to its own citizens because of a foreign takeover, they would be up for an impeachment. However, the President doesn’t even want this subject mentioned because he stopped construction of the border fence and did not provide any of the 3000 troops requested by Arizona and Senator McCaine to take back this part of our country. If the subject is mentioned, he would look bad. But the facts are there. So again, I ask where is the citizenry’s cry for the impeachment of a President who refuses to honor his oath?

The big debate in Washington is how to fix Wall Street. Wall Street’s greed caused the financial collapse. Wall Street earns too much money. Wall Street is the root of the problem in “haves” and “have-nots”.

H.R. 4173, Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 is bill that the House Committee on Financial Services has written to fix the problems with Wall Street. The bill’s intention will be to avoid another financial meltdown. The Chairman of this committee is Congressman Barney Frank.

The highlights of the bill are as followed:

1) Consumer Protections: A new consumer protection agency, CFPA, to protect Americans from Wall Street. The sounds good, but the idea of Wall Street is based on speculating. No bill can protect the consumer from loosing money on a bad speculation. However, this new agency, CFPA, will create more deficit spending, increase the national debt and reduce America’s ability to compete.

Latest Betrayal: Obama Turning Internet over to Foreigners

Some of the technical background for this blog can be found here:

http://www.yale.edu/pclt/COMM/TCPIP.HTM

http://www.garykessler.net/library/tcpip.html#intro

Of all the many betrayals of Barak Obama, some day the one we may all regret the most under a Brave New One-World government may be his “giving away” of the internet. The information superhighway, internet, worldwide web or just the WEB as we know it may soon become a thing of the past thanks to Barak Obama’s need to prove his compliance with the rest of the world’s power structure and just how cooperative, sharing, inclusive and multi-national in thought he can be.

Understanding the nature of this betrayal comes from first understanding that the internet was from day one an American Department of Defense creation so that computers of the American military could talk to one another, easily, accurately and quickly and so that important American military information could be shared among all American military computers. The system has remained in American hands since the beginning so that no foreign power would ever have the power to disrupt it or interdict our communications. The system as it now stands canNOT be given away without giving away immense amounts of knowledge and potential control over America’s cyber-infrastructure.

Within a year, control and key management of the internet by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce may be non-existent. Could this help tyrants control all communications in their country? Could this allow Barak Obama to control all communications in this country? Remember the internet crackdown in China last year? Remember the role the web played in Iran in allowing dissidents to communicate the activities of their illegally elected president, Iran’s police and just to keep them in touch with each other? Today 90% of the most serious internet information thefts in science, industry and even the military are begun in one country: China . . . how much easier might things be for the Chinese communists if we just give away control of the system we created?

It’s a somewhat long and fascinating story, but let’s leave out 99% of the details and look at it in a nutshell . . . (First of all, Al Gore did NOT invent the internet, in reality he had little to do with it so that statement’s just as inaccurate as anything he’s said about global warming.) The information superhighway as we know it began small with a lot of scientists sharing information over the prototypical equivalents of what today we call a local area network (LAN). A few businesses were doing the same thing, but not many because the process of setting things up was labor extensive and very expensive and worked best in small areas, not for widespread large companies. The connections were hardwired and slow and they might serve a dozen or up to a couple hundred individuals in a relatively small area. The whole thing was limited by its relation to old fashioned telephone-switching techniques which were extraordinarily slow, expensive and unreliable.

The first big breakthrough was a method of switching called “packet- switching” which, once invented, made the server as we know it today possible and changed the whole ballgame. Today’s internet grown immensely complicated and widespread since the invention of packet-switching is just the realization of predictions that go back nearly fifty years. In a series of memos beginning in August 1962, J.C.R. Lichlider of MIT discussed the potential of a "Galactic Network" and how social interactions and educational information sharing might be enabled through networking. The Internet today certainly provides such a nationwide and global infrastructure and already interplanetary Internet communication has been seriously discussed.

Just about the time that scientists from multiple universities were seeing the tremendous potential of sharing information on more extended networks, the American military saw the immense value such systems (if expanded to a dramatically greater extent) would have for offering them strategic and tactical advantages in information gathering and sharing, not to mention virtually instantaneous speed of distribution. Beyond anything else, the American military was the driving force for creating the internet.

About that same time a huge bunch of additional technical breakthroughs were happening. More importantly, two more Americans, Dr.Robert E. Kahn and Dr. Vinton G. Cerf, working for the DOD (Department of Defense) in DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) up to and after 1972 conceived of, designed and oversaw the development and execution of a something called “open-arching” (pronounced “arking”) or open-architecture networking, an immense breakthrough in networking and connectivity which gave birth to the internet as we know it today and gave the whole process its “weblike” quality. Instead of the need to hardwire every single connection, the process relied on a combined 1) receiver-transmitter 2) identity recognition device 3) data storage and 4) switchboard-executing machine called a“server” which in concert with virtually unlimited other servers brought together as first a few individual networks and then a whole series of interconnected networks which thus made the information superhighway virtually unlimited in size and scope.

What made the whole thing possible was the server and . . . thanks to Kahn and Cerf’s conceptions each person or (more accurately) each computer connection onto each server was provided with a unique “identifier,” now known as its tcp/ip that could be instantaneously recognized and instantaneously communicate with others and otherwise interact through the server network. When the process went beyond the DOD and became national, the U.S. Department of Commerce was put in charge.

It wasn’t too long till the whole thing went international and soon other individual businesses, universities, groups, and countries created their own webs within the greater worldwide web. Here is the key thing to understand: ALL vital communication is based upon the abilities to send, receive, identify any and all the other parties to the communication and to make your own identity known. IP means “internet protocol”; TCP means “transmission control protocol.” A protocol in computing is a set of electronic instructions that permit these processes to occur. Not to belabor things with the overly technical, but the magic of the tcp/ip identifier is that the system’s entire “integrity” is based upon it. Ceding control over such processes here in America to foreign powers could lead to sabotage of such a nature and scope as to become cataclysmic.

Nevertheless, the Obama administration is without fanfare, surrendering control over the web to foreign powers. Without American ingenuity and investment of the American taxpayer, no internet as we know it today would exist. Our control “imperative” is via management and control over the Domain Name System (DNS) and the humongous servers that service the present internet. Global coordination of the entire internet on behalf of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce is locked into a system of internet protocol resources. Without an IP address and all these other internet protocols, a person or nation would have no access to the internet itself. Allowing foreign powers that control is definitely NOT in the best interest of the United States. For example, let’s say that China or its buddy Iran wishes to black out information on internal squabbling or the quashing of dissent within its borders, what could be simpler than to simply put the whole system on the fritz until such a time as they felt open communications offered no threat to their perceived interests? The Chinese have already demonstrated the most sophisticated national hacking capabilities of any entity in the world. Obama’s actions will certainly make it much easier for the Sino-fox to dominate the world's and America's henhouses.

Within months of Obama's taking office, his administration, through the Department of Commerce, agreed to give “greater representation to foreign telecommunication companies” and countries. Control and management of this American invention is not only the right of America but also our responsibility. That responsibility is twofold: 1) for American’s economic and national security and 2) for the functionality of the web for the entire international community. No better nation than the United States exists to protect these twin interests. Americans developed and invented it; paid for it and the research for implementing it; we are, despite Mr. Obama’s desire for media control, the freest and most tolerant nation on earth; we gain nothing from the user fees paid to ISPs (internet service providers) which are operated by individual companies and countries all over the world; and we have no policy of censorship unlike an awful lot of other foreign powers. Additionally, the ability of U.S. intelligence to monitor financial movements as well as other communications by terrorists and terrorist organizations will become remarkably compromised if the give away is allowed to happen. As usual, the Obama agenda is not just NOT pro-American, but only pro-Obama and mysterious and virtually unfathomable (unless you, like Rajjpuut, understand his underlying Marxism) to those interested in freedom and prosperity as well as open and honest government dedicated to the best interests of the American people.

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut