Obama Regime Drones On
Feb 5, 2013 Political
The Obama Regime has released a memo indicating that the US can order the killing of US citizens if the government thinks they are involved with terrorists. The government has left definitions open to interpretation which means that it can effectively justify killing any American in other countries.
This whole action takes away the due process Americans enjoy.
The rationale for this is to preemptively strike those who might cause us harm even if there is no proof they will do so or when they might actually do it. In other words, if the government thinks you are a bad person who might someday try to do bad things to the US then you can be murdered by a drone strike whether or not there is any evidence you are in the process of doing something bad.
It would appear as if a person could make statements that America is a Great Satan and should be knocked to its knees and then have a drone wipe them out. Basically, the memo denies First Amendment rights in the absence of any actionable intelligence. If they think it then it must be so…
The Regime claims that this does not violate the ban on assassinations:
“A lawful killing in self-defense is not an assassination,” the white paper reads. “In the Department’s view, a lethal operation conducted against a U.S. citizen whose conduct poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States would be a legitimate act of national self-defense that would not violate the assassination ban. Similarly, the use of lethal force, consistent with the laws of war, against an individual who is a legitimate military target would be lawful and would not violate the assassination ban.” NBC News
How is killing an American who meets this definition not an assassination when killing the president of Iran or the leader of North Korea, both of whom fit this description, would be?
This is all about preemption. If the government thinks you might be a threat it can preemptively attack and kill you with a drone.
Does anyone remember the Bush Doctrine of preemption? The left went bonkers over that and yet they seem to be quiet about the Obama Doctrine of preemptive murder of Americans. Does anyone remember how upset everyone on the left got over enhanced interrogation techniques? The Bush White House presented a legal memo indicating that the procedures were not torture and that it was all legal. The left still went nuts.
Where are they now that Obama has his legal team say it is OK to murder Americans on a whim?
How long will it be before the Regime decides that it is legal to use drones IN the US to wipe out those who might someday pose a threat?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Tags: americans, assassinations, criminals, drone strikes, lies, Obama, terror
Obama Photoshopped Shooting Picture
Jan 30, 2013 Political
UPDATE: The content of this post has been removed because it was inaccurate and contained a link to a phony site.
While I like to keep things posted I did not want to have the information continue around the web spreading something false.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Democrat Promises Never Change, Neither Do the Results
Jan 26, 2013 Political
Thomas D’Alesandro, Jr. was the father of Nancy Pelosi and he was as big a left wing liberal Democrat as she is today. His positions and his political life influenced her political life and certainly on her view of America. D’Alesandro was born in Baltimore Maryland and served in a number of elected offices including Maryland House of Delegates, Mayor of Baltimore, and US House of Representatives. He dropped out of the race for Maryland Governor because he did not report money he took from someone who was convicted of fraud and conspiracy. He also ran for the US Senate in 1958. That year brings us some information about Democrats, their promises and the failures of those promises.
His son, Thomas III was a politician and his daughter, Nancy Pelosi still is. That family has lived off the taxpayer (and gotten rich off them) for decades.
A friend informed me that he was cleaning out an old Maryland property he had obtained and he found a 1958 campaign flyer from D’Alesandro’s Senate campaign. On that flyer, Tommy declares (among other things) that he will end the recession and restore America to full employment, strengthen the educational system to make our children the best educated int he world, and wipe out slums, raise the standard of living, guarantee decent housing to millions of Americans who are entitled [emphasis mine] to greater opportunities.
These promises are the same ones that have been made by progressives (regardless of party) for decades. They always promise they are going to do these things and lift people out of poverty and give them what they deserve (as if you deserve something for nothing). Nancy Pelosi is no different than her corrupt daddy. He lived off the taxpayer and so does she. They live off our money and push policies to get millions of others living off the taxpayer and this is done for two reasons. It is done to keep people in poverty and to ensure votes.
These progressives have determined that they are the ruling class and that the rest of us need them in charge. This is what Obama believed as a young man growing up and he lives that out each and every day. You are not smart enough to make it on your own and you are not able to survive without your betters providing for you. We will keep giving you these things and you keep voting for us.
The uninformed are kept that way by an educational system that teaches revised history aimed at making the youth of any given day the progressive soldiers of the future. The institutes of alleged higher learning are indoctrinating those youths into radical progressives who Occupy Wall Street in the name of their slave masters.
Make no mistake about it. Our system, as designed by progressives, is designed to keep people uninformed and begging for their Obamaphones and Obamacare, their birth control and their abortions all of which are provided in exchange for votes. Illiterate people are kept that way and encouraged to breed new generations of welfare recipients who will some day vote for their handouts. Yes, these people are not Republicans or Democrats they are Gimmiedats.
Look at the brochure from 1958 (pdf file) and tell me how the promises, or the “…Things for which I Stand” part is any different from what progressives say today. There is always some underrepresented class that progressives are looking to help with their promises. The goal is to enslave these people to government so that they are always a reliable vote.
People from both parties are involved in this game and the only voices opposed are those of the truly conservative folks in Congress. There are conservatives in both parties who believe in small government and adherence to the Constitution. There are not enough of these voices because the slaves have been allowed to vote in more and more slave masters who will throw them a phone or two along the way.
The problem is that this will likely not get any better anytime soon since there is a growing number of illiterate people. Rush Limbaugh calls them the low information voters but I call them what they are, illiterate. The slaves held on plantations were denied education because education allows freedom. The educational system today is designed to produce illiterate people who are indoctrinated in progressive ideologies. They are functionally illiterate. They can’t tell the difference between right and wrong and they lack the ability to take informed choices when picking leaders.
They vote for the masters who promise them stuff. Gimmiedat!
Those of you who are happy with the government providing for you keep in mind that you are supposed to be in charge of the government, not the other way around. If you relinquish your power government will be happy to take it.
“Socialists ignore the side of man that is the spirit. They can provide you shelter, fill your belly with bacon and beans, treat you when you’re ill, all the things guaranteed to a prisoner or a slave. They don’t understand that we also dream.” ~ Ronald Reagan
Yes, you can be provided everything and be a prisoner or a slave. Slaves and prisoners have another thing in common, they are deprived of the right to keep and bear arms.
Why do you think the slave masters are working so hard to ban and/or restrict guns?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Tags: conservative, gimmiedats, gun control, lies, Obama, Pelosi, politicians, prisoners, progressives, slaves, tommy d'alesandro
It Is Not About Safety, It Is About Control
Jan 25, 2013 Political
The federal government and a number of states with liberals in charge are working very hard to infringe on the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Yesterday Senator Feinstein introduced a bill that would ban 150 firearms because they look scary and would limit the number of rounds a magazine can hold to 10. That ten round limit is, in effect, a ban of certain types of firearms because the smallest magazine for them holds more then 10.
Joe Biden, the drunkard VP, is in charge of the gun ban effort and he has come out to make it very clear that this is not about gun control, it is about safety.
He also made it clear that the proposals of the Obama regime will not end gun crime but could make a difference.
The vice president fielded questions online in a Google+ Hangout, saying the proposals that he and President Barack Obama have laid out won’t end gun crime, but they still could make a difference. WSJ
It has long been recognized that these kinds of laws will not work and Biden is basically acknowledging that fact. So if what they are doing won’t end gun violence and at best, COULD, still make a difference then how is it about safety? If it does not make it better (which it won’t) then it can’t be about safety because no one will be safer. If it is therefore not about safety it must be about gun control.
Gun control is not about guns but about control so the overarching theme is that the Obama regime wants more control over people.
Basically what Biden is telling us is they want to infringe upon our rights for the possibility of safety (though he admits we won’t be safer). Should we as a people give up our rights for safety?
Ben Franklin, a man much wiser than any in politics now, said it very well:
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
The right to keep and bear arms is an essential liberty and it is a liberty the Obama regime (and minions across the nation) is trying to take from us for a promise of safety (safety that COULD happen). If we give up our liberty for this alleged safety we will deserve neither.
And we will get neither. We will no longer have the right and we will not be safe from the most dangerous threat to our existence.
The government.
What are your thoughts on the proposed gun ban?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Tags: ben franklin, gun control, joe biden, lies, safety, security
Feinstein And The Other Oath Breakers
Jan 24, 2013 Political, Second Amendment
Senator Dianne Feinstein of Commiefornia has introduced her anti Second Amendment bill and in that bill she and several other oath breakers list 150 different firearms that they want banned. Her anti American bill also calls for a national registry ala Adolph Hitler and most other dictators.
Feinstein introduced this bill and the national registry provision would violate Public Law 99-308, the Firearms Owner’s Protection Act, which prohibits a national database. This law was the result of documented abused by the ATF in enforcing the Gun Control Act of 1968.
That should come as no surprise since the attempt to ban firearms is in and of itself, unconstitutional as it violates the Second Amendment.
Keep in mind, Feinstein had her own carry permit because she was threatened with harm. She had one while claiming other women do not need to have firearms because women are not strong enough to use these machines of destruction.
She was joined by Chuck Schumer of New York, another gun grabber who has a New York carry permit AND has armed officers surrounding him when he is in New York.
Banning firearms will not stop the next lunatic from shooting people because criminals and those who have mental health problems will not follow the law. They will still be able to get firearms, banned or not, and they will still be able to get magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. These are facts and have been demonstrated time and again. The Columbine shootings happened in the middle of the last “assault weapons” ban so it would appear as if the ban did not work.
It is important to emphasize the point that laws do not keep criminals from doing bad things. The overarching thing to remember when it is reported that someone murdered people with a gun is that MURDER IS ILLEGAL. If laws against murder are not obeyed what makes anyone think laws banning the instruments used by criminals will be obeyed?
The very people who want to ban firearms are against the death penalty. They claim that the death penalty does not deter crime. That is an issue for another time but someone please tell me, if the death penalty is not a deterrent how will a gun ban deter criminals from using guns to do bad things?
This whole anti American bill from Feinstein and her cohorts is nothing but a move to further control people’s lives. Millions of gun owners do not commit crimes each day but they suffer for the criminals who do.
We have not banned banks to prevent bank robberies. We have not banned cars or alcohol to prevent drunk driving. We have not banned forks to prevent obesity but somehow banning guns will prevent gun crime.
Gun control is not about guns, it is about control.
[note]References:
Washington Times
Weekly Standard
CBS San Fran
Daily Caller
Guns Save Lives
Reason
State Department Memo 7277, September 1961[/note]
MOLON LABE
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Tags: criminals, dianne feinstein, gun ban, lies, oath breaker, Second Amendment