Friday, May 27, 2016

This West Point Instructor Just Issued a Call to the Military to Overthrow Obama…

EVICTION 
 Tuesday, December 8, 2015 


Who can blame a West Point instructor, a man of honor who has served his nation faithfully, for suggesting in a law review article that the military should overthrow the treasonous Obama, and put him where he belongs: In Leavenworth, awaiting a trial for treason, where if convicted, he can pick between the gallows or a firing squad? It’s not like there isn’t support for the idea among every day Americans either.

In a recent poll, 1/3 of Americans Said They Would Support Military Coup of the Obama Administration. That doesn’t even include the millions who have no idea the extent of the President’s treachery because the mainstream media is in lock step with him, and constantly provides him with cover. If the American people knew that a Top Obama Appointee (Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency), Said “The President Knowingly and Willingly Armed ISIS,” how many more would agree? What if they knew a Four Star Admiral with intimate details of Benghazi accused Obama of Treason, Colluding With the Enemy, and Providing the Enemy with Stinger Missiles? Then there’s also a Lieutenant General who has accused Obama of Treason saying he’s allowed the Muslim Brotherhood to infect every level of government, and then what if the American people heard what a former CIA Director, and a former Assistant Director of the FBI had to say about Obama? I bet that 1/3 of Americans would be closer to 2/3 of Americans. Why? Those are some very credible sources who have come forward but conveniently been covered up by Obama’s Crime Inc., and the media.

It’s not just domestically that people want Obama tried for treason. In the first video below, and Egyptian reporter goes bonkers:

“We’ve said to them a million times, and we are still saying… Obama the liar, the ally of the terrorists, I call him a liar. He’s a liar. He is the ally of the terrorists, and this Obama deserves to stand trial!” Watch the video to see what he says about the American people for falling for Obama’s nonsense… 

 This vdeo not avilable here.



In the second video, Alex Jones goes through a laundry list of items Obama is guilty of treason for, and both above, and after the article about the West Point Instructor are even MORE examples of Obama’s clear-cut treason. If he doesn’t eventually flee the country as the sniveling little worm of a coward that he is, eventually, I believe we’ll get the justice we deserve for what Obama has “knowingly and willingly” done to this country, using his own appointees words. 


 
 

A former West Point instructor who has called for American critics of the “war on terror” to be imprisoned or executed as traitors suggests that the U.S. military would be hailed as the “constitutional and political savior” of the country if it overthrew the civilian government – and a surprisingly large number of Americans may agree with him.

Legal scholar William C. Bradford, who was forced to resign from his position as an instructor of law at West Point in August, has privately circulated a draft of an unpublished law review article entitled “Alea Iacta Est: The U.S. Coup of 2017.” An abstract of that essay posted to Bradford’s LinkedIn page adumbrates a scenario in which a U.S. president – presumably, Barack Obama – becomes an undisguised “tyrant” who must be replaced by a military junta.

“What if the American people were to elect a president who want[s] to destroy the nation and works to create division among the people, encourage a culture of ridicule for basic morality and the principles that made and sustained the country, undermine the financial stability of the nation, and weaken and destroy the military?” Bradford writes. “What remedies, if any, did the Framers commend to us in the event a tyrant should every assume the presidency? Do the people have the right to resist a tyrant, and does that really hold any prospect of success without the support of the military? Does the U.S. military have the right or even the duty to intervene in the domestic politics of the United States as constitutional and political savior when the times require it, and who makes that determination?… Is such a duty incumbent upon the U.S. Armed Forces at present?”(Emphasis added.)

The title of Bradford’s essay might be an allusion to a previous treatment of a similar theme:
Brig. Gen. Charles J. Dunlap’s essay “The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012,” which was published in the Winter 1992—93 issue of the U.S. Army War College journal Parameters. Where Bradford appears to believe that a coup might be a “duty” incumbent on the military, Gen. Dunlap – writing from a constitutionalist, rather than praetorian, perspective – was clearly alarmed by what he saw as an entirely plausible scenario.

Dunlap used the literary device of a smuggled prison letter composed by “Prisoner 222305759,” condemned to death for “treason” by military ruler Gen. E.T. Brutus. Following a series of military disasters overseas and domestic crises at home, Brutus, acting on concerns very similar to those spelled out by Bradford (or, for that matter, described in Robert Heinlein’s premonitory novel Starship Troopers), staged a coup in the name of protecting “public order” from the corruption of the political class.

In the decades leading up to the putsch, the unnamed Prisoner recalled, “The one institution of government in which people retained faith was the military.” Even as the public lamented the corruption and profligacy of Big Government, they had nothing but bottomless respect for the Regime’s chief instrument of death and property destruction. The military retained its prestige in spite of the fact that its structural defects — made painfully visible by a long, bloody, and futile war in the Gulf — left it “unfit to engage an authentic military opponent.”

While the military was no longer well-suited to fight and win wars, its subtle integration into every element of domestic life made it perfectly suited to carry out a coup:
“Eventually, people became acclimated to seeing uniformed military personnel patrolling their neighborhood. Now [meaning 2012 in the essay’s timeline] troops are an adjunct to almost all police forces in the country. In many of the areas where much of our burgeoning population of elderly Americans live — [military dictator] Brutus calls them ‘National Security Zones’ — the military is often the only law enforcement agency. Consequently, the military was ideally positioned in thousands of communities to support the coup.”
Although 2012 passed without an overt military takeover, Dunlap’s projection of trends – especially the disastrous long-term military entanglement in the Middle East, the expanding role of the Pentagon in routine domestic law enforcement, and the pervasive cultural presence of the military in everyday American life — has proven to be uncannily prescient. The same is true of the apparently inexhaustible respect and public deference enjoyed by the military, despite widespread and deepening disillusionment with nearly every other branch of government.

A recent YouGov survey of 1000 people posed the question: “Is there any situation in which you could imagine yourself supporting the U.S. military taking over the powers of [the] federal government?” Nearly one-third of the respondents – thirty percent – answered in the affirmative, with 43 percent of Republicans (as opposed to twenty percent of Democrats) endorsing undisguised military rule.
The poll also found that a substantially higher percentage of respondents (70 percent) believed that military officers want what’s best for the country than police officers (55 percent). This result is broadly reminiscent of public opinion in Egypt during the 2011 uprising that overthrew long-ruling U.S. puppet dictator Hosni Mubarak – and eventually resulted in the installation of a brutal military-led junta ruled by General Abdel al-Sisi. The impenitent corruption and relentless brutality of the Egyptian police led many of that country’s citizens to believe, in the words of protester Mustafa Abdel Wahab, that “The army is all good men by the police, every policeman is bad.”
.
As the protests spread, observed Steve Coll of The New Yorker, reports proliferated “that protesters are relieved to see the Army in the streets; no doubt, as in many other like countries, the Army has more credibility than the corrupt and often torture-prone police.”
What Egyptians tragically failed to understand – and what many Americans, who have less excuse, are forgetting – is that the police and army are what Alexander Hamilton called “correspondent appendages of military establishments.” In the Federalist, essay number eight, Hamilton, who was no light touch when it came to the exercise of executive power, warned that military bodies (which include police agencies) “have a tendency to destroy … civil and political rights.”
Decades of “emergency” rule in Egypt destroyed whatever trivial substantive differences may once have separated the police from the military, and when the former were discredited a desperate public was manipulated into embracing the latter as “saviors in uniform.”

Although the privations and abuses experienced by Americans have not generally been as severe as those inflicted on the long-suffering subjects of Egypt’s police state, the country has endured a variant of emergency rule since creation of the national security state in 1946 – which was radically deepened and expanded after the incident that should be memorialized as Government Failure Day, September 11, 2001. A crisis of similar magnitude could very easily lead to the consummation of the military coup Gen. Dunlap dreaded, and William C. Bradford eagerly awaits.




VIDEO: Innocent Man Stands Up To Entire SWAT Team Raiding His Home With No Warrant





SEYMOUR JOHNSON AIR FORCE BASE, N.C.—A Duplin County Sheriff’s Office special response team member prepares to break down a door during a training exercise here, April 5, 2011. The 4th Security Forces Squadron and the Duplin County Sheriff’s Office special response team members completed a joint operation training exercise to improve their tactical skills. The Duplin County Sheriff’s Office is located in Kenansville. (U.S. Air Force photo/Senior Airman Whitney Lambert) (RELEASED) 


May 11, 2016   

SEYMOUR JOHNSON AIR FORCE BASE, N.C.—A Duplin County Sheriff’s Office special response team member prepares to break down a door during a training exercise here, April 5, 2011. The 4th Security Forces Squadron and the Duplin County Sheriff’s Office special response team members completed a joint operation training exercise to improve their tactical skills. The Duplin County Sheriff’s Office is located in Kenansville. (U.S. Air Force photo/Senior Airman Whitney Lambert) (RELEASED)




Odessa, TX — On Thursday morning, an Odessa man and his family were rudely awakened by a dozen militarized DEA and SWAT officers with AR-15s at their front door. Instead of cowering to the men who were clearly not authorized to be there, this man stood his ground and sent them on their way.
“We were rudely awakened, they just started banging on the door,” said the man who wishes to remain anonymous in an interview with KEPJ News, “I just didn’t like the way they did it.”

Ector County SWAT team was assisting the DEA in a raid on Tripp Avenue when they simply decided to move to the next house and attempt to enter without a warrant. The next house belonged to this innocent man, who was angered by such a vulgar display of incompetent power.
READ-BREAKING NEWS-Government Quietly Admits to Weather Modification Program

official MintPress sponsor
As the SWAT team tries to enter the man’s home without a warrant, he began filming and giving them a piece of his mind.

After their verbal beating, the cops finally left but not before one of them flipped him off.

On Friday, while speaking with KPEJ, the agency released the following statement regarding the matter:

“On May 5, 2016, agents from the Drug Enforcement Administration executed a federal search warrant on Tripp Avenue. During the course of this same investigation, agents contacted (the resident) who resides at a nearby residence. (The resident) was uncooperative with the agents so they departed the premises without incident.”


 
 
0  

ARTICLE-MARTIAL LAW WARNING: To All Americans GOV Will Move Up Citizens Into FEMA Camps 2016-Find The FEMA Camp Nearest You
Tabatha Werkmeister, Grinage Dion Wilson and their four young children, ages 2 through 9 were subject to violent militarized men kicking in their door in a predawn raid in January of last year. These armed men threw a smoke bomb into their home and forced the family, who was barefoot and in their pajamas, into the 20-degree snowy weather outside. To provide them with a bit of police state comfort, they were forced into the back of an unheated SWAT vehicle for nearly an hour before the SWAT team realized they were at the wrong home.
When you turn on the news and you hear a story about an innocent family being attacked in their home, do you feel safe? I know I sure didn’t for the longest time. I always worried 0it would happen to my family, to my children. What would I do if confronted with a life or death situation? I honestly didn’t know. I liked to think I would save my family, but a tragedy that happened in my home state got me thinking how lucky I was that it hadn’t been me. So I decided I needed to change that. Thus began my long journey into the study and mastery of self-defense.
I tried many programs, trainers, systems, and products from all over the world. I tried programs made by MMA fighters, by Kung Fu artists, by Boxers, and more. But it wasn’t until I found the Patriot’s Self-Defense Program that I truly felt I could keep my wife and kids safe through anything. Click Here To Download Patriot Self Defense 

Matt Agorist is the co-founder of TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared. He is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world.

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Should We Fear Islam? Czech Parliament /Euope is under siege

Europe is under siege by hords of people whoes basic deology is very foreign and totally incomprehensible to the Judaeo-Christian psyche.  In the Western world we  protect our children from harm of any kind and try to prepared them to prosper in life, hoping their child has a better life than they had.  The Muslim parent that wants the best for their child prepares him for the afterlife, which can only be achieved through death fighting for Islam.  An other totally different attitude concerns women.  They accept the premise that women are at the same level as farm animals.   A woman is not considered human.



The Western nations are faced with a choice.  Accept Islam and submit to all its ways or stand and fight it just like we did with the horrors of past despotic ideologies of Italian fascism, fascist Nazism, Japanese Imperialism, and Communism.


John Roberts' Obamacare


Published on Jun 16, 2015
The steps leading to the downfall of a once prosperous Czechoslovakia have been identified by scholars as the blueprint for a Marxist-Leninist takeover through peaceful means. The same steps have been at work in all parts of the free world. The symptoms of this vanishing democracy are:

1. Internationally: The agonizing atmosphere of "Munich," which rejects the responsibilities of collective security and maintains the conception that democracies can save their existence by appeasing the power appetite of totalitarian aggressors.

2. Nationally: The delusive thinking of conscience-stricken democratic leaders who believe that constant concessions to aggressive minority groups manipulating nationality against nationality, class against class, race against race, and threatening with violence and revolution will bring about, in the long run, the desired equilibrium of order and justice in the country.

3. Legislatively: Hasty laws of broad social and economic reforms by old-fashioned politicians that imitate the so-called successful socialist countries, undermine the upper and middle-class backbone of the country, and gradually replace the initiative of a free enterprise system with the bitter impotence of a mushrooming bureaucracy.

4. Administratively: The creation of a deceptive coalition (national front) virtually functioning as an instrument of international Communism to brainwash the population, infiltrate public offices, and channel all organs of federal and state power toward a Communist takeover.

5. Judicially: Institutionalized permissiveness with an unchallenged growth of criminality leading to out-right plundering of entire regions and conditioning the public to a feeling of general insecurity and fear.

6. Morally: Common rejection of absolute values such as truth, honesty, decency, patriotism, as outlived and impractical, especially among the youth brought up under the impact of an unprincipled progressive education.

7. Spiritually: General abandonment of the Judeo--Christian belief in a life under God and man's responsibilities as a free moral agent, alternated by seductive demagoguery of materialist humanism and secular collectivism.

Many countries in our present world find themselves in the wrecking process that Czechoslovakia went through before February '948. They are headed down the bankrupt road of a one-party political system, to bureaucratic socialism, materialist humanism, and collective cynicism.


http://www.marianland.com/bromlibor/w...

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Jesuit priest: Islam is “violent throughout its entire history” out of “obedience to the Law of Allah”

quran2 
  By



Another Jesuit strays off the reservation. No matter how ruthlessly Pope Francis and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops work to suppress any challenge to their new iron dogma that Islam is a Religion of Peace (which they appear to believe in more fervently than they do their own creed, as they enforce adherence to it much more strictly), reality keeps breaking though their fog of disinformation. What will they do? No doubt work all the harder to make sure that voices that challenge their ridiculous fantasies do not get heard.

“Let them alone; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)
“Have I then become your enemy by telling you the truth?” (Galatians 4:16)


…we recall recent events from “9/11”, the bombings in Spain, England, Mumbai, Bali, Fort Hood, San Bernardino, twice in Paris, Lahore, and Brussels, not to mention the persecutions and beheadings in Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen, Nigeria, Libya, Somalia, Chad, Syria, and the Sunni/Shiite inner-Muslim battles. What is the most plausible way to judge such continuing violence and its origins? To make this assessment, we have to acknowledge that Islam, in principle, is actually and potentially violent throughout its entire history. The basic reason for this method is obedience to the Law of Allah, not love for violence itself.

On the basis of evidence and theory, we cannot conclude from the fact that Islam is a “religion” that therefore it is not “violent” or is so only by abuse of its own founding. It is possible to be a religion and to espouse violence. (Were this not so, we would have to exclude many key passages on the Old Testament itself.) We cannot obscure what is there and affirmed to be there by Muslims themselves. Realism means that we can and should call what happens by its proper name. It also means that, if we cannot or will not make this proper naming, we are not realistic. We will inevitably suffer the consequences of our failure to state the truth of what is there.

These things are said not to promote counter violence against Muslims or to justify Muslim violence against others. Rather it is to respect Islam’s insistence that all those inside and outside of its enclosure be subject to the law of the Prophet. Whether we like it or not, this vision of world rule that is proper to Islam can only be called “religious” in nature. It is rooted in and promoted as a worship of the god called Allah. Not to take this wording seriously is unrealistic. The Muslims who claim that they can read their religious texts as if such violence is not advocated and justified may be applauded for trying to mitigate the historic record. But the fact is that those who see this violence as essential to the religion have the better side of the argument and are the better witnesses to what historic Islam stands for.


II.
What is argued here, then, is not to be unfairly “critical” of Islam. On the contrary, it is written with considerable admiration for the zeal, consistency, and effectiveness displayed over the centuries by Islamic armies and law. And while it may be politically incorrect to state these things, they need to be stated and are in fact the truth—things that both Muslims and non-Muslims need to hear and consider. The designated and determined goal of the conquest of the world for Allah has been reinvigorated again and again in world history from the time of Mohammed in the seventh century. These revivals and expansions, which have only been temporarily halted by superior counterforce, have roots in the Qur’an itself and in its commentaries.

What we witness today, much to our surprise, is but another step in the historic world mission that Islam envisions for itself as the will of Allah, a goal that inspires the real and recurrent vigor that is found in its history. The reason we do not call it what it is lies not in Islam but in our own very different concepts of philosophy, religion, and law. In this sense, it is our own culture that often prevents us from being ourselves political realists.

Many believing Muslims, likely more than we are willing to admit, are tired and frustrated at having their religion’s principles denied. Outside observers are unwilling to believe or imagine that what Muslim advocates say about themselves, both in their founding texts and in their historic actions, is true. World conquest over time is what they hold must be achieved.

In other words, whether they be Muslim or otherwise, many people refuse to acknowledge that violence is proposed and carried out in the name of Islam. Outside Islam, it is called by the peculiar word “terrorism”. It is rarely called what it is, namely, a religious endeavor to conquer the world as an act of piety. Muslims, in this central tradition, are not “terrorists” just for the fun of it. That is insulting and resented. They practice what we call “terror” because they see themselves carrying out the will of Allah, even sometimes to their own death in doing so. Those who, in the process, kill “infidels”—that is, any non-Muslim or Muslim who does not accept true Islam—is considered to be a “martyr” to the cause of Islam. Only if Islam is not true can these ritual killings be seen as the objective evil that they are.

A subtle philosophic theory (called “voluntarism”) purports to justify this usage of what we call terror for religious purposes. The principle of contradiction cannot hold in a “revelation” that contains, in its texts, contradictory commands, as does the Qur’an. Allah then must become pure will, not bound by Logos or reason. Hence Allah is not limited by any distinction of good and evil. The Muslim blasphemy laws that threaten with death anyone who violates this claim arise from this source.

Allah’s mandate to Islam is progressively to subject the world to his will and to the law based on it. Terror will end and true “peace” will result only when all are submissive to Allah and live under Muslim law in all its details. What we outside of Islam call acts of violence are considered within it to be the carrying out of Allah’s will. Gruesome beheadings of Christians, however innocent, are seen as acts of justice. They are acts of “virtue” in this sense. The people who cannot understand this religious charge given to Islam, whether they be themselves Muslim or not, are themselves both unrealistic and dangerous. Their own presuppositions prevent them from recognizing and judging the real issue. They also prevents them from doing anything effective to hinder this expansion of Islam into Europe, Asia, Africa, and America….


We see well-equipped modern armies, with inept and not seeing political leadership and with little motivation of forces, out-fought by young armed zealots in pick-up trucks who can, with their followers, threaten every train station and public building in Europe, Africa, Asia, and America. As they planned, they have managed to turn the whole world into a battleground of fear. The cry “Allah be praised!” is heard after every act of destruction. It is quite clear by now, or should be, that no cultural artifacts—be they books, buildings, statues, or paintings—will be allowed to exist. They are seen to be contrary to Allah’s will, no matter what they are or when created. In this sense, the Pyramids, the Buddhist statues, the library in Timbuktu, the Vatican, and the monasteries in the deserts, Canterbury, the towers in New York, the kosher markets in Paris, and the airports in Brussels are equally subject to destruction. Everything must be protected because everything is now threatened.

Not only are individual Christians eradicated but so are the statues of their saints. The reason for this destruction is “religious”. Such things ought not to exist. We have here a literal application of the belief that nothing should be allowed public or private space that does not correspond with strict Muslim beliefs. Provisional tolerance of Christians and Jews if they accept second class citizenship and pay heavy fines is merely temporary until the conquest is complete. Such zealous destruction to do the will of Allah, in other words, is considered to be an act of piety. If someone is going to oppose such acts, it cannot be done on the grounds of opposition to “terror” or that it is unreasonable. Ultimately, it depends, as Augustine learned with the Donatists, on a conversion and rejection of the theology that justifies it.
 
IV.

Whether Islam, in its origins, is a rereading of Jewish, Nestorian, and Christian texts (as it probably is) can be disputed. First, Islam claims to be a literal revelation of what is in the mind or being of Allah. In this sense, what is in the text must always remain in the text. It cannot be changed or “reinterpreted” to leave out those multiple passages that propose and justify violence in the name of the expansion of this religion. This advocacy of violence, which has been practiced in Islam from its seventh century beginning, has a purpose. This purpose is, ultimately, religious and pious. Whether the Muslim notion of “heaven,” where its martyrs go, is primarily this-worldly or transcendent, can also be disputed. In any case, the concept of heaven is very earthy sounding. This picture is not, as such, an argument against its truth.

The message contained in the Qur’an is that the world should bow in submissive worship to Allah. This purpose abides and recurs over the centuries because it is there in the text. Men may temporarily neglect its zealous pursuit, but the text itself always contains the mission for others to find and pursue. There will always be those who realize that the mission of world conquest in the name of Allah is not complete. This realization is why, so long as it exists unrefuted, the Qur’an will always produce what we call “terrorists”. What we see now is little different from what has been seen throughout the centuries wherever Islam is found.
In this view, the world is divided into an area of peace and an area of war. The former is where the law of Allah rules politically, religiously, and culturally, where no other philosophy or faith has any right to be present. All signs of alien religion, art, artifact, and people are eliminated through forced conversion or death. Sometimes, Christians and Jews can be allowed to stay alive provided that they accept second class citizenship and pay taxes. This situation, in practice, is the basic constitutional rule in all existing Muslim states, even in those that reject ISIS or other approaches to eventual conquest of the world. Once Islam has conquered, it has always followed the same principles. In its history, certain famous battles have turned back Muslim conquests for a time, sometimes for centuries. But this relative inertness is only on the surface. As long as the book exists, its goals will again and again inflame prophets, imams, politicians, and the young men to recommence the conquest of the rest of the world.

In conclusion, what is argued here in terms of political realism is that we must understand the religious nature of Islamic expansion and the methods used to achieve it. By trying to abstract these motivation from the soul of this particular religion, which is, on this score, unlike most others, only makes it impossible to describe what in fact is going on in the mind of the adversary that is Islam. Wars are first fought in minds—and this is a war. It is not World War III; rather, it is an extension of the wars that Mohammed first launched against Byzantium, Persia, Syria, eventually North Africa, even to India, Spain, the and Balkans.
The Muslim protagonists of today realize how close they were several times in the past to conquering Europe as the next step in world conquest. What they see today is a very realistic opportunity to succeed where their ancestors failed. They, though also idealists, are (often unlike ourselves) realists. That is, they see what our minds really hold. And they see that they are largely empty of what really counts in this world: a true conception of God. Their only fault is that of choosing a false understanding of the real God. Aside from this “small” issue, one cannot help but admire, and fear, a blind faith that so abides over time and place without the real presence of the Logos whose incarnate presence in the world is explicitly denied.


Monday, May 23, 2016

Colombia cracks down on a horrific wave of acid attacks against women

Colombia’s wave of acid attacks is a relative anomaly in Latin America, where the tactic remains rare — despite entrenched sexism and high levels of violence against women across the region. Perpetrators are overwhelmingly men, while victims are mostly women.

Acid throwing is common in India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Cambodia and Uganda. But the place where the trend has received the most international attention is Pakistan, where at least 160 attacks were reported in 2014 and as many in the first four months of 2015.

Yet in Colombia, the annual number of acid attacks is around 100, according to one prominent activist — which would make the per capita rate in the South American country, with its 48 million population, nearly twice that of Pakistan, where 199 million people live. (These are incomplete figures, however, which could only tell part of the story.)

As he signed the bill, Santos paid tribute to the victims, saying: “Despite the human misery that is hidden behind these acts, it is admirable to see how in the end the inner strength in the souls and hearts of the victims triumphs.”

Previously, Colombian law treated acid attacks as causing “personal injuries” rather than being intentional violent crimes, meaning attackers faced light sentences. In practice, just a handful of perpetrators were ever even put on trial.
Meanwhile, the country keeps no national archive of victims, and many women don’t even report their injuries as being the result of an acid attack, making it impossible to know the true extent of the horror.

Gina Potes was thought to be Colombia’s first acid attack victim, back in 1996. She now runs a foundation to help victims called Reconstruyendo Rostros — Spanish for "Rebuilding Faces" — and welcomed the measure.
“This is something that we have been working for for a long time,” she told GlobalPost. “It is very satisfying to see it finally pass into law. At long last, the authorities are taking this terrible crime seriously.”

But she also warned that more needs to be done, calling for the state to provide medical and psychological treatment for victims, and support as they rebuild shattered lives.

 “There are so many victims who are vulnerable and who are alone, who can’t even afford the bus fare to see a doctor never mind the medical fees,” added Potes, 39, who has undergone 26 reconstructive surgeries since her attack. “And, of course, the law is not retroactive so this won’t bring justice to those people who have already been hurt and had their lives torn apart.”

Experts believe the root of Colombia’s problem lies in a dangerous cocktail of misogynistic attitudes ingrained in mainstream culture and high levels of violence following a half-century civil war that killed more than 200,000. That conflict is only coming to an end now through painfully slow peace talks between the government and the armed Marxist rebels of the group known as FARC.

One obvious historic marker of the country’s patriarchal culture is that women did not get the right to vote until 1954 — trailing some 20 of Colombia’s regional neighbors in Latin America which had already hit that milestone.

Potes says 87% of Colombia’s acid attack victims are women, while 90% of perpetrators are men. “Usually it is someone from the victim’s inner circle, a husband or the father of her children, who cannot accept being turned down or left,” she says. “The attitude is ‘If I can’t have you, then no one else can either.’”

But it’s not just spurned partners who carry out the attacks. In one prominent 2013 case, a construction worker took exception to industrial inspector Elizabeth Ruales, 38, telling him to use proper safety methods, and threw a bucket of acid at her, burning her face, neck, arms and legs.

Her attacker was eventually given an 18-month suspended sentence after the judge ruled that the man was “not a threat to society.”

That kind of jaw-dropping leniency now appears to be over. But even more than harsh punishments for acid attackers, activists like Potes hope that attitude changes in Colombia will make this horrific crime a thing of the past.

This article originally appeared on GlobalPost. Its content was created separately to USA TODAY.

BREAKING: Armed Black Panthers Are Now Terrorizing Neighborhoods In THIS State [PICS]

taking-pictures-470x357 
 Posted by /




That is the welcoming motto of the Huey P. Newton Gun Club of Dallas, Texas. Not just an oppressed person of color, but an oppressed gun-wielding black Baby Huey. This is the brain-child of Charles Goodson and Darren X. The former is a wannabe Bob Marley plus gun, and the latter is the National Field Marshal for the New Black Panther Party.




darren-x-470x731 

“The complete agenda involves going into our communities and educating our people on federal, state and local gun laws. We want to stop fratricide, genocide—all the ‘cides.”
Fratricide? Is there a spate of nuclear family sibling homicide in the black community? They are retarded. In truth, the last people you want wandering around with guns are the mentally disabled. Compound this with the retards being members of this little gun club and neighborhoods in Texas have a problem on their hands.






march-participant-470x714 


Hopefully they are educating themselves on gun laws….as in, you point one at somebody and chances are that a Texan has a bigger one to point straight back at ya’.

gonzalez-470x738 

outside-house-470x350 


Where is Obama and Lynch on this?  Nowhere to be found. These are the faces of voter intimidation, racial division, and reasons to kill white cops. These are their friends.

The Lone Star state is the bellwether call the rest of us ought to be paying attention to. They have had their fair share of problems of late, from clock-bomb kid, Sharia courts, Nidal Hassan at Fort Hood, to the killing of Deputy Darren Goforth, and now this.

interview1-470x347 

Get it together Texas, or you are going to be facing another Alamo. Sadly, you can’t count on the nation, under the direction of this president, to avenge you this time around.

Media Blackout In Venezuela

 Media Blackout In Venezuela

Home, News, world truth February 20, 2014 0 Comments




Dear International Editor:

Listen and understand. The game changed in Venezuela last night.What had been a slow-motion unravelling that had stretched out over many years went kinetic all of a sudden.
What we have this morning is no longer the Venezuela story you thought you understood.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Throughout last night, panicked people told their stories of state-sponsored paramilitaries on motorcycles roaming middle class neighborhoods, shooting at people and storming into apartment buildings, shooting at anyone who seemed like he might be protesting. People continue to be arrested merely for protesting, and a long established local Human Rights NGO makes an urgent plea for an investigation into widespread reports of torture of detainees. There are now dozens of serious human right abuses: National Guardsmen shooting tear gas canisters directly into residential buildings. We have videos of soldiers shooting civilians on the street. And that’s just what came out in real time, over Twitter and YouTube, before any real investigation is carried out. Online media is next, a city of 645,000 inhabitants has been taken off the internet amid mounting repression, and this blog itself has been the object of a Facebook “block” campaign.
 
 
 
 
 
 
What we saw were not “street clashes”, what we saw is a state-hatched offensive to suppress and terrorize its opponents.

After the major crackdown on the streets of major (and minor) Venezuelan cities last night, I expected some kind of response in the major international news outlets this morning. I understand that with an even bigger and more photogenic freakout ongoing in an even more strategically important country, we weren’t going to be front-page-above-the-fold, but I’m staggered this morning to wake up, scan the press and find…

Nothing.

As of 11 a.m. this morning, the New York Times World Section has…nothing.
 
 
 

Charlotte Observer: Girls Must Overcome ‘Discomfort’ of Seeing ‘Male Genitalia’ in Locker Rooms



shower-girls-penis



bigstock-Young-Girl-Crying-and-Upset-25718201  Charlotte Observer: Girls Must Overcome ‘Discomfort’ of Seeing ‘Male Genitalia’ in Locker Rooms bigstock Young Girl Crying and Upset 25718201Thanks to the “progress” made by “progressives” in government, the media and the SJW movement we, as a nation, are quickly approaching the point of losing our collective minds and turning the country into the living embodiment of a Far Side cartoon. There is currently no better example of this than the ongoing debate taking place in North Carolina over the question of whether or not men (and I am tired of using the redundant, needless phrase biological men) should be allowed in public bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms and showers with women and young girls. [5] A leading North Carolina newspaper issued an editorial last week telling girls to attempt “overcoming discomfort” at the sight of “male genitalia,” should transgender bathroom laws be enacted.  In a defense of President Obama’s order compelling schools to allow access to restrooms on the basis of gender identity, the Charlotte Observer editorial board compared the discomfort of school-aged girls seeing male genitalia in locker rooms to the discomfort of white people being around black people in post-segregation America. [1] The newspaper assumes the law will eventually be repealed or declared illegal. While that may or may not happen any time soon, it is the justification for this position used by the Observer that reveals the true nature of this battle of the bathroom. [2] 


Washington Times:
“This is what the Obama administration nudged the rest of the country toward Friday,” the editorial said. “Yes, the thought of male genitalia in girls’ locker rooms — and vice versa — might be distressing to some. But the battle for equality has always been in part about overcoming discomfort — with blacks sharing facilities, with gays sharing marriage — then realizing it was not nearly so awful as some people imagined.” [1]
Writing at The American Thinker, Rick Moran throws some much needed cold water on the idea that this is anything in the same zip code as “normal” or that it’s some sort of parallel to racial inequity.
The notion that the Obama administration is “nudging” anything is laughable. The Obama Justice Department is shoving this rule down the throats of Americans, most of whom oppose the policy.  How is this issue remotely connected to race relations? It isn’t, but gullible Americans will believe it, despite the disconnect from reality. Black and white people did not choose their race. By its very definition, transgendered people choose their gender identity. That’s a monumental difference hidden in this politically correct message. [2]
Rick is absolutely correct and little more on that specific aspect of the discussion needs to be said. The era of segregation saw people of different races being herded into separate facilities, with those provided for minorities frequently being of lesser quality if they were available at all. And, as he notes, no one ever gave a black person the “choice” to be white instead. In this farcical debate, even in facilities which only provide the two, traditional, gender specific accommodations, everyone is offered the same services and they are only separated for reasons of privacy, comfort and safety. Comparing this debate to race relations is a dishonest attempt to deliberately cloud the issue. [5] 
 
While admitting that exposure to male genitalia is a possible outcome of transgender bathroom laws, the editorial said the notion that such laws constitute a threat to the privacy and safety of women and children is a “political fiction” pushed by Republicans.  “Those safety issues are political fiction — non-transgender men wouldn’t have been allowed in women’s bathrooms under the Charlotte ordinance that HB 2 killed, and the 200 or so cities with similar ordinances have had no incidents involving bathroom predators,” the editorial said. [1]  Liberals believe that attacks by men in women’s rooms will be rare, so it’s ok – except,of course, for the parents of a young girl who is molested on one of those “rare” occassions.   But “progress” demands we make those kinds of sacrifices, you ignorant hillbillies.   When a man exposes himself on the street in front of a teenage girl, the police always offer the services of a psychologist to the young woman to help her deal with the trauma of seeing a male penis. Liberals will claim the context is different in a locker room or bathroom. That’s nonsense. To a teenage girl, a penis is a penis and context is meaningless. But to the Charlotte Observer and the Obama administration, teenage girls being exposed to the sight of male genitals is something to be “overcome.” In this lunatic world, we place the burden of transgender progress on young girls, telling them to just get over it. [2] 

President Obama issued a legally nonbinding order on Friday compelling schools to allow bathroom access on the basis of gender identity, or risk losing federal education funding. Several states have promised to oppose the decree.  The U.S. Department of Justice has sued the state of North Carolina over a law regulating public restroom access on the basis of biological sex. [1] 

 ————————-
[1] Bradford Richardson, Charlotte Observer: Girls must overcome ‘discomfort’ of seeing ‘male genitalia’ in locker rooms, The Washington Times, Wednesday, May 18, 2016
[3] Claire Chretien, Girls must get over their ‘discomfort’ at seeing male genitals in locker room: Charlotte Observer, Life Site News, Fri May 20, 2016 – 3:48 pm EST

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Islamic Cleric: “We want to invade America and the Christians will die” 




While the Obama Administration and their liberal media crows try to convince the world that Islam is a religion of peace, on the other side of the world anybody who turns on a television or knows anything about the religion of Islam is laughing.

If you go to the video on the next page, you’ll see an Islamic Cleric on a talk show, speaking the truth about the Islamic Jihad. And all of the fears that President Obama claims to be false, are suddenly proven right.

The Cleric goes on to say that when Muslims invade America, they will offer us three choices, convert to Islam, pay a tax or fight. Those that refuse will be killed and have their women sold into sex slavery.

Talk about taking a walk back to the dark ages. How is it that Americans are preaching the value of tolerating a religion that wants to do something like that? It goes against all of the principles America was founded on.

 The video below is like watching an Islamic version of The View. The cleric is obnoxious and thinks he’s above the guy asking the questions just because he’s a scholar. Though what he says is interesting and frightening, he’s still somewhat annoying.

The evidence is right there, which leads me to believe that President Obama has never actually had a conversation with a devout Muslim. So why is he trying so hard to protect them if they obviously have it out for us? The United States has reached a point where it’s beyond dangerous to have a man like him in office. Denying that Islam is dangerous after watching that video is like denying somebody stole from a supermarket, despite having security footage of the act.