Read more: Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/forget-homeland-security-now-its-about-environmental-justice#ixzz1tW9iOqn4 Under Creative Commons License: Attribution It is the nature of any government to seek to expand its authority. The Founding Fathers knew this and gifted Americans with a Constitution that limits authority devolving it to the states and to “the people.” Read the Tenth Amendment. It isn’t working. […]
Billions to Terror, But It’s For Your Safety
Read more: Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/billions-to-terror-but-its-for-your-safety#ixzz1tW8AEAZd
The AFP reported on Friday,
President Barack Obama has signed a waiver to remove curbs on funding to the Palestinian Authority, declaring the aid to be “important to the security interests of the United States.”
We need first to understand that the US Congress froze a $192 million aid package to the Palestinian Authority last September after Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas defied the US and sought to attain UN endorsement of Palestinian statehood.
The Department of State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2012 states under section 7040 (a) PROHIBITION OF FUNDS,
None of the funds appropriated by this Act. may be obligated or expended with respect to providing funds to the Palestinian Authority.
Section 7040 (b) WAIVER states,
The prohibition included in subsection (a) shall not apply if the President certifies in writing to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President pro tempore of the Senate, and the Committees on Appropriations that waiving such prohibition is important to the national security interests of the United States.
In simple English, section ‘a’, “no funds to the Palestinian Authority” may be ‘waived’ according to section ‘b’ if “it is important to the national security interests of the United States.”
Obama has now signed a waiver and instructed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to inform Congress accordingly.
By citing section ‘b’ the ‘waiver’ Obama signed circumvents Congress and releases all funds immediately,
MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE
SUBJECT: Waiver of Restriction on Providing Funds to the Palestinian Authority
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 7040(b) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2012 (Division I, Public Law 112-74) (the “Act”), I hereby certify that it is important to the national security interests of the United States to waive the provisions of section 7040(a) of the Act, in order to provide funds appropriated to carry out Chapter 4 of Part II of the Foreign Assistance Act, as amended, to the Palestinian Authority.
BARACK OBAMA
Iranian naval admiral: ‘If needed, we can move to within three miles of New York’
Read more: Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/iranian-naval-admiral-if-needed-we-can-move-to-within-three-miles-of-new-york?f=must_reads#ixzz1tW7Rvhf8
The Islamic Republic of Iran said Tuesday that it has the ability to position a naval vessel within three miles of the East Coast of the United States.
“The power of our naval forces is such that we have a presence in all the waters of the world and, if needed, we can move to within three miles of New York,” Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi said Tuesday during a speech to the students of the University of Yazd in Iran. His remarks were quoted by an Iranian student news agency.
This naval saber rattling represents a stark escalation in Iran’s war rhetoric, as the West weighs the question of whether to impose new economic sanctions or directly attack the Islamic regime’s illicit nuclear facilities.
“The Americans’ only tool to rule the world is their naval dominance of the Persian Gulf,” Fadavi added, “and they will face any other power that threatens their status.”
The admiral was speaking on the anniversary of a failed April 24, 1980 U.S. military operation – dubbed “Operation Eagle Claw” – that sought to rescue American hostages held captive at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.
A Pentagon official responded to Fadavi’s claim on Friday. “You should ask the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps what their plans are,” the official told The Daily Caller. “We support freedom of the seas and encourage all countries to follow international laws.”
But on Friday, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, Iran’s top air force commander, told the Fars New Agency that the Islamic republic’s military is also capable of crippling or disabling U.S. aircraft carriers.
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ Controlling a large number of people isn’t easy. The United States alone consists of 312 million people spread out across nearly 4 million square miles. Add on nearly 500 million for the population of the European Union and another nearly 4 million square miles of territory. Then pile on Canada with 34 million people […]
http://www.romirowsky.com/11621/peace-process
THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY FOR ANY ARAB SOVEREIGNTY BETWEEN THE PRE 1967 LINES AND THE JORDAN RIVER….PERIOD….RSK
Something has gone horribly wrong with the Palestinian-Israeli peace process, and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad’s recent decision not to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is only the latest example and reason for the widespread pessimism about its trajectory.
The so-called Middle East conflict has grown more rather than less intractable since Palestinian and Israeli leaders began their efforts to resolve it through negotiations. Indeed, almost two decades of negotiations have failed to convince Palestinian and Israeli leaders of a way to share the land and its resources. And in fact the core of the conflict is more about co-existing on the same land than just dividing it.
Perhaps the realization of how many dreams would remain unfulfilled if the compromises necessary for an agreement were struck convinced politicians on both sides that resolving the dispute would be more costly and unpopular than perpetuating it.
Perhaps, both sides have clung more tightly to their national narratives than to proposals to be exchanged for concessions because discussions, themselves, disclosed the gap, not so much between the two sets of negotiators, but rather between reality and the dreams ordinary Palestinians and Israelis have been encouraged to imagine of the final resolution.
At the very least, national narratives give Israelis and Palestinians a clear definition of their collective identities even if they lock them into their confrontation.
For Palestinians, a narrative etched in the injustices of exile and oppression is preferred to the founding of a state that leaves behind too many refugees stuck in the same camps created for what was believed a temporary displacement. For Israelis, whose national story is woven around the survival of the Jewish people, it is preferable to retain control over territories serving as staging ground for attacks – even though the patrols, checkpoints, and the separation barrier are often described as marks of oppression – than surrendering the land without a clear Palestinian commitment to stop their wars and end their grievances against the Jewish state.
So, the conflict persists; the negotiations are deadlocked and the calls by the international community through the Quartet for compromise and negotiations seem more akin to linguistic rituals than to imperatives for action.
Thus, a peace process cannot be successful unless the tight grip of narratives sustaining the conflict is dislodged. And they can only start to loosen if both Palestinians and Israelis begin to have different experiences of one another and of the two states a solution is expected to produce.
Focus on state building
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/three_murderous_ideologies_nazism_communism_and_militant_islam.html Militant Islam has far more in common with Nazism and Communism than it does with any genuine religious faith. All three have two common elements: (1) the openly stated intention to rule the entire world and (2) a claim to the right to deport, oppress, re-educate, or exterminate those who do not fit into […]
By: Amil Imani with James H. Hyde
http://amilimani.com/2012/04/the-biggest-cover-up-in-american-history/
In our previous article, “Exonerating President Obama”, we noted that the only Supreme Court precedent for the meaning of the term “natural born Citizen” in Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution appears to be the Judge Harlan dissent in the United States v. Wong Kim Ark case. In collaboration with a constitutional attorney, we have examined the subject matter further.
We believe that to understand the complexity of this issue it will be essential to have an understanding of the place that the concepts of “Natural Law” and the book titled Law of Nations had obtained in the run up to the War of Independence with Great Britain. These concepts of natural law were commonly used throughout the colonies to explain, defend and justify the colonists’ contentions in our dispute with Great Britain. Our investigation leaves no doubt that the Founding Fathers of our nation clearly understood the meaning of the term “natural born Citizen” and its relation to Natural Law and Law of Nations. When you have finished studying our research you will also understand that these terms were used in the Declaration of Independence as well as in our Constitution and in the constitutions of a large number of states written at the same time as the Constitutional Convention was in session.
This background understanding will clarify why the delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention elected to include “natural born Citizen” in the eligibility requirements for the Office of the President of our nation and what it truly means.
In this article we will prove beyond all doubt that Barack Hussein Obama is not a natural born Citizen and is thus ineligible to be President of the United States.
Citations following the textual part of this article are not simply to provide you the references that support our assertions. They also provide you citations to reading material that will help you understand the 1770 period in our History. To understand our reasoning, it is important that the reader understands the Colonial people, and especially the Founders with their educational backgrounds, their political fears and the nation’s interrelationship with other nations at the time leading up to the War of Independence. In this short article we could not provide all those dimensions, but we hope the reader will study the references to fully understand the time period during which these things took place. Unfortunately there are citations to books which are not available to download online, so to get the whole picture, the reader will need to find a library to borrow the needed materials.
1. In the time frame of 1740—1790, “Natural Law” had grown from the 17th century studies of the early enlightenment philosophers (Grotius, Pufendorf, Rousseau, Locke, de Wolf) into a reason-based concept that was based on the fact that all humans have inherent animal qualities that contribute to laws worldwide that are essentially the same.
2. Emer de Vattel, a Swiss scholar, published a now world famous work titled Law of Nations in French in 1758. The Vattel work built upon the earlier philosophy of Natural Law, especially that of de Wolf. But what made Vattel’s work so famous was his adoption of a more modern and easier-to-understand format, which was written like a scientific thesis. It started out with definitions that were worked into the initial textual material in a manner very different from the heavy, incomprehensible writing style of the earlier philosophers. His work is written like a modern do-it-yourself project where he captured the entire history and essence of Natural Law but mixed it into a means to build a new nation based on a new type of constitution or a way of establishing an acceptable set of rules for running a nation in a common sense manner based on the experience of political science as it developed over the centuries.
A PATRIOT, A ZIONIST, A DISCIPLE OF JABOTINSKY, AN EMINENT SCHOLAR…. MAY HE REST IN ETERNAL PEACE.
HIS LATEST BOOK IS A MUST READ:
Product Details
The Founding Fathers of Zionism by Benzion Netanyahu (Hardcover – May 15, 2012)
Buy new : $24.99 $16.49
Product Details
Don Isaac Abravanel: Statesman and Philosopher by B. Netanyahu (Paperback – Dec 23, 1998)
Product Details
The Origins of the Inquisition in Fifteenth-Century Spain by B. Netanyahu (Paperback – Sep 30, 2001)
Islamic Necrophilia and Leftist Silence — on The Glazov Gang
byJamie Glazov
Leftist film producer Tommi Trudeau joins Nonie Darwish and Evan Sayet on the gang — and fireworks ensue over bizarre Islamic legislation.
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/04/30/islamic-necrophilia-and-leftist-silence-on-the-glazov-gang/
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3041/geert-wilders-marked-for-death
“[I am] imprisoned in my own country for the mere fact that I have spoken out against the enemies of the West.”
Islam is waging an aggressive war against the West; nothing less than the future of individual liberty is at stake.
The conflict is civilizational in scope and is being fought on two primary fronts: Europe and America.
The Islamization of the West is being aided and abetted by multiculturalists in Europe and America who are enforcing politically correct curbs on free speech designed to silence all criticism of Islam.
Islam’s war on the West has reached a decisive phase. Europe may already be a lost cause, leaving America as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe.
These are just a few of the conclusions of an insightful and highly readable new book about Islam, Marked for Death: Islam’s War against the West and Me, authored by Geert Wilders, the Dutch lawmaker who has devoted his life to fighting for free speech and stopping the Islamization of Europe.
Wilders — one of a growing number of Westerners who have been marked for death for criticizing Islam — opens the book by briefly describing his life under round-the-clock guard because of explicit threats to murder him by Muslim extremists.
“I have a panic room in my house,” Wilders writes, “where I am supposed to take refuge if one of the adherents of the ‘religion of peace’ makes it past my permanent security detail and into my home. In fact, it’s not really my home at all—I live in a government safe house, heavily protected and bulletproof….I have been surrounded by police guards and stripped of nearly all personal privacy…. I am driven every day from the safe house to my office in the Dutch Parliament building in armored police cars….I wear a bulletproof jacket….Always surrounded by plainclothes police officers, I have not walked the streets on my own in more than seven years…. [I am] imprisoned in my own country for the mere fact that I have spoken out against enemies of the West.”
