Month: April 2016

“SURGE” REBRANDED TO “ALTERNATIVE SAFE PATHWAYS” FOR “SYRIAN” ILLEGAL REFUGEES~RESETTLEMENT IN DISGUISE?

“ALTERNATIVE SAFE PATHWAYS” 
FOR “SYRIAN” ILLEGAL REFUGEES~
RESETTLEMENT IN DISGUISE? 
BY WILLIAM F. JASPER
SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/item/23074-here-comes-the-obama-un-refugee-surge-rebranded-as-safe-alternative-pathways; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Across the United States, designated “Welcoming Communities” have begun receiving — or soon will be recipients of — Syrian “refugees” chosen by the United Nations and  supposedly vetted by U.S. agencies. But only months ago top officials of these same agencies stated it would be impossible to vet  the enormous pool of refugee applicants for terrorist and criminal backgrounds, or even to prove that they are from Syria, considering the chaos in the Middle East and lack of documentation among the migrant. Nevertheless, while in Germany last September, Secretary of State John Kerry promised the United States would take “a minimum of 10,000 Syrian refugees,” and would bump up total annual U.S. refugee admission to 100,000 — or more.
Even prior to that pledge, at a 2014 meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, Kerry’s Assistant Secretary of State Anne Richard told the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), “we expect admissions from Syria to surge in 2015 and beyond.” However, the shocking experience of Europe’s refugee “surge” last year — with more than 1.5 million migrants from Africa, the Middle East, Turkey, Afghanistan, and elsewhere flooding in — and the chaos, turmoil, welfare costs, and the crime that followed, caused sufficient alarm in the U.S. to force President Obama to back off, temporarily. Now the administration’s “surge” is back, but it has been rebranded as “safe alternative pathways,” per the marketing folks at UNHCR and the State Department.
New Plan of Attack: Expand Beyond “Refugees” to Give Visas to Other Categories
Because the governors of 27 states and a large portion of the American public have voiced opposition to Obama refugee resettlement “surge” plan, the UNHCR and various globalist think tanks have been teaming up with the State Department to hatch new ways of sliding more migrants in as students, temporary workers, and through expanding the always-effective “family reunification” program.
Nyla Rush of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) exposed this new scheme in an April 25 blog entitled, “’Alternative Safe Pathways’ for Syrian Refugees —  Resettlement in Disguise?” “In a panel discussion on ‘The Global Refugee Crisis: Moral Dimensions and Practical Solutions’ organized by the Brookings Institution earlier this year,” Rush noted  “Beth Ferris, Research Professor at Georgetown University and adviser to the United Nations Secretary General on humanitarian refugee policy, talked about the need to find different solutions to the ongoing humanitarian Syrian crisis. The refugee resettlement program was no longer sufficient to admit Syrian refugees she said; ‘alternative safe pathways’ are needed.”
Professor Beth Ferris told the Brookings conference that the refugee crisis is expected to go on for the next 10-15 years and the United States needs to be taking in 200,000 refugees per year —  or 2-3 million. And she explained how officials could “tweak” our immigration policies to accomplish this more quickly. According to Professor Ferris:
Refugees and government officials are expecting this crisis to last 10 or 15 years. It’s time that we no longer work as business as usual…. UNHCR next month [March 2016] is convening a meeting to look at what are being called “alternative safe pathways” for Syrian refugees. Maybe it’s hard for the U.S. to go from 2,000 to 200,000 refugees resettled in a year, but maybe there are ways we can ask our universities to offer scholarships to Syrian students. Maybe we can tweak some of our immigration policies to enable Syrian-Americans who have lived here to bring not only their kids and spouses but their uncles and their grandmothers. There may be ways that we could encourage Syrians to come to the U.S. without going through this laborious, time-consuming process of refugee resettlement.” [Emphasis added.]
Professor Ferris was relaying the plans of a UNHCR conference that took place in Geneva this March 30, under the title of  “High-level meeting on global responsibility sharing through pathways for admission of Syrian refugees.” Hundreds of UN delegates from 92 member nations and representatives from UN agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) participated in the confab, which focused on drastically increasing resettlement numbers and for “innovative approaches” to admit Syrian refugees.
The new UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi, in his opening remarks, called upon governments to create “alternative avenues” for the admission of Syrian refugees:
These pathways can take many forms: not only resettlement, but also more flexible mechanisms for family reunification, including extended family members, labour mobility schemes, student visa and scholarships, as well as visa for medical reasons. Resettlement needs vastly outstrip the places that have been made available so far…. But humanitarian and student visa, job permits and family reunification would represent safe avenues of admission for many other refugees as well.
The Voice of Goldman Sachs/Trilateral Commission/Bilderberg Speaks
Peter Sutherland, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for International Migration and Development, told the Geneva conference: “We face a rising tide of nationalism, which is based on false concepts of identity, which has no moral core, and which rejects multiculturalism as an essential part of modern society that is globalizing. It is essentially a moral issue, and there is not enough moral leadership, politically, to deal with the crisis which we now face.”
As we have reported previously (see here and here), Sutherland is the consummate predatory one-worlder (former chairman of Goldman Sachs International, former Steering Committee member of the ultra-secretive Bilderberg Group, former European chairman of the Trilateral Commission) who invokes humanitarian compassion to centralize power. According to Sutherland, it is imperative “to set out a future governance system, which is based on principle and morality.” “What do I mean by that?” he asked rhetorically, before answering that we must create permanent “support mechanisms” with permanent revenue streams, as well as expand the definition of “refugees” to include not only those threatened with persecution, but those suffering from natural disasters. The UN and national governments, he averred, must create and issue “humanitarian visas” to an ever-widening classification of refugees. He said:
I mean that we have to have, into the future, agreements in terms of support mechanisms, which are not simply ad hoc responses year by year to developing crises. We have to recognize that there are those who are not refugees who also deserve support: those who are escaping from natural disaster, their lives may be threatened equally, with the appalling faith of those who are escaping from dreadful wars. We have to accept collectively, as a global community, the need for a humanitarian visa system to supplement the unquestioned obligation to provided asylum to those who are refugees. We have to look at these in terms of not having to come year after year begging for pledges, pledges that are sometimes given and then, as the Secretary-General said at the outset today, have not been always honoured in performance.
Sutherland pointed repeatedly to the upcoming  UN High-level Meeting on Refugees and Migrants scheduled to take place at the UN headquarters in New York on September 19 of this year. Between now and then, Sutherland, Obama, and the UN’s NGO activists and their establishment media allies plan to step up the drumbeat for turning the new “pathways” into a Refugee Express freeway.
Related articles and videos:

CRIME ON CAMPUS: “DENYING TRANSGENDERISM”~JESUIT CATHOLIC COLLEGE CALLS BELIEVING IN TWO GENDERS A “HATE CRIME”~BOYCOTTERS TARGET TARGET FOR TRANSGENDER BATHROOM POLICY

FROM CLERGY CHILD ABUSE 

TO ATTACK ON FREE SPEECH:

JESUIT PAPAL ENFORCERS MANDATE “PANSEXUALITY”:

ARE YOU IN DENIAL? THAT’S A SIN AND A CRIME

MORE FOR CATHOLICS 

TO FEEL GUILTY ABOUT

INCREASED WORRY & ANGST ABOUT GOING TO PURGATORY, HELL AND/OR  PRISON SHOULD THEY OFFEND LGBT PEOPLE

THE AGONY OF CATHOLIC STUDENTS & GENDER IDENTITY!!!
Published on Oct 21, 2015
The hosts sit down with LMU Biology Professor, Dr. Martina Ramirez who shares her story and views on gender identity. The Los Angeles Loyolan’s Sarah Litz then interviews students on campus to get their opinions.
THE BIOLOGY OF SEX LIVES OF ANIMALS & HUMAN ANIMALS;
OPEN & CANDID
GETTING STUDENTS & FACULTY USED TO BEING SUBJECTED TO PARAMILITARIZED POLICE SWAT RAIDS
LMU’S BIAS INCIDENT RESPONSE TEAM (BIRT)
SEE: http://academics.lmu.edu/diversity/reportdiscriminationbiasincidents/biasincidentresponseteambirt/
SEE ALSO: 

Anthony Garrison-Engbrecht, Director, LGBT Student Services

Phone: 310.338.5307
Email: anthony.garrison@lmu.edu
http://studentaffairs.lmu.edu/interculturalism/lgbtstudentservices/staff/

BELIEVING IN TWO GENDERS IS A ‘HATE CRIME’ UNDER POLICE INVESTIGATION AT CATHOLIC COLLEGE

The school was so spooked it called the 

Los Angeles Police Department

BY Matt Lamb College Fix 
SEE: http://www.infowars.com/believing-in-two-genders-is-a-hate-crime-under-police-investigation-at-catholic-college/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
You can have your opinion’ as long as it doesn’t ‘deny my existence’
It’s uncommon at Jesuit universities these days for someone to openly share a traditional Catholic viewpoint.
When it happened at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, the school was so spooked it called the Los Angeles Police Department.
Both the police and the university’s Bias Incident Response Team are investigating the stated belief that only two genders exist, male and female, as a hate crime.
A Loyola alumni office employee discussed her views on sexual orientation, which align with the Roman Catholic Church, with students who were hanging up posters on the subject on April 14.
Cosette Carleo, one of the students involved, told The College Fix in a phone interview that the hate crime under investigation is “denying transgenderism.”
Carleo’s account agrees in part with an email by the husband of the employee with whom she tangled.
The employee told Carleo, who identifies as gender-neutral, that only two genders exist, male and female, according to the student. Carleo told The Fix that statement was the hate crime.
Carleo responded that “you can have your opinion” as long as it doesn’t “deny my existence.”
Promoting ‘PanSexual’ lifestyle
Outside reports of what happened differ. Carleo told The Los Angeles Loyolan that she and two other students noticed that Rainbow Week posters “had been removed and placed behind a garbage can.”
As they were reposting the signs, the employee “allegedly approached the students about LGBTQ+ issues and voiced her opinions on differing sexualities, expressing that anti-LGBTQ+ signs should be put up in place of the students’ sign.”
Carleo told The Loyolan the employee “told me that I was wrong and unnatural.” An opinion editor at The Loyolan also referred to the employee’s traditional Catholic view as a “hate crime” because it “disrespect[ed] someone else’s existence.”
cosette-carleo.instagram.screenshot
In an April 16 email forwarded to California Catholic Daily, the employee’s husband blasted The Loyolan for a “distortion of facts” around the incident, saying his wife told him about the entire incident the same day it happened. (Neither has been publicly identified.)
The students were hanging up signs promoting “PanSexual” orientation, the husband wrote. After the employee discussed her traditional Catholic views on love and sexuality, it was the students who “suggested that Campus ministry place a sign promoting the Catholic idea of relationships next to their signs next year.”
The husband wrote that an alum who overheard his wife’s conversation with the students can back her account.
After discussing the signs, “everyone shook hands and my wife invited them into the Alumni office anytime they wanted to talk more,” the husband wrote. “The girls express out loud how much they enjoyed the opportunity to ‘dialogue’ on these subjects with my wife.”
Loyola-Marymount.Mishigaki.WMC
The husband said his wife was suspended before anyone “got her side of the story” and the alum who witnessed the incident has not been interviewed either.
When the employee approached her supervisor “to protest the accuracy” of the Loyolanarticle, the supervisor “refused to talk to her,” the husband wrote.
A Facebook user claiming to be the LMU alum who was with the employee, Anthony “AJ” Gonzales, wrote a long post about the altercation, clarifying that he was on the phone with the employee.
Gonzales said the employee was “in the process of seeking legal counsel” to defend herself and hold LMU accountable for how she was “unfairly treated and summarily dismissed” before she could give her side. He did not immediately respond to a Facebook message from The Fix Tuesday night.
The account given by the LMU Gender-Sexuality Alliance does not square with what Carleo told The Fix.
The alliance’s press release said the verbal altercation happened between 9 a.m and noon, but Carleo said it happened between 12:30 and 1:15 p.m. Carleo said the students assumed the signs, which had been posted two days earlier, had been removed between 9 and noon.
Though the Bias Incident Response Team told The Loyolan there were two investigations – the sign removal and the employee’s conversation with the students – Carleo admitted they have no evidence that the employee removed the signs.
Carleo told The Fix that while voices were raised in the conversation, there was no actual yelling, and witnesses who considered intervening saw that “there was no danger.”
Anthony Garrison-Engbrecht, director of LMU’s LGBT Student Services, referred Fix inquiries to spokeswoman Celeste Durante. She told The Fix on April 19 that the investigation was ongoing.
The alumni office employee did not return requests for comment. An email to her drew an automatic “out of the office” reply.
Loyolan Assistant News Editor Kellie Chudzinksi, the author of the article, did not return multiple requests for an explanation of how she attempted to reach the employee.
_______________________________________________________
Celeste Durant head
CELESTE DURANT
Business, Finance, Education, Science
cdurant1@lmu.edu
Office: 310.338.7708
Cell: 424.225.0836
Loyola Marymount University’s shocking partnership with transgenders!
BY REV. AUSTIN MILES
SEE: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/miles/160429; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
LOS ANGELES 4/29/16 – A new hate crime has been created, by a Catholic University. It is called, “Denying Transgenderism.” You read that right. A Catholic institution is now calling police on any student or staff member who refers to only two genders, male and female, which, they say, denies transgenderism. Such references are now prosecuted as a “Hate Crime.” (?)

The LGBT Bias Incident Response Team is the campus cops to enforce this. Again, this is taking place in a Catholic University! As one magnanimous LGBT student, Cosette Carleo, stated, “You can have your opinion (about two genders-male and female), as long as it doesn’t deny my existence”( – as a transgender). So the advice is; do not mention, male and female and you will be OK.

An Opinion Editor at The Loyolan (campus newspaper) referred to an employee’s traditional Catholic view as a “hate crime, because it disrespected someone else’s existence.” How’s that again?

Anthony Garrison-Engbrecht is the director of Loyola Marymount University LGBT Student Services. They say they are promoting a “PanSexual’ lifestyle. The spokeswoman Celeste Durante said that the investigation of the above hate crimes was ongoing.

Rainbow posters are seen throughout the campus even though some students have tried to take them down. So another Catholic organization has been taken over by sexual deviants who now have the power to cause teachers and other personnel to be fired if they do not embrace the things the Bible strictly prohibits. This is nuts!

First of all, what in God’s name is an LGBT Club doing in a Catholic University?? Yes, in God’s name, which this university is under and trusted with teaching and upholding God’s moral laws. Yet they bought the devil a steak dinner by caving into the demands of perverts that have no place in a Christian college or university. My telephone calls to Loyola Marymount have not been returned. No surprise here.

This is not the only Catholic Institute of learning that has seemingly been smoking the same dope. Georgetown University has an active LGBT club on campus and holds their own ‘Lavender Graduation Ceremonies.’ Sit down – it gets worse! Georgetown University also had as a speaker, Cecile Richards,who is the President of Planned Parenthood which is in the business of wholesale abortion of inconvenient babies, even selling the body parts of the murdered babies for profit. Doesn’t Catholicism teach that abortion is wrong?

Yet those who do it are not only welcomed to Catholic Institutions but permitted to endorse everything the church opposes.

Notre Dame had Obama, another pro-abortion official as a guest speaker. What is more, when he speaks at Catholic universities, including Georgetown, he demands that the cross, crucifix and other symbols of the Christian faith be covered up. And these religious institutions go along with that even though it pulls against everything they supposedly stand for? At this point church, what DO you stand for?

NOW ON TO THE LUTHERAN CHURCH. A prominent Lutheran Pastor in theEvangelical Lutheran Church of America, stated publicly that Jesus wasIntersex, a term used by LGBT advocates to describe people born with both male and female sexual anatomy and other traits. In other words, a hermaphrodite. No doubt this would give comfort to the insanity-laden LGBT folk who do not want to be thought of as…strange.

This particular misguided pastor, Clint Schnekloth of Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Fayetteville, Arkansas, said he is quoting Thomas Jefferson who supposedly said in a personal letter; “I believe in the virgin birth, though many of my fellow Christians don’t. I do think it means Jesus was intersex.” I looked but cannot find this quote which probably never happened. In any case it appears that major churches in general are turning into powerful vehicles to promote a “social justice warrior agenda.” My question is, WHY? A pastor is ordained to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ and nothing else.

Exposed blogs about the teachings, sayings and ways of ELCA Rev. Clint Schnekloth:
And yes, last year the Church of England wanted Christians to refer to God as a….”she.”

Church attendees, stop supporting any church that preaches this blasphemy. Take a stand. Preachers, take stock of yourselves lest you wind up on the road to the devil’s domain. Do not forget who you are and the sacred task that has been entrusted into your hands and the sacred vows you took. Dare to pervert that and you are instantly proved to be a false prophet and the end awaiting you is hell.

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles…Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire: Mt.7:15-16, 19.

ANALYZING TODAY’S NEWS FOR TOMORROW’S HISTORY
________________________________________________________

Denying Transgenderism Is Now A Hate Crime!

Published on Apr 28, 2016
It’s uncommon at Jesuit universities these days for someone to openly share a traditional Catholic viewpoint.

When it happened at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, the school was so spooked it called the Los Angeles Police Department.

Both the police and the university’s Bias Incident Response Team are investigating the stated belief that only two genders exist, male and female, as a hate crime.

A Loyola alumni office employee discussed her views on sexual orientation, which align with the Roman Catholic Church, with students who were hanging up posters on the subject on April 14.

Cosette Carleo, one of the students involved, told The College Fix in a phone interview that the hate crime under investigation is “denying transgenderism.” http://www.infowars.com/believing-in-…
Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we’re reaching millions help us reach millions more. Share the free live video feed link with your friends & family: http://www.infowars.com/show

Arrested For Denying Transgenderism

_______________________________________________________________

Target Stores No Longer Safe
SEE ALSO:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXIdX4ml6E0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRaVJghZX5M


OBAMA WANTS AN 11 FOOT HIGH FENCE AROUND WHITE HOUSE, BUT MOCKED TRUMP’S PROPOSED WALL AT THE U.S.-MEXICO BORDER

OBAMA’S BELATED PARANOIA
EXTRA SHARP SPIKES ADDED TO OLD FENCE TEMPORARILY TO KEEP OUT
CITIZEN “EXTREMISTS”;
NEW FENCE WON’T BE TO HIS BENEFIT



Secret Service proposing ‘taller and stronger’ White House fence
FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT DAN BONGINO EXPLAINS

THE BORDER MAY BE OPEN, BUT THE WHITE HOUSE WILL GET A NEW FENCE

Current 6-foot fence will be 11-feet tall in 2018

SEE: http://www.infowars.com/the-border-may-be-open-but-the-white-house-will-get-a-new-fence/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Obama may oppose Trump’s proposal for a fence along the border to keep out millions of illegal immigrants—many of them, as Trump has pointed out, criminals—but when it comes to the White House the president is all for a fence.
On Wednesday, the Secret Service announced it plans to add five feet to the fence surrounding the White House and add a new concrete foundation to reduce the risk of fence-jumpers.
“The current fence simply is not adequate for a modern era. We’ve said that before. It is becoming more and more acutely clear that that is in fact the case,” Secret Service official Tom Dougherty said.
“(The fence) is entirely scale-able, depending upon the circumstances. And we have now a society that tends to want to jump over the fence and onto the 18 acres,” Daugherty added.
The existing fence at the White House has spikes to deter climbers.
The agency and the National Park Service plan to use tax money to begin construction on the new fence in 2018, according to an NBC News Washington report.
The fence proposal will be officially announced on May 5 at a meeting of the National Capital Planning Commission, which must first approve any changes.

THE FUTURE OF AMERICA?-MORE THAN HALF OF ALL U.S. ADULTS UNDER AGE 30 NOW REJECT CAPITALISM

Young People Abstract - Public Domain
THE FUTURE OF AMERICA?-MORE THAN HALF OF ALL U.S. ADULTS UNDER AGE 30 
NOW REJECT CAPITALISM
BY MICHAEL SNYDER
SEE: http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/the-future-of-america-more-than-half-of-all-u-s-adults-under-age-30-now-reject-capitalism; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
A shocking new survey has found that support for capitalism is dying in America.  In fact, more than half of all adults in the United States under the age of 30 say that they do not support capitalism at this point.  You might be tempted to dismiss them as “foolish young people”, but the truth is that they are the future of America.  As older generations die off, they will eventually become the leaders of this country.  And of course our nation has not resembled anything close to a capitalist society for quite some time now.  In a recent article, I listed 97 different taxes that Americans pay each year, and some Americans actually end up returning more than half of what they earn to the government by the time it is all said and done.  So at best it could be said that we are running some sort of hybrid system that isn’t as far down the road toward full-blown socialism as most European nations are.  But without a doubt we are moving in that direction, and our young people are going to be cheering every step of the way.
When I first heard of this new survey from Harvard University, I was absolutely stunned.  The following is from what the Washington Post had to say about it…
The Harvard University survey, which polled young adults between ages 18 and 29, found that 51 percent of respondents do not support capitalism. Just 42 percent said they support it.
It isn’t clear that the young people in the poll would prefer some alternative system, though. Just 33 percent said they supported socialism. The survey had a margin of error of 2.4 percentage points.
Could it be possible that young adults were confused by the wording of the survey?
Well, other polls have come up with similar results…
The university’s results echo recent findings from Republican pollster Frank Luntz, who surveyed 1,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 26 and found that 58% of respondents believed socialism to be the “more compassionate” political system when compared to capitalism. And when participants were asked to sum up the root of America’s problem in one word, 29% said “greed.”
This trend among our young people is very real, and you can see it in their support of Bernie Sanders.  For millions upon millions of young adults in America today, Hillary Clinton is not nearly liberal enough for them.  So they have flocked to Sanders, and if they had been the only ones voting in this election season, he would have won the Democratic nomination by a landslide.
Sadly, most of our young people don’t seem to understand how socialism slowly but surely destroys a nation.  If you want to see the end result of socialism, just look at the economic collapse that is going on in Venezuela right now.  The following comes from  a Bloomberg article entitled “Venezuela Doesn’t Have Enough Money to Pay for Its Money“…
Venezuela’s epic shortages are nothing new at this point. No diapers or car parts or aspirin — it’s all been well documented. But now the country is at risk of running out of money itself.
In a tale that highlights the chaos of unbridled inflation, Venezuela is scrambling to print new bills fast enough to keep up with the torrid pace of price increases. Most of the cash, like nearly everything else in the oil-exporting country, is imported. And with hard currency reserves sinking to critically low levels, the central bank is doling out payments so slowly to foreign providers that they are foregoing further business.
Venezuela, in other words, is now so broke that it may not have enough money to pay for its money.
We are losing an entire generation of young people.  These days, there is quite a lot of talk about how we need to get America back to the principles that it was founded upon, but the cold, hard reality of the matter is that most of our young people are running in the opposite direction as fast as they can.
And Americans under the age of 30 are not just becoming more liberal when it comes to economics.  Surveys have found that they are more than twice as likely to support gay rights and less than half as likelyto regularly attend church as the oldest Americans are.
So why is this happening?
Well, the truth is that our colleges and universities have become indoctrination centers for the progressive movement.  I know, because I spent eight years at public universities in this country.  The quality of the education that our young people are receiving is abysmal, but the values that are being imparted to them will last a lifetime.
And of course the same things could be said about our system of education all the way down to the kindergarten level.  There are still some good people in the system, but overall it is overwhelmingly dominated by the progressives.
Meanwhile, the major entertainment providers in the United States are also promoting the same values.  In a recent article entitled “Depressing Survey Results Show How Extremely Stupid America Has Become“, I discussed a Nielsen report which detailed how much time the average American spends consuming media on various electronic devices each day…
Watching live television: 4 hours, 32 minutes
Watching time-shifted television: 30 minutes
Listening to the radio: 2 hours, 44 minutes
Using a smartphone: 1 hour, 33 minutes
Using Internet on a computer: 1 hour, 6 minutes
Overall, the average American spends about 10 hours a day consuming one form of entertainment or another.
When you allow that much “programming” into your mind, it is inevitable that it is going to shape your values, and our young people are more “plugged in” than any of the rest of us.
So yes, I believe that it is exceedingly clear why we should be deeply concerned about the future of America.  The values that are being relentlessly pounded into the heads of our young people are directly opposed to the values that this nation was founded upon, and it is these young people that will determine the path that this country ultimately takes.
*About the author: Michael Snyder is the founder and publisher of The Economic Collapse Blog. Michael’s controversial new book about Bible prophecy entitled “The Rapture Verdict” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.*

“NET NEUTRALITY” WILL REGULATE INTERNET RATES DESPITE PROMISES

“NET NEUTRALITY” 
WILL REGULATE INTERNET RATES 
DESPITE PROMISES
BY C. MITCHELL SHAW
SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/23057-net-neutrality-will-regulate-internet-rates-despite-promises; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
When FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler launched the opening salvo in the battle to regulate the Internet, he said time and time again that Net Neutrality would not be used to regulate rates. Now he is arguing that restricting the FCC from regulating Internet rates will kill Net Neutrality. Brace yourselves: Rate regulation is coming, and Net Neutrality and those who supported it are to blame.
In February 2015, Wheeler wrote an op-ed piece for Wired that laid out his strategy to “ensure net neutrality” by treating the Internet as a public utility and applying the same types of regulations that are used for phone and electric companies. He wrote that his plan would “modernize Title II, tailoring it for the 21st century” and that there would be a light touch to FCC regulation of the Internet. “For example, there will be no rate regulation, no tariffs, no last-mile unbundling,” according to Wheeler then.
The New American reported at the time that Commissioner Ajit Pai was telling a different story concerning Wheeler’s Net Neutrality. After studying the 332 pages of rules — which were kept secret at the time — Pai tweeted, “Here is President Obama’s 332-page plan to regulate the Internet. I wish the public could see what’s inside.” Pai issued a press release listing — point by point — his reasons for voting against Net Neutrality. As this writer said then:
Any one of his six major objections to FCC regulation of the Internet is damning all on its own; when seen in toto, they are frightening indeed. Pai says he has studied the document “in detail” and determined that it is worse than he thought. For example, he says that regulation will include rate regulation, rules that stifle competition and innovation, tax hikes on broadband services, provisions that morph the FCC into a sort of “Department of the Internet” with authority to “micromanage the Internet,” and future utility-style regulations. In other words, this is the beginning of a complete government takeover of the Internet.
But Wheeler and others pushing Net Neutrality continued to assure the public that “there will be no rate regulation.” As Tech Policy Daily reported in March 2015:
But there is one issue about which Chairman Tom Wheeler has been crystal-clear since announcing his support for reclassification: the commission will not engage in broadband rate regulation. In his landmark Wired op-ed announcing his plan to put reclassification to a vote, he insisted that “there will be no rate regulation,” a promise he repeated in a fiery speech a few days later at the Silicon Flatirons Center. Three times in the span of 1600 words, the FCC fact sheet on net neutrality promised that whatever else it contains, “the Order makes clear that broadband providers shall not be subject” to rate regulation, the “proposed order does not include utility-style rate regulation,” and there will be “[n]o rate regulation or tariffs.” And as she cast her vote, Commissioner Clyburn took umbrage at the suggestion that the commission would use its new-found classification authority to regulate broadband rates.
The article was quick to point out that “these fervent protests cannot mask that Title II is fundamentally a regime for rate regulation.” Any person or organization opposed to Wheeler’s plan was accused of paranoia or worse. After all, Wheeler had made it clear: Internet rate regulation was not on the table.
That was then; this is now.
Congressman Dan Kinzinger (R-Ill.) introduced the “No Rate Regulation of Internet Access Act” (H.R. 2666) to make certain that Wheeler and the other architects of Net Neutrality kept their promises not to regulate rates. One would expect Wheeler to ignore the bill, or — at most — to issue a statement that it was unnecessary since there are no plans to regulate rates. Instead, Wheeler testified before the House Communications and Technology Subcommittee that the bill would kill Net Neutrality and prevent the commission from enforcing the rules against blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization.
Ars Technica, playing the role of apologist for Net Neutrality, reported that Wheeler published a letter on the FCC website stating that the bill would threaten nearly every aspect of Net Neutrality:
Wheeler wouldn’t object to legislation that merely prevents traditional rate regulation from being imposed on ISPs, he wrote. But this bill “would introduce significant uncertainty into the Commission’s ability to enforce the three bright line rules that bar blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization rules, as well as our general conduct rule that would be applied to issues such as data caps and zero rating,” Wheeler wrote. “It would also cast doubt on the ability of the Commission to ensure that broadband providers receiving universal service subsidies do not overcharge their consumers. Finally, it would hamstring aspects of the Commission’s merger review process.”
What Ars Technica left unanswered is why forbidding something that Wheeler said would not happen in the first place would threaten anything other than his ability to break his promise and do it anyway.
The bill passed the House earlier this month and will still need to pass in the Senate. Even then, President Obama — who had directed Wheeler to press forward with Net Neutrality by reclassifying the Internet as a utility — has said he will veto the bill if it reaches his desk.
So even though there is little likelihood of the bill becoming law, it at least serves as notice that Net Neutrality was intended from the beginning to allow the FCC to set prices for Internet service. When that happens, it will be interesting to see Ars Technica and other Net Neutrality supporters try to spin the facts. Until then, the rest of us just need to prepare ourselves to pay more for less.
Big Government strikes again.
______________________________________________________

FCC Commissioner Pai Ordered To Keep Obamaphone Fraud Quiet


OKLAHOMA LAWMAKERS PASS BILL THAT WOULD REVOKE MEDICAL LICENSES OF ABORTIONISTS

OKLAHOMA LAWMAKERS PASS BILL THAT WOULD REVOKE MEDICAL LICENSES OF ABORTIONISTS 
BY HEATHER CLARK
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
OKLAHOMA CITY — Lawmakers in Oklahoma have passed a bill that would revoke the medical licenses of abortionists in the state.
As previously reported, Sen. Nathan Dahm, R-Broken Arrow, introduced S.B. 1152 earlier this year, adding a provision to a section that regulates the way physicians are licensed in the state.
“Any physician participating in the performance of an abortion shall be prohibited from obtaining or renewing a license to practice medicine in this state,” it reads. “No person shall perform or induce an abortion upon a pregnant woman. Any person violating this section shall be guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than three years in the state penitentiary.”
The legislation passed the House on Thursday 59-9, just over a month after it was approved in the Senate 40-7.
“This is a core function of government,” Dahm had said during the hearings. “This is our proper function, to protect life.”
“If we take care of morality, God will take care of the economy,” supporter David Brumbaugh, R-Broken Arrow, also remarked.
But abortion advocacy groups have decried the move as a “new low.”
“Oklahoma politicians have made it their mission year after year to restrict women’s access vital health care services, yet this total ban on abortion is a new low,” Amanda Allen, senior state legislative counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights, told Reuters.
The group has threatened to file a legal challenge if it the bill is signed into law.
Paul Blair, pastor of Fairview Baptist Church in Edmonton, remarked in an op-ed for the Edmonton Sun that the state should push back if the courts strike down the law as unconstitutional.
“The ultimate fate of abortion laws in Oklahoma won’t hinge on what lawmakers do. It won’t hinge on what the courts do. The future hinges on what our leaders do in response to the courts,” he wrote.
“Many northern states said ‘no’ in a response of moral outrage to the Fugitive Slave Act and the Dred Scott decision. Oregon, Colorado, Washington and Alaska have all said ‘no’ to federal marijuana laws,” Blair said, noting that he doesn’t personally agree with the marijuana legalization. “Sometimes the forces of history come together with the right people at the right time to bring justice to people who have been denied it for too long. This could be that time.”
The bill now moves to the desk of Gov. Mary Fallin, who has not yet indicated whether she will sign the measure.

MICHELLE OBAMA’S LUNCH RULES BANS FRIED FOODS, FROSTED FLAKES IN DAYCARE

MICHELLE OBAMA’S LUNCH RULES BANS FRIED FOODS, FROSTED FLAKES IN DAYCARE 
Final regulation only allows daycare centers to serve juice once a day
BY ELIZABETH HARRINGTON
SEE: http://freebeacon.com/issues/michelle-obama-lunch-ban-daycare/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
New rules stemming from the school lunch law championed by first lady Michelle Obama are banning popular children’s cereals like Frosted Flakes in daycare centers.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service issued a final rule Monday that will affect more than 3 million kids in daycare centers across the country. The regulation will only allow daycare centers to serve juice once a day, will ban fried foods, and encourages centers to not add honey to a child’s yogurt.
The regulation is a result of the 2010 law aimed at school lunches, a top priority of Mrs. Obama’s Let’s Move anti-obesity initiative. The government hopes the new rule will “help children build healthy habits.”
“This final rule updates the meal pattern requirements for the Child and Adult Care Food Program to better align them with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, as required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010,” the final rule states. “This rule requires centers and day care homes participating in the Child and Adult Care Food Program to serve more whole grains and a greater variety of vegetables and fruit, and reduces the amount of added sugars and solid fats in meals.”
The law required the USDA to “promote health and wellness in child care settings via guidance and technical assistance that focuses on nutrition, physical activity, and limiting electronic media use,” according to the regulation.
The final rule will apply to participating organizations in USDA’s Child and Adult Care Food Program, which reimburses centers for meals and snacks. Over 3.3 million children and 120,000 adults participate in the program every day.
The new regulation represents the first major change to the program since 1968 and will go into effect in 60 days.
Childcare and adult day care centers will only be allowed to serve juice once per day, and the new rule places strict limits on the amount of sugar in cereals served.
Breakfast cereals can “contain no more than 6 grams of sugar per dry ounce,” according to the regulation. The sugar limit means no Lucky Charms, Trix, Cocoa Puffs, Cap’n Crunch, or Frosted Flakes.
Cereals that will meet the new sugar restrictions include Cheerios, Puffed Rice, Fiber One, and All-Bran.
The final regulation does allow meat and “meat alternates,” such as tofu, if they are served “in place of the entire grains requirement at breakfast a maximum of three times per week.”
Also banned are flavored milk for kids aged two to five and fried foods.
“This final rule prohibits frying as a way a preparing food on-site,” according to the document. “Frying is defined as deep-fat frying (i.e. cooking by submerging food in hot oil or other fat). This definition of frying was recommended by commenters and continues to allow providers to sauté, pan-fry, and stir-fry.”
The government explained that fish can be served “ if it is pan-fried or prepared another way, as long as it is not cooked by submerging the bread into hot oil or other fat.”
Centers will be allowed to serve cheese, cottage cheese, and yogurt, as long as it has fewer than 23 grams of sugar per 6 ounces. The first version of the regulation would have banned cheese, cottage cheese, and “cheese food, or spread.”
The government said it will allow daycare centers to break the rules for special occasions like birthdays, but urged centers to “use discretion.”
“[The Food and Nutrition Service] FNS recognizes that there may be times when a provider would like to serve foods or beverages that are not reimbursable, such as on a child’s birthday or another special occasion,” the agency said. “Providers still have the flexibility to serve non-reimbursable foods and beverages of their choosing.”
“However, FNS encourages providers to use their discretion when serving non-reimbursable foods and beverages, which may be higher in added sugar, solid fats, and sodium, to ensure children and adult participants’ nutritional needs are met,” the agency said.
The rule also includes “best practices,” or guidelines that are preferred by the government but are optional for organizations.
“Best practices” include serving only lean meats, nuts, and legumes, and limiting meals with processed meats to a maximum of once a week. The government also prefers daycare centers serve low-fat and reduced-fat cheese, and unflavored milk and warns against adding honey or jam to foods.
“Avoid serving non-creditable foods that are sources of added sugars, such as sweet toppings (e.g., honey, jam, syrup), mix-in ingredients sold with yogurt (e.g., honey, candy or cookie pieces), and sugar-sweetened beverages (e.g., fruit drinks or sodas),” the final rule states.
The regulation is intended to bring daycare centers in line with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which have generated controversy over the years. The latest version stressed a “collective” approach to eating, and reversed a decades-long recommendation for cholesterol, by deeming eggs OK to eat. The federal committee in charge of drafting the guidelines ultimately did not include sustainability in its final version, which would have added environmentalism and advocated for “plant-based diets” out of climate change concerns.
Other questions have been raised about the science behind the Dietary Guidelines over the years, including steering millions of Americans away from whole milk, despite studies demonstrating its health benefits.
Some organizations expressed “strong concerns regarding cost, increased record keeping burden, and the period of time afforded for implementation” in complying with the daycare regulation.
Members of the food industry also “voiced concerns that some aspects of the proposed rule would limit food choices, increase costs, and prohibit serving nutritious foods that may be more palatable to children.”
The government said the rule was “designed to be cost-neutral.”

DUMB SENATOR TOM CARPER OF DELAWARE BOTCHES HILLARY CLINTON’S RESUME~ASCRIBES FALSE WORK EXPERIENCES TO HER

DECEIVER, MENTALLY ILL, DUMB OR JUST CONFUSED?
PLAYING TO A STUPID CROWD OF HIS AND HILLARY’S SUPPORTERS GETS LAUGHS
LIBERAL DELAWARE SENATOR TRIES TO BOOST HILLARY CLINTON WITH LIES ABOUT HER GOVERNMENT WORK HISTORY
WITH STUPID DELAWAREANS BELIEVING THEM

“Confused” Clinton Surrogate Carper

Botches Clinton’s Resume 

by JENNA LIFHITS
SEE: http://freebeacon.com/politics/confused-clinton-surrogate-botches-clintons-resume/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Sen. Tom Carper (D., Del.) reminisced about Hillary Clinton’s eight years as governor Monday at a campaign event in Delaware, even though Clinton is a former New York senator and has never served as a governor.
“Hillary Clinton was right there in the middle of it all. I saw her. I saw her as a governor, as chairman of the National Governor’s Association, she was terrific,” Carper said.
Carper conjured up warm memories of his time working with Clinton in the House of Representatives and praised her for her doing her job, although Clinton never sat in the House.
“For eight years that we served together in the House, she did her job. She did her job. She was amazing. She was amazing,” Carper said. “She always surrounded herself by the best people you could find. God, she was a terrific colleague.”
He even claimed to remember where the former Senator sat.
“She sat right behind me!” Carper said.
Carper isn’t the only one confused about the former New York senator’s background.
Clinton’s daughter Chelsea has also bungled her mother’s platform, oversimplifying parts of her education plan. Bill Clinton has also confused the details of his wife’s college affordability plan while campaigning for her.
Hillary herself also has memory troubles. Her closest aide, Huma Abedin, has written that Clinton is “often confused” and must consistently be reminded of her schedule.
Carper is the same age as former president Bill Clinton and only one year older than Hillary.

NATIONWIDE PROTEST SEEKS TO ABOLISH PLANNED PARENTHOOD

NATIONWIDE PROTEST SEEKS TO ABOLISH PLANNED PARENTHOOD 
BY LISA SHAW
SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/item/23040-nationwide-protest-seeks-to-abolish-planned-parenthood; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Justice was being called for, as thousands of Americans across the nation joined together to protest the scandalous actions of Planned Parenthood.
On the morning of April 23, citizens rallied outside of more than 300 Planned Parenthood facilities nationwide, not just to challenge the horrific acts of the nation’s leading abortion provider, but to demand a suspension of government funding for the organization. According to Planned Parenthood’s 2013-2014 Annual Report, an outrageous $528.4 million of their revenue came from taxpayer funding.
#ProtestPP, the coalition that organized the event, was created in response to the videos released last year by the Center for Medical Progress revealing the abortion giant’s heinous practice of trafficking aborted baby parts. The coalition is made up of state and national pro-life groups, headed by three national pro-life activist organizations: Citizens for a Pro-Life Society, Created Equal, and the Pro-Life Action League. #ProtestPP also calls to light the injustice of the charges against David Daleiden, the undercover journalist who courageously infiltrated Planned Parenthood and showed America the underbelly of this massive beast. Daleiden should be applauded, at the least, for his fortitude and diligence as he sat through conversation after conversation enduring the grisly boastings of the organization’s bloodthirsty leaders, in order to present the truth to a duped society. However, in a twisted turn of events, we find him the criminal, as the truth gets distorted and the facts get manipulated by those with hidden agendas.
Because distortion and manipulation of this type has found its way into the minds and actions of our society at large, it becomes necessary for those who know the truth to share it with others. At the rallies throughout America on Saturday, the speakers with #ProtestPP did just that.
In Richmond, Virginia, Leslie Blackwell – Virginia regional co-coordinator of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign — was the #ProtestPP organizer. A former radical feminist, and having had two abortions of her own, Blackwell was, at one time, very supportive of what has become known as a “woman’s choice.” In fact, she was a month away from becoming a board member of the Virginia League for Planned Parenthood when she experienced a major heart change. Blackwell now uses her time and talent to defend life and bring awareness to the pain of abortion.
The protest in Richmond took place outside the Planned Parenthood clinic on Hamilton Street, where more than 2,000 unborn babies were murdered in 2014. It is also where Governor Terry McAuliffe recently vetoed the bill to defund Planned Parenthood in Virginia.
“This organization should not be receiving any taxpayer funding for any reason and Governor Terry McAuliffe should be ashamed for his recent ceremonial veto at this very Planned Parenthood location,”stated Blackwell.
The peaceful, but enthusiastic demonstration drew both positive and negative responses as passers-by honked their horns or booed loudly, with nearly 150 supporters lining the 200 block of N. Hamilton Street.
At the demonstration was Fiat Ministries, streaming live, and delegate David LaRock, 33rd House of Representatives District, sharing his pro-life stance and encouraging people to vote pro-life, as well as various other speakers. Within earshot of the workers who would occasionally step outside and the officers from the six police cars stationed in the clinic’s parking lot, these defenders of life boldly shared their stories.
Andie Pearson, Virginia co-coordinator of Silent No More, told of her three abortions and the pain that haunted her for many years after. She spoke of the cold and unfriendly environment she was surrounded by after her first abortion and of the shame and pain of the other young women around her as no one made eye contact, but suffered alone.
Dr. David Russell, author of Through My Father’s Eyes, What Every Man (and Woman) Should Know About Abortion, challenged the idea that abortion is all about a woman’s choice, as he shared his sad experience as a young father who chose abortion for his child and now regrets his decision.
Eliminating the notion that rape is a valid reason for abortion, Richmond Radio and Internet Blogger/Host, Craig Johnson told his history of being conceived in a situation of rape. His mother chose life for him, though, he laments, he later went on to choose to abort his own child conceived out of marriage.
Michael Lewis gave a moving speech discrediting the pro-abortion idea that children with disabilities are of no value and, therefore, more worthy of abortion. Having cerebral palsy owing to a traumatic birth, doctors told Lewis’ parents that he would never walk or talk as he should. Defying the odds, he has gone beyond walking and talking to being a husband, father, and lobbyist, living a fully functional life. Defending the value of life, he adamantly states, “No mere mortal has the right to decide what constitutes a life worth living.”
Offering adoption as an option to abortion, Callie Jett, founder/CEO of Let’s Talk Adoption (open adoption), shared her encouraging story of hope. She described her fears as a pregnant teen 13 years ago, with no place to go and no way to support herself. Finding a pro-life pamphlet, clearly overlooked, in the waiting room of a Planned Parenthood clinic showing the stages of growth of a baby in utero, she decided not to abort. Through a series of events, Jett decided to choose adoption for her son, whom she has been in contact with from the beginning and who was also at the rally on Saturday, along with his adopted mother.
Though very different people, from very different backgrounds, these speakers have a commonality. They each, through their individual experiences, dispel myths that Planned Parenthood and its allies spread to the world. The truth is, abortion is emotionally devastating. Men are affected by abortion. Rape is not a justification for abortion. A child with disabilities has just as much a right to life as a completely healthy one. And, there are alternatives to abortion.
In response to the #ProtestPP rally, Planned Parenthood of Virginia said this:
Planned Parenthood’s top priority is the health and safety of our patients. For the women, men, and young people we serve, the care we provide isn’t about politics – it’s about their well-being. Our dedicated health center staff work to ensure that women and families are able to access affordable, high-quality health care in a safe and caring environment.
These protests are designed to shame the patients who seek basic health care services from Planned Parenthood and to intimidate the health care professionals who work here. The bottom line is that everyone should be able to get health care without fear of violence, harassment, or intimidation.
If we are to believe that this organization’s “top priority” is the health and safety of its patients, then we are to suspend logic and reason. As Pearson recalled in her speech, each patient was laid on a hospital type gurney in a cold room where no one even came to check on the patients. There are no follow up appointments at a Planned Parenthood clinic, therefore any complications from botched abortions are not reported. These women that Planned Parenthood claims are so important are sent to another doctor or, more often, the emergency room to be treated after receiving “high-quality health care.”
While their claim that “everyone should be able to get healthcare without fear of violence, harassment, or intimidation,” rings true enough, further examination of this organization’s practices would reveal a bit of hypocrisy. Life News reports:
According to the president of Planned Parenthood’s Medical Directors’ Council, abortionist Mary Gatter, “maybe 60% to 70%, but a large percent of patients we approached would say yes” to having their aborted babies’ body parts harvested.
Gatter admits to asking patients to harvest their baby’s body parts.
Mental gymnastics are not required to realize that having a salesperson on hand to pounce on an already emotionally distraught young woman to ask her whether or not she would like to sell her dead baby’s body parts would cross into the realm of harassment and probably be a little intimidating. Nor are those same gymnastics required to recognize the real motivation for this industry’s actions. Planned Parenthood has built an empire with blood money on the backs of the innocent unborn, and more and more people are being motivated to action.
After two national days of protest held by #ProtestPP in 2015, over 20 Planned Parenthood facilities closed and nine states voted to defund the organization. This year’s protest was the first annual event organized, and is to be held on the fourth Saturday of April every year until Planned Parenthood “no longer preys upon our communities,” according to the coalition’s website.
May our voices be heard and our actions make a difference, as we seek to defend the defenseless.
________________________________________________________

Steven N.H. Wood, Esq.: #ProtestPP on April 23, 2016


RACE DIVIDER MICHELLE OBAMA ATTACKS MISSISSIPPI RELIGIOUS FREEDOM BILL~GOES INTO RANT ABOUT WHITE RACISM, BLACK, LGBT & ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT STRUGGLES

RACIAL DIVIDER
MICHELLE OBAMA 
ATTACKS MISSISSIPPI 
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM BILL,
DRAGS UP 1960s RACE RIOTS IN REVISIONIST HISTORY RANT
THE ATTACK, WHILE SUPPORTING LGBT & ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

                                 

FULL SPEECH ATTACKS WHITE HERITAGE & CULTURE COUCHED IN A BLACK COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS

                                 

Michelle Obama Criticizes Mississippi Religious Freedom Bill During Commencement Speech

BY HEATHER CLARK
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:



JACKSON, Miss. — Michelle Obama criticized Mississippi’s newly-signed religious freedom bill on Saturday during her commencement speech at Jackson State University, painting it to be antithetical to the civil rights movement and societal “progress.”



“We see it right here in Mississippi—just two weeks ago—how swiftly progress can hurtle backward,” she told students during her speech. “How easy it is to single out a small group and marginalize them because of who they are or who they love.”



As previously reported, last month, Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant signed into law the Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act, which prohibits the government from punishing those who pass up forms of participation in marital events for religious reasons.







“The state government shall not take any discriminatory action against a person wholly or partially on the basis that the person has provided or declined to provide … services, accommodations, facilities, goods, or privileges for a purpose related to the solemnization, formation, celebration, or recognition of any marriage, based upon or in a manner consistent with a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction,” it reads in part.



The bill only pertains to events and does not permit the refusal of service in general. It also requires restroom use to correlate with birth gender.



“If we fail to exercise our fundamental right to vote, then I guarantee that so much of the progress we’ve fought for will be under threat,” Obama remarked on Saturday. “Congress will still be gridlocked. Statehouses will continue to roll back voting rights and write discrimination into the law.”



Amid citing that the Mississippi Veterans Memorial Stadium used to only be used by whites at one time and that “what was essentially a pro-Jim Crow rally” was once held at the location as well, she lumped same-sex and gender identity issues into the African American civil rights movement.



“So we’ve got to stand side by side with all our neighbors—straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender; Muslim, Jew, Christian, Hindu immigrant, Native American—because the march for civil rights isn’t just about African Americans, it’s about all Americans,” Obama said.



“It’s about making things more just, more equal, more free for all our kids and grand kids,” she stated. “That’s the story you all have the opportunity to write. That’s what this historic university has prepared you to do.”



Bryant had defended his signing of the law by noting that it “merely reinforces the rights which currently exist to exercise of religious freedom as stated in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”



“Mississippians from all walks of life believe that the government shouldn’t punish someone because of their views on marriage,” also stated Alliance Defending Freedom legal counsel Kellie Fiedorek. “After all, you’re not free if your beliefs are confined to your mind. What makes America unique is our freedom to peacefully live out those beliefs, and the Constitution protects that freedom.”



An estimated 35,000 people flocked to hear Obama speak at the university, including approximately 800 graduates.









			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
BOYCOTT TARGET: OVER 671,000 SIGN AFA PETITION AGAINST TRANSGENDER BATHROOM POLICY~TARGET REFUSES TO BACK DOWN
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

DANGER TO WIVES & DAUGHTERS



SIGN PLEDGE TO BOYCOTT:





“Target’s policy is exactly how sexual predators get access to their victims”











BATHROOM BACKLASH: OVER HALF A MILLION SIGN PETITION TO BOYCOTT TARGET



“Target’s policy is exactly how sexual predators get access to their victims,” petition states



BY ADAN SALAZAR



SEE: http://www.infowars.com/bathroom-backlash-over-half-a-million-sign-petition-to-boycott-target/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







A petition calling for a boycott on Target over the store’s new bathroom policy promoting “gender inclusivity” has reached over half a million signatures.



Featured at the American Family Association website, the petition contends Target’s new policy “means a man can simply say he ‘feels like a woman today’ and enter the women’s restroom…even if young girls or women are already in there.”



Furthermore, the petition asserts, “Target’s policy is exactly how sexual predators get access to their victims.”



The new bathroom policy also disproportionately endangers female bathroom users, according to the petition.



“Clearly, Target’s dangerous new policy poses a danger to wives and daughters. We think many customers will agree. And we think the average Target customer is willing to pledge to boycott Target stores until it makes protecting women and children a priority.”



Last week, Target announced via its corporate website it would be changing its bathroom policy to “welcome transgender team members and guests to use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity,” in the name of inclusivity.



Backlash immediately ensued with several parents taking to social media to vent their protest.



“Basically Target just told us – and millions of concerned parents – that we’re no longer accepted, respected, and welcome in their stores,” wrote dad Izzy Avraham last week in a viral Facebook post. “My friends, Target has crossed a line, and I believe this is a test case.”



Others vented on Twitter under the hashtag #BoycottTarget:


















As a solution, the petition’s author suggests, “Target should keep separate facilities for men and women, but for the trans community and for those who simply like using the bathroom alone, a single occupancy unisex option should be provided.”



_______________________________________________________






________________________________________________________



600k+ sign petition boycotting Target after statement about transgender bathroom policy











TARGET REFUSES TO BACK DOWN


                                 







Target’s Pro-Transgender Bathroom Policy Is Dangerous to Women and Children



Published on Apr 23, 2016





As the boycott of Target stores over its pro-transgender bathroom policy grows, the question of just who such a policy puts in danger is a natural one to ask. As these policies proliferate across the country, the number of stories of predators threatening women and children in public restrooms is also growing by the day.


The Target department store chain drew the ire of millions of Americans after it announced it was opening its bathrooms to transgender shoppers and employees and allowing them to choose whatever bathroom they feel like using at any given time.


Days later a #BoycottTarget petition effort launched that drew over 200,000 signatures in a day and over 300,000 by the weekend.


The current imbroglio should not be a surprise, as for years Target has been a big purveyor and supporter of gay-friendly policies and causes. So, this current bathroom policy issue is not the first time the chain waded into left-wing issues.


On its corporate website, for instance, there are many posts and announcements celebrating the LGBT lifestyle.


Furthermore, last year, Target was a corporate sponsor of the “Out & Equal” conference, a summit aimed at forcing corporations into adopting gay-friendly workplace policies.


The company was also praised by gay groups for its “It Gets Better” campaign meant to boost the status of homosexuality in the U.S.















ALEX JONES TRANSGENDER BATHROOMS RANT



Published on Apr 25, 2016





The Target department store chain has jumped into the transgender bathroom debate by declaring that men who claim to be women may use whatever bathroom or changing room they choose. http://www.infowars.com/target-stores…
http://www.infowars.com/is-the-britis…
http://www.infowars.com/youtuber-walk…
http://www.infowars.com/what-pisses-m…















Duke Pesta: Target Panders To Politics, 
Not Customers

























			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
PLANNED PARENTHOOD PRESIDENT COMPARES ABORTION ADVOCACY TO FIGHT AGAINST RACISM DURING SPEECH AT CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

CECILE RICHARDS, PRESIDENT OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD SPEWS HER UNGODLY OPINIONS UNCHALLENGED BY CATHOLIC AUDIENCE



Richard s Credit David Shankbone-compressed



Photo Credit: David Shankbone



PLANNED PARENTHOOD PRESIDENT COMPARES ABORTION ADVOCACY TO FIGHT AGAINST RACISM DURING SPEECH 



AT CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY 



BY HEATHER CLARK








WASHINGTON — The president of Planned Parenthood compared abortion advocacy to the fight against racism during her speech on Wednesday at the nation’s oldest Catholic university, during which she obtained a standing ovation.



Cecile Richards, the daughter of former Texas Gov. Ann Richards, had been invited by the student-run Georgetown Lecture Fund, a move that some sharply criticized.



Roman Catholic Cardinal Donald Wuerl told reporters that it was outside of Catholic tradition to give a platform to an individual who promotes abortion.







“This is the latest in a long history of scandal at Georgetown University,” Cardinal Newman Society President Patrick Reilly also stated. “Disguised as an academic event, this is nothing more than a platform for abortion advocacy at a Catholic university.”



“We’re probably the most liberal Catholic university in the nation,” Michael Khan of Georgetown Right to Life told reporters. “Many of our students and faculty aren’t Catholic and are very hostile to Catholic doctrine and Jesuit and Catholic values. We certainly have an active and strong pro-life group on campus, but there’s an equally, perhaps stronger, pro-choice group on campus.”



Khan’s group was among those who stood outside of the event to protest Richards’ appearance. The group Vita Saxa planted thousands of pink and blue flags on the Georgetown lawn to “represent the 3,562 lives lost in the U.S. to abortion each day.”



“They’ve perpetuated this myth that ‘if we go away, so goes women’s health care,’” said Missy Stone of Students for Life of America. “We’re saying no, there are 13,000 federally qualified health centers nationwide and there’s only 700 Planned Parenthood facilities.”



Richards acknowledged that her appearance came with opposition on Wednesday, but compared abortion advocacy to the nation’s fight against racism.



“Based on my Twitter feed, I know there are a lot of folks who didn’t want me to speak today. So thanks for showing up,” she said, according to audio obtained by the Christian Post. “But it is sort of appropriate, in a way, because I think every bit of progress that we have made in this country and we make as a people in the world is because there are people willing to speak out even when it is unpopular.”



Richards spoke of the opposition John Lewis faced in Selma, Alabama in speaking up for the rights of African Americans, and noted the sit-ins that were held in the South to protest racism.



“Our history with race in America is something that we all have to address, including Planned Parenthood,” she said. “It’s important that we understand our collective history and the legacy that it leaves on those that are still living in an unjust system. Lack of access to healthcare and reproductive rights is a result of many factors—race, gender, sexual orientation, geography and immigration status. In order to build true equity in America we have to address it all.”



Richards also praised founder Margaret Sanger, who was known to be a supporter of eugenics and changed the organization’s name from the Birth Control League to Planned Parenthood after some found it to be offensive.



“It is kind of interesting now to see these sepia-toned photos and from day one, there were women lined up down the block pushing baby strollers with babies on their shoulders,” she recalled of Sanger’s clinic in New York City. “Ten days later, an undercover cop who was posing as a mother busted Margaret and threw her in jail.”



While Richards received a standing ovation in the 400-seat Lohrfink Auditorium where she spoke, others were not so pleased with the presentation, nor the question and answer period that followed.



“I don’t think that today’s event represented a free exchange of ideas or a spirit of dialogue,” student Reed Howard told Religion News. “Instead, Cecile Richards was given a platform to spew her beliefs unchallenged.”



________________________________________________________



THE PROTESTORS



Published on Apr 20, 2016





Video by Ford Fischer, for The College Fix


As Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards spoke at Georgetown University on 4/20/16, many in the pro-life movement organized to protest.


One group called the “American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property” chanted anti-abortion slogans and handed out fliers at the entrance to the school. While they invited debate, many were disturbed by their presence. On camera, one student even attempted to burn their flier with her lighter and threw it on the ground when she failed to do so.


Meanwhile, on campus, a Catholic monsignor along with members of Students for Life of America spoke out about abortion outside the building Richards spoke in.


As pro-life students who attended the speech exited, they said Richards did not satisfactorily answer their questions, but rather avoided the issue of abortion as much as possible.













PROFESSOR TEACHES ABORTION AT GEORGETOWN





















			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
MIKE PITTS: “SOUTH CAROLINA RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM REGISTRY LAW” IS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL COMMUNIST STYLE INFRINGEMENT ON FREEDOMS OF SPEECH & PRESS
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

NO, IT’S NOT LIBERAL NEW JERSEY







MIKE PITTS: 



“SOUTH CAROLINA RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM REGISTRY LAW” 



IS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL, COMMUNIST 



STYLE INFRINGEMENT 



ON FREEDOMS OF SPEECH & PRESS



South Carolina lawmakers consider forcing journalists to register with the state



SEE: http://the-trumpet-online.com/south-carolina-lawmakers-consider-forcing-journalists-to-register-with-the-state/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:









http://www.liberty.news/2016-04-22-sc-lawmakers-consider-forcing-journalists-to-register-with-the-state-to-eliminate-freedom-of-the-press.html



South Carolina is considered a “red state” – that is, one whose legislature is dominated, supposedly, by small-government conservatives and whose governor, Nikki Haley, was a darling of the Tea Party when she was running for her first term. In fact, one of the most conservative of all U.S. senators, Tim Scott, was appointed by Haley to replace a retiring Republican in 2013.



So what gives with the South Carolina legislature considering a bill that is pro-big government, anti-free speech and smacks of authoritarianism?



As reported by The State, Rep. Mike Pitts, a Republican from Laurens, filed a bill recently in the South Carolina House that would establish a “responsible journalism registry” that would be managed by the S.C. secretary of state.



A summary of the legislation says the measure would “establish requirements for persons before working as a journalist for a media outlet and for media outlets before hiring a journalist.” The summary also says the bill would establish registration fees, set fines for non-compliance and establish criminal penalties for violations.



That’s about as nanny state as it gets: fees, fines and penalties.



The State reported further:





A person seeking to register with the state as a journalist would have to submit a criminal record background check and “an affidavit from the media outlet attesting to the applicant’s journalistic competence.”





The full paragraph of the bill, H. 4102, says, “A person seeking to register shall provide all information required by the office including, but not limited to, a criminal record background check, an affidavit from the media outlet attesting to the applicant’s journalistic competence, and an application fee in an amount determined by the office.”



Thankfully, not everyone in the state is in agreement that the bill is a good idea. You can include Bill Rogers, executive director of the S.C. Press Association (The State is a member of that organization), who said the registry proposal “is ridiculous and totally unconstitutional.”



Governments – state or federal – cannot require journalists to register, said Rogers. He cited the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press as evidence of that.



Pitts told The Post and Courier that while his bill is not a reaction to any particular news story, it is intended instead to stimulate a discussion over how he believes gun issues are being reported.



“It strikes me as ironic that the first question is constitutionality from a press that has no problem demonizing firearms,” Pitts said. “With this statement I’m talking primarily about printed press and TV. The TV stations, the six o’clock news and the printed press has no qualms demonizing gun owners and gun ownership.”



The measure states that persons are “not competent” to be journalists in the state if, within three years of applying for the registry, they have been convicted of “libel, slander, or invasion of privacy; or… a felony if the underlying offense was committed to collect, write, or distribute news or other current information for a media outlet.”



Also, a candidate for registry would be denied if “the person has demonstrated a reckless disregard of the basic codes and canons of professional journalism associations, including a disregard of truth, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness, and public accountability, as applicable to the acquisition of newsworthy information and its subsequent dissemination to the public.”



The assumption is that the secretary of state gets to make the determination, and that such determinations are likely to be arbitrary (“Iwas objective!” “No you weren’t!”).



While there isn’t much chance a law like this passes, even if it does it is highly unlikely it would withstand judicial scrutiny. That said, it’s hard to imagine such a law would even be proposed by a member of a political party that is supposedly opposed, ideologically, to the overarching control of nanny government.



One other point: In this day and age, the Internet has created a massive army of citizen journalists who aren’t necessarily educated as journalists or who don’t practice traditional journalism, but who nevertheless “report” news and events as they happen. A bill like this would kill citizen journalism in South Carolina.



__________________________________________________



Would Require Journalists To Register With Government







MEDIA LICENSE, FEES, PENALTIES?











SEE BILL HERE: 




_______________________________________________________



Representative Michael A. Pitts



Representative Michael A. Pitts











Republican – Laurens



District 14 – Greenwood & Laurens Counties – Map











Columbia Address



327C Blatt Bldg.

Columbia 29201



Business Phone (803) 734-2830







Home Address



372 Bucks Point Rd.

Laurens 29360



Home Phone (864) 923-2925








Send message to Representative Pitts













Personal Information


    

  • Retired Greenville Police
    • 

  • Born in Laurens
    • 

  • Son of the late Joseph C., Jr. and the late Lois Lollis Pitts
    • 

  • Lander University, B.S., 1985
    • 

  • June 28, 1974 married Susan W. Slay, 3 children, Nolan, Clifton, and Della
    • 

  • Ex Council of NASC
    • 

  • Life member, NRA
    • 

  • North American Hunting Club
    • 

  • Gun Owners of South Carolina
    • 

  • Member, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
    • 

  • National Wild Turkey Federation
    • 

  • ALEC
    • 

  • President, National Assembly of Sportsmen’s Caucuses (NASC)
    • 

  • Other Funds Oversight
    • 

  • Lottery Oversight
    • 

  • Agency Heads Salary and Benefits
    • 

  • Rabun Creek Baptist Church
    • 

  • United States Army Reserve
    • 






   





Committee Assignments




Sponsored Bills


    

    

  • Primary Sponsor:  Yes   No
    • 

  • Search Session: 2015-2016 (121)2013-2014 (120)2011-2012 (119)2009-2010 (118)2007-2008 (117)2005-2006 (116)2003-2004 (115) 
    • 




Voting Record


    

    

  • Search Session:  2015-2016 (121) 2013-2014 (120) 2011-2012 (119) 
    • 




Service In Public Office


    

  • Vice Chairman, Laurens County Council
    • 

  • House of Representatives, 2003 – Pres
    • 


















			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
PRIVY PRIVACY: WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE RESTROOMS?
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

PRIVY PRIVACY: WHY DO WE 



EVEN HAVE RESTROOMS?



POTTY RE-TRAINING FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FORGOTTEN DECENCY & THE CONSTITUTION



NO KIDDING! WHY THIS NEEDS AN EXPLANATION IN 2016



Published on Apr 23, 2016





Why don’t we just do it in the road? Why do some want to remove privacy in the privy? Why are we worried about national borders but opposed to legal boundaries on government intrusion into private property, privacy & community ideas of decency? Can a judge mandate co-ed bathrooms and showers for boys & girls? Can a state legislature dictate urinals (and men) be added to the ladies’ room? You don’t have a country if you don’t have borders and legal boundaries. You won’t have a country worth having if you destroy the borders and boundaries that define privacy, private property, the difference between men & women, and the family.







You won’t have a country worth having if you 



destroy the borders and boundaries 



that define privacy and decency

















			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
HILLARY ON USING EXECUTIVE ORDERS TO TAKE GUNS: “AMEN”~CHELSEA CLINTON HAPPY THAT JUDGE SCALIA IS DEAD SO MORE GUN CONTROL LAWS CAN BE PASSED
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

LIBERAL RELIGIOUS FERVOR



HILLARY ON USING EXECUTIVE ORDERS TO TAKE GUNS: “AMEN”





Supporter urges Clinton to take on “the sons and daughters of Charlton Heston”





BY PAUL JOSEPH WATSON



SEE: http://www.infowars.com/hillary-on-using-executive-orders-to-take-guns-amen/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







Hillary Clinton plans to use executive orders to chip away at the gun rights of American citizens.



HILLARY: “LET THE CONGREGATION SAY ‘AMEN'”







During an event in Philadelphia, a Hillary-supporting gun control advocate rose to urge Clinton to take on “the sons and daughters” of former NRA icon and legendary actor Charlton Heston.



“We need you to be able to use your executive powers to legislate that you can’t carry guns in cars,” said the man, adding, “You can’t bring guns in buildings that are not insured to carry them.”



Hillary nodded in agreement before the man asserted, “We need executive powers that say we will fight for life and will not kowtow to the sons and daughters of Charlton Heston. We can’t kowtow to the sons and daughters of Charlton Heston.”



“We must have a greater voice. Thank you for coming and I will elect you,” concluded the man.



“Whoa…let the congregation say, ‘Amen,’” responded Hillary.



Hillary hasn’t shied away from expressing her support for gun control while on the campaign trail.







Earlier this month at a similar event, the former Secretary of State nodded along vigorously as a member of the panel described gun owners as terrorists.



“Citizens are the terrorists, right?” the woman states as Hillary nods multiple times. “We’re so worried about terrorism but we have terrorism on our own soil,” she continued.



Earlier this month at a similar event, the former Secretary of State nodded along vigorously as a member of the panel described gun owners as terrorists.



“Citizens are the terrorists, right?” the woman states as Hillary nods multiple times. “We’re so worried about terrorism but we have terrorism on our own soil,” she continued.



The Clinton’s appetite for gun control runs in the family.



During a separate speech, Chelsea Clinton expressed enthusiasm about the opportunity to restrict firearms rights now that Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia had died.







______________________________________________________________







Chelsea Clinton: Gun Control Can Now Be Passed Thanks To Scalia’s Death



Published on Apr 23, 2016





During a speech in support of Hillary Clinton’s campaign for President, her daughter Chelsea told those gathered that there is now a great opportunity to pass strict gun control laws since Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia has passed away.http://www.infowars.com/chelsea-clint…















CHELSEA CLINTON: GUN CONTROL CAN BE IMPLEMENTED NOW SCALIA IS DEAD





“The next time the Court rules on gun control, it will make a definitive ruling.”





BY STEVE WATSON



SEE: http://www.infowars.com/chelsea-clinton-gun-control-can-be-implemented-now-scalia-is-dead/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







During a speech in support of Hillary Clinton’s campaign for President, her daughter Chelsea told those gathered that there is now a great opportunity to pass strict gun control laws since Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia has passed away.







“It matters to me that my mom also recognizes the role the Supreme Court has when it comes to gun control.” Clinton said





“With Justice Scalia on the bench, one of the few areas where the Court actually had an inconsistent record relates to gun control,” she added.



“Sometimes the Court upheld local and state gun control measures as being compliant with the Second Amendment and sometimes the Court struck them down.”



Clinton then touted several gun control lobbyist groups who have supported Hillary Clinton, and predicted that if Hillary becomes president, new laws will be implemented.



“So if you listen to Moms Demand Action and the Brady Campaign and the major efforts pushing for smart, sensible and enforceable gun control across our country, disclosure, have endorsed my mom, they say they believe the next time the Court rules on gun control, it will make a definitive ruling,” Clinton said.



“So it matters to me that my mom is the only person running for president who not only constantly makes that connection but also has a strong record on gun control and standing up to the NRA.” Chelsea continued.



“This is one of those issues I didn’t know I could care more about until I became a mother. And I think every day about the Sandy Hook families whose children every day, don’t come home from school. And I can’t even imagine that living horror and tragedy.” she concluded.



Scalia’s death in February was mired in confusing circumstances after he was found alone in his room with a pillow over his head, and his body was quickly embalmed following the decision not to conduct an autopsy.



A poll conducted by the Conservative Outfitters website finds that 79% of its readers suspect “foul play” was involved, while intelligence insiders also surmised that all was not right with the circumstances of Scalia’s passing.



Although the leftist media has attempted to portray any examination of the narrative about Scalia’s death as crass and insensitive, the same standards seemingly don’t apply when it comes to leftists themselves celebrating the death of the Supreme Court Justice.









______________________________________________



HILLARY COMING FOR YOUR GUNS















WANTED 25% TAX ON GUNS IN 1993









































			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
RAND PAUL PUSHES BILL TO BLOCK OBAMA’S SOCIAL SECURITY GUN BAN
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						





RAND PAUL PUSHES BILL TO BLOCK OBAMA’S SOCIAL SECURITY GUN BAN 



BY AWR HAWKINS




republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







Senator 



Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) 


has introduced legislation to stop President Barack Obama from imposing a stealthy gun ban on an estimated 75,000 Social Security beneficiaries.



Breitbart News previously reported last July that Obama’s gun ban would hit Social Security beneficiaries who are labeled as having “mental health” issues. That category is so broad that it includes people who need help to handle personal finances.



Obama added this gun ban into the executive gun controls he announced in January.



The White House explained that the Social Security Administration would execute the ban by reporting beneficiaries with a “mental health issue” to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). This, in turn, would bar them from purchasing a gun.



The reporting would happen “in consultation with the Department of Justice” and would “cover appropriate records of the approximately 75,000 people each year who have a documented mental health issue, receive disability benefits, and are unable to manage those benefits because of their mental impairment.”



Senator Paul has now introduced legislation to shield beneficiaries from losing gun rights simply because they need help balancing a checkbook.



Paul’s legislation–Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act–explicitly “prevents the Social Security Administrator from reporting individuals to NICS unless [that] individual has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent.”



In other words, it makes a finding of mental incompetence the result of a process rather than a proclamation. This protects the due process rights of each individual who might otherwise have simply been proclaimed mentally incompetent.



Moreover, even after the proper process has been followed, Paul’s bill requires the Attorney General to certify each adjudication–which is one more way of taking pains to ensure the protection of individual rights. And once an adjudication is lifted or absolved, rights are restored to the individual.



________________________________________________________




04.14.16



Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act



WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Rand Paul today introduced the Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act, which would provide protection for gun owners by ensuring due process rights are upheld in the event an individual’s eligibility is questioned and reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).



“The Obama administration is at it again, and this time they are unilaterally stripping gun rights from our nation’s veterans and seniors. The Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act will provide necessary protection for gun-owning Americans, and ultimately ensure that the Second Amendment is not infringed upon,” Sen. Paul said.



The Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act has gained support from the following organizations: the Gun Owners of America and the National Association of Gun Rights.



“Senator Paul’s ‘Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act’ will do much to block President Obama’s ability to strip the Second Amendment rights from law-abiding gun owners, veterans, and senior citizens without due process. Furthermore, it would restore rights for thousands of law-abiding gun owners, veterans, and senior citizens who were stripped of their Second Amendment rights without getting their day in court. Once again this bill shows that Senator Paul is one of Washington’s leading advocates for gun owners and the Second Amendment,” said the National Association of Gun Rights.



To read the legislation in its entirety, click HERE. Top-line bullet points and background information on the Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act can be found HERE or below.



BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THE PROTECTING GUN RIGHTS AND DUE PROCESS ACT


    

  • Prohibits the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to an individual that has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent or committed to a psychiatric hospital. Adjudication requires findings by a judicial officer or court and the individual receives notice to participate with counsel. 
    • 



    

  • Within 90 days, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs must review and remove from NICS any veteran that has not been adjudicated as mentally incompetent. The Attorney General will certify that the removal of names has taken place.
    • 



    

  • Prevents the Social Security Administrator from reporting individuals to NICS unless individual has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent. Attorney General will conduct a yearly review to certify reported names have necessary documentation.
    • 



    

  • Attorney General must certify a state’s report indicating a person had been adjudicated as mentally incompetent prior to inclusion to NICS.
    • 



    

  • All individuals considered to no longer be adjudicated as mentally incompetent will be notified and have their rights restored. 
    • 


			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
SAUDI ARABIA THREATENS TO DUMP $750 BILLION IN U.S. INVESTMENTS IF SECRET 28 PAGES OF 9/11 REPORT ARE RELEASED
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

MUSLIM BLACKMAIL FROM SAUDIS

FURTHER PROOF ISLAM IS NOT PEACEFUL AND/OR COMPATIBLE WITH CHRISTIANITY

























Pamela Geller & Robert Spencer 
on Sean Hannity Radio Discussing 
Saudi involvement in 9/11











This Is Why The Saudi’s Are So Scared Of Trump And The 28 Pages











Bailout The Truth! Saudis Attempt $750B Blackmail Over Secret 28 Pages



Published on Apr 19, 2016





When it comes to allowing the American people to know what the 9/11 Commission said about Saudi involvements, the Senators running for President — Clinton, Sanders, Cruz — are either indifferent or oppose disclosure and compensation as the Saudi’s threaten economic blackmail.















Senator Bob Graham tells 60 Minutes 
the secret 28 pages prove Saudi Arabia 
financed 9/11 attacks











Ron Paul Reports: 
Saudi 9/11 Blackmail: ‘We’ll Dump Dollar!’



Streamed live on Apr 18, 2016





The Saudi foreign minister threatened to dump $750 billion in US Treasuries if Congress passes a bill suspending sovereign immunity over state involvement in terrorist attacks on US soil. The possible release of the secret 28 pages of the 9/11 report may implicate Saudi state organs in the attack. Who will blink?


Be sure to visit http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com for more libertarian commentary.













			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
TRUMP’S PRESBYTERIANISM NOT BIBLICAL, BUT EXPEDIENT MORAL RELATIVISM: ABORTION EXCEPTIONS; TRANSGENDERS IN BATHROOMS
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

CHAMPION FOR CHRISTIANS???



TRUMP TAKES THE BROAD WAY, NOT THE NARROW WAY OF JESUS:



 WON’T FIGHT ON MORAL ISSUES; 



“LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS”; 



BECAUSE IT CAUSES TOO MUCH “STRIFE”



Except Trump Wants Republican Platform Changed to Include Abortion Exceptions 



(Even if it Causes Strife)



BY HEATHER CLARK



SEE: http://christiannews.net/2016/04/22/trump-wants-republican-platform-changed-to-include-abortion-exceptions/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







Trump abortion-compressed





During his appearance on NBC’s “Today” show on Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Donal Trump said that he would like the Republican platform changed to include exceptions to abortion.



Co-host Savannah Guthrie noted to Trump during the broadcast that the current platform does not cite any exceptions, and asked Trump if he would like them to be included.



“The Republican platform, every four years, has a provision that states that the right of the unborn child shall not be infringed. And it makes no exceptions for rape, for incest, for the life of the mother. Would you want to change the Republican platform to include the exceptions that you have?” she asked.







“Yes, I would,” he replied. “Yes, I would. Absolutely. For the three exceptions, I would.”



“Would you have an exception for the health of the mother?” Guthrie inquired.



“I would leave it for the life of the mother,” Trump responded, “but I would absolutely have the three exceptions.”



The current Republican platform reads in part, “Faithful to the ‘self-evident’ truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.”



As previously reported, in January, Trump wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Examiner that he supports abortion exceptions.



“Let me be clear—I am pro-life,” he stated. “I support that position with exceptions allowed for rape, incest or the life of the mother being at risk.”



Trump said that he “did not always hold [his current] position,” but, without explanation conveyed that he “had a significant personal experience that brought the precious gift of life into perspective for me.” Trump stated that he now sees that Roe v. Wade has resulted in the deaths of millions of Americans.



“Over time, our culture of life in this country has started sliding toward a culture of death,” he wrote. “Perhaps the most significant piece of evidence to support this assertion is that since Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Count 43 years ago, over 50 million Americans never had the chance to enjoy the opportunities offered by this country.”



Roe v. Wade, however, centered on a Texas woman named Norma McCorvey who sought an abortion over an alleged rape, which Trump states that he would allow for an exception. McCorvey later admitted that she had lied, as she was never raped. She also never obtained an abortion, but placed her child up for adoption and became a vocal pro-life advocate.



Trump’s statements allowing for exceptions are similar to those made by other recent Republican presidents, including George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush.



“My own position on abortion is well-known and remains unchanged. I oppose abortion in all cases except rape or incest, or where the life of the mother is at stake,” George H.W. Bush said in 1992.



”My position has always been three exceptions: rape, incest and the life of the mother,” George W. Bush likewise outlined in 2006.



Last month, following controversy over his remarks about abortion, Trump said that “at this moment, the laws are set, and I think we have to leave it that way.”



“You had told Bloomberg in January that you believe abortion should be banned in some pregnancies,” John Dickerson with CBS’ “Face the Nation” asked. “Where would you like to see a ban…?”



“Well first of all, I would’ve preferred states’ rights,” Trump said. “I think it would’ve been better if it were up to the states. But right now, the laws are set. And that’s the way the laws are.”



“But do you have a feeling on how they should change?” Dickerson asked. “There are a lot of laws you wan to change. You’ve talked about them—everything from libel to abortion. Anything you’d want to change on abortion?”



“At this moment, the laws are set. And I think we have to leave it that way,” Trump replied.









_______________________________________________________________









Trump: Let Men Dressed Like Women Into Women’s Restrooms





BY HEATHER CLARK



SEE: http://christiannews.net/2016/04/21/trump-let-men-dressed-like-women-into-womens-restrooms/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:


















Being interviewed at a town hall event in Indianapolis on Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump expressed objection to North Carolina’s “bathroom bill” and said that he is fine with those who identify as the opposite sex using the restroom of their choice.



“Tell us your views of LGBT and how you plan to be inclusive,” he was asked by a viewer of NBC’s “Today” show. “Please speak about the North Carolina bathroom law.”



“Oh, I had a feeling that question was going to come up, I will tell you. North Carolina did something that was very strong. And they’re paying a big price. There’s a lot of problems,” he replied.



Trump said that he believes that matters should have been left alone as disagreement over North Carolina’s law caused controversy in society and effected the state economy.



“[O]ne of the best answers I heard was from a commentator yesterday saying, leave it the way it is right now,” Trump said. “There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go. They use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate. There has been so little trouble.”



“And the problem with what happened in North Carolina is the strife and the economic—I mean, the economic punishment that they’re taking,” he continued.



The Republican presidential candidate said that he doesn’t like the idea of creating separate restrooms for “transgendered” persons.



“First of all, I think that would be discriminatory in a certain way. That would be unbelievably expensive for businesses in the country,” he explained. “Leave it the way it is.”



Trump was also asked if Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner were to enter Trump Tower, if he would be fine with Jenner using the restroom of his choice.



“That is correct,” Trump replied.



As previously reported, in February, Trump was asked by a lesbian reporter if he would support homosexual causes as president, to which he replied that he would in the name of bringing people together.



“[W]e’ve had some great progress for the gay and lesbian community through politics, through all sorts of judicial actions and elected actions over the past 20 years,” said Susan O’Connell, the publisher of Bay Windows, which according to its website is “New England’s largest publication for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender readers.”



“When President Trump is in office can we look for more forward motion on equality for gays and lesbians?” she asked.



“Well, you can,” Trump replied. “And look, again, we’re going to bring people together. And that’s your thing and other people have their thing. We have to bring all people together, and if we don’t we’re not going to have a country anymore. It’s going to be a total mess. It’s a mess right now, and it’s going to be worse.”



Trump has stated that he does not support same-sex “marriage,” but also told reporters last year that he believes the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges is “the law of the land.”



“I like the idea of amending the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include a ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation,” he told the homosexual publication “The Advocate” in 2000. “We don’t need to rewrite the laws currently on the books, although I do think we need to address hate-crimes legislation. But amending the Civil Rights Act would grant the same protection to gay people that we give to other Americans. It’s only fair.”








________________________________________________________________



A Warning to Conservative Christians Supporting Trump



Published on Apr 21, 2016





In light of Donald Trump’s comments on 4-21-16 re: abortion, transgender rights, and the North Carolina bathroom privacy bill, Dr. Brown raises concerns for conservative Christians looking to Trump for support and protection.





















			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
MONETARY POLITICAL CORRECTNESS TO CREATE RACIAL DIVISION: ANDREW JACKSON NOW DEEMED A WHITE RACIST SLAVE MASTER TO BE REMOVED FROM $20 CURRENCY NOTE
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						









    



























Donald Trump Is (Slightly) Wrong About 
Harriet Tubman And The 20 Dollar Bill











Americans Petition to Ban Cash and Issue New Digital Dollar for a Cashless Society











Why The Fed Wants To Memory Hole Andrew Jackson



Published on Apr 20, 2016





It has been announced that Andrew Jackson will be replaced on the $20 by Harriet Tubman. Regardless of whose face we use, it’s the Federal Reserve that needs to go. We look at why the faces on our money are there, why Hamilton is not being removed as originally announced and what Andrew Jackson’s Bank War tells us about the Federal Reserve, the Supreme Court and the Constitution in our time. 















$20 Bill is About Creating Racial Division



Published on Apr 21, 2016





Jackson needs to come off because he owned slaves? Jackson saved his country from slavery to the British, from slavery to the Central Bank slavery and from slavery to the dictates of the Supreme Court. Do you realize YOU’RE the slave of the Federal Reserve and Obama? 











BLACK TO THE FRONT; 



WHITE TO THE BACK 



OF THE $20 BILL 



(NOT THE BUS THIS TIME, 



BUT YOU GET IT)








Andrew Jackson, Who Fought Central Bank, Removed From $20 



As “Public Concern For Liberty” Erased



BY MAC SLAVO



SEE: http://www.activistpost.com/2016/04/andrew-jackson-removed-from-20-dollar-bill.html; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







The War on Cash has many fronts.



The latest battle is for the face of the currency itself, and the central bankers, who control the front anyway, have imposed a symbolic defeat against the leaders in America’s past who have fought against the stranglehold of the money makers.



Naturally, there are liberal politics at play, fighting for every inch of ground in the war for ideological re-engineering. History is being whitewashed, various figures of antiquity rolling in their graves….



At stake is a dispute for the powers of government even better than the more famous duel between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton, of whom we also speak.















The iconic $20 bill, with the face of President Andrew Jackson, and the $10 bill, with the face of the nation’s first Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton, have long pitted two ideological extremes against each other as they pass along as some of the most used denominations in circulation.



But now, the money powers at the Treasury Department have decided that it is time to add a woman’s face to the money supply as well.



As such, the powers-that-bank have decided to oust Andrew Jackson from the line up, and with it, part of his legacy.



It will be “removed in favor of a female representing the struggle for racial equality,” according to CNN, while an early proposal to remove Alexander Hamilton’s bill will be scrapped, though the proposal includes a redesign on the backs of his and several other notes with scenes from the Woman’s Suffrage Movement, Susan B. and all the gals.





Treasury Secretary Jack Lew is expected to announce this week that Alexander Hamilton’s face will remain on the front of the $10 bill and a woman will replace Andrew Jackson on the face of the $20 bill, a senior government source told CNN on Saturday.





Dramatically, it seems that there was a backlash to counter the coup against Hamilton, including support from former Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke:





The decision to make the historic change at the expense of Hamilton drew angry rebukes from fans of the former Treasury Secretary. The pro-Hamilton movement gained steam after the smash success of the hip-hop Broadway musical about his life this year.



Those pressures led Lew to determine that Hamilton should remain on the front of the bill.





And there’s a reason for Bernanke’s bias towards Hamilton.






It was Hamilton, who from the early days of the nation clamored for a central bank and a strong interventionist federal government.



I have quoted Thomas DiLorenzo on the evil Hamilton before:



Hamilton was a compulsive statist who wanted to bring the corrupt British mercantilist system — the very system the American Revolution was fought to escape from — to America. He fought fiercely for his program of corporate welfare, protectionist tariffs, public debt, pervasive taxation, and a central bank run by politicians and their appointees out of the nation’s capital….



Hamilton complained to George Washington that “we need a government of more energy” and expressed disgust over “an excessive concern for liberty in public men”…



The Philadelphie Federal Reserve publication. A History of Central Banking in America, reports:



Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury, urged Congress to also assume the war debts of the individual states and then create a national bank to help refinance all these debts. Hamilton’s proposal faced major opposition. Critics said that Hamilton’s bank was unconstitutional, would be a monopoly, and would reduce the power of the states. Although Hamilton won, the bank’s charter was limited to 20 years.









And that’s right where Andrew Jackson’s legacy with the banks picks up.



With the charter of the first “Bank of the United States” ending, Jackson was determined to stop the charter of the second “Bank of the United States” and famously stated:









“You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God, I will rout you out.” (Andrew Jackson, to a delegation of bankers discussing the recharter of the Second Bank of the United States, 1832)





President Jackson likened their agents to the hydra-beast, with its many heads, and even survived an assassination attempt, by staving off an attacker personally.



jackson-banks-vipersThe bankers, and the powerful families including the Rothschilds who supported it, wanted a “national bank” because they could load the board with “their” guys and outweigh the will of the people and the normal channels of government.



You’ll be kicking yourself for not picking up silver at these prices (Ad)



jackson-route-bankers-national-bankOf course, the same exact state of affairs has been going on today for more than a century with the Federal Reserve, which is run by the successors to the same exact banking interests, including the still immensely-powerful Rothschild family.







The struggle is depicted well in The Money Masters, which spans several centuries of history with the threat of banking powers over individual sovereignty in stark contrast. To be sure, there is an important and nefarious plot afoot to ensnare you, your family and everyone on the block with debt.







There is a line, and you should figure out what side of it you’re going to be on.



Jackson narrowly succeeded in staving off banker domination of the U.S. during his day.







Of course, Andrew Jackson, who was the United States’ seventh president, was also a complete controversy his entire lifetime. It is no surprise that the same people who took down the Confederate flag from the South on the back of a mass shooting tragedy are now trying to tear down the image of a particularly controversial and intriguing figure from the American past.



Jackson was a recalcitrant and unyielding general and war hero, and later an outsider riding a wave of populist support into the White House, bringing in sometimes unscrupulous companions, and plenty of Masons. Many of his backers were diametrically opposed to the entrenched power of New York bankers and speculators, as well as patrician politicians who dominated the first phase of politics in the nation’s history. Jackson played a nasty role in the Trail of Tears affairs with Indians, too, and with the South and Western expansion of slave-friendly territories. Many shades of grey.



Meanwhile, behind the scenes in the founding days of this country, Alexander Hamilton, an advocate of strong central government, and maneuvered on behalf of his banker masters to collectivize the war debt from the states and create a central bank to control the financial strength of the country, and ingrain the early United States with the mindset of the British masters they had just fought to shake off.



After the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, and the crisis and consolidation of wealth during the Great Depression, and ever since the 2008 economic collapse, the rule by bankers has become a foregone conclusion, though there will be more chances to shake off their yoke of control. (BitCoin is one possible avenue; Congressionally-controlled greenbacks another; gold and silver yet another…)



Erasing Andrew Jackson from the faces of the fiat funny-money that is passed around by an increasingly ignorant and dependent society (which itself has adopted digital currency as the new norm) will further cut off the past from the masses, and ensure their enslavement.



Read more:



_____________________________________________________________





Tubman’s Replacement of Jackson Highlights Currency Changes



Tubman’s Replacement of Jackson 



Highlights Currency Changes



BY STEVE BYAS



SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/item/23019-tubman-s-replacement-of-jackson-highlights-currency-changes; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:









Harriet Tubman (shown) was an escaped slave who became a major leader in the Underground Railroad — the organized effort to help escaping slaves in the early part of the 19th century. The Underground Railroad used “safe houses” and a network of anti-slavery activists. Tubman died in 1913. After the abolition of slavery, Tubman turned her attention to women’s suffrage. Now, she will become the first person of black African ancestry on American currency, but not the first woman. That honor was held by Pocahontas. The last woman’s whose image appeared on American paper money was Martha Washington.



Tubman replaces Andrew Jackson, who first made it onto a $20 Federal Reserve Note in 1936 (the 100th anniversary of his election as president). Jackson will remain on the back of the note, sharing space with an image of the White House.



Secretary of the Treasury Jacob Lew announced that Tubman will appear on the $20 bill and added that the $10 and $5 bills are also scheduled to have updates, as well. Presently, the Lincoln Memorial is on the back side of the $5 bill. Now, the $5 bill will be redesigned to highlight certain events that took place there, including the famous “I have a dream” speech by Martin Luther King. But Alexander Hamilton, considered the father of American central banking, and Abraham Lincoln, the nation’s 16th president, will continue to grace those denominations of money.



The $10 note had been the next bill scheduled for an overhaul, with the plan to replace Hamilton, but that plan met with a great amount of resistance. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke contended that Hamilton, as the father of the First Bank of the United States, had a better claim than any other person to be on American currency.



Predictably, any mention of Andrew Jackson includes the obligatory derogatory comments that he was a slave owner and, in the words of the LA Times, his polices “led to the deaths of countless Native Americans.”



Cherokee Chief Bill John Baker weighed in, praising the selection of Tubman, adding that Jackson’s legacy “was never one to be celebrated, and his image on our currency is a constant reminder of his crimes against Natives.”



Certainly, “Old Hickory” is now reviled by the “politically correct” crowd and cast as a man of almost unbelievable evil. The image now perpetuated in the popular American culture, the media, and in academia is more like a comic book villain rather than a real flesh-and-blood human being with many flaws — and many heroic features.



A little perspective is in order.



Andrew Jackson’s role in the Indian removals is certainly part of a dark chapter in American history. He carried out the will of Congress in negotiating resettlement treaties with various tribes. These treaties were overwhelmingly approved by the American public. If we are going to erase the other positive contributions of Jackson to American history because of this, then it is only fair to spread the blame to Congress — and to the people themselves who were alive at the time. And Jackson was not even president for all of the removals. The Cherokee removals actually took place after Jackson was living in retirement at the Hermitage in Tennessee. The Indian removal was an indefensible policy, but Jackson did not even originate the idea of moving the indigenous tribes west of the Mississippi River. After Thomas Jefferson and Congress purchased the Louisiana Territory from the French in 1803, Jefferson urged Native American tribal chiefs to voluntarily move west.



Jefferson was troubled by continued westward expansion, which was leading to the destruction of the Indians’ tribes and culture. As farms moved westward, forest lands, so critical to the tribal economy, were diminished. After Jefferson, others, notably Secretary of War John C. Calhoun, advocated Indian removal. Had public opinion polls been conducted at the time, there is little question that removal would have received strong majority support — whether that removal was effected through voluntary or involuntary means.



Though the Indian removals were certainly a prime example of “democracy in action” (of course, our country was founded as a republic, not a democracy), the back side of the new $5 bill will honor events at the Lincoln Memorial that, in the words of the folks at the Treasury Department, “helped to shape our history and our democracy.”



As Americans pushed up against, and even into, Indian lands, pressure was brought for the government to purchase more and more land from the indigenous tribes. With increasing reluctance, tribes signed away land, extracting promises that the federal government would keep white settlers off the remaining Indian land.



But once again, “democracy” won out. Jackson, a military man, saw firsthand the difficulty in enforcing these promises. Before he removed the Indians, he removed whites — from Indian lands. Then they would return. Any president who actually cracked down on settlers violating tribal sovereignty would face the settlers’ wrath at the polls. These poor settlers may not have had much wealth, but they did have the vote. And they were not afraid to use it.



By the time Jackson took the White House in 1828, it was clear that either Jackson would remove the Indians in the east, or the people would elect a different president who would accomplish the removal of the Indians.



Jackson’s removal of the Indians is certainly a blot on his reputation. But if we are going to delete every person off the currency who has flaws, Federal Reserve Notes would have no portraits.



And Jackson never said, “The only good Indian is a dead Indian.” In fact, Jackson and his wife, Rachel, adopted a little Creek Indian orphan boy.



To say that Jackson is not alone in having done some things wrong is not an argument for keeping him on the $20 bill. So, what did he ever do to deserve his place on American currency in the first place?



Jackson certainly has significant achievements. On January 8, 1815, leading a rag-tag army composed of frontier militia, pirates, and allied Indians, Jackson annihilated the British army at the Battle of New Orleans — an army that had just bested Napoleon. Had he lost, the city might very well not be part of the United States today. Historical illiterates often comment that the battle was actually fought after the War of 1812 was over. Their contention is that the Treaty of Ghent, ending the war, was signed in Belgium several days earlier. Such an assertion does not consider that the treaty was as yet unratified by Parliament, and therefore not yet in effect. Had the British won at New Orleans, it is doubtful the Parliament would have ratified the Treaty of Ghent, and then simply handed the city back to the United States.



Before Jackson became the seventh president, the Republican Party launched by Thomas Jefferson had drifted into adopting many of the policies of the rival Federalist Party, led by Hamilton. While Jefferson had begun his Republican Party largely to oppose Hamilton’s Bank of the United States, regarded by Jefferson as unconstitutional, it was his own party that later chartered a Second Bank of the United States in 1816.



This was a major complaint of the “Old Republicans,” who wanted to restore the party to its constitutionalist roots. The movement needed a popular man who could attract enough voter support to regain control of the government.



That man was Andrew Jackson. In 1832, in an effort to stop Jackson from winning reelection, Nicholas Biddle, the president of the Second Bank of the United States, brought up its 20-year charter for a renewal vote four years early. The opposition Whig Party thought if Jackson dared to veto the measure, he would lose the election to Henry Clay. If he signed it, their central bank was safe for another 20 years.



Jackson vetoed the bill, leading to the eventual demise of America’s second central bank. In his veto message, he argued that the bank was an unconstitutional granting of a monopoly by Congress (much as Jefferson had argued against Hamilton’s bank many years earlier). He believed it was an example of the wealthy and powerful elites using the power of the federal government to achieve an unfair advantage — much like the “crony capitalism” of today — and was a dangerous concentration of power in the hands of that elite.



The Federal Reserve System, created in 1913, was, in effect, America’s third central bank. Some have wondered if the decision to put Jackson on a Federal Reserve Note — paper money of the sort that was despised by Jackson — was some little joke against the man who had once snuffed out the life of central banking in the United States.



Certainly, Andrew Jackson did both good and bad as president. But Jackson’s victory over the British in 1815, and his killing of central banking in 1832 are certainly both great achievements. While there are other Americans who, it could be argued, have made even greater positive contributions to the country than Jackson (as well as the others who are presently the faces of our currency), there would certainly not be very many.



Jackson would have, no doubt, approved of his removal from a note issued by a central bank in exchange for the abolition of the central bank itself, known in America as the Federal Reserve System.



And as long we are talking about changes to the currency, perhaps we should note that the biggest and most devastating change to the currency has already occurred — making it fiat currency (money not back by a precious commodity such as gold) that can be created out of thin air at a whim, causing inflation.



That was the very thing that Jackson tried to prevent with his great veto, killing central banking in 1832. Hopefully, we will have another president again who will have Jackson’s courage to kill the Federal Reserve Bank — and with it, restore the soundness to American currency, making it once again as good as gold.









			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
“INCLUSIVE” BATHROOMS/FITTING ROOMS AT TARGET~ANNOUNCES CUSTOMERS MAY USE THEM CORRESPONDING WITH “GENDER IDENTITY”
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						





ABOVE: CAROLINE WANGA, TARGET’S SENIOR DIRECTOR 



OF DIVERSITY & INCLUSION















TRANSGENDERS’ CATERED TO AT RETAILER



TARGET ANNOUNCES CUSTOMERS MAY USE RESTROOM, FITTING ROOM CORRESPONDING WITH “GENDER IDENTITY” 



BY HEATHER CLARK



SEE: http://christiannews.net/2016/04/20/target-announces-customers-may-use-restroom-fitting-room-corresponding-with-gender-identity/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







The retail giant Target has announced that it will now allow employees and customers to use the restroom or fitting room that corresponds with their “gender identity.”



The corporate headquarters posted its announcement to its website on Tuesday, stating that it wished to outline its stance on the issue in light of discussions over recent laws passed in North Carolina and Mississippi.



“Inclusivity is a core belief at Target. It’s something we celebrate,” Target officials wrote. “We stand for equality and equity, and strive to make our guests and team members feel accepted, respected and welcomed in our stores and workplaces every day.”







The company then outlined that restrooms and fitting rooms in stores may be used in accordance with one’s preferred gender.



“In our stores, we demonstrate our commitment to an inclusive experience in many ways. Most relevant for the conversations currently underway, we welcome transgender team members and guests to use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity,” the company said.



Target also expressed its support for the federal Equality Act, a bill introduced in Congress last July that would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to “include sex, sexual orientation and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation.”



“Target proudly stands with the LGBT community through all that we do, from our partnerships with organizations like the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), to our volunteer efforts, and even the products we sell,” Caroline Wanga, Target’s senior director of diversity and inclusion, said in a statement last September.



Company executives reiterated their support on Tuesday and said that recent laws on restroom use prompted them to provide their store policy publicly.



“We regularly assess issues and consider many factors such as impact to our business, guests and team members. Given the specific questions these legislative proposals raised about how we manage our fitting rooms and restrooms, we felt it was important to state our position,” Target’s announcement said.



Comments under the blog post were mixed, but with the majority expressing strong disapproval.



“I will no longer be shopping at Target,” one former customer wrote. “It is your right as a business to establish policies, but … you will also have to deal with the consequences.”



“I’m done too!” another stated. “I am not being respected when I have to share a restroom or fitting room with someone who is of the opposite sex!”



“I’m closing down my red card account and no longer shopping at Target. This is a privacy invasion and I’m am not comfortable with it!” a third remarked. “Plenty of other stores to shop at. You are losing a very loyal customer. Shopped there at least 5xs a week. Bye!”



As previously reported, Target has also expressed their support for homosexuality in their company advertisements, releasing a commercial in 2014 that features two lesbian women who are preparing a room for the arrival of a child.



“I’m Amanda, and I’m Cat,” the ad begins. “And we’re having a baby!”



Some noted that it is impossible for two women to have a baby and that the child has a father somewhere in the world.



______________________________________________________



Target’s move to gender-neutral signs has people talking











2015: Anti-Christ Alert! Target Stores Eliminate The Identity of Boys and Girls ‘Gender’











Gender Identity Policy Threatens Children’s Safety











Target: “Use the bathroom of your ‘gender identity'” = PURE EVIL !!! TVC Responds













			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
“THEY ARE FOR WAR”: “CONSERVATIVES” ATTACK 91 YEAR OLD PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY FOR SUPPORTING DONALD TRUMP INSTEAD OF WAR MONGER CRUZ
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

SIX “CONSERVATIVE” EAGLE FORUM BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE MOTIVATED BY TED CRUZ GO AFTER 91 YEAR OLD TO GET HER OFF THE BOARD; SECRETIVE BOARD MEETING PASSES RESOLUTIONS IN VIOLATION OF BY-LAWS, WITHOUT HER PRESENCE







“THEY ARE FOR WAR”: 



“CONSERVATIVES” ATTACK 91 YEAR OLD PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY FOR SUPPORTING DONALD TRUMP INSTEAD OF WAR MONGER CRUZ



“THEY ARE FOR WAR”



BY CHUCK BALDWIN



SEE: http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/Articles/tabid/109/ID/3455/They-Are-For-War.aspx; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







The Matriarch of the pro-life, pro-family, Christian Right movement is the elegant stateswoman Phyllis Schlafly. She has no peer; there is no close second. At age 91, she remains the icon of America’s pro-life community.



Phyllis received her B.A. from Washington University, her J.D. from Washington University Law School, and she received her Master’s in Government from Harvard University. She worked her way through college on the night shift at the St. Louis Ordnance Plant testing .30 and .50 caliber ammunition by firing rifles and machine guns and as a laboratory technician investigating misfires and photographing tracer bullets in flight.



Mrs. Schlafly is an attorney admitted to the practice of law in Illinois, Missouri, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Supreme Court. She and her late husband are the parents of 6 children and the grandparents of 14 grandchildren. Phyllis personally taught all of her children to read before they started school.



It is no exaggeration to say that Phyllis is the single person most responsible for defeating the Equal Rights Amendment and has been one of the most influential personalities in politics over the last half-century. She founded her Eagle Forum organization in 1972, and today over 80,000 people claim membership.



One would think that the pedigree, accomplishments, and lifetime efforts of Mrs. Schlafly would speak so loudly and clearly that no one–not even her political adversaries–could question her sterling character and steadfast convictions. At age 91, and after all of her hard work, Phyllis should be enjoying the most happy fruits of her labor and the most heartfelt appreciation and respect of everyone who knows her–and especially of the Christian conservative community throughout this country.



Guess again.



As we speak, Phyllis Schlafly is the target of a hostile takeover by people within her own organization, including by her own daughter. They want Phyllis OUT. They want to throw her into the garbage bag like an old dishrag. After all of these years, after all she has done, after a lifetime of Herculean effort, they want Phyllis Schlafly GONE.



What, you ask, could be the awful sin, the horrific iniquity, the egregious act of malfeasance Phyllis could have committed to warrant such an attack? Answer: she endorsed Donald Trump for president.



Mind you, these attacks are not coming from the ACLU or the SPLC. They are coming from Christian conservatives within Eagle Forum. And from a political perspective, the people who want to destroy Mrs. Schlafly are, guess who: the Ted Cruz supporters, that’s who.



See this report:




Ted Cruz’s base of support is comprised mostly of Israel-First evangelical Christians. Prophecy preachers from all over America have declared Ted to be God’s “anointed” presidential candidate. These end-time evangelicals see Ted Cruz as their Elijah or John the Baptist to usher in the Millennial Kingdom. However, the fact that Cruz’s supporters are attacking Mrs. Schlafly in such a vile and vicious manner, shows that hell, not heaven, is in their hearts.



I am reminded of the words of King David: “I am for peace: but when I speak, they are for war.” (Psalms 120:7 KJV)



Whether people agree with Schlafly’s decision to endorse Donald Trump is NOT the issue. To target Phyllis as an “enemy” because of her endorsement is the grossest and most vile attempt at character assassination that I can possibly imagine. Agree with her or not, Phyllis Schlafly is a paragon of integrity.



This leads to a very serious and all-too-common current reality: a sizeable percentage of our so-called “Christian” community is filled with a heart of hatred and war. They like to talk about peace and love, but what they are really about is war and hate.



I can’t keep from saying “I told you so” at this point.



When G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney began their propaganda war against Iraq and Afghanistan, I told my radio audience, “Because G.W. Bush professes to be a Christian, and because he has so much support from within the Christian community, Bush is going to change the definition and character of the word ‘Christian’ in this country forever.” And that is EXACTLY what has happened. Ted Cruz is picking up right where G.W. Bush left off.



The Christian standard used to be “Blessed are the peacemakers.” Today the standard is “Blessed are the warmongers.” These Bush/Cruz, Israel-First cultists are prepared to not only blow up the Arab world, they are prepared to blow up Eagle Forum or any other organization or personality that does not subscribe to their brand of Israel-First obsession. Believe me, if these divisive, hate-filled “Christians” could get away with it, they would be as bloodthirsty and violent as any Muslim terrorist. But since they are unable to behead people such as Phyllis Schlafly or Chuck Baldwin, however, they set out with all malice to destroy our work and reputations. Yes, I am dealing with many of these same hate-filled “Christians,” too.



And I know that many of my brethren will recoil when they hear me say what I’m going to say, but I have analyzed and studied this phenomenon for many years now, and there is a DEFINITE common denominator.



I’m talking about decades of church splits; pastors being savagely and mercilessly attacked from inside the church; pastors’ families being destroyed by members of their own congregations; and the most bitter, divisive, backstabbing, meddlesome, tale-bearing, discordant, mean-spirited actions and attitudes on the planet. All in the name of Christianity. All in the name of love. All in the name of Bible doctrine. All in the name of Jesus Christ. All in the name of truth.



What is the common denominator? Almost without exception these haters and destroyers are Israel-First, end-time prophecy zealots.



I cannot imagine another presidential candidate’s supporters attacking someone such as Phyllis Schlafly like the Cruz supporters are now doing. It is Ted Cruz’s supporters who are engaging in this attempted destruction of America’s First Lady of The Pro-Life Movement, Phyllis Schlafly. And again, Ted Cruz is Mr. Christian Zionist. Cruz is to politics what John Hagee is to religion.



Ted Cruz claims to be pro-life, but he is allowing his supporters to crucify the most influential pro-life American of the last half-century, Phyllis Schlafly.



Remember, Ted Cruz is the one who is promising to “make the sand glow” in the Arab states–except not in Saudi Arabia, of course. Meaning he wants the United States to launch nuclear missiles against millions of innocent men, women, and children throughout the Middle East. Again, all in the name of Christian love. No, that’s not exactly true: all in the name of ISRAEL and all in the name of Bible prophecy. And if he’s elected president, I’m sure he would make good on his promise.



After over 40 years of labor and leadership in the liberty and Christian movements, and having personally witnessed the massive amount of death and destruction inflicted upon untold thousands of good and honorable men and women at the hands of these calloused and calculating beasts of prey, it is now (finally) becoming apparent what is behind all of this devastation. It is the same enemy that is trying to destroy Phyllis Schlafly.



When the spirit of hatred and war take over the heart, no one is safe. Not even friends.



Please pray for Phyllis Schlafly.



P.S. Once again, I invite readers to obtain my four message series entitled “The Church And Israel.” It is available on ONE DVD. Titles include:



*The Presentation And Rejection of The King
*“An High Priest For Ever After The Order of Melchisedec”
*Jesus: The Seed of David, The Seed of Abraham
*Christ’s Last Words To Israel



This series of messages will help people understand why the modern Zionist state of Israel can hold no claim to the promise given to Abraham in Genesis 12:3 and why the “Israel-First” theology of John Hagee and so many others is egregious Biblical error. And readers should also understand that I came to these conclusions after being trained in “Israel-First” theology and believing and preaching it for most of my life. But the longer I preached it, the more dissatisfied I became with it. I knew something wasn’t right. And the more I studied the matter, the more I came to repudiate what I now know is patently false doctrine.



To order my DVD, “The Church And Israel,” go here:




______________________________________________________________



A Message from Phyllis Schlafly











Another Conservative Coup!



Published on Apr 13, 2016





This time, the founder of the modern conservative movement, Phyllis Schlafly is the target. Six Eagle Forum board members who support Ted Cruz are attempting to remove Schlafly, 91, as CEO and board chairman of her conservative group after she endorsed Donald Trump for president.















Exclusive: Woman Mugged By Cruz Operatives Speaks Out



Published on Apr 20, 2016





Alex Jones talks to Phyllis Schlafly of the Eagle Forum about the dirty tricks used by the Cruz campaign against the organization after Schlafly backed Donald Trump.


http://www.eagleforum.org/















Phyllis Schlafly Endorses Donald Trump
March 11, 2016











Is Cruz Campaign Behind Eagle Forum Coup?



Published on Apr 13, 2016





NEW YORK – Conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly confirmed to WND that six board members of her group Eagle Forum have called a special meeting Monday that she believes is an attempt to remove her as CEO and board chairman because of her support for Donald Trump’s campaign for the White House. http://www.infowars.com/phyllis-schla…
8 http://citizenanalyst.net/bombshell-i…















Phyllis Schlafly on Trump vs. Republican Kingmakers



Published on Jan 27, 2016





Phyllis Schlafly of http://EagleForum.org talks with Jesse about “take-charge” Donald Trump and the American people vs. “bunch of losers” put forward by Republican kingmakers and RINOs like House Speaker Paul Ryan and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley. Phyllis Schlafly’s article in Townhall: “Will The Republican Establishment Stand Down?”http://townhall.com/columnists/phylli…


Phyllis Schlafly is author of “Who Killed the American Family?” Catch Jesse’s interview with her about it here: Phyllis Schlafly, Author of “Who Killed the American Family?” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T907V…) Buy the autographed book: http://superstore.wnd.com/Who-Killed-… or buy it on Kindle: http://www.amazon.com/Killed-American… 





















			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
“GOD IS GAY”: BLASPHEMOUS SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE SKIT MOCKS BAKERIES THAT DECLINE SAME-SEX “WEDDINGS”
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						





SNL-compressed



“GOD IS GAY”: BLASPHEMOUS SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE SKIT MOCKS BAKERIES THAT DECLINE SAME-SEX “WEDDINGS” 



BY HEATHER CLARK



SEE: http://christiannews.net/2016/04/19/god-is-gay-blasphemous-saturday-night-live-skit-mocks-bakeries-that-decline-same-sex-weddings/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







A blasphemous skit mocking bakeries that decline forms of participation in same-sex “weddings” aired on Saturday Night Live this past weekend, portraying two homosexual men taking a baker to court to force her to say that “God is gay.”



The segment, entitled “God Is a B**b Man,” features comedienne Vanessa Bayer, who plays a small town baker named Beth Walsh.



In the movie trailer parody of the “God’s Not Dead” films, a man enters Walsh’s bakery and requests a wedding cake.







“Of course,” Walsh replies. “Where’s the lucky bride?”



“He’s right here,” the man responds as his male partner approaches. “Now make the cake.”



“They wanted her to spit the face of God,” the announcer declares, as the man demands to a frustrated Walsh, “I said make the cake!”



As she states that she can’t go through with it, the man calls out, “You’ll be hearing from our Jewish lawyer.”



When Walsh appears in front of the attorney, she is told to confess that God is a homosexual.



“My clients just need you to say three simple words,” the attorney states.



“God is gay,” the man who had ordered the cake declares.



“But He’s not gay,” Walsh answers. “God is as straight as they come.”



“Then I guess we’ll be seeing you in court,” the attorney replies.



Walsh then appears to court to “prove once and for all that God is straight,” making sexual gestures before those gathered and declaring, “If God is gay, then why aren’t there any gay priests?”



A mock crowd stands outside of the court in support of Walsh, holding signs such as “God just needs to find the right woman” and “God is a ladies man.”



“Miss Walsh, you are on thin ice,” the judge angrily states. “You know God is gay. Just admit it!”



“No,” Walsh firmly replies.



The trailer spoof then shows Walsh interrupting her governor’s meeting on state crises to request help as she “wants to deny basic goods and services to gay people.” The governor then clears the room, declaring that her issue takes priority.



When she is given her last chance in court to declare that “God is gay,” Walsh stands up and blurts out, “God is a b**b man!”



The YouTube posting of the skit has now gone viral, generating nearly three million views in just three days.



Viewer reaction has been mixed, with much profanity unleashed from both sides.



“This is coming from a faithful Christian. I [expletive] love it. God bless you SNL,” one commented.



“I just want to say I’m Christian … and as much as I try to find this bad, I just can’t! Its so hilarious!” another wrote.



“In the last days there would be scoffers!” one said, alluding to Scripture. “When all stand before the Master and give an account, there will be no scoffing that day!”



“Isn’t it interesting when people defend God and base things off of His word, everybody gets upset and offended and wants to fight or go against it, but when someone makes fun of Christianity and mocks God, people love it get a rise and laugh?” another asked.



“Let me see you do a parody video like this about Muhammad and his 9 year old bride,” one viewer remarked.







THE CHRISTIAN RESPONSE TO THE TRASH BRAINWASHING ABOVE THAT CONDITIONS PEOPLE TO HATE CHRISTIANS



SNL Short Film God Is A GAY Boob Man EXPOSED! Satanic Saturday Night Live Sell-Outs!











ANOTHER CHRISTIAN EXPOSES 



THE GOD HATING PROPAGANDA





			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
PREACHERS THAT ARE SAYING IT IS “ANTI-CHRISTIAN” TO GET PREPARED ARE BEING EXCEEDINGLY IRRESPONSIBLE
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

PREACHERS THAT ARE SAYING IT IS “ANTI-CHRISTIAN” TO GET PREPARED ARE BEING EXCEEDINGLY IRRESPONSIBLE 



BY MICHAEL SNYDER








Is it “anti-faith” to prepare for the very hard times that are coming?  You would be surprised at how many Christians believe that this is true.  Recently, I have been reading a number of articles by Christian leaders that take the position that Christians should not be preppers, and not too long ago I watched two very well known ministers actually mock the idea of preparing for the future on a major Christian television show.  To me, this is exceedingly irresponsible.  If you don’t want to do anything to get prepared for the very difficult years that are coming that is your business, but don’t urge multitudes of your fellow believers to go down that road with you.



In Matthew 24, Jesus describes what conditions will be like just prior to His return, and He told us that one of the things that we can expect is famine…



7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines, epidemics, and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.



Jesus promises us that famine is coming, and if we truly are entering the period of time that the Bible refers to as “the last days”, this is one of the things that we should fully expect to see.



And yet there are very prominent preachers out there that have taken the liberty to mock other preachers that are actually encouraging their flocks to store up food and supplies.



Well, what are those mocking preachers going to do when things get really crazy and the people in their own congregations don’t have anything to eat?



Are those preachers going to personally feed all of them?



If you can see what is coming and you don’t warn the people, you are going to be responsible for what happens to them.



Without a doubt, it is very clear in the Scriptures that we are not to fear and that we are not to worry.  We are repeatedly commanded to trust God with everything in our lives, but does “having faith” mean that we sit back on our couches watching television while we wait for God to do everything for us?



Of course not.



Radical faith almost always involves radical action.  God tells us what to do, and then He expects us to trust Him enough to do what He has instructed us to do.



If faith really means doing nothing while God does everything, then why would any of us ever go to work?



Why wouldn’t we just sit back and wait for God to miraculously zap the money that we need into our bank accounts for us?



And why do those that are “living by faith” ever fill up their vehicles with gasoline?



Why don’t they just “trust God” to fill up their tanks every time?



Look, without a doubt God can do incredible supernatural things that require absolutely no participation on our part.  I know that this is true, because it has happened to me many times.  But the vast majority of the time God works with us and through us.  He requires us to take challenging steps of faith and obedience, and in the process He leads us, He guides us, He blesses us and He opens doors for us.



Just look at the example of Noah.  God could have certainly built an ark for Noah, or He could have zapped Noah up to some sort of “heavenly waiting area” while the flood happened.



But He didn’t do either of those things.



Instead, God ordered Noah to build a boat that was approximately the size of a World War II aircraft carrier, and then He watched as Noah and his family spent years doing exactly that.



Noah was the very first “prepper” in the Bible, and his radical faith resulted in radical action.  In Hebrews 11:7, Noah is commended for this…



7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.



Unfortunately, many Christian leaders today mock this kind of effort.  They seem to believe that if God wants them to survive what is coming then He will do everything for them.



Another example that we see in the Scriptures is Joseph.  In Genesis chapter 41, God showed Joseph that there would be seven good years followed by seven lean years in the land of Egypt.



So how did Joseph respond?



He didn’t sit back and relax knowing that seven good years were ahead.  Instead, he implemented the greatest “emergency food storage project” that the world had seen up until that time.



By heeding God’s warning and taking radical action, he ended up saving the nation of Egypt and his entire family as well.



I don’t get why more Christians can’t seem to understand these things.  So many of them even admit that incredibly hard times are coming, and yet they accuse me of being “anti-faith” because I am constantly urging my readers to get prepared.



The following is an excerpt from one email that was sent to me by a fellow believer some time ago…



“Now, although I agree with you about the things you write about the corruption of the financial system, and that there will be a collapse, yet I do not agree with you in promoting people to be self-sufficient contrary to the Lord’s teaching. If you truly have God then no provision needs to be made at all for yourself, just trust in God’s providence alone.”



Just consider the implications of what this person was saying.  If “no provision needs to be made at all for yourself”, then we should all quit our jobs, empty our bank accounts, quit saving for retirement and cancel our health insurance.



Personally, I want to be radical in trusting God, but trusting God almost always involves doing something.



There are so many passages in the Bible that speak about working hard and preparing for the future.  For instance, the following bit of wisdom found in Proverbs 6:6-11 comes from the Modern English Version…





6 Go to the ant, you sluggard!
    Consider her ways and be wise.
7 Which, having no guide,
    overseer, or ruler,
8 provides her bread in the summer,
    and gathers her food in the harvest.







9 How long will you sleep, O sluggard?
    When will you arise out of your sleep?
10 Yet a little sleep, a little slumber,
    a little folding of the hands to sleep—
11 so will your poverty come upon you like a stalker,
    and your need as an armed man.





Approximately one out of every 25 verses in the New Testament is about the last days.  God obviously wants us to understand what we are going to be facing, and just like Noah and Joseph, He expects us to take appropriate action.



Unfortunately, most evangelical Christians have been taught that there isn’t any need to get prepared for the future because they are going to be taken off the planet before anything really bad happens.  For the first 1800 years of the Christian era, the church did not teach this, but over the past 200 years this new doctrine has become dominant in the western world.  It is called “the pre-Tribulation rapture”, and I grew up believing it too.



But you won’t find it anywhere in the Bible.  In my new book entitled “The Rapture Verdict“, I spend 37 chapters conclusively proving that Jesus does not come back and gather His bride until the Tribulation is over.  It is the clearest and most comprehensive work on the subject anywhere out there, and it is turning out to be one of the most controversial Christian books of 2016.



And even if you believe that a pre-Tribulation rapture is coming, the truth is that America is going to fall before we even get to the Tribulation.  This is something that I also cover in my book.



So no matter what your view on Christian eschatology is, we all need to be getting prepared to face the exceedingly difficult times that are immediately ahead of us.



But just like in the days of Noah, most people are going to ignore the warnings, and the mockers are going to continue to mock until judgment begins.



I always expected that unbelievers would mock, but I never expected that so many Christian leaders would gleefully join the mocking.



In the end, they and their followers will pay a very great price for not listening to the warnings and not getting prepared while they still had time.



*About the author: Michael Snyder is the founder and publisher of The Economic Collapse Blog. Michael’s controversial new book about Bible prophecy entitled “The Rapture Verdict” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.*





			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
NOAA STOCKPILING MILITARY WEAPONS~EPA, USDA AMASS THEIR OWN PARAMILITARY FORCES
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						

usda







NOAA STOCKPILING MILITARY WEAPONS~



EPA, USDA AMASS THEIR OWN 



PARAMILITARY FORCES



SEE: http://the-trumpet-online.com/noaa-stockpiling-military-weapons-epa-usda-amass-their-own-paramilitary-forces/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:







(NaturalNews) Most Americans can understand why the FBI, CIA, DHS and the government’s various law enforcement agencies are all armed – and some heavily – but they question why seemingly benign agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – which falls under the Commerce Department, and is primarily responsible for weather-related research – needs so many armed agents.



As noted by PJ Media‘s Rick Moran, the agency now has 96 armed agents, and that in the era of an uber-militarized federal government. NOAA – the government’s primary weather and environmental research agency – is arming up at a time of increasing intolerance from Left-wing officials inside the Obama administration as well as some state attorneys general, over what they call “climate change denial.”



NOAA officials justify the existence of armed agents as a means of enforcing various laws under the agency’s jurisdiction. But honestly, if a waterway is being over-fished, or there is some other violation of environmental law, can’t another traditionally armed federal agency handle the arrest?



You know – like the armed Environmental Protection Agency. Yes, that’s right, the notorious EPA has its own armed force as well, and it was(ridiculously) on display when the agency carried out an armed raid on a mine in Chicken, Alaska (real name), to enforce a provision of the Clear Water Act – a raid that eventually sparked a special investigation and congressional hearing. After all, Chicken, Alaska, has a whopping population of 7 as per the last census.



The number of armed agencies keeps growing



Nevertheless, as Reason magazine reported:



“The agency sent a heavily armed team eight strong over possible violations of the Clean Water Act, an act the miners said amounted to intimidation. Residents questioned the need for armed agents to participate in what amounted to a water safety check, as well as the public safety threat the action posed.”



But why wouldn’t the EPA use this tactic to enforce an insignificant statute? After all, when you’re equipping a small army, the temptation to use it is obviously strong. As reported by The Daily Signal, the agency recently spent $1.4 million on heavy and automatic weapons, ammunition, night vision gear and camouflage clothing.



“We were shocked ourselves to find these kinds of pervasive expenditures at an agency that is supposed to be involved in clean air and clean water,” said Adam Andrzejewski, founder of public watchdog group, Open The Books. “Some of these weapons are for full-scale military operations.”



As further noted by The Daily Signal:



“And not just a few weapons. Open the Books found that the agency has spent millions of dollars over the last decade on guns, ammo, body armor, camouflage equipment, unmanned aircraft, amphibious assault ships, radar and night-vision gear, and other military-style weaponry and surveillance activities.”



The question is, why? Based on this weapons list you’d think that the EPA was getting ready to invade Russia or something. Or maybe New Orleans.



Next on the list is the Department of Agriculture, believe it or not. As reported by CNN in September 2014, the “food stamp” agency, like other federal departments, is using a provision of the Homeland Security Act as a reason to arm up:



“The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Office of Inspector General has 85 shiny new submachine guns, locked and loaded.



“They’ve long had a small police force, and they’re not alone, thanks to a mostly forgotten provision in the behemoth 2002 Homeland Security Act that allows certain the [sic] Offices of Inspector General to equip themselves with agents who carry guns.



“Criminal investigators at agencies like the USDA, the Small Business Administration and NASA can carry firearms.”



Who are all these weapons REALLY targeted at?



The USDA has had the ability to arm agents since 1981, CNN reported. But the 2002 “Homeland Security” legislation that Congress passed so quickly after the 9/11 attacks is obviously being abused by federal agencies that are spending taxpayer money on weaponry and military gear like drunken sailors – and apparently without much congressional oversight or explanation to the public.



That could be because Congress doesn’t know much about the weapons purchases. Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, sought to request a Government Accountability Office study of all the purchases a couple of years ago, so the American people and their elected leaders could get a handle on the situation. He also introduced legislation that would strip OIGs of their weapons, but that didn’t go anywhere.



“Americans don’t see why dozens of federal agencies need their own highly armed police forces with the authority to raid homes and businesses,” Stewart told CNN at the time.



So how come investigators at agencies known more for meat inspections and processing crop insurance claims need automatic weapons?



“Regarding the need for weapons’ procurements, OIG’s Investigations division conducts hundreds of criminal investigations each year, some of which involve OIG agents, USDA employees, and/or members of the public facing potentially life threatening situations,” USDA Deputy Counsel Paul Feeney told the news network.



Agencies won’t wage war against each other, right?



Fine, but that still doesn’t answer the question. And it doesn’t answer the question about why other federal agencies – like the Department of Education – have armed agents.



For his part, Stewart agrees that any legitimate law enforcement needs to be done by legitimate federal law enforcement agencies that have much better-trained staff.



“When there are genuinely dangerous situations involving federal law, that’s the job of the Department of Justice, not regulatory agencies like the FDA or the Department of Education,” he said.



Adds Tim Lynch, director of the Project on Criminal Justice at the Cato Institute, a libertarian-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C., “There’s no question there’s been a proliferation of police units at the federal level. To me, it’s been a never-ending expansion, a natural progression, if you will, of these administrative agencies always asking for bigger budgets and a little bit more power.”



And, obviously, they are getting it.



Without question, the vast bureaucracy of the federal government no longer feels like its sole purpose and reason for existence is to serve the American people. Rather, the bureaucracy has become an entity unto itself, untouchable by Congress, and increasingly utilized by presidents as a weapon to suppress liberty, freedom and individualism. That much is evident by the level of armament these agencies think they need.



These agencies aren’t ultimately planning on warring against each other,are they?














			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	


			  

					1
2
3
4