Wednesday 03-09-16

I'm not there yet, but soon will be if the lairs keep lying, and basically the people that defend it need to be honest about it.  I might have a small amount of respect for Al Sharpton if he would have denounced Twana Brawley after she admitted she lied.  Maybe not, but maybe.

I NOW BASICALLY ASSUME THAT ANY JUICY RACISM STORY IS FAKE, AND I’M SELDOM WRONG: More damaging evidence in the SUNY Albany racial hoax:

Audio from two 911 phone calls and video footage of the alleged racially motivated assault at a New York college has been released, providing more evidence why the women who made the accusation are now being charged with false reporting.
The three women claimed they were attacked by more than a dozen white people who hurled racial slurs at them as they rode a bus back to the State University of New York at Albany campus. But video footage from the bus and cell phone cameras showed that one of the alleged victims threw the first punch and that one of the accusers is the one who used a racial slur — against a white passenger.
Now some of that footage has been released, but it is difficult to tell what exactly happened. The 911 audio is more damaging, showing one of the accusers saying “I think it’s so funny” and “I beat up a boy” before the call connected to a dispatcher.
When the call connected, the accuser then tells the story that she was “jumped” on a bus and that it was a racially motivated attack. . . .
The incident, which occurred in late January, sparked protests at the campus and a fountain of support for the accusers. Even now that evidence has come to light showing they were not the victims of a hate crime, there are some in the community standing by them.
The Upstate New York Black Lives Matter Organization has issued a letter supporting the women, calling the evidence against them “inconclusive.”

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/227968/

FBI Anti-Terrorism Website Up with Muslim Group Changes, Omission of Islamist Extremists

A government anti-radicalization internet program set to be launched months ago is finally up and running with the changes demanded by Islamic activists that claimed the original version was biased against Muslims.
This is a story Judicial Watch has followed closely. Back in November JW reported that the Obama administration abruptly pulled the plug on a new Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) website aimed at preventing the radicalization of youth after Muslim and Arab rights groups protested that it was discriminatory and would lead to bullying, bias and religious profiling of students. The interactive website (“Don’t Be a Puppet”) was created by the U.S. government as a tool for the nation’s schools to prevent susceptible youth from getting recruited online by terrorists. The stated goal is to combat a growing epidemic of violent extremism by keeping youth from falling prey to online terrorists.
But when the website first went live in early November, 2015 the same Islamic groups that have strong-armed federal and local law enforcement agencies into purging ant-terrorism training material considered offensive to Muslims, expressed outrage. The Obama administration promptly caved in and changes were made. One of the groups, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, issued a victory statement saying the website improperly characterized Muslims as a suspect community with targeted focus and stereotypical depictions that could exasperate the problem by leading to bullying, bias and religious profiling. The group also fired off a follow-up letter, signed by other Muslim rights advocates, suggesting the FBI stay away from schools. They claimed the original “Don’t Be a Puppet” site created a “dangerous precedent of FBI overreach into sectors of our society that are best managed by experts, like teachers, curriculum developers, and other educators.”
A few days ago the revamped, Muslim activist-approved version of “Don’t Be a Puppet” quietly went up on the FBI’s website and it omits any reference to Islamist extremism or Islam. It does, however, list other types of extremism such as white supremacy extremists, environmental extremists, militia extremists, religious extremists and anarchist extremists. The website defines violent extremism as “encouraging, condoning, justifying or supporting the commission of a violent act to achieve political, ideological, religious, social or economic goals.” A section that addresses why people become violent extremists claims there’s no single reason to explain it “but it often happens when someone is trying to fill a deep personal need.” As examples it lists those who may feel alone or lack meaning and purpose in life, those who are emotionally upset after a stressful event and people who don’t feel valued or appreciated by society or think they have limited chances to succeed.
Another section says groups that commit acts of violent extremism can have very different beliefs and goals, an obvious effort to diversify the terrorist population and avoid singling out Islamists. “They are located in many countries around the world,” the website proclaims. Al Qaeda, Somalia-based Al Shabaab, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia and ISIS/ISIL are listed as international violent extremist groups. The website goes out of its way to explain that, although ISIL calls itself “Islamic State” it does “not represent mainstream Islam and the vast majority of Muslims are horrified by their actions.” U.S. groups with some of the most common domestic ideologies are identified as abortion extremists, animal rights, sovereign citizen extremists and white supremacists. Islamic extremists aren’t mentioned anywhere in the FBI’s revamped website.
This pathetic censorship is part of a broader effort by the government to appease Muslim rights groups, which have proven to wield tremendous power in the Obama administration. This is especially true of the terrorist front organization Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which also flexed its muscle in this matter. It was CAIR that got the FBI to purge anti-terrorism material determined to be offensive to Muslims. Judicial Watch uncovered that scandal a few years ago and obtained hundreds of pages of FBI documents with details of the arrangement. JW also published a special in-depth report on the subject. CAIR and its allies also got several police departments in President Obama’s home state of Illinois to cancel essential counterterrorism courses over accusations that the instructor was anti-Muslim. The course was called “Islamic Awareness as a Counter-Terrorist Strategy” and departments in Lombard, Elmhurst and Highland Park caved into CAIR’s demands.

 

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/03/fbi-anti-terrorism-website-up-with-muslim-group-changes-omission-of-islamist-extremists/

Once they open Pandora's box, it will be open for anyone.  Just saying, what if terrorist force Apple to unlock I Phone they steel from government employees?  You don't think they could force through blackmail or torture Apple to do it, once they have done it for the government?  They have plenty of money they could buy the info, what then?

France Votes on Bill That Could Make Apple Unlock Terrorist Data

France’s lawmakers will vote Tuesday on a plan to impose penalties and jail time on technology executives who deny access to encrypted data during a terrorist investigation, helping security services and prosecutors force companies such as Apple Inc. into cooperation.
The amendment was submitted by the opposition party The Republicans and, while the government hasn’t officially supported the measure, it will be included in Justice Minister Jean-Jacques Urvoas’s bill to overhaul legal procedures and fight organized crime in the wake of the Nov. 13 terrorist attacks that killed 130 people in Paris.
“The rule aims to force phone makers to give investigators data and it will be up to the manufacturer to use whatever technique is necessary,” Republican lawmaker Philippe Goujon, who proposed the amendment, said in an interview. “The target is to have them cooperate. The aim is not to break the encryption -- the principle is that manufacturers should cooperate.”

Apple is fighting a Californian judge’s order to unlock the iPhone of a dead terrorist who carried out a massacre in San Bernardino in December, with its Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook saying the ruling is an attack on privacy. In France, phones with encrypted data are holding up investigators working in several terrorism cases, including the Nov. 13 attacks, Goujon said.

French Proposals

Under Goujon’s proposals, a company operating in France would face a 350,000-euro ($386,000) fine and its executives could be jailed for up to five years if it denied investigators access to data. In addition, every person who refused to share information relating to an investigation could be sentenced to two years in jail and fined 15,000 euros.
The U.S. court has faced a backlash from other technology companies and even the United Nations commissioner for human rights over the San Bernadino iPhone.
Technology giants from Microsoft Corp. to Google have set aside rivalries to back the maker of the iPhone while the UN on Friday said U.S. courts risk hurting human rights. Law-enforcement groups seeking to join the case said their ability to extract data from the equipment they seize is critical to solving crimes and protecting the public.

France’s bill will be reviewed by the Senate once it clears the lower house and the government aims for a final vote in the next couple of months. The government will seek to alter the amendment in the Senate debate, Goujon said, “but not to change the target. It will be to make it more compatible with the French penal code” to prevent the law being challenged on constitutional grounds. The Justice Minister’s office didn’t return calls seeking comment.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-08/france-votes-on-bill-that-could-make-apple-unlock-terrorist-data

Tuesday 10-13-15

Phew - Nasa says giant asteroid missed Earth in 'near-miss' - at a distance of 15m miles

Not asteroid 86666 (2000 FL 10) Photo: Alamy

 

The doom-mongers have already been proved wrong once this week, when a date for the end of the world passed without incident on Wednesday.

Now the world has been given a second reprieve.

Nasa has confirmed that a giant asteroid passed safely by Earth on Saturday - considered a near-miss at a distance of 15 million miles away.

At 1.5 miles wide, a collision with asteroid 86666 (2000 FL 10) would have been catastrophic.

But on Friday Nasa's Jet Propulsion Lab's Near Earth Object Office, which tracks asteroids, said it would not come closer than 15m miles (about half the distance between the orbits of Earth and Mars).
In August Nasa was forced to issue a statement denying reports of a deadly asteroid threatening earth.


Online conspiracy theorists claimed one would crash into Puerto Rico in September, causing widespread devastation to the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the US, Mexico and Southern America.
Nasa tracks and characterises asteroids and comets passing within 30 million miles of Earth using telescopes on the ground and in space.
Overall the risk of a collision in the next 100 years is negligible. More precisely all known Potentially Hazardous Asteroids, as they are described, have less than a 0.01 per cent chance of hitting Earth in the next 100 years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/11923717/Phew-Nasa-says-giant-asteroid-will-miss-earth-by-15m-miles.html

Whitey Can’t Win

If whitey moves out of a black neighborhood, “white-flight”, he is racist. If whitey moves into a black neighborhood, “gentrification”, he is racist.
If whitey doesn’t give welfare to blacks he is racist. If white does give welfare to blacks he is “keeping them on the plantation” and is racist.
If whitey doesn’t let in non-white immigrants he is racist. If white does let in non-white immigrants he is subjecting them to “white privilege” and is racist.
If whitey builds up the Third World through colonization he is racist. If whitey doesn’t build up the Third World through foreign aid he is racist.
If whitey doesn’t promote Affirmative Action he isn’t giving non-whites a chance and is racist. If whitey does promote Affirmative Action he is peddling “the soft bigotry of low expectations” and is racist.
If whitey doesn’t celebrate non-white cultures he is “narrow minded” and is racist. If whitey does celebrate non-white cultures he is committing “cultural appropriation” and is racist.
If whitey doesn’t vote for a non-white candidate he is only doing so because of the candidate’s race and is racist. If whitey does vote for a non-white candidate he is only doing so because of the candidate’s race and is racist.
If whitey doesn’t create a history month for a non-white group he is racist. If whitey does create a history month for a non-white group he is “confining that group’s history to only a month” and is racist.
If whitey isn’t colorblind he is racist. If whitey is colorblind he is racist.
No matter what whitey does he is racist.
Whitey can’t win.

https://smokingwhileromeburns.wordpress.com/2015/10/06/whitey-cant-win/

Wenesday 12-26-12

Well back to work i go...

If is amazing to me that a black person would have the nerve to bring up rational profiling.  It is done to white people all the time, he is either woefully ignorant or just plain stupid.  But i guess it ok to profile the white guy (because he deserves it, lol).  But to answer the dullard question, white men are already profiled, and they don't whine about, but what happens when a black or muslim is profiled?

CNN's Don Lemon On Gun Control: Should We Start Profiling White Men?

CNN's Don Lemon discusses the possibility of profiling white men in an attempt to prevent gun violence and decrease the amount of mass shootings. Lemon argues that white males between the ages of 18 and 25 were behind nearly all recent mass killings.

On the panel: David Sirota, radio talk show host; Richard Moran, criminologist; Lou Palumbo, retired police detective and private security provider; and Tom Deets, gun store owner.

 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/23/cnns_don_lemon_on_gun_control_should_we_start_profiling_white_men.html

Active shooters in schools: The enemy is denial


Preventing juvenile mass murder in American schools is the job of police officers, school teachers, and concerned parents   “How many kids have been killed by school fire in all of North America in the past 50 years? Kids killed... school fire... North America... 50 years... How many? Zero. That’s right. Not one single kid has been killed by school fire anywhere in North America in the past half a century. Now, how many kids have been killed by school violence?”
So began an extraordinary daylong seminar presented by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, a Pulitzer Prize nominated author, West Point psychology professor, and without a doubt the world’s foremost expert on human aggression and violence. The event, hosted by the California Peace Officers Association, was held in the auditorium of a very large community church about 30 miles from San Francisco, and was attended by more than 250 police officers from around the region.
Grossman’s talk spanned myriad topics of vital importance to law enforcement, such as the use of autogenic breathing, surviving gunshot wounds, dealing with survivor guilt following a gun battle, and others. But violence among and against children was how the day began, and so I'll focus on that issue here.

Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, pictured with PoliceOne Senior Editor Doug Wyllie, spoke before a crowd of more than 250 police officers in an event hosted by the California Peace Officers Association.

Arming campus cops is elementary
“In 1999,” Grossman said, “school violence claimed what at the time was an all time record number of kids’ lives. In that year there were 35 dead and a quarter of a million serious injuries due to violence in the school. How many killed by fire that year? Zero. But we hear people say, ‘That’s the year Columbine happened, that’s an anomaly.’ Well, in 2004 we had a new all time record — 48 dead in the schools from violence. How many killed by fire that year? Zero. Let’s assign some grades. Put your teacher hat on and give out some grades. What kind of grade do you give the firefighter for keeping kids safe? An ‘A,’ right? Reluctantly, reluctantly, the cops give the firefighters an ‘A,’ right? Danged firefighters, they sleep ‘till they’re hungry and eat ‘till they’re tired. What grade do we get for keeping the kids safe from violence? Come on, what’s our grade? Needs improvement, right?”
Johnny Firefighter, A+ Student

“Why can’t we be like little Johnny Firefighter?” Grossman asked as he prowled the stage. “He’s our A+ student!”
He paused, briefly, and answered with a voice that blew through the hall like thunder, “Denial, denial, denial!”
Grossman commanded, “Look up at the ceiling! See all those sprinklers up there? They’re hard to spot — they’re painted black — but they’re there. While you’re looking, look at the material the ceiling is made of. You know that that stuff was selected because it’s fire-retardant. Hooah? Now look over there above the door — you see that fire exit sign? That’s not just any fire exit sign — that’s a ‘battery-backup-when-the-world-ends-it-will-still-be-lit’ fire exit sign. Hooah?”
Walking from the stage toward a nearby fire exit and exterior wall, Grossman slammed the palm of his hand against the wall and exclaimed, “Look at these wall boards! They were chosen because they’re what?! Fireproof or fire retardant, hooah? There is not one stinking thing in this room that will burn!”
Pointing around the room as he spoke, Grossman continued, “But you’ve still got those fire sprinklers, those fire exit signs, fire hydrants outside, and fire trucks nearby! Are these fire guys crazy? Are these fire guys paranoid? No! This fire guy is our A+ student! Because this fire guy has redundant, overlapping layers of protection, not a single kid has been killed by school fire in the last 50 years!
“But you try to prepare for violence — the thing much more likely to kill our kids in schools, the thing hundreds of times more likely to kill our kids in schools — and people think you’re paranoid. They think you’re crazy. ...They’re in denial.”
Teaching the Teachers

The challenge for law enforcement agencies and officers, then, is to overcome not only the attacks taking place in schools, but to first overcome the denial in the minds of mayors, city councils, school administrators, and parents. Grossman said that agencies and officers, although facing an uphill slog against the denial of the general public, must diligently work toward increasing understanding among the sheep that the wolves are coming for their children. Police officers must train and drill with teachers, not only so responding officers are intimately familiar with the facilities, but so that teachers know what they can do in the event of an attack.
“Come with me to the library at Columbine High School,” Grossman said. “The teacher in the library at Columbine High School spent her professional lifetime preparing for a fire, and we can all agree if there had been a fire in that library, that teacher would have instinctively, reflexively known what to do.
"But the thing most likely to kill her kids — the thing hundreds of times more likely to kill her kids, the teacher didn’t have a clue what to do. She should have put those kids in the librarian’s office but she didn’t know that. So she did the worst thing possible — she tried to secure her kids in an un-securable location. She told the kids to hide in the library — a library that has plate glass windows for walls. It’s an aquarium, it’s a fish bowl. She told the kids to hide in a fishbowl. What did those killers see? They saw targets. They saw fish in a fish bowl.”
Grossman said that if the school administrators at Columbine had spent a fraction of the money they’d spent preparing for fire doing lockdown drills and talking with local law enforcers about the violent dangers they face, the outcome that day may have been different.
Rhetorically he asked the assembled cops, “If somebody had spent five minutes telling that teacher what to do, do you think lives would have been saved at Columbine?”
Arming Campus Cops is Elementary

Nearly two years ago, I wrote an article called Arming campus cops is elementary. Not surprisingly, Grossman agrees with that hypothesis.
“Never call an unarmed man ‘security’,” Grossman said.
“Call him ‘run-like-hell-when-the-man-with-the-gun-shows-up’ but never call an unarmed man security.
"Imagine if someone said, ‘I want a trained fire professional on site. I want a fire hat, I want a fire uniform, I want a fire badge. But! No fire extinguishers in this building. No fire hoses. The hat, the badge, the uniform — that will keep us safe — but we have no need for fire extinguishers.’ Well, that would be insane. It is equally insane, delusional, legally liable, to say, ‘I want a trained security professional on site. I want a security hat, I want a security uniform, and I want a security badge, but I don’t want a gun.’ It’s not the hat, the uniform, or the badge. It’s the tools in the hands of a trained professional that keeps us safe.
“Our problem is not money,” said Grossman. “It is denial.”
Grossman said (and most cops agree) that many of the most important things we can do to protect our kids would cost us nothing or next-to-nothing.
Grossman’s Five D’s

Let’s contemplate the following outline and summary of Dave Grossman’s “Five D’s.” While you do, I encourage you to add in the comments area below your suggestions to address, and expand upon, these ideas.
1. Denial — Denial is the enemy and it has no survival value, said Grossman.
2. Deter — Put police officers in schools, because with just one officer assigned to a school, the probability of a mass murder in that school drops to almost zero
3. Detect — We’re talking about plain old fashioned police work here. The ultimate achievement for law enforcement is the crime that didn’t happen, so giving teachers and administrators regular access to cops is paramount.
4. Delay — Various simple mechanisms can be used by teachers and cops to put time and distance between the killers and the kids.
a. Ensure that the school/classroom have just a single point of entry. Simply locking the back door helps create a hard target.

b. Conduct your active shooter drills within (and in partnership with) the schools in your city so teachers know how to respond, and know what it looks like when you do your response.
5. Destroy — Police officers and agencies should consider the following:
a. Carry off duty. No one would tell a firefighter who has a fire extinguisher in his trunk that he’s crazy or paranoid.

b. Equip every cop in America with a patrol rifle. One chief of police, upon getting rifles for all his officers once said, “If an active killer strikes in my town, the response time will be measured in feet per second.”

c. Put smoke grenades in the trunk of every cop car in America. Any infantryman who needs to attack across open terrain or perform a rescue under fire deploys a smoke grenade. A fire extinguisher will do a decent job in some cases, but a smoke grenade is designed to perform the function.

d. Have a “go-to-war bag” filled with lots of loaded magazines and supplies for tactical combat casualty care.

e. Use helicopters. Somewhere in your county you probably have one or more of the following: medevac, media, private, national guard, coast guard rotors.

f. Employ the crew-served, continuous-feed, weapon you already have available to you (a firehouse) by integrating the fire service into your active shooter training. It is virtually impossible for a killer to put well-placed shots on target while also being blasted with water at 300 pounds per square inch.

g. Armed citizens can help. Think United 93. Whatever your personal take on gun control, it is all but certain that a killer set on killing is more likely to attack a target where the citizens are unarmed, rather than one where they are likely to encounter an armed citizen response.
Coming Soon: External Threats

Today we must not only prepare for juvenile mass murder, something that had never happened in human history until only recently, but we also must prepare for the external threat. Islamist fanatics have slaughtered children in their own religion — they have killed wantonly, mercilessly, and without regard for repercussion or regret of any kind. What do you think they’d think of killing our kids?
“Eight years ago they came and killed 3,000 of our citizens. Do we know what they’re going to do next? No! But one thing they’ve done in every country they’ve messed with is killing kids in schools,” Grossman said.
The latest al Qaeda charter states that “children are noble targets” and Osama bin Laden himself has said that “Russia is a preview for what we will do to America.”
What happened in Russia that we need to be concerned with in this context? In the town of Beslan on September 1, 2004 — the very day on which children across that country merrily make their return to school after the long summer break — radical Islamist terrorists from Chechnya took more than 1,000 teachers, mothers, and children hostage. When the three-day siege was over, more than 300 hostages had been killed, more than half of whom were children.
“If I could tackle every American and make them read one book to help them understand the terrorist’s plan, it would be Terror at Beslan by John Giduck. Beslan was just a dress rehearsal for what they’re planning to do to the United States,” he said.
Consider this: There are almost a half a million school buses in America. It would require almost every enlisted person and every officer in the entire United States Army to put just one armed guard on every school bus in the country.
As a country and as a culture, the level of protection Americans afford our kids against violence is nothing near what we do to protect them from fire. Grossman is correct: Denial is the enemy. We must prepare for violence like the firefighter prepares for fire. And we must do that today.
Hooah, Colonel!

http://www.policeone.com/active-shooter/articles/2058168-Lt-Col-Dave-Grossman-to-cops-The-enemy-is-denial/

How about instead of "how Black is that" we say how racist is that.

Friday 11-23-12

The first atyicle shows not all the crazy people are locked away, some are professors.

Thanksgiving Celebrates Our 'Original Sin,' 'Views Virtually Identical To Nazis,' Journalism Prof Preaches


By Dan Gainor

November 22, 2012

Subscribe to Dan Gainor's posts Forget all that turkey, stuffing and pumpkin pie, today should be a day of fasting and atonement for American “sin.” That’s according to Robert Jensen, a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin. Jensen, known for his hard-left politics, also calls Thanksgiving a “white-supremacist holiday.”
Jensen’s opinion piece “No Thanks for Thanksgiving,” appeared on the far-left, Soros-connected website Alternet on Thanksgiving eve. In it, he wrote how Native Americans suffered because of the “European invasion of the Americas.” He went on to compare the Founding Fathers to Nazi Germany. “How does a country deal with the fact that some of its most revered historical figures had certain moral values and political views virtually identical to Nazis?” he asked.
According to Jensen, Thanksgiving is “at the heart of U.S. myth-building. “But in the United States, this reluctance to acknowledge our original sin -- the genocide of indigenous people -- is of special importance today,” he explained.
Jensen has a long career in both working journalism and academia, including work as a copy editor at The St. Paul Pioneer Press and the St. Petersburg Times, as well as “volunteer editing and writing for the Texas Triangle, Austin (weekly statewide lesbian/gay paper).”
This wasn’t the first time Jensen has bashed America. He does so on a regular basis. Other Alternet pieces include headlines like “The Painful Collapse of Empire: How the ‘American Dream’ and American Exceptionalism Wreck Havoc on the World” or “What White People Fear.”

Alternet is part of the George-Soros-supported Media Consortium. It is one of 58 left-wing media operations that aim to create a progressive “echo chamber.”

http://cnsnews.com/blog/dan-gainor/thanksgiving-celebrates-our-original-sin-views-virtually-identical-nazis-journalism

Obama To Unleash Racial-Preferences Juggernaut

If your organization has a policy or practice that doesn't benefit minorities equally, watch out: The Obama administration could sue you for racial discrimination under a dubious legal theory that many argue is unconstitutional.

President Obama intends to close "persistent gaps" between whites and minorities in everything from credit scores and homeownership to test scores and graduation rates.

His remedy — short of new affirmative-action legislation — is to sue financial companies, schools and employers based on "disparate impact" complaints — a stealthy way to achieve racial preferences, opposed 2 to 1 by Americans.Under this broad interpretation of civil-rights law, virtually any organization can be held liable for race bias if it maintains a policy that negatively impacts one racial group more than another — even if it has no racist motive and applies the policy evenly across all groups.Equal Outcomes

This means that even race-neutral rules for mortgage underwriting and consumer credit scoring potentially can be deemed racist if prosecutors can produce statistics showing they tend to result in adverse outcomes for blacks or Latinos.

Already, Attorney General Eric Holder has used the club of disparate-impact lawsuits to beat almost $500 million in loan set-asides and other claims out of the nation's largest banks.

In addition to the financial settlements — which include millions in funding for affordable-housing activists — Bank of America, Wells Fargo and SunTrust have all agreed to adopt more minority-friendly lending policies.

Though the administration seeks equal credit outcomes, regardless of risk, across the entire banking industry, it doesn't have to sue every bank to achieve its goal. As a prophylactic against similar prosecution, IBD has learned the American Bankers Association recently advised its 5,000 members to give rejected minority loan applicants a "second look," which it says "can result in suggested changes in underwriting standards."

Also, the administration sent a chill through the financial industry earlier this year when it announced its new credit watchdog agency will join Justice, as well as HUD, in using the disparate-impact doctrine to enforce civil-rights laws.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau chief Richard Cordray warned companies the agency will "protect consumers from unfair lending practices — as well as those that have a disparate impact on communities of color." He added:

"That doctrine is applicable for all of the credit markets we touch, including mortgages, student loans, credit cards and auto loans," as well as small-business loans.

Hiring Criminals

For the first time, the nation's consumer credit reporting agencies, including Equifax, Experian and TransUnion, will come under federal review. CFPB examiners will subject these companies and others to an "effects test" to make sure credit transactions are racially balanced.

Those who reject minority applicants for credit cards or charge them higher loan rates had better be prepared to prove to Cordray's diversity cops they aren't racist. Many have already decided it's safer to give black and Latino applicants preferential treatment, which of course is racism of another kind.

Other targets of the administration's "racial justice" juggernaut include: standardized academic testing, professional licensing examinations, employee background checks, voter ID requirements, student disciplinary codes, prison sentencing guidelines — you name it.

The goal is to equalize outcomes based on race without regard for performance or merit.

According to Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, President Obama is committed to "aggressively pushing the 'disparate impact' approach to civil-rights enforcement" through which "the federal government insists that the numbers come out right — even if it means that policemen and firefighters cannot be tested, that companies should hire criminals, that loans must be made to the uncreditworthy, and that — I kid you not — whether pollution is acceptable depends on whether dangerous chemicals are spread in a racially balanced way."

Last month, moreover, the Education Department pressured the Oakland school district to impose "targeted reductions" in the number of black students suspended.

The department charged that Oakland's disciplinary policy has a "disparate impact" on African-American students, who are suspended at higher rates for violent behavior.

The Oakland case is the first of some 20 such investigations of school districts across the U.S. "The Obama administration is pressuring school districts not to suspend violent or disruptive black students if they have already disciplined 'too many' black students," said Competitive Enterprise Institute counsel Hans Bader.

Education is also investigating a "disparate impact" complaint recently filed by the NAACP alleging the entrance exam used by selective New York City high schools illegally discriminates against blacks.

Through disparate impact suits, Holder has forced banks to adopt racial lending quotas and even open branches in minority neighborhoods.

He's authorized five more lending-discrimination suits, while opening another 30 investigations against banks. And he's just getting warmed up.

"The question is not does (affirmative action) end, but when does it begin?" Holder said in February at a Columbia University forum. "When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are entitled?"

Banks had hoped the Supreme Court would declare his actions unconstitutional.

But a landmark disparate-impact case was scuttled at the last minute this year when the petitioner withdrew it under pressure from Holder's civil-rights chief.

Congress is probing the unusual arm-twisting — which included what appears to be a corrupt quid-pro-quo bargain — that led to the case being dropped.

Most agree that had the Magner v. Gallagher case gone forward, the high court would have struck down the use of disparate impact and effectively shut down the administration's witch hunt against lenders.

On the campaign trail, Obama was mum about his disparate-impact strategy and rarely talks at all about race.

He's no doubt aware of polling in his last presidential bid which found 56% of voters harbored fears he'd favor African-Americans. But his 2006 writings inform us.

To close the "stubborn gap that remains between the living standards of black, Latino and white workers," then-Sen. Obama proposed "completing the unfinished business of the civil rights movement — namely, enforcing nondiscrimination laws in such basic areas as employment, housing and education."

He added: "The government, through its prosecutors and its courts, should step in to make things right."

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/110812-632759-obama-to-wield-bigger-disparate-impact-club.htm

Additional example is found here

Obama’s ‘Constituency Groups’ Checklist Offers No Options for Whites or Men

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-s-constituency-groups-checklist-offers-no-options-whites-or-men

Guess What They Are Not Cutting In The Fiscal Cliff...


Submitted by Simon Black of Sovereign Man blog,


In his farewell address to Congress yesterday, Ron Paul blasted the dangers of what he called 'Economic Ignorance':

"Economic ignorance is commonplace. . . Believers in military Keynesianism and domestic Keynesianism continue to desperately promote their failed policies, as the economy languishes in a deep slumber."

He's dead right. Around the world, economic ignorance abounds. And perhaps nowhere is this more obvious today than in the senseless prattling over the US 'Fiscal Cliff'.
Here's the deal: You may remember the Debt Ceiling debacle of 2011. At the time, the US government was about to breach its debt ceiling, and there was an embarrassing standoff between Congress and President Obama.
As part of their eventual compromise, the debt ceiling increased by $400 billion in August 2011... then again by another $500 billion five weeks later... and finally by another $1.2 TRILLION twenty weeks after that.
In return, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011. The law stipulates that, unless another compromise is reached, a series of tax increases and budget cuts will automatically take place on January 1, 2013, including the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the temporary 2% payroll tax holiday, plus new taxes related to Obamacare.
They call this the 'Fiscal Cliff' because everyone is terrified that all the budget cuts and new taxes will bring the US economy to its knees once again.
I've spent days analyzing the bill... and frankly, it's a joke. You can read the 200+ pages yourself if you like, but here are the important points--
As we've discussed before, US government spending falls into three categories.
1.Discretionary spending is what we normally think of as 'government.' It funds everything from the military to Homeland Security to the national parks.

2.Mandatory spending covers all the major entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare.

3.Then there's interest on the debt, which is so large they had to make it a special category.

The latter two categories are spent automatically, just like your mortgage payment that gets sucked out of the bank account before you have a chance to spend it. The only thing Congress has a say over is Discretionary Spending. Hence the name.
But here's the problem-- the US fiscal situation is so untenable that the government fails to collect enough tax revenue to cover mandatory spending and debt interest. In Fiscal Year 2011, for example, the US government spent $176 billion MORE on debt interest and mandatory spending than they generated in tax revenue.
In Fiscal Year 2012, which just ended 6 weeks ago, that shortfall increased to $251 billion. This means that they could cut the ENTIRE discretionary budget and still be in the hole by $251 billion.
This is why the Fiscal Cliff is irrelevant. The automatic cuts that are going to take place don't even begin to address the actual problem; they're cutting $110 billion from the discretionary budget... yet only $16.9 billion from the mandatory budget.
Given that the entire problem is with mandatory spending, slashing the discretionary budget is pointless. It's as if the US economy is a speeding train heading towards a ravine at 200 mph, and the conductors are arguing about whether they should slow down to 150 or 175.
Oh, and there's just one more problem.
The government thinks that they will collect a few hundred billion dollars more in tax revenue when all of these new taxes kick in. Again, wishful thinking.
In the six+ decades since the end of World War II, tax rates in the US have been all over the board. Yet during this time, the US government has only managed to collect roughly 17.7% of GDP in tax revenue.
Conclusion? Increasing taxes won't increase their total tax revenue. Politicians have tried this for decades. It doesn't work. The only way to increase tax revenue is for the economy to grow... and higher tax rates do not pave this path to prosperity.
Ron Paul was spot on. Economic ignorance abounds. And all the Talking Heads in the mainstream media blathering away about the Fiscal Cliff are only reinforcing his premise.
Bottom line-- the Fiscal Cliff doesn't matter. The US passed the point of no return a long time ago.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-15/guess-what-they-are-not-cutting-fiscal-cliff

Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants


Proposed law scheduled for a vote next week originally increased Americans' e-mail privacy. Then law enforcement complained. Now it increases government access to e-mail and other digital files.

A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans' e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law, CNET has learned.


Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns, according to three individuals who have been negotiating with Leahy's staff over the changes. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans' e-mail, is scheduled for next week.

Revised bill highlights

✭ Grants warrantless access to Americans' electronic correspondence to over 22 federal agencies. Only a subpoena is required, not a search warrant signed by a judge based on probable cause.

✭ Permits state and local law enforcement to warrantlessly access Americans' correspondence stored on systems not offered "to the public," including university networks.

✭ Authorizes any law enforcement agency to access accounts without a warrant -- or subsequent court review -- if they claim "emergency" situations exist.

✭ Says providers "shall notify" law enforcement in advance of any plans to tell their customers that they've been the target of a warrant, order, or subpoena.

✭ Delays notification of customers whose accounts have been accessed from 3 days to "10 business days." This notification can be postponed by up to 360 days.

Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

CNET obtained a draft of the proposed amendments from one of the people involved in the negotiations with Leahy; it's embedded at the end of this post. The document describes the changes as "Amendments intended to be proposed by Mr. Leahy."

It's an abrupt departure from Leahy's earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boasted last year that his bill "provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by... requiring that the government obtain a search warrant."

Leahy had planned a vote on an earlier version of his bill, designed to update a pair of 1980s-vintage surveillance laws, in late September. But after law enforcement groups including the National District Attorneys' Association and the National Sheriffs' Association organizations objected to the legislation and asked him to "reconsider acting" on it, Leahy pushed back the vote and reworked the bill as a package of amendments to be offered next Thursday. The package (PDF) is a substitute for H.R. 2471, which the House of Representatives already has approved.

One person participating in Capitol Hill meetings on this topic told CNET that Justice Department officials have expressed their displeasure about Leahy's original bill. The department is on record as opposing any such requirement: James Baker, the associate deputy attorney general, has publicly warned that requiring a warrant to obtain stored e-mail could have an "adverse impact" on criminal investigations.

Christopher Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said requiring warrantless access to Americans' data "undercuts" the purpose of Leahy's original proposal. "We believe a warrant is the appropriate standard for any contents," he said.

An aide to the Senate Judiciary committee told CNET that because discussions with interested parties are ongoing, it would be premature to comment on the legislation.

Marc Rotenberg, head of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said that in light of the revelations about how former CIA director David Petraeus' e-mail was perused by the FBI, "even the Department of Justice should concede that there's a need for more judicial oversight," not less.

Markham Erickson, a lawyer in Washington, D.C. who has followed the topic closely and said he was speaking for himself and not his corporate clients, expressed concerns about the alphabet soup of federal agencies that would be granted more power

(read the rest at)

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552225-38/senate-bill-rewrite-lets-feds-read-your-e-mail-without-warrants/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=title


ConsumerWatch: Stores Requiring ID, Tracking To Prevent Repeated Returns

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5) – When you make a return this holiday season you may have to hand over more than just your receipt, as retailers try to prevent repeated returns.
“I was required to provide them a copy of my driver’s license, where they actually took the information and scanned it into their database,” said a shopper who asked to be identified only as Leslie.
Leslie told the sales associate at The Children’s Place that she was uncomfortable handing over her ID just to make an exchange, but she was told that the requirement is corporate policy.

In fact, according to the National Retail Federation, 62 percent of retailers have a similar policy. Among those who demand ID for returns are The Finish Line, Home Depot, Target and more.
So where does your information go? Likely it’s being stored on The Retail Equation, a service which tracks how often you bring stuff back and identifies habitual returners.

The retail exchange has said return fraud and “renting” – buying an item to wear and return – costs the retail industry billions each year.
In an effort to stop that practice, they’re tracking you, and all of your returns at their participating stores, in a database.

Return items too frequently, and you may lose your right to bring back your purchases anywhere.
“They have no right, I my view, of swiping my drivers license,” said Peninsula Congresswoman Jackie Speier. “I will never let someone scan my driver’s license.”
California civil code currently allows retailers to swipe your ID when investigating fraud, abuse or misrepresentation.

But Speier believes a legitimate return with a receipt does not fall under that exception.
State law does require retailers post the ID requirement prominently in their return policy…both Victoria secrets and The Children’s Place do just that. If it’s in their policy, and you want to make a return, you’ll likely have to hand over your ID.
For more information on The Retail Equation, or to request a copy of your profile, visit their website.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/11/20/consumerwatch-stores-requiring-id-tracking-to-prevent-repeated-returner/

Wednesday 10-17-12

They must be racist, they are leaving out Solomon.  Very biased.  
2 Chronicles 9:22, And king Solomon passed all the kings of the earth in riches and wisdom.

Meet Mansa Musa I of Mali – the richest human being in all history


A new study has produced an inflation-adjusted list of the richest people of all time

When we think of the world’s all-time richest people, names like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and John D Rockefeller immediately come to mind.
But few would have thought, or even heard of, Mansa Musa I of Mali – the obscure 14th century African king who was today named the richest person in all history.
With an inflation adjusted fortune of $400 billion, Mansa Musa I would have been considerably richer than the world’s current richest man, Carlos Slim, who ranks in 22nd place with a relatively paltry $68 billion.
The list, compiled by the Celebrity Net Worth website, ranks the world’s 24 richest people of all time. The list advertises itself as the top 25, but 26 names appear in the list.
Although the list spans 1000 years, some aspects of wealth appear consistent throughout history; there are no women on the list, only three members are alive today, and 14 of the top 25 are American.
The list uses the annual 2199.6 per cent rate of inflation to adjust historic fortunes – a formula that means $100 million in 1913 would be equal to £2.299.63 billion today.
Mansa Musa I ruled West Africa’s Malian Empire in the early 1300s, making his fortune by exploiting his country’s salt and gold production. Many mosques he built as a young man still stand today.
After Mansa Musa I death in 1331, however, his heirs were unable to hang on to the fortune, and it was substantially depleted by civil wars and invading armies.

Second on the list are the Rothschild family, whose descendants are still among the richest people on the planet. Starting out in banking in the late 18th Century, Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s finance house accumulated a total wealth of $350 billion. The money has since been divided between hundreds of descendants, many of whom are business leaders today.
Meanwhile John D. Rockefeller, third on the list, is the richest American to have ever lived, worth $340billion in today's USD at the time of his death in 1937.
In comparison, the poorest man on the list is 82-year-old Warren Buffett, who at his peak net worth, before he started giving his fortune to charity, was $64billion.
Here’s the full list of the ‘26 richest people of all time’:
1. Mansa Musa I, (Ruler of Malian Empire, 1280-1331) $400 billion
2. Rothschild Family (banking dynasty, 1740- ) $350 billion
3. John D Rockefeller (industrialist, 1839-1937) $340 billion
4. Andrew Carnegie (industrialist, 1835-1919) $310 billion
5. Tsar Nicholas II of Russia (last Emperor of Russia, 1868-1918) $300 billion
6. Osman Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VII (last ruler of Hyderabad, 1886-1967) $236 billion
7. William the Conqueror (King of England, 1028-1087) $229.5 billion
8. Muammar Gaddafi (former Libyan leader, 1942-2011) $200 billion
9. Henry Ford (Ford Motor Company founder, 1863-1947) $199 billion
10. Cornelius Vanderbilt (industrialist, 1794-1877) $185 billion
11. Alan Rufus (Fighting companion of William the Conqueror, 1040-1093) $178.65 billion
12. Bill Gates (Founder of Microsoft, 1955- ) $136 billion
13. William de Warenne, 1st Earl of Surrey (Norman nobleman, ??-1088) $146.13 billion
14. John Jacob Astor (businessman, 1864-1912) $121 billion
15. Richard Fitzalan, 10th Earl of Arundel (English nobleman, 1306-1376) £118.6 billion
16. John of Gaunt (son of Edward III, 1330-1399) £110 billion
17. Stephen Girard (shipping and banking mogul, 1750-1831) $105 billion
18. Alexander Turney Stewart (entrepreneur, 1803-1876) $90 billion
19. Henry, 1st Duke of Lancaster (English noble, 1310-1361) $85.1 billion
20. Friedrich Weyerhaeuser (timber mogul, 1834-1914) $80 billion
21. Jay Gould (railroad tycoon, 1836-1892) $71 billion
22. Carlos Slim (business magnate, 1940- ) $68 billion

23. Stephen Van Rensselaer (land owner, 1764- 1839) $68 billion
24. Marshall Field (Marshall Field & Company founder, 1834-1906) $66 billion
25. Sam Walton (Walmart founder, 1918-1992) $65billion
26. Warren Buffett (investor, 1930- ) $64billion

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/world-history/meet-mansa-musa-i-of-mali--the-richest-human-being-in-all-history-8213453.html

Monday 09-24-12

Using racism, it is politically correct?  Her great grand parents were probably driving the bus, not riding in the back.  It amazes me that they have the nerve to even bring it up.
At Black Caucus dinner, Michelle Obama urges members to get out the vote
Michelle Obama used a speech to the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation on Saturday night to urge delegates to register voters and encourage African Americans to turn out in November’s election.
Speaking in Washington at the foundation’s annual Phoenix dinner, the first lady likened turning out the vote to the civil rights struggles of previous eras.
“Make no mistake about it, this is the march of our time,” Obama told the audience at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center. “Marching door-to-door registering people to vote, marching everyone you know to the polls every single election.” That effort, she said, “is the movement of our era — protecting that fundamental right, not just for this election but for the next generation and generations to come.”
Obama did not refer explicitly to voter-ID laws that that have been passed or proposed in states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida, but she warned against being dissuaded from voting.
“We cannot let anyone discourage us from casting our ballots,” she said. “We cannot let anyone make us feel unwelcome in the voting booth. It is up to us to make sure that in every election, every voice is heard and every vote is counted. That means making sure our laws preserve that right.”
Republicans have backed voter ID laws, which often require photo identification, arguing that they help prevent ballot fraud. Democrats and voter advocates say the measures could be used to keep some poor and minority voters away from the polls because it can be more burdensome for them to get the required IDs. Opponents have mounted several legal challenges to the laws.
This year’s dinner issued honors to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.; film director George Lucas; Harvey Gantt, the first African American mayor of Charlotte; and Rep. Corrine Brown (D-Fla.).
Earlier at the convention center, issues of faith dominated the final day of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s annual legislative conference
Faith leaders discussed one of the most controversial issues facing them in the black community: President Obama’s public support for same-sex marriage.
Opening a roundtable session by calling for a civilized discussion, Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.) noted that the president “has not asked anybody to introduce legislation on same-sex marriage. What the president did is stand up one day and say, ‘This is my position.’ That’s it.”
Views on the issue differed. The most unequivocal opposition to the president’s stance on same-sex marriage came from the Rev. Annette Wilson.
“When God says a man should not lie with another man as a woman, that’s what he meant,” she said. “When He says that two women should not lie together as a man would a woman, that’s what he meant. He meant what he said, and we have to give an account for it. . . . When we know what God says and then go against it, there are consequences.”
Another panelist who disagreed with Obama explained why she would not let her view change her support for him. The Rev. Mankekolo Mahlangu-Ngcobo said that “even though I was not in favor of what the president has said,” she supported Obama “because as an African immigrant, his immigration policy is what I can support. I am an educator — his education platform is what I can support. I am in health care, and his health-care — Obamacare — he really cares.”
Jesse L. Jackson, by contrast, said that he supported same-sex marriage but that he could not see why the issue had gained prominence.
“I support the proposition. I cannot put it on the front of the line,” he told the assembled delegates. “Don’t win the same-sex debate and lose the right to a house, health and education.”
This was a view echoed in remarks from the Rev. S. Todd Yeary of Douglas Memorial Community Church in Baltimore, who said the issue was being used as a wedge to divide black voters.
“David slew Goliath with five stones,” he said. “We’ve got to decide when we’re going to stop stoning one another for the issues we really don’t all understand.”
The final day of the 42nd conference opened with the caucus’s annual prayer breakfast, addressed by Noel Jones, pastor of the City of Refuge Church in Gardena, Calif., who preached that God alone empowers people to make a difference in someone else’s life.
“We are living in a time when we as African Americans have given everybody else the rights to our lives because we believe that we need everybody to make our lives work,” Jones said in an interview after his sermon. “At the end of the day, we are responsible for whatever happens in our lives to make our lives work.”
With the November election only weeks away, the Rev. Barbara Williams Skinner reminded people in her prayer that lawmakers represent those who have no voice. She prayed for the children for whom “nobody checks their homework, nobody looks at their report card, nobody cares whether they come home or not.”
Drawing applause more than a dozen times during her speech later that evening, Michelle Obama’s remarks fared better than the president’s did at the same event last year.
Calling on the caucus to back his jobs bill, the president urged the audience in 2011 to “take off your bedroom slippers, put on your marching shoes” and support him, comments that were not well received by some present.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/at-cbcf-conference-faith-leaders-discuss-same-sex-marriage/2012/09/22/9cb60d0e-04ea-11e2-9146-c0cef8e81262_story.html

Michelle Obama to Congressional Black Caucus: "our journey is far, far from finished" Transcript
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2012/09/michelle_obama_to_congressiona.html

I have been over the Verrazano bridge a number of times.  It is testing the waters, they throw a high number out to get them to settle for a lower increase and they will be thankful when they get the lower increase, people are so gullible.

Staten Islanders Furious As MTA Considers A $15 Toll To Cross Verrazano Bridge


NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) – One woman told 1010 WINS’ Steve Sandberg that she doesn’t even have to leave Staten Island to feel the burden of high tolls.
“It’s actually cheaper for tolls in Brooklyn than for tolls in Staten Island,” she said Saturday.
Now, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority wants to hike the Verrazano Bridge toll to $15, and Staten Islanders are banding together to say “enough is enough” with all these tolls.
“It’s totally ludicrous,” one man said. “It keeps on going up. There’s no (stopping it). When is it going to end?”
“No matter which way we go we have to put our hand in our pocket to leave the island, and I think it’s unfair,” another man added. “And it’s a burden on us.”
But the toll hike won’t happen if Congressman Michael Grimm gets his way. He hopes to put up a roadblock — a federal law to cap toll hikes at 10 percent over five years, or lose millions.
“If this is enacted by 2013, they will have to roll their toll back to $12.10 for five years for them to be eligible for that federal funding,” Grimm said. “In 2008, the Verrazano Bridge (toll) was $10. So in 2013, that bridge could not be raised more than $1 — 10 percent of the $10 — to $11. In 2013, the next five-year period, they can raise it another 10 percent.”
Grimm’s bill would force a toll cut.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/09/22/staten-islanders-furious-as-the-mta-considers-a-15-toll-to-cross-verrazano-bridge/

Friday 09-07-12

What happened to Hope and Change?  Now that they have had their fill of it, the want none of it?  You know if someone had suggested you should vote for someone because they were white, the media would be all over it. 

Sunday 09-02-12

Here are a few stories from the Fridays news notes   http://www.wayoflife.org/


NEW YORKERS: LET CHICK-FIL-A BUILD RESTAURANTS
(Friday Church News Notes, August 24, 2012, www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) -

The following is excerpted from “NY Voters Poll,” Christian Post, Aug. 16, 2012: “Most New York City voters say Chick-fil-A should not be blocked from getting permits over its traditional stance on marriage, according to a new poll. Amid debate over Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy's statement last month against same-sex marriage, 82 percent said there should be no impact on the fast-food chain's ability to get permits, a Quinnipiac University poll revealed Wednesday. Also, 83 percent said elected officials should not try to discourage people from eating at Chick-fil-A. ‘New Yorkers may disagree with what you say, but they defend your right to sell chicken,’ said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, in a statement. The survey was conducted among 1,298 New York City voters. It follows comments by several mayors and other elected officials that they don't want Chick-fil-A in their cities.”


MUSLIMS DEMAND THEIR OWN NATION IN NORWAY
(Friday Church News Notes, August 24, 2012, www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) -

The following is excerpted from “Muslims Demand Breakaway Islamic Nation,” Examiner.com, Aug. 19, 2012: “The Norwegian news portal VG Nett is reporting that a Muslim terrorist group, Ansar al-Sunna, is threatening that if a section of the nation’s capitol isn’t transformed into a sharia-complaint Muslim nation, an attack rivaling 9/11 will be launched upon the Scandinavian nation. ... As translated by Michael Laudahn: ‘If Norwegian soldiers can take planes to Afghanistan, then Osama and Mohammed can also take planes to Norway ... This is not a threat, only the words of truth. The words of justice. ... We do not want to be a part of Norwegian society. And we do not consider it necessary either to move away from Norway, because we were born and grew up here. And Allah’s earth belongs to everybody. But let Grønland become ours. Bar this city quarter and let us control it the way we wish to do it. ... We do not wish to live together with dirty beasts like you.’”



ATHEISTS CLAIM CROSS AT 9/11 MUSEUM MAKING THEM SICK
(Friday Church News Notes, August 24, 2012, www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) -

The American Atheists have filed a lawsuit demanding that the steel cross at the 9/11 museum be removed, as it violates the U.S. Constitution and is causing them “depression, headaches, anxiety, and mental pain and anguish” (“Despite Atheists’ Absurd Claims,” American Center for Law and Justice, Aug. 17, 2012). The Ground Zero Cross is composed of a surviving crossbeam from the Twin Towers and is displayed as one of 800 artifacts. The 9/11 museum is defending the display, arguing that the cross became a symbol of hope to many during the recovery effort, and “there is no legal authority for the proposition that a museum is prohibited from displaying an item with historical, cultural or artistic significance merely because that item also has religious significance.”



BLACK COMMUNISTS MURDERING WHITE FARMERS IN SOUTH AFRICA
(Friday Church News Notes, August 24, 2012, www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) -

The following is excerpted from “Genocide Looms for White Farmers,” WorldNetDaily, Aug. 18, 2012: “Last month, when Genocide Watch chief Gregory Stanton declared that white South African farmers were facing a genocidal onslaught and that communist forces were taking over the nation, virtually nobody noticed. ... The silence is so deafening that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton didn’t even publicly mention the problems when she was there last week. Instead, she was busy dancing, pledging billions of dollars and praising the ruling government. ... Over [the past] 10 years, thousands of white South African farmers, known as Boers, have been massacred in the most horrific ways imaginable. Experts say the ongoing slaughter constitutes a clear effort to exterminate the whites or at least drive the remaining ones--now less than 10 percent of the population--out of the country. ... Many more victims have been savagely tortured, raped, disemboweled, drowned in boiling water or worse. ... When ANC Youth League boss Julius Malema began singing ‘Kill the Boer,’ Genocide Watch moved up South Africa to stage six out of eight on the road to genocide ... When a court declared the racist song ‘hate speech’ for inciting genocide against whites, the self-styled communist president of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, began singing it too. ... It is all part of a vicious campaign of dehumanization aimed at whites, according to experts. Demonizing the victims always precedes genocide. ... The government, meanwhile, has already launched a campaign to disarm Afrikaner farmers. ... Even before apartheid was dismantled, the ANC was notoriously brutal to its opponents, using some of the most barbaric tactics imaginable even against blacks who refused to bow down. Necklacing, in which a tire filled with gasoline is placed around a victim’s neck and set on fire, for example, became a common form of punishment for dissenters and ANC opponents. Even Nelson Mandela’s wife endorsed the monstrous practice.”




NEW BLACK PANTHERS CALL FOR KILLING WHITE BABIES IN AMERICA AND ALL WHITES IN SOUTH AFRICA

(Friday Church News Notes, August 24, 2012, www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - The New Black Panther Party in America is applauding the murderous ways of their ANC brethren in South Africa. The New Black Panther Party’s (NBPP) radio program last week rebroadcast a 1993 obscenity-laced message by the late Khalid Muhammad, former chairman of the NBPP, calling for the murder of all white people in South Africa. “We give them 24 hours in South Africa to get out of town. I say, if they don’t get out of town, we kill the men, we kill the women, we kill the children, we kill the babies, we kill the blind, we kill the cripple, we kill the crazy, we kill the ******, we kill the lesbians, I say ******** we kill them all” (“New Black Panther Audio,” Examiner.com, Aug. 16, 2012). An audio at the NBPP’s web site calls for white babies in America to be killed by firebombing nurseries (“New Black Panthers,” Breitbart News, Aug. 14, 2012). The audio calls for a new black militia to “kill everything white in sight” (“New Black Panther Party,” Townhall.com, Aug. 25, 2012). On NBPP Radio, August 12, chief of staff Michelle Williams ranted about why she hates whites and why all blacks should, too. Cursing and blaspheming, she said her foot will be on the necks of white people. In June, the NBPP’s General T.A.C.O. (Taking All Capitalists Out) said his party is going to hunt down whites. He said, “Once [white people] die, we should dig ‘em up, and kill e’m again, bury ‘em, dig ‘em up, kill ‘em again, and again and again!” The Barack Obama justice department has taken no action against this organization. Once certain parties are above the law and are a protected or even semi-protected class (e.g., homosexual activists, black activists, Muslim activists, illegal aliens), law and order gradually breaks down and anarchy takes it place, and this is happening in America. This didn’t begin under Obama, but it has been taken to a new level under his watch.

Friday 08-10-12

This is funny and sad at the same time because it is so true, hope you enjoy as much as i did.

A Harley Biker is riding by the zoo in Washington, DC when he sees a little girl leaning into the lion's cage. Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the collar of her jacket and tries to pull her inside to slaughter her, under the eyes of her screaming parents. The biker jumps off his Harley, runs to the cage and hits the lion square on the nose with a powerful punch.


Whimpering from the pain the lion jumps back letting go of the girl, and the biker brings her to her terrified parents, who thank him endlessly. A reporter has watched the whole event.

The reporter addressing the Harley rider says, 'Sir, this was the most gallant and brave thing I've seen a man do in my whole life.'

The Harley rider replies, 'Why, it was nothing, really, the lion was behind bars. I just saw this little kid in danger and acted as I felt right.'

The reporter says, 'Well, I'll make sure this won't go unnoticed. I'm a journalist, you know, and tomorrow's paper will have this story on the front page... So, what do you do for a living and what political affiliation do you have?'

The biker replies, "I'm a U.S. Marine and a Republican."

The journalist leaves.

The following morning the biker buys the paper to see if it indeed brings news of his actions, and reads, on the front page:

"U.S. MARINE ASSAULTS AFRICAN IMMIGRANT AND STEALS HIS LUNCH"

... and THAT pretty much sums up the media's approach to the news these days.

Tuesday 07-31-12

Does this really surpize anyone?  I doubt it goes all the way to the President.  But the President as already shown his true colors with some of his earlier jump to concultion like in the Gates/Crowley arrest.

Federal Court finds Obama appointees interfered with New Black Panther prosecution



A federal court in Washington, DC, held last week that political appointees appointed by President Obama did interfere with the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the New Black Panther Party.



The ruling came as part of a motion by the conservative legal watch dog group Judicial Watch, who had sued the DOJ in federal court to enforce a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents pertaining to the the New Black Panthers case. Judicial Watch had secured many previously unavailable documents through their suit against DOJ and were now suing for attorneys’ fees.

Obama’s DOJ had claimed Judicial Watch was not entitled to attorney’s fees since “none of the records produced in this litigation evidenced any political interference whatsoever in” how the DOJ handled the New Black Panther Party case. But United States District Court Judge Reggie Walton disagreed. Citing a “series of emails” between Obama political appointees and career Justice lawyers, Walton writes:


The documents reveal that political appointees within DOJ were conferring about the status and resolution of the New Black Panther Party case in the days preceding the DOJ’s dismissal of claims in that case, which would appear to contradict Assistant Attorney General Perez’s testimony that political leadership was not involved in that decision. Surely the public has an interest in documents that cast doubt on the accuracy of government officials’ representations regarding the possible politicization of agency decision-making.
…
In sum, the Court concludes that three of the four fee entitlement factors weigh in favor of awarding fees to Judicial Watch. Therefore, Judicial Watch is both eligible and entitled to fees and costs, and the Court must now consider the reasonableness of Judicial Watch’s requested award.


The New Black Panthers case stems from a Election Day 2008 incident where two members of the New Black Panther Party were filmed outside a polling place intimidating voters and poll watchers by brandishing a billy club. Justice Department lawyers investigated the case, filed charges, and when the Panthers failed to respond, a federal court in Philadelphia entered a “default” against all the Panthers defendants. But after Obama was sworn in, the Justice Department reversed course, dismissed charges against three of the defendants, and let the fourth off with a narrowly tailored restraining order.


“The Court’s decision is another piece of evidence showing the Obama Justice Department is run by individuals who have a problem telling the truth,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “The decision shows that we can’t trust the Obama Justice Department to fairly administer our nation’s voting and election laws.”

http://washingtonexaminer.com/federal-court-finds-obama-appointees-interfered-with-new-black-panther-prosecution/article/2503500