Freedom Outpost

The Washington  Times reported Sunday that “the Homeland Security Department has granted  legal status to 99.2 percent of all illegal immigrants who have applied under  President Obama’s new non-deportation policy for young adults, according to the  latest numbers released Friday.”

It’s another giant middle finger to the American people by the Obama  administration, endangering national security and guaranteeing higher  unemployment. Supporters of this policy, according to the Times, “say the high  rate makes sense given the motivated pool of youngsters, known as ‘Dreamers’ because of the Dream Act legislation that would give them full citizenship  rights.”

Yes, the motivated pool of youngsters like Al Harbi, the Saudi “person of  interest” whose role in the Boston Marathon jihad bombing has never been  adequately explained, and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the Boston jihad bomber himself, or Khalid  Ali-M Aldawsari (building bombs to use on the home of George W. Bush,  hydroelectric dams, nuclear power plants, nightclubs and the homes of soldiers)  or Ahmed Ferhani and Mohamed Mamdouh (who plotted to bomb a New York synagogue  and the Empire State Building) or Amine El Khalifi (who plotted a suicide  bombing plot of U.S. Capitol) or Mohammad  Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis (who plotted to bomb the Manhattan office of the  Federal Reserve Bank) and so many  other highly motivated youngsters.

We have been importing jihadists for years now with Muslim immigration  programs under the Refugee  Resettlement program, diversity  visas and religious  visas. The Refugee Council  USA says: “The U.S. has historically maintained a policy of admitting  refugees of special humanitarian concern into the country.” Yet what that means  in practice is very different from what most Americans would expect. It’s always  a shock to people when they first find out how Refugee  Resettlement works. Instead of giving refuge to the religious minorities  that are persecuted, oppressed and subjugated under the Shariah, we are opening  the floodgates to Islamic supremacists and jihadists.

And what most folks don’t know is that it’s the OIC-driven  U.N. that decides who gets refugee status. The U.N. High Commissioner for  Refugees (UNHCR) determines which of the world’s “huddled masses” comes to the  U.S. as humanitarian refugees. According to a  2008 report (and little has changed since then), “major refugee ‘hot spots’ include the Horn of Africa with Somalia, Darfur in the Sudan and Ethiopia, Iraq,  Pakistan and Myanmar. The U.S. is the third-highest ranked country in terms of  hosting refugees. The annual budget for the UNHCR is over $1.7 billion derived  from government contributions, foundation grants and donations.”

Here’s the thing. Anthony Kimery reported in Homeland Security Today last  week that “the threat of ‘homegrown’ and foreign jihadist groups and individuals  plotting mass casualty attacks on U.S. soil has not weakened, despite  degradation of al-Qaida Central (AQC). … Authorities said there is an  exceptionally ‘heightened concern’ regarding intelligence that the successful  radicalization of Muslims and new converts to jihad in the U.S. and throughout  the West who’ve been involved in mass casualty plots and plotting has resulted  in inspiring of a legion of ‘inspired’ new jihadists, many of whom are ‘quite  willing’ to carry out mass casualty attacks, including suicide martyr attacks.”

This is a direct result of the huge influx of whole Muslim communities from  jihad areas and nations into the U.S. since 9/11. The Obama  administration is importing whole Muslim communities from Islamic countries like  Somalia. The “diversity” immigration  numbers are doubling, tripling in some  months. This immigration must stop. Many of these devout Muslims do not  assimilate. They agitate for jihad, and many return to Somalia (or Pakistan,  Afghanistan) for training. Why are we importing hostile invaders?

We should be importing whole Christian communities or Hindu communities,  etc., that are living (and dying) under the boot of the Shariah. I know several  people (Jews among them) who are trying to get out of Europe and Canada, and  they are prohibited from emigrating. These include the best of people,  businessmen (who would bring jobs), doctors, etc. They have met years of red  tape and denial. Further, I must field three or four emails a day from former  Muslims in Egypt, Mauritania, Gaza, etc., begging me to help them escape their  dangerous circumstances. Again, brick wall.

But jihadists with “insurgent histories”? Welcome. Why? “Refugee  resettlement.”

My organization, the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), has called  for an  immediate halt of immigration by Muslims into nations that do not currently  have a Muslim majority population, and with good reason. There is no chance of  that being implemented anytime soon. But it may one day soon become a matter of  our national survival.

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/05/why-are-we-importing-jihadists-to-america/#ixzz2U6iwpmFI

As we relax after the failure of the gun-grabbing bill in the Senate, America’s enemies are attacking our fundamental freedom by more deviant means — with help from their fellow authoritarian socialists at the United Nations. Comrade Obama will sign the UN’s “Small Arms Treaty” early next month. Forbes has listed a few things this treaty would do to Americans:

1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.

2. Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).

3. Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp).

4. Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.

5. In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.

Aligning himself with a hostile power against the USA by signing this clearly unconstitutional treaty would dwarf the many other scandals for which Obama should be removed from office.

Weasel Zippers

Our bad.

WASHINGTON — One day before President Obama is due to deliver a major speech on national security, his administration on Wednesday formally acknowledged that the United States had killed four American citizens in drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan.

In a letter to Congressional leaders obtained by The New York Times, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. disclosed that the administration had deliberately killed Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Muslim cleric who was killed in a drone strike in September 2011 in Yemen.

The American responsibility for Mr. Awlaki’s death has been widely reported, but the administration had until now refused to confirm or deny it.

The letter also said that the United States had killed three other Americans: Samir Khan, who was killed in the same strike; Mr. Awlaki’s son Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who was also killed in Yemen; and Jude Mohammed, who was killed in a strike in Pakistan.

“These individuals were not specifically targeted by the United States,” Mr. Holder wrote.

Well, well, well, the Huma Abedin controversy has finally hit the legacy media. Okay, okay — it’s not the Huma Abedin controversy, but it’s one Obama’s court stenographers apparently feel comfortable talking about.

It seems Ms. Abedin, accurately described by the New York Times as Hillary Rodham Clinton’s  ”longtime aide and confidante,” spent her last months at the State Department not really at the State Department. Despite maintaining her title as Secretary of State Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, she was permitted, upon returning to government service from maternity leave in mid-2012, to remain at home in New York with her newborn child and her husband, the disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner — he of the notorious Weiner all aTwitter photos. While the State Department was paying her $135,000 as a “special government employee,” Abedin was also permitted to moonlight as a “strategic consultant” for Teneo, a firm founded by Doug Band, a former adviser to President Bill Clinton. (Teneo, the Times informs us, advises such firms as MF Global, the brokerage firm whose investors were broken by Jon Corzine — the former New Jersey governor and Obama campaign bundler.) In addition, Abedin found time in her busy “special government employee”  schedule to do consultant work for the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation.

With that familiar Clinton flare, Abedin did not disclose her consultant income on government financial disclosure forms. According to the State Department, you see, her new “part-time” position as “special government employee” meant the usual disclosure requirements did not apply to her … notwithstanding that, the Atlantic Wire reports, Abedin continued to be referred to in official documents as deputy chief of staff to the United States secretary of state. The arrangement finally came to an end in March when Ms. Abedin officially left the State Department to head up Mrs. Clinton’s six-person “transition office” — i.e., the transition from secretary of state to what the tongue-in-cheeky Atlantic calls Mrs. Clinton’s “version of private life.”

Apparently not to the great delight of the Clintons, Weiner, as part of his effort to come back from his virtual sex scandal and maybe make a run for New York City mayor, decided to release the couple’s 2012 tax returns. They show that these dedicated public servants made just shy of a half-million dollars last year. Turns out Weiner’s been “consulting” too, but the couple is not saying how much of the haul comes from Abedin’s extracurricular activities while she was still on the government payroll.

This story is getting some attention — sure to be fleeting — from the reliably Clinton-adoring press and some “good government” types. But that has more to do with a potential Weiner political campaign than with the tangled web of government policy-making and Clinton cronies (like the Saudis and Qataris — multi-million dollar donors to the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation who do mega-business with the State Department). There has to date been scant media interest in Abedin’s earlier part-time job.

As detailed previsously here at Ordered Liberty, Ms. Abedin began her long professional association with Mrs. Clinton in 1996, as an intern to the first lady in the Clinton White House. In the years that followed, she remained a Clinton staffer from the White House to the Senate, and eventually to the State Department. At the same time, she also served from 1996 through 2008 as assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, a publication founded by Abdullah Omar Naseef, a major financier of al Qaeda whose Islamic “charity,” the Rabita Trust, is a designated terrorist organization (on which Naseef colluded with Wael Hamza Jalaidan, an Osama bin Laden intimate who is one of al Qaeda’s founders).

Naseef is a former secretary general of the Muslim World League, which Osama bin Laden described as one of al Qaeda’s primary funding sources. In the late seventies, he retained Abedin’s parents to run his newly formed Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs and edit its journal, which has been an Abedin family affair ever since. For seven years, Naseef overlapped with Huma Abedin at the journal, as a member of its advisory editorial board. He withdrew after 2003 — right around the time he was named as a defendant in the civil case brought by the victims of the 9/11 atrocities (a suit from which he was dropped in 2010 because a court found it lacked jurisdiction over him). The journal is still edited by Ms. Abedin’s mother, Dr. Saleha Abedin, who took over when Ms. Abedin’s father passed away. Both parents have had deep Muslim Brotherhood ties. In fact, Saleha Abedin runs an organization, the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child, which is a part of the Union of Good — a major Hamas supporter and, yes, a designated terrorist organization run by Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the top Muslim Brotherhood sharia jurist.

Somehow, Ms. Abedin’s consulting work at Naseef’s journal has been of considerably less interest to the media.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) blasted members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Tuesday, which voted overwhelmingly to arm elements of the Syrian opposition in a bill co-sponsored by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN). “This is an important moment,” Paul said, addressing his Senate colleagues. “You will be funding, today, the allies of al Qaeda. It’s an irony you cannot overcome.”

The legislation, which would authorize the shipment of arms and military training to rebels “that have gone through a thorough vetting process,” passed in a bipartisan 15-3 vote. Paul offered an amendment that would strike the bill’s weapons provision, but it was rejected along with another Paul amendment ruling out the authorization of the use of military force in Syria. (Connecticut Democrat Chris Murphy was the only senator to join Paul in support of the weapons amendment.)

Nidal Hasan has been charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder.

Islamist killer Nidal Hasan has been paid $278,000 since he murdered 13 Americans in a terrorist attack in 2009. NBC DFW reported:

The Department of Defense confirms to NBC 5 Investigates that accused Fort Hood shooter Major Nidal Hasan has now been paid more than $278,000 since the Nov. 5, 2009 shooting that left 13 dead 32 injured. The Army said under the Military Code of Justice, Hasan’s salary cannot be suspended unless he is proven guilty.

If Hasan had been a civilian defense department employee, NBC 5 Investigates has learned, the Army could have suspended his pay after just seven days.

Personnel rules for most civilian government workers allow for “indefinite suspensions” in cases “when the agency has reasonable cause to believe that the employee has committed a crime for which a sentence of imprisonment may be imposed.”

Meanwhile, more than three years later soldiers wounded in the mass shooting are fighting to receive the same pay and medical benefits given to those wounded in combat.

Reblogged from We the People:

• 
• 

Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper and Patriot.

Two new Seal Team VI members Accidents in parachute training exercise in Arizona.  

Let's get very basic here....When has Obama ever told the truth?

Any reader at this site understands that I have proved to my satisfaction the Osama bin Laden was not killed on the night in question.

Please visit: …

Read more… 379 more words

By 1 Dragon

I was wondering……. just how long it will take our Dictator in Chief to fly out to Oklahoma to push some more of his BS on America. After all, wasn’t it Rahm Emmanuel who said, never let a crisis go to waste. Besides, it would give him another excuse to hop on Air Force One and spend some more ou the tax payers money, but hey that’s just my opinion.

How many times over the last decades are we going to hear from Washington  leadership, especially in the Executive Branch, that they “didn’t know” or it  was some underlings fault?  I wonder how long the American people are going  to get scammed with those excuses before finally waking up.  There is a  basic and simple reason for these pleas of incompetence from perpetrators of  criminal behavior.  You don’t go to jail for incompetence or lack of  knowledge.  You do go to jail for intent and deliberate  illegal acts.  Possibly you could go to jail for negligence, but not nearly  for the same degree of punishment as if clear intent was proven.  You don’t  go to jail if you can show that the act was committed by some rogue employee and  you knew nothing about it.  Uh huh, and my Aunt Sadie was the Queen of  Sheba.

Let’s look at incompetence, just for the sake of argument.  We are all  so tolerant these days of fallibility.   So and so “didn’t mean to do  it.”  So and so was just a weak person and fell into a circumstance so and  so could not handle.  Poor so and so.  O.K. that might work for a  youngster who needs guidance.  But we are talking about the supposed cream  of the crop at the upper echelons of leading our nation.  How much slack  are you willing to give these people after they have landed in the most powerful  positions in the nation?  A lot of these folks are graduates of the  nation’s top law schools.  If you want to pretend they are incompetent, you  surely are kidding yourself.  Some incompetence could be applied, but not  at the highest levels and that alone is reason to remove them from their  positions.  Do you really think all of this amounts to incompetence at this  point?   And when incompetence meets malfeasance, how much of this is this  nation going to tolerate?

“But judge, but judge, I didn’t have a clue that would happen!”  “No,  judge, I didn’t know anything about that!”  “But judge, now that I see  there is a problem, I’ll make sure it never happens again!”

“And after all, what difference does it make?”  “Yes, judge, I’ll start  an investigation and get to the bottom of it!”  “Whether it is legal or not  is irrelevant!”  “It must have been that awful and repulsive video!”  What?  You say the AP was wiretapped?  “Oh, no, I didn’t know anything  about that!  Oh, wait, I remember now!” “That was a national security issue  so we had to do it!”  “But judge, it was just some low level employees who  didn’t know any better!”  “Yeah, that’s the ticket!”

The truth is they have gotten away with this “can’t remember,” “I didn’t  know,” what difference does it make,” shtick for so long now that they can’t  imagine it won’t work again and again.  Because it has.  I guess it is  too much to expect that the guilty liars would admit their culpability.   Nope.  You have to pin it on them and make it stick.  I sure hope that  is what we will see happen next.  What do you want to bet that Valerie  Jarrett is vacationing somewhere in Iran about that time?

How much smoke burns your eyes and throat before you recognize there is a  fire?  And how much evidence do you need to accept that there is a  Communist arsonist in the White House, propped up by sycophants and funders who  hate America?  The thing of it is, the POTUS and his surrounding fellow  travelers know very well the crimes they have committed against the United  States and they know if they are prosecuted for those actions, jail time at  least is on the table.  So pleading dumb is the ploy.

If you can’t cry…you might as well try to laugh….Obama  Denies Role in Government

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—President Obama used his weekly radio  address on Saturday to reassure the American people that he has “played no role  whatsoever” in the U.S. government over the past four years.

“Right now, many of you are angry at the government, and no one is angrier  than I am,” he said. “Quite frankly, I am glad that I have had no involvement in  such an organization.”

The President’s outrage only increased, he said, when he “recently became  aware of a part of that government called the Department of Justice.”

“The more I learn about the activities of these individuals, the more certain  I am that I would not want to be associated with them,” he said. “They sound  like bad news.”

Mr. Obama closed his address by indicating that beginning next week he would  enforce what he called a “zero tolerance policy on governing.”

“If I find that any members of my Administration have had any intimate  knowledge of, or involvement in, the workings of the United States government,  they will be dealt with accordingly,” he said.

“Yeah, that’s the ticket!”

Try this video for a little relief and a cynical but truthful view

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/05/the-obama-incompetence-excuse-im-not-buying-it/#ixzz2Tt61BFFg

I  don’t normally display lawn signs or bumper stickers during political campaigns;  I usually keep my voting preferences to myself.  (That’s the point of  secret ballots, right?)  But the November 2012 elections got me charged up  to the point where I felt the urge to do something public, and since my friends  already knew how I felt, I didn’t think I would be divulging any secrets by  doing so.

But  I didn’t like the bumper stickers offered by the campaigns, or any of the clever  ones being sold over the internet, because I was really against certain  candidates rather than for the opposition.  So I designed and  ordered my own, shown below in Figure OB:

Figure  OB.  “Obama Built This Forgery” bumper sticker.

(The  “Obama Built” is a reference to Obama’s “You didn’t build that!” statement on  the campaign trail, because he did build this fake “birth certificate,” or had it built for him.)

Because  I live in a very blue state, when I was out in my car, I would occasionally be  stopped and asked about my sticker, usually by an ill-informed progressive. I  would tell this person that the Obama “birth certificate” released by the White  House in April 2011 is clearly a fake, and you can plainly see the proof…right  on this bumper sticker!  In the minute or two before I would be dismissed  as a raving lunatic, I would be able to explain:

The  public was essentially told that Hawaii Department of Health officials took a  bound volume of original paper 1961 birth certificates, turned to Obama’s,  placed it on the copier, copied it onto green security paper, stamped and embossed-sealed it, and  then delivered it to Obama’s lawyer to be flown back to Washington.  In  which case, the image on my bumper sticker, a copy of the digital PDF “birth  certificate” released on April 27, 2011 by the White House, and which the  president declared to be his long-form birth certificate, must be fake –  because near the left margin, especially at the top of the document, the text  and lines of the form bend downward (to simulate the bending of the page near  the binding).  It’s impossible for a copier to do that  bending.

This  is the point at which I would usually be dismissed as a madman — a conservative  nut-job.

But  since you are still reading this, I presume that you are interested in knowing  just why this is impossible.

In  Figure ULC, take a look at the upper-left corner of the more detailed blowup of  the PDF forgery (shown immediately below in Figure LF):

Figure  LF.  Obama long-form digitized (PDF) “birth certificate” released by the  White House on April 27, 2011 (with wide margins trimmed).  Click to  enlarge.

In  Figure ULC below, you can clearly see how the horizontal lines of the form bend  downward without going out of focus, and how the text bends downward without being out of focus, and how the paper purportedly curves away  from the copier glass without going very dark, and even how the penciled numbers  “6,” “5,” and “2″ at the very left edge, which are in focus, can be  easily read.

Neat  trick, huh?

Figure  ULC.  Upper-left corner detail of Figure LF.  Click to  enlarge.

And  how does this compare with what a copier really does?

For  my at-home comparison I selected a dictionary, a very thick book where the text  runs close to the binding, so I would be certain to copy letters which curved  well away from the copier glass.

You  can see the result in Figure MW, below, where I have reproduced the upper-left  corner of the copied image:

Figure  MW.  What a copier actually creates.  Text blurs and goes dark (but  does not bend) where the paper curls away from the copier’s glass  plate.

As  the paper curves away from the copier glass, note how quickly the text becomes  blurry, and how quickly it turns dark and unreadable.  Also note that the text does not bend; it is impossible for the copier to make this  happen.

(The  technical reason for this is that copiers copy the original document one very  thin line at a time, depositing an electrostatic charge on a rotating drum one  thin line at a time, synchronously with the document-scanning  mechanism.)

So  how was that bending created in the forgery?  The most likely explanation  is that the forger began with an image taken by a camera, where the  camera was positioned roughly at the bottom of the certificate and aimed  slightly upward when the shutter clicked.  Because the camera captures the  entire picture at once, the camera lens can create this distortion on parts of a  curling image that are well-removed from the center of the picture.  You  can see this more clearly by looking at the left edge of the full “birth  certificate” image shown in Figure LF.  The lines at the very top-left bend  downward most sharply — at the bottom left edge, hardly at all.  This is  exactly the kind of image behavior you’d expect to see in a photograph, where  the entire picture was taken off-center.

The  forger could have used one of the several images of genuine microfilmed or  photographed vintage Hawaiian birth certificates that are floating around on the  internet as a template for building the forgery, or the effect could be entirely  synthetic, photoshopped by the forger to create the illusion of a bent page in a  big book.

Since  the president has now been re-elected, this information has zero political  value; it is of interest primarily to set straight the historical record.   Therefore, there is no political incentive for any progressive to call you  a nutcase when you bring up the subject; you should be able to do so freely,  without retribution.  Barack Obama built this fake — he now owns it.   His campaign peddled it on mugs and T-shirts.  The evidence of  forgery can be clearly seen to the naked eye  — on the internet, in  newspaper and magazine stories, on merchandise — and even on my bumper sticker! — by  anybody.

The  shoe is now on the other foot.  You no longer have to prove that that it’s  fake; it’s up to the president’s sycophants to try to prove it’s genuine.  And “because Barack Obama says so” isn’t  proof.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/05/obama_built_this_forgery.html#ixzz2TpC6LHrC Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook