Jailed for Facebook comments, Marine sues

WND Exclusive
It happens in China routinely. It frequently happened in the old Soviet Union. Undoubtedly in North Korea, although generally there’s no one around to witness it. But in the United States? It happens here, too, apparently.
A lawsuit has been filed by officials with the Rutherford Institute on behalf of a Marine who was jailed and held for the comments he made on Facebook – comments that expressed a dissatisfaction with the present direction of the U.S. government.

According to officials at Rutherford, the civil rights action names as defendants members of law enforcement and the government who were involved in last year’s episode where Marine veteran Brandon Raub, 27, was arrested by a swarm of FBI and Secret Service and forcibly detained in a psychiatric ward for a week.
His crime was posting controversial song lyrics and political views on Facebook, the institute reported.
In one of his postings, he cited the evil in the world.
“The United States was meant to lead the charge against injustice, but through our example not our force. People do not respond to having liberty and freedom forced on them,” he wrote.
He was released later when a judge stepped in and concluded the prosecution’s case against Raub was “so devoid of any factual allegations that it could not be reasonably expected to give rise to a case or controversy.”
The lawsuit asks for damages for Raub for the attack he endured. It was filed in U.S. District Court in Richmond, Va., and claims Raub’s seizure and detention were part of a plan executed by the Obama administration called “Operation Vigilant Eagle.”

That, the institute explains, was a federal program to do surveillance on military veterans who express views critical of the government.
Institute attorneys claim the attempt to label Raub as “mentally ill” and authorities’ efforts to involuntarily commit him into custody was intended to silence his criticism of the government. However, they explain the strategy also violated Raub’s First and Fourth Amendment rights. “Since coming to Raub’s defense, The Rutherford Institute has been contacted by military veterans across the country recounting similar incidents. In filing a civil suit against government officials, Rutherford Institute attorneys plan to take issue with the manner in which Virginia’s civil commitment statutes are being used to silence individuals engaged in lawfully exercising their free speech rights,” the organization said.
“Brandon Raub’s case exposed the seedy underbelly of a governmental system that is targeting military veterans for expressing their discontent over America’s rapid transition to a police state,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute.

“Brandon Raub is not the first veteran to be targeted for speaking out against the government. Hopefully, by holding officials accountable, we can ensure that Brandon is the last to suffer in this way.”
It was last Aug, 16 when Chesterfield police, Secret Service and FBI agents arrived at Raub’s home and asked to talk with him about his Facebook posts.
“Like many Facebook users, Raub, a Marine who has served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, uses his Facebook page to post song lyrics and air his political opinions. Without providing any explanation, levying any charges against Raub or reading him his rights, law enforcement officials handcuffed Raub and transported him to police headquarters, then to John Randolph Medical Center, where he was held against his will,” the Institute reported.
“In a hearing on Aug. 20, government officials pointed to Raub’s Facebook posts as the reason for his incarceration. While Raub stated that the Facebook posts were being read out of context, a Special Justice ordered Raub be held up to 30 more days for psychological evaluation and treatment.”
When Circuit Court Judge Allan Sharrett, however, found out about the case, he ordered it dismissed and Raub released, because there was no evidence of a case.

In asking the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to acknowledge the harm done to Raub and to rectify the violation of his First, Fourth, Fifth and 14th Amendment rights, Institute attorneys are requesting that Raub be awarded damages.
The 14-page complaint describes Raub’s “baseless incarceration” and said it violated his free speech, due process and other rights.
The complaint claims the arrest was a “pretext” that was orchestrated to “silence Raub’s speech critical of the government by subjecting him to involuntary commitment.”

Muslims outraged over pig parts dumped at Swiss mosque site

oped: Good idea...non violent protest:)

(CNN) -- Muslims in Switzerland are responding with shock and outrage after a pig carcass and severed swine heads were discovered buried at the site of a proposed mosque.

Police in the town of Grenchen uncovered the pigs Friday after they received an anonymous message claiming that someone had buried the body parts and spilled 120 liters of blood from the animals in an effort to desecrate the ground to halt the construction of the mosque.

Pork and pork byproducts are haram, or forbidden, in Islam.

The unsigned flier, written in German, says "This operation was done (conducted) to protest against the growing expansion of Islam in Switzerland," and says that a similar desecration in Spain earlier halted another mosque construction project.

Thomas Suber, chief of the Solothurn Canton police, told CNN by phone that there were no suspects currently, but that a full investigation is under way.

"We can't say yet it is a hate crime in those words, but it could have been done to stop the mosque," said Suber. 

Suber said that whoever is responsible may be brought up on environmental pollution charges.

The police chief says that veterinary health officials have been called in to find if pig's blood has in fact been spilled, and that charges may be filed over illegal dumping of animal parts in addition to other potential criminal charges.

But for Muslims in Switzerland, it's just the latest sign that they are being victimized by some in the far right.

Abdel Azziz Qaasim Illi, spokesman for Switzerland's Central Islamic Council said the deed "crossed a line" that had already been pushed against Muslims since a popular referendum in 2009 banned the construction of new minarets.

"Since the ban on minarets there's been an increase in Islamophobia and Islamophobic events, so it was not really surprising" said Illi. "But it is an escalation in Switzerland because this is a peaceful country where Christians and Muslims have all been living together... and we are a bit afraid this may increase."

There are an estimated 500,000 Muslims in Switzerland, out of a population of more than 7 million says Illi, who admitted that the population is rising but that most Swiss Muslims were immigrants from Albania and elsewhere in the Balkans, where there is a tradition of moderate Islam. 

The property had been purchased by the local Muslim community several years ago from a Swiss far right political activist. The man claimed that he had not been informed that it would be used for a mosque and had fought the sale in court, before ultimately losing his civil case recently allowing construction to go forward.

"We can just wait for the next rain or snowfall to cleanse the ground, so we do not fear from this side anything," said Illi.

"But on the other hand it's an emotional thing, it means that there are actually people in this society who deny the right of Muslims when it comes to a mosque in Switzerland and this is something that hurts us."

U.S. Military: We Could Have Saved Ambassador Stevens

  oped: The whole damn Obama administration are liars,frauds and imo 'Cowards'
 

                                                                            Following insertion via MH-60 helicopter, Green Berets with a CIF Unit


By Jonathon Moseley
Elite U.S. troops were completely capable of saving Ambassador Chris Stevens during the Benghazi Consulate attacks on September 11, 2012.  Elements of the highly specialized Combatant Commanders In-Extremis (CIF) units are always on alert, on forward deployment, ready to respond.  Their job description is to hit the ground in 3 to 5 hours.  CIF elements are ready to engage in active combat anywhere in their region, 3 to 5 hours after the call. 


Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense at the time, either misled the U.S.  Congress or was incompetent.  Panetta testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on February 7, 2013 that the U.S. military could not have responded in less than 9 to 12 hours.

Obama's first secretary of defense, Robert Gates, told CBS's Face the Nation on May 12, 2013 that "[w]e don't have a ready force standing by" in that region. 

But we absolutely do "have a ready force standing by" to reach any trouble spot in a few hours.  Insider reports previously revealed that CIF elements were training in Croatia and could have been in Benghazi in three and a half hours.

Although rotating out of the United States, some CIF elements are always forward-deployed within each military command region, always on stand-by.  Their training includes expertise within each local region.  Some of each region's unit is always ready.  They don't need to pack.  Being ready to go -- immediately -- is their job description.  It's the reason they exist. 

The U.S. military has developed a range of capabilities, from CIF teams to the Navy SEALs, to Rangers, to Green Berets.  But now many in the special forces/special operators community feel betrayed.  Commanders in Extremis units are so highly trained and expert that even elite Green Berets wash out of the highly demanding CIF training in large numbers. 


Standard military doctrine is to activate all such resources immediately, even if they are ultimately not used.  Military's plans require getting such teams in the air and on the way, not waiting to see if they will be needed.

So Panetta's and Gates's statements to the public violate standard military protocol.  Leon Panetta telegraphed to our enemies an image of incompetence of U.S. forces.  Panetta's testimony was an insult to the U.S. military.  Elite forces go through constant, grueling training to be able to do what Panetta and Gates say they cannot do.  One of the purposes of "special operators" is deterrence.  Panetta and Gates undermined that deterrence.

The U.S. military perfected capabilities after the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000, the 2008 U.S. Embassy bombing in Yemen, and similar events.  Gates emphasized the need for planning; Commanders in Extremis forces plan constantly for all contingencies.

CIF units answer directly to the general for each regional command to eliminate delay.  Therefore, if AFRICOM -- the U.S. military's regional command for matters involving Africa -- had actually wanted to rescue Ambassador Stevens -- and the classified secrets in the Consulate -- the AFRICOM general would have communicated directly with the CIF team on forward deployment in the region.

Panetta testified that the U.S. military could not react because they didn't know the situation on the ground in Benghazi.  In fact, two unmanned drones were overhead, sending real-time video, including infrared and night-vision cameras, back to the national command authority.  Everyone but Panetta seems to know how dumb Panetta's statement was.

Panetta testified that we should not send in aircraft without knowing what is happening on the ground.  Au contraire.  You send in the correct aircraft to find out what is going on.  It's called reconnaissance.  The U.S. Air Force has been conducting reconnaissance since World War I (then as part of the U.S. Army).  Unless maybe our leaders don't want to know.

In fact, it is reported that CIF elements assigned to AFRICOM were already mobilizing and preparing to respond in Southern Europe.  But they were ordered to stand down.  It is believed they were mobilizing at a U.S./NATO air base in Sigonella, Italy, near Naples.

Sigonella air base is only 475 miles from Benghazi.  Fighter jets from Sigonella could have been above Benghazi in 20 minutes from takeoff at the F-16's maximum speed of 1,500 miles per hour.  Transports and gunships could have reached the Consulate in 90 minutes from take-off.

F-16s can carry fuel for a flight of 2,000 nautical miles.  So the 475-mile flight from Sigonella would have left enough fuel for an hour of operations over the Consulate in Benghazi plus a flight to Andravida Air Base in Greece, only 405 miles away, to land and refuel.  Greece is a NATO partner.  Later waves could have refueled first in Andravida, 405 miles away.

Meanwhile, the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis and its battle group were within range to assist the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.  Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette was relieved of command and flown back to the States on undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment, as reported in the military's Stripes magazine.  It is widely believed within the U.S. military that Admiral Gaouette was mobilizing a response to come to the aid of Ambassador Stevens but was ordered to stand down.  The allegation of "inappropriate judgment" was that Admiral Gaoutte insisted on mounting a rescue, leading to sharp words being exchanged.

Gregory Hicks, Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya, immediately tasked his embassy defense attaché with calling for help from the U.S. military.  According to Hicks's testimony on May 8, AFRICOM told the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli that the U.S. airbase in Aviano, Italy could have F-16s over Benghazi in 2-3 hours but that there were no aerial tankers in the area to refuel the F-16s.

That excuse rings false.  Throughout Europe, U.S.-compatible standard refueling tankers are always available.  That's why they exist.  NATO exists so that all NATO countries will come to the aid of any of their fellows when attacked.

Furthermore, why Aviano?  Sigonella was roughly half the distance.  Sigonella's F-16s could have reached Benghazi in 20 minutes from wheels up, conducted action above the Consulate, and returned to Italy or Greece with fuel to spare.  Remember: a "spotter" from the Benghazi CIA annex was on the roof of the Consulate, "laser designating" the attackers' mortar team and reporting by radio.


Gates also commented that U.S. F-16s could not have simply buzzed the Benghazi Consulate to scare away the attackers because of the risk of anti-aircraft missiles.  Hogwash.  For months the year before the U.S. Air Force and NATO jets had strafed and bombed the Libyan military and decimated its anti-aircraft weaponry.  And since when are members of the U.S. military afraid to come to the defense of civilians because someone might hurt them?

Even liberal columnist Maureen Dowd commented: "The defense secretary at the time, Leon Panetta, insisted, 'We quickly responded.' But they responded that they would not respond."  Dowd sums it up: "All the factions wove their own mythologies at the expense of our deepest national mythology: that if there is anything, no matter how unlikely or difficult, that we can do to try to save the lives of Americans who have volunteered for dangerous assignments, we must do it."

What the Government Could Learn From the Marine Corps

by David L. Goetsch
In the aftermath of Barack Obama’s re-election, many mainstream Republicans are undergoing a crisis of conscience. Having lost two presidential elections in a row, the Republican Party is questioning the validity of its traditional values and principles. Some party professionals are even recommending a shift to the left in an attempt to appeal to what they view as the new American electorate. Some key decision makers in the Republican Party think the time has come to cast aside their opposition to same-sex marriage, abortion, gun-control, and the immigration policies of the left. In other words, instead of changing how they do things some Republicans think they should change who they are.
The soul searching that is currently taking place in Republican circles reminds me of when I served in the United State Marine Corps. It was a time that is now widely acknowledged to among the worst years in the Marine Corps’ history. The Viet Nam War was in its worst and most unpopular phase. Anti-war, anti-military, and anti-America protests, demonstrations, and riots were the order of the day. The more conservative hairstyles and dress of the early 1960s had been replaced by long hair, dirty blue jeans, and tie-dyed tee-shirts. Spit-and-polish Marines with their high-and-tight haircuts stood out like a sore thumb in a society of hippies and flower children. Once admired universally for its strict adherence to a creed characterized by duty, honor, country, commitment, and courage, the Marine Corps found itself out of step with the society from which it drew its new recruits.

The youth of the late 1960s and early 1970s were into drugs, casual sex, and rejection of traditional American values, not the discipline and values held dear by the Marine Corps. In short, the socio-cultural trends were the antithesis of everything the Marine Corps stood for. In this new anti-establishment environment, the Marine Corps was considered passé. Some pundits even predicted the ultimate demise of this hallowed branch of the American military.
It is difficult to believe today that in the early 1970s there were those who thought the Marine Corps represented the past and needed to be replaced by a new branch of the military that comported more closely with current social trends. The attitudes of those who believed this were the antithesis of the Marine Corps’ traditions and methods. As a result, Marine Corps enlistments had dropped dramatically. In fact, recruiters had to scrape the bottom of the social barrel just to make their minimum enlistment numbers each month. Those who did join often complained that the training was too hard, the discipline too strict, the deployments too long, the marksmanship standards too stringent, and the expectations too high. As a result, discipline cases, unauthorized absences, brig time, and AWOLs were at the highest levels in the Corps’ history.

In view of all of the social upheaval in America at the time, some weak-kneed leaders in key decision-making positions had begun to question the Corps’ values and its methods as well as long-standing regulations concerning hair length, the uniform, and spit-shined shoes and so forth. In short, there were some who thought the answer to the recruiting problem would be found in diluting the very principles and values that had made the Marine Corps the proud and highly-respected organization it had been for almost 200 years. Some leaders in key positions of authority had come to doubt the values, methods, and principles that had made Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima, Inchon, and the Chosin Reservoir hallowed names in the Marine Corps’ illustrious history.
Fortunately, cooler heads eventually prevailed and the Marine Corps decided to change how it did what it did rather than who it was and what it stood for. Recruiting, training, and discipline standards were increased, not decreased. The Marine Corps focused on doing a better job of choosing it leaders and preparing them for the challenges they would face. Finally, they did a better job of communicating why their values, principles, and traditions were so important to America’s on-going national defense. As a result of these decisions, the Marine Corps emerged from the 1970s a better and stronger Corp. There is a lesson in this for the Republican Party of today.

Allen West: I’ll Be Back In 2016

TAMMY BRUCE, RADIO HOST: Do you find for your Guardian Fund, that it’s necessary because the Republican Party kind of pushes out the people you’re describing, the military heroes, the minorities who are running, do you think that they’re finding, that they’re getting better on those issues at all? Like your loss by 200 votes, Mia Love’s loss, and she is again running again. I take it that you’re supporting her as well, obviously.
WEST: Absolutely
BRUCE: You mentioned that — you referred briefly to the election being stolen. We now know that so many people have been arrested or indicted on voter fraud in this last election. Many of us do believe you won that election, Allen. Does that bother you at all, would you ever re-run again? What are your thoughts on that?
FMR. REP. ALLEN WEST (R-FL): Well, we’ll get back into the political scene, but there are so many things I can do right now that can really help us going forward to the midterm elections. It’s not about me; it’s about the team, it’s about our country and that’s what I’m focused on primarily. So after the midterm election cycle we’ll look into getting back into the political framework in 2016. There’s no doubt about it.

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/allen-west/2013/05/25/allen-west-i-ll-be-back-2016

Russian police detain activists, foes at gay rally

MOSCOW (AP) — Gay-rights campaigners and their opponents clashed at an unsanctioned rally in the Russian capital on Saturday, but a heavy police presence in Ukraine kept the two sides apart at that country's first-ever gay pride march.

Russian police said they arrested at least 30 gay rights campaigners and Christian Orthodox vigilantes in Moscow.

The campaigners tried to unfurl banners denouncing Kremlin-backed anti-gay legislation in front of Russia's lower house of parliament, but they were attacked by vigilantes carrying religious icons and crosses.
The lower house in January voted in favor of a bill that makes public events and dissemination of information about the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community to minors punishable by fines of up to $16,000.
The bill, still awaiting final approval, is part of an effort to promote traditional Russian values as opposed to Western liberalism, which the Kremlin and church see as corrupting Russian youth and contributing to a wave of protest against President Vladimir Putin's rule.

Russia decriminalized homosexuality in 1993, but homophobia remains strong in the country. Government critics and gay rights activists claim that the Kremlin and the powerful Orthodox Church encourage vigilante groups to attack gay rallies and parades.

In Kiev, between 50 and 100 gay rights activists staged the ex-Soviet nation's first-ever gay pride parade. They held banners reading "Homosexuality is no disease" and "Human rights are my pride."

Ukraine authorities on Thursday won a court order banning the rally from going ahead in the city center, saying it would disturb the annual Kiev Day celebrations. The activists moved to an area outside that zone, and authorities deployed hundreds of riot policemen to prevent any attacks by opponents.
Last year, Ukraine's gay and lesbian community canceled the event at the last minute when skinheads gathered at the planned location, intent on beating up the participants. Two leading activists were brutally beaten by radicals in subsequent weeks.
Despite condemnation from the West, the Ukrainian parliament is debating several anti-gay bills, including one that would make any public, positive depiction of homosexuality punishable by up to five years in prison.

UK police question alleged soldier killer's friend

By SYLVIA HUI 

LONDON (AP) — Counterterrorism police on Saturday questioned a friend of alleged Islamic extremist Michael Adebolajo, one of two suspects in a savage killing of a British soldier on a London street that has horrified the country.

The friend, Abu Nusaybah, was arrested immediately after he gave a BBC Television interview Friday describing how Adebolajo may have become radicalized in Kenya and alleging that Britain's security services tried to recruit him six months ago. Police said Nusaybah was wanted on suspicion of involvement in unspecified acts of terrorism.
Adebolajo, 28, and Michael Adebowale, 22, are suspected of killing soldier Lee Rigby by hacking his body with knives and a meat cleaver in front of dozens of passersby Wednesday in the southeast London district of Woolwich. The horrific scene was recorded on witnesses' cellphones, and a video has emerged showing one of the two suspects making political statements and warning of more violence as the soldier lay on the ground. Police shot both men as they arrived minutes after Rigby's slaying. Both suspects remain under armed guard at two London hospitals. 

The attack has sparked fears of anti-Muslim sentiments in Britain. Police on Saturday arrested three people on suspicion of posting racist comments on Twitter ahead of a march organized by the far-right group English Defense League in the northern city of Newcastle. Police said some 1,500 people took part in the march.
The group, which has clashed violently with police in the past, has used Rigby's murder to criticize the British government for not paying enough attention to radical Islam in the country. About 350 people staged a counter-demonstration.
Faith Matters, a charity campaigning against extremism, said its helpline has received 162 calls since Rigby was killed from people reporting anti-Muslim incidents including attacks against mosques.
Questions abound over what could have led the two men to attack Rigby, a 25-year-old ceremonial military drummer and machine-gunner who had served in Afghanistan and was off duty when he was walking near his barracks. Nusaybah's interview offered one possible narrative. He said Adebolajo's behavior changed after he allegedly suffered abuse at the hands of Kenyan security forces.
Nusaybah said Adebolajo became withdrawn after he was allegedly arrested and then abused both physically and sexually while in jail.
"Although that change wasn't necessarily one that became overt, aggressive or anything like that, he became ... less talkative. He wasn't his bubbly self," Nusaybah told the BBC.

He claimed that agents from Britain's domestic spy agency, MI5, approached Adebolajo after he returned to Britain and initially asked him if he had met specific Muslim militants, then asked Adebolajo if he was willing to act as an informer.
"He was explicit in that he refused to work for them," Nusaybah said.
The BBC said police arrested Nusaybah outside its studios Friday night immediately after recording the interview.
"This interviewee had important background information that sheds light on this horrific event," the BBC said in a statement. "And when we asked him to appear and interviewed him, we were not aware he was wanted for questioning by the police."
London police confirmed that a 31-year-old man was arrested Friday night on suspicion of "the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism." Police declined to identify Nusaybah by name or provide further detail.
It was not immediately possible to verify the information provided by Nusaybah, who said he had known Adebolajo for about a decade. MI5 does not publicly discuss its efforts to recruit informers.
It is not uncommon, however, for special services officers to occasionally visit communities to ask people if they know potential terror suspects or others under MI5 surveillance.

Potential informants go through a screening process to determine if they should be trusted, what their motivation might be and whether their information would be likely to be accurate.
Nusaybah said Adebolajo was converted to Islam around 2004. His account corroborates those provided by two Muslim hard-liners who said they also knew Adebolajo.
Anjem Choudary, a former leader of a banned British radical group called al-Muhajiroun, said Adebolajo was a Christian who converted to Islam around 2003. Choudary told The Associated Press that Adebolajo participated in several of the group's London demonstrations before Britain outlawed the group in 2010.
Omar Bakri Muhammad, another former al-Muhajiroun leader and radical Muslim preacher, said Adebolajo is a Nigerian who was born and raised in Britain. He said that Adebolajo attended his London lectures in the early 2000s, but added that he had not stayed in touch with the suspect since then. Muhammad fled London and resettled in Lebanon in 2005 after suicide attacks on London's public transit system killed 56 people, including four bombers.
"I don't know what Michael did since 2004 or 2005," Bakri told the AP. "Two years ago he stopped attending our open lectures and lessons as well as our activities."

The University of Greenwich confirmed Saturday that records show Adebolajo was registered as a student there between 2003 and 2005. His academic progress was unsatisfactory and he did not complete his studies there, vice chancellor David Maguire said. The university did not have records for the second suspect, Adebowale.
University officials are investigating whether there was any evidence of extremism on its campus, Maguire added.
Police have not officially named the two suspects — officials in Britain usually wait to name suspects until charges have been filed. The AP has received confirmation of the identity of Adebowale from a British official speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to disclose the information.
Few details have emerged about Adebowale besides one reported brush with death as a teenager.
The Guardian reported Saturday that Adebowale was stabbed in 2008, when a man attacked him and two friends in a London apartment. One 18-year-old friend died and the attacker received a life sentence for murder, the newspaper said.
Both suspects had been known to Britain's security services as part of previous terrorism investigations. Authorities said they have arrested three others, a man and two women, on suspicion of conspiracy to murder, but it is not yet clear whether the killing was part of any larger plot. The man remains in custody and the two women have been released without charge.

MI5 Director-General Andrew Parker is expected to deliver a preliminary report next week to Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee detailing what the agency knew about both suspects and whether MI5 could have done anything to stop the attack.
The directors of Britain's foreign spy agency, MI6, and Britain's eavesdropping agency, GCHQ, also are expected to give reports on what intelligence they had on the two men.
___
Associated Press writer Paisley Dodds in London and Bassem Mroue in Beirut contributed to this report.

Taliban attack international compound in Afghan capital

oped: So how is Obama's war on terror working out? Well I suppose his 'Braveheart' moment of taking out Usama Bin Laden single handedly really skerred' the Taliban...yeh baby they are all hiding out in their proverbial caves! NOT!

By Amie Ferris-Rotman and Mirwais Harooni

KABUL (Reuters) - Taliban militants launched a large-scale attack involving the United Nations in the center of the Afghan capital Kabul on Friday, sparking a five-hour battle with security forces.

A plume of smoke hung over Kabul after the attack was launched, with the sound of .50 caliber heavy machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and sniper fire clearly audible throughout the city center as night fell.

An Afghan police officer was killed and 10 other people were wounded during the attack, which began at 4 p.m. (1130 GMT) with a suicide car bomb outside a compound used by the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), Afghan police said.

While the IOM is not part of the United Nations, it is affiliated with it in Afghanistan.
The attack came eight days after six American soldiers and civilians and nine Afghans were killed in a suicide car bombing in Kabul.
The Taliban, fighting to expel Western forces and establish Islamist rule in Afghanistan, claimed responsibility for Friday's attack, saying a "rest house" used by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had been attacked.

After the initial bombing, about six Taliban fighters engaged in a firefight with nearby guards, officials said.
Two were killed and the remaining three or four militants entered an unused building across the road from the IOM compound and continued to fight.
There were at least four large blasts during the course of the evening, and witnesses said that at 9 p.m. (1630 GMT) exchanges of fire were still going on between the attackers and Afghan forces supported by Norwegian special forces.

"As a result of the attack, three IOM staff and one International Labour Organisation (ILO) staff were wounded," U.N. spokesman Eduardo del Buey told reporters in New York.

He said one of the IOM personnel was in serious condition, and that all U.N. staff in Kabul had been accounted for.
The ILO is a subsidiary of the United Nations and operates in Kabul under the banner of the U.N. Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA).

Such attacks reinforce concern about how the 352,000 members of the Afghan security forces will cope with the insurgency after most foreign NATO-led combat troops leave by the end of next year.

Insurgent attacks against civilians, government workers and Afghan security forces have increased since the Taliban announced their so-called spring offensive late last month.

A Taliban spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, speaking to Reuters by telephone, said Friday's attack had targeted a compound used by the CIA.
It is likely that the Taliban, driven from power in Kabul by a U.S-led force in late 2001, are using the high-profile attacks to exert increasing pressure on the Afghan government and their international backers.
Last year, more than a dozen people were killed during a Taliban attack in Kabul that started with coordinated suicide attacks and led to an 18-hour siege in the heart of the city.
(Additional reporting by Louis Charbonneau in New York; Writing by Dylan Welch; Editing by Kevin Liffey)

Go Punch Obama Voters In The Face, Urges Fox News Host Andrea Tantaros

oped: Gotta luvs spunky Andrea...:) You go girl!
During her radio show she suggested to her listeners to "punch" Obama voters "in the face" after hearing that the Department of Justice was targeting journalists.
She said:

"Let me tell you how people and journalists are being treated these days. They are being stalked. They are being spied on. In Missouri, a news station fired an anchor who talked about the IRS shakedown. Yeah—fired. This is how corrupt the left is."
"This is what's happening to our press. This is Obama's America. It's like the Soviet Union. He said he would change the country. He said it ... and a lot of people voted for him. And if you see any of those people today, do me a favor and punch them in the face."

Did you vote for President Obama? You should probably get punched in the face. That was the message that Fox News host Andrea Tantaros had for her audience today.
Tantaros, who hosts the show The Five, was speaking on her radio shows on Thursday when she told her listeners to go out and punch Obama voters in the face.

The Obama administration has received a lot of criticism recently for monitoring one of Fox News’ reporters. Tantaros was rightfully angry with the administration but she probably crossed a line when she urged her listeners to go out and harm Obama voters.
Tantaros said: “This is what is happening to our press! This is Obama’s America! It’s like the Soviet Union … He said he would change the country. He said it. And a lot of people voted for him. And if you see any of those people today, do me a favor, punch them in the face.”
Andrea later tried to backpedal and assured her listeners that she was not threatening the president. Tantaros made it clear that she only wanted to punch Obama voters, and not Obama himself, in the face.

Tantaros said: “To be clear, I didn’t say punch Obama in the face … You’re going to get me arrested with this type of government. If someone voted for him! If anyone that you know who voted for President Obama, smack ‘em down.”

http://youtu.be/jHHhpe-kaKI

Did Obama Forget to Salute?

http://youtu.be/1QhzOpf2V5Y 

By Chris Good
The president may have forgotten something as he boarded Marine One this morning.
On his way to the U.S. Naval Academy graduation ceremony on Annapolis, Md., President Obama didn’t return the salute of the marine standing guard at the door of Marine One, as he climbed the steps to the helicopter cabin.
Obama soon ducked his head out, waved to the pilot, and jaunted back down the stairs to address the marine, shaking his hand. In the short video clip, one can’t hear the two men talking, so it’s unclear what exactly was said. A faint smile appeared to cross the marine’s face as the they exchanged brief words.
Obama jogged back up the steps, still not having saluted.
While this exchange may seem to be a military faux pas–Obama typically salutes as he boards Marine One–presidential salutes aren’t a fully closed matter. In a 2009 New York Times op-ed, Smithsonian magazine editor and former marine Carey Winfrey identified them as a recent phenomenon, one that evoked mixed feelings from him:

… whenever I saw a president stepping off a helicopter and bringing hand to brow, my drill instructor’s unambiguous words came back to me with much of their original force.
Then there were the salutes themselves, which ranged from halfhearted to jaunty. None of them fulfilled the characteristically succinct prescription that Capt. Jack O’Donnell of the Marine Corps delivered, in 1963, to my platoon of freshly minted second lieutenants at basic school in Quantico, Va.: “Your salute,” he pronounced, “must be impeccable …
Presidents have long been saluted, but they began returning salutes relatively recently. Ronald Reagan was thought to be the first, in 1981.

Reagan, Winfrey wrote, consulted the Marine Corps commandant on whether saluting back was appropriate. Marines themselves are taught not to do so out of uniform, and Winfrey raised the obvious point: Presidents, in suits and ties, aren’t wearing uniforms. But as commanders in chief, they’re in charge, and according to the advice Reagan got, supersede the protocol.
So while Obama typically does salute, it’s not as if he’s required to.

French soldier stabbed in throat outside Paris

PARIS (AP) — A French soldier was stabbed in the throat in a busy commercial district outside Paris on Saturday, and France's president said authorities are investigating any possible links with the recent slaying of a British soldier.

President Francois Hollande said the identity of the attacker was unknown and cautioned against jumping to conclusions about the assault on the uniformed soldier in the La Defense shopping area. The life of the 23-year-old soldier was not in danger, the Interior Ministry said in a statement.
The stabbing follows the slaying Wednesday of a British soldier, who was brutally stabbed on a London street in broad daylight in a suspected terrorist attack that has raised fears of potential copycat strikes.

"There could be a link, but we will look at all the elements," Hollande said during a news conference in Ethiopia, where he was traveling.
The British soldier, 25-year-old Lee Rigby, was attacked while walking outside the Royal Artillery Barracks in the Woolwich area of south London.
The gruesome scene was recorded on witnesses' cellphones, and a video has emerged in which one of the two suspects — his hands bloodied — boasted of their exploits and warned of more violence as the soldier lay on the ground. Holding bloody knives and a meat cleaver, the suspects waited for the arrival of police, who shot them in the legs, according to witnesses.
In the video, one of the suspects declared, "We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you ... We must fight them as they fight us."
Two Muslim hard-liners have identified that suspect as Michael Adebolajo, a Christian who converted to Islam and attended several London demonstrations organized by banned British radical group al-Muhajiroun.
French security forces have been on heightened alert since their country launched a military intervention in the African nation of Mali in January to regain territory seized by Islamic radicals.

Egypt court rejects religious slogans in election law

CAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt's highest court ruled on Saturday that parts of a revised election law setting out terms for a parliamentary vote were unconstitutional, casting fresh doubt over a poll that has already been delayed.

The Islamist-dominated upper house of parliament had approved the law last month and sent it to the Supreme Constitutional Court to check the legality of the voting procedures for a new lower house.

Opposition politicians had denounced the text of the revised election law approved by parliament and repeated threats to boycott the vote.
The court ruled that four provisions of the bill were unconstitutional, a judicial source said.
In its decision, the court took issue with parliament's removal of a long-standing ban on religious slogans in electoral campaigning.
The ruling said that failing to include a specific clause in the law banning religious slogans could "undermine national unity." The bill will now be sent back to parliament for review.

The ruling is the latest sign of friction between the judiciary, which Islamist lawmakers accuse of being loyal to deposed leader Hosni Mubarak and obstructing elections and legislation, and President Mohamed Mursi's Muslim Brotherhood. 

Mursi, an Islamist elected last year, originally called elections for April but postponed them when the court annulled the decree setting the dates.
Mursi has said elections could now begin in October, completing the democratic transition from Mubarak's rule.
A separate court ruling last year dissolved the Muslim Brotherhood-led lower chamber elected in 2011-12.
Egypt has been plagued by political instability since Mubarak's ouster, scaring away investors and tourists who are needed to keep the economy afloat.
Outside parliament, baton-wielding police pushed back activists who were protesting against a controversial judicial reform law that was being discussed inside the chamber.
Parliament voted to continue discussions of the law, angering secular MPs who wore black sashes condemning it.
Islamist lawmakers allied to the Brotherhood are pushing the bill, which would force out more than 3,000 judges by lowering the retirement age.

The bill has also angered liberal, leftist and ultra-conservative Islamist opposition groups which accuse the Brotherhood of trying to control state institutions rather than pressing genuine reforms. The Brotherhood denies this.

Mursi has faced a revolt against Islamist attempts to force out thousands of judges and he has alienated some of his aides.
Earlier this month, senior Egyptian judges halted talks with Mursi on judicial reforms after parliament decided to discuss the proposed laws despite presidential promises to seek consensus first.
(Reporting by Omar Fahmy; Writing by Maggie Fick; Editing by Michael Georgy and Mike Collett-White)

Historian photographs UFO hovering over historic California barn that's better known for its ghosts

http://youtu.be/AOLhMMRJ7R8 



Local airport and Marine Corps Air Station nearby both couldn't explain

By Nina Golgowski
A metallic flying saucer appearing no different from any Sci-Fi movie was allegedly photographed hovering over a historic Southern California barn that’s already famously known for its spooks.
Santee Historical Society researcher Ellen Henry says she was outside taking pictures of the Edgemoor Barn near San Diego when she unknowingly caught the perfectly clear cigar-shaped object hovering in the sky.
'I was constantly looking up and around the area, including the sky's background, so I can get it just right, and not at any time did I see anything in the sky, or heard a sound of an aircraft,' she later wrote with her picture. 


It wasn't until she uploaded the picture onto her computer that the 'speck,' previously seen on her camera’s view screen, became much more, sending her chills.
'Why was it there? What was it doing? …the next time I come here, the barn will be beamed up!' Henry later told 10News.
Adding to her fright, she says her camera immediately stopped working after taking the photo. 

Though the mysterious sighting is said to be the first in the skies above the historic 1913 barn, it's not the first to send shivers on the ground.
The Santee Historical Society says they often receive reports of ghost sightings, the number of instances often drawing paranormal investigators to investigate.
'We think someone's come into the barn and we get up to look, and no one is there,' Elaine Murphy, president of the Santee Historical Society, told 10News. 

Unexplainable: The photo is seen zoomed in even closer to the object that a local airport and Marine Corps Air Station both couldn't explain

'Santee's Old Edgemoor Hospital, was a place of healing, home, and inevitably last rights,' the historical society writes on their website.
'Many people died on this property, the exact number is not known. Even before the hospital and it's buildings were demolished, accounts of the paranormal were reported.'
They keep a collection of sightings, including audio and video footage, on their website.
As for the UFO, the barn is situated under several flight paths leading to obvious suspicions that it could very well be a military or civilian aircraft.
But public airport Gillespie Field and Marine Corps Air Station Miramar both couldn't explain the sighting to 10News.
'...being from a military background I am familiar with these types of air crafts, and at this point the closest aircraft that is often mistaken for a UFO are the Stealth Fighter Bombers, and that was definitely not one,' Henry wrote.
'Someone did mention perhaps it was a drone, however I have not seen any drones that were round, or oval, and lacking wings, rudders, or propellers, even the drone that looks like a fly has wings.'

Leopards Can’t Change Their Spots: Pattern of IRS Bullying Goes Back to Obama’s 2008 Campaign

Kimberly Strassel has a must-read column at the Wall Street Journal today that explains the context in which the IRS scandal emerged–not just during the Obama administration’s attempt to quash the Tea Party, but in Obama’s efforts to shut down all opposition, both Republican and Democratic, in the 2008 campaign.
Strassel notes that Bob Bauer, the Obama campaign (and later White House) general counsel, wrote letters to the Department of Justice in August 2008 attacking a conservative 501(c)4 called the American Issues Project for running an ad that highlighted Obama’s connection to former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. Bauer did not stop there; he also contacted the Federal Election Commission. That same month, a left-wing activist created a 501(c)4 called Accountable America that was designed to intimidate GOP donors.

Earlier that year, Strassel notes, during the Democratic Party primary, Bauer had used the same tactics against a left-wing 501(c)4 that supported Hillary Clinton, and another against one supporting John Edwards. As even Ben Smith, then of Politico and a noted defender of the Obama campaign, noted:

It’s worth noting that this isn’t the first time Bauer has called for criminal investigations and prosecutions into the donors to independent groups critical of Obama, including one supporting John Edwards and another supporting Hillary Rodham Clinton. His words did have the effect of scaring their donors and consultants, but haven’t yet appeared to result in any prosecution.

There are many other examples that one can add to Strassel’s analysis. One that I remember with particular bitterness is from September 2008, when the Democratic National Committee and several Obama-aligned organizations pressured the Jewish community to un-invite Sarah Palin from a rally against Iran at the UN.
Read more: breitbart.com

Sheriffs plan to put feds back in their place

by: Drew Zahn 

Sheriffs and peace officers from across the country will be meeting with likeminded supporters for a national convention focused on one goal: restoring constitutional rule in the United States of America.
From May 31-June 1, the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, or CSPOA, will be meeting in St. Charles, Mo., for its Heartland of America Conference.

The purpose of the conference is to equip sheriffs, peace officers and public officials with information and public support to carry out their oaths of office – specifically, to uphold the U.S. Constitution – recognizing that in the case of federal overreach, the county sheriff may be the last line of defense in protecting Americans’ constitutional rights.
“We are going to train and vet them all, state by state, to understand and enforce the constitutionally protected rights of the people they serve, with an emphasis on state sovereignty and local autonomy,” explains CSPOA Founder and Executive Director Sheriff Richard Mack. “Then these local governments will issue our new Declaration to the Federal Government regarding the abuses that we will no longer tolerate or accept. Said declaration will be enforced by our Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers.
“In short,” Mack says, “the CSPOA will be the army to set our nation free.”
Mack is more than familiar with fighting federal overreach. The former sheriff of Graham County, Ariz., in 1994 Mack joined six other sheriffs in challenging a provision of the federal Brady Bill placing the burden of its background checks on local sheriffs. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to strike down the provision.

Police Chief Larry Kirk of Old Monroe, Mo., told WND, “In the past few years we have seen many of the citizens of this country become concerned over the direction it has taken. We have watched personal rights being eroded and a disconnect developing between citizens and officers working in law enforcement.
“I wanted to find other officers that shared my concerns,” he continued. “I wanted to be able to work with our sheriffs and other peace officers in educating the citizens and others in our career field on the powers of the sheriff’s office and what is needed for us to stand on guard to protect our rights and those of our fellow citizens. The CSPOA is the organization at the front of this movement.
“The people of my state are seeing the overreach of government at the federal level and want to know where their sheriffs will stand,” he concluded. “The people of this state need to hear this message, and the sheriffs of this state need to hear it. Sheriffs and officers need the support of their communities, and we need to support them. This is the organization that can help educate us all on the proper roles that we should play and what we can do to stop the encroachment on our liberties and unalienable rights.”

Sheriff Mack further told WND, “In view of the culture of corruption, which seems so prevalent in Washington, many Americans are searching for hope and solutions that are both effective and peaceful. The purpose of the CSPOA convention is to offer absolute evidence that both indeed exist. Each attendee will leave with this evidence and a renewed hope that restoring liberty in America is not only possible, but already underway!”
The convention, to be held at the Ameristar Hotel in St. Charles, Mo., is free to all public officials and open to the public at large.
Register to attend the Heartland of America Conference at the CSPOA website now! 


“We already have hundreds of police, sheriffs and other officials who have expressed a desire to be a part of this holy cause of liberty,” Mack explains.
In fact, CSPOA maintains a growing list of – at last count – 18 state sheriffs associations and over 450 sheriffs across the country already taking a stand against what they perceive as attempts by the Obama administration to enact unconstitutional gun-control measures.
As WND reported, Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio is among those after telling a local radio host the federal government is “going to have problem” if they expect him to confiscate guns from private citizens.
“I took [multiple] oaths of office, and they all say I will defend the Constitution of the United States,” Arpaio told Mike Broomhead of KFYI Radio in Phoenix, Ariz. “Now if they’re going to tell the sheriff that he’s going to go around picking up guns from everybody, they’re going to have a problem. I may not enforce that federal law.”
Broomhead pushed the man sometimes called “America’s toughest sheriff” even further, asking Arpaio if the feds passed a law banning ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, would his deputies confiscate such magazines?

“No,” Arpaio said. “My deputies, I said before, I’m going to arm all my deputies – a month ago I said before this – with automatic weapons and semi-automatic weapons. We’re going to be able to fight back. … I don’t care what they say from Washington.”
Larry Pratt, president of Gun Owners of America, told WND he supports sheriffs taking a tough stand.
“The county sheriffs need to act and make new deputies to stop federal authority in the counties,” Pratt said. “There is a misconception in our time that the court somehow is the arbiter of what is constitutional; that’s not true! Every official that raises their right hand and says they’re going to adhere to the constitution, seek to protect it to the best of their ability, ‘so help me God’ – that’s something that they’re all obligated to do.”

Islamic Cleric Calls UK Soldier’s Beheading “A Courageous And Heroic Act”

by Pamela Geller 

Here again, the calls for murder and war in the cause of Islam comes from a cleric. So again we ask, what is being done to expunge the Quran (and Islam) from the violent teachings that inspire jihad?
The cleric has praised the beheading.

UK-based cleric inspired Woolwich suspect to behead Islam enemies
Zee News, May 24, 2013 (thanks to Lookman)

London: The suspects behind the Woolwich beheading of a British soldier were reportedly inspired by the preachings of cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed.


According to a secret film, Bakri states that Islam’s enemies are permitted to be decapitated under certain interpretations of the religion.

The radical Muslim cleric has been banned from Britain for his extremist activities and his alleged links to the al Qaeda, The Independent reports.

According to the report, one of the suspects, Michael Adebolajo, a British-Muslim convert of Nigerian origin, had given a video interview where he claimed that he killed Drummer Lee Rigby, 25, as he was fighting for ‘Almighty Allah’. 


Michael Adebowale, 22, of Greenwich is currently being considered as another suspect for the crime.

Lebanon resident Bakri Muhammed said he had seen the interview, and justified the crime by saying that he understood the feeling of rage that had motivated the attackers.

He said Islam permits such acts as he was not targeting civilians but was taking on a military man in an operation, which is considered to be a courageous and heroic act among Muslims in the Middle East. 

The report also says that the two suspected killers of Drummer Rigby were already known to British intelligence outfit MI5 and, almost certainly, to counter-terrorism officers in the police, one of whom was not allowed to travel to Somalia to join the Islamist militia Al-Shabaab last year.

Muhammed is known to deliver messages on Islamic websites where he addresses Muslims to ‘use the sword to remove the head of the Westerners’ and said he hoped that British Muslims who are in the army in Afghanistan can be captured.

Muhammed, however, stated that he and his followers were not involved in violence while residing in the UK, as they had come to be known as the ‘covenant of security’ under which Islamist organizations were allowed to carry out their activities, but desisted from taking armed action in the country which had given them refuge.


Meanwhile, the Independent Police Complaints Commission has said that the shooting had been captured by a council camera and the suspects are in a hospital with non-fatal injuries.
I am sure that a good many Muslims would disagree — I am also sure a good many Muslims would agree, and there’s the rub. Of course we expect people to recoil and reject this savagery. That’s a given. The problem is the Muslims who respect it, adhere to it, and believe in holy war in the cause of Islam. That is our problem. These arguments about peaceful Muslims are a distraction. The argument is irrelevant. No one has an issue with them.

Where are the Muslim protests against jihad and calls for a reformation in Islam (ie Vatican II)? The only demos I ever see by Muslims and their antifa SS army are violent protests against counter jihad groups like SIOE and EDL. Why is that?

Radical cleric Anjum Chaudhry claims most Muslims would agree with Woolwich attacker
Express.com

ANJUM Chaudhry has claimed most Muslims would agree with what the man believed to be the Woolwich attacker was filmed saying moments after the death of Lee Rigby. Dion Dassanayake, May 23, 2013
Muslim panelists on Newsnight strongly rejected the claims from Anjum Chaudhry

The man believed to be one of the Woowich had attended a demonstration held by Charudyry

On Newsnight tonight, Chaudhry said while the brutal attack on a serving soldier was shocking what the man covered in blood said about foreign policy explained what he did.

Chaudhry, who set up Islam4UK which was condemned in the Terrorism Act 2000, refused to say he abhorred and was horrified by the attack.

Drummer Rigby, a married father of a two-year-old boy, died after being brutally attacked in broad daylight by two men in South East London yesterday.

He said: “What he said in the clip which is being televised, not many Muslims can disagree with it.”

 Presenter Kirsty Wark strongly disagreed with the statement, along with his fellow panelists from the Muslim community.

Shams Ad-Duha Muhammad, a director at Ebrahim College, said the vast majority of Muslims would strongly disagree with Chaudhry.

He said: “Why is not possible for us as Muslims that we cannot condemn what happened here and air our views regarding foreign policy?”
The man believed to be one of the Woolwich attackers had attended a demonstration held by Chaudhry.
What he said in the clip which is being televised, not many Muslims can disagree with it.

Anjum Chaudhry on Newsnight
While Julie Siddiqi, Executive Director at the Islamic Society of Britain, said there was ‘absolute condemnation’ from every Muslim organisation.

She said: “I want to give my condolences to Lee Rigby’s family.

“There is no justification for what we saw yesterday.”

The man seen in the video had met Chaudhry before, and attended one of his demonstrations for anti-Western al-Muhajiroun organisation.

The clip, obtained by ITV News, shows a bloodied man wielding a bloodied meat cleaver in the street and shouting as stunned eye-witnesses looked on.

He says: “I apologise that women had to witness this today, but in our lands our women have to see the same.

“You people will never be safe, remove your governments they don’t care about you.”

Obama Scandals: President Out of the Loop?

Just about sums it up...have y'all had enough of the Obama administration yet?

So much for plausible deniability! Attorney General Eric Holder's

by: John Hayward
GOOD AFTERNOON TO EVERYONE!
So much for plausible deniability! Attorney General Eric Holder's signature is all over the paperwork authorizing surveillance against Fox News reporter James Rosen. This was revealed just hours after President Obama told America he would assign Eric Holder to get to the bottom of the scandal. Holder probably didn't even have time to ask himself any stern questions in the mirror before the truth leaked out.

The President is supposed to be "troubled" about the use of Justice Department power to criminalize reporting and intimidate the press. "Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs," said Obama yesterday.

Holder has survived numerous scandals by pleading incompetence, but it's hard to imagine he can get away with claiming he didn't read the Fox News search warrants before he signed them.

Meanwhile, we've learned that IRS Director of Exempt Organizations Lois Lerner - supposedly shocked to discover those fabled "low-level employees in Cincinnati" were systematically discriminating against conservative organizations - was signing off on intimidating letters to those very same organizations, nine months after she said she learned of the abusive practices and put a stop to them. She is now on paid administrative leave, reportedly because she refused to resign.

It's long past time for heads to start rolling. Paid vacations handed out with a mild cluck of the tongue are not enough.

CRACKDOWN IN ENGLAND!...Arrest Twitter Users For Ugly “Anti-Muslim” Tweets

oped: Really?...and here I thought the UK adhered to the free speech doctrine! and let's not forget it took the UK police 20 minutes to respond...being that only Scotland Yard are armed...regular police are unarmed...so they had to wait till coffee break was over and locate some special Scotland Yard Investigators to go for it...maybe the UK needs to revisit their Gun Control Laws!


Yes, this really happened.

by Jim Hoft 

Great Britain understands that people are upset after the bloody terrorist attack this week. So they’re cracking down on Twitter users.

British officials jumped into action following the bloody terror attack this week… And, arrested Twitter users for ugly anti-Islamic tweets.
From The Daily Mail:

Two men have been arrested for making alleged offensive comments on Twitter after the murder of a British soldier.
MailOnline understands the pair had tweeted using inflammatory language and were trying to organise an anti-Muslim protest in Bristol following the execution of Drummer Lee Rigby, 25, in Woolwich two days ago.
Complaints were made to Avon and Somerset Police about remarks that appeared on the social networking website, which were of a racist or anti-religious nature.

Eric Holder violated 18USC1001 Lois Lerner violated the 5th Amendment

 

It is time for Congress to put on their big boy pants and charge Eric Holder with perjury as well as Lois Lerner for violating the 5th Amendment...Eric holder under oath stated he had no knowledge of the Search Warrant against James Rosen and Fox News since he stated he was recused and said he had no knowledge...when in fact he did sign off on the search warrant : Attorney General Eric Holder personally signed off on the search warrant that labeled Fox News reporter James Rosen a “possible co-conspirator” and resulted in the seizure of his private emails, according to an NBC News law enforcement source. Congress need s to have the Sgt of Arms take Eric Holder into custody under arrest for violation of 18USC1001 for starters!
It is a common mistake to deny involvement in a criminal offense during an interview with a federal agent. Making a false claim of innocence can result in its own criminal charges.
Federal law establishes a possible penalty of 5 years in prison for making a false statement to the federal government or its agents:

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully-
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years…

The statute applies to written and oral statements. It does not matter whether the statement was recorded (although the absence of a recording would enable the defendant to argue in trial that the statement never happened).
It is irrelevant whether the person took an oath to tell the truth. Statements that are not sworn under penalties of perjury can still be the basis of prosecution. However, if the statement was made under oath, then federal perjury charges would apply.


see video: http://youtu.be/wTOovCMMODA 




Lois Lerner violated the 5th Amendment when she made statements prior to taking the 5th Amendment on continuing questions under oath!
SEE:
The Supreme Court has determined that the 5th Amendment does not allow a suspect to falsely deny his guilt of a criminal offense. See Brogan v. US, 522 U.S. 398, (1998). The privilege against self-incrimination allows a defendant to refuse to answer questions from the police. It also protects a person from being compelled to testify against himself in court.
But where the person begins talking, the 5th Amendment no longer applies. Falsely denying guilt of a crime to federal investigators can be prosecuted under 18 USC 1001.
Federal law does not support the exculpatory no doctrine. This means that when federal agents ask a suspect if he was involved in a crime, he cannot falsely say ‘no’ in an attempt to exculpate himself (eg, prove his innocence).

JAPAN and MUSLIMS (must read)

 
oped: I must say the Japanese know how to avoid Jihad..they do not allow it within their borders...maybe our politicians can learn from this and submit bills making Sharia Law and the practice of Islam illegal within the United States also.....maybe the UK could also learn from this!  After all other religions are not allowed to practice within Islamic countries...we should follow their lead and not allow them within our borders!


by Yo'Adrienne..AFCL
The Japanese are a very evolved race.

Have you ever read in the newspaper that a political leader or a prime minister from an Islamic nation has visited Japan?
Have you ever come across news that the Ayatollah of Iran or the King of Saudi Arabia or even a Saudi Prince has visited Japan?

Japan is a country keeping Islam at bay.
Japan has put strict restrictions on Islam and ALL Muslims.
The reasons are:

a) Japan is the only nation that does not give citizenship to Muslims.
b) In Japan permanent residency is not given to Muslims.
c) There is a strong ban on the propagation of Islam in Japan.
d) In the University of Japan, Arabic or any Islamic language is not taught.
e) One cannot import a 'Koran' published in the Arabic language.
f) According to data published by the Japanese government, it has given temporary residency to only 2 lakhs, Muslims, who must follow the Japanese Law of the Land. These Muslims should speak Japanese and carry their religious rituals in their homes.
g) Japan is the only country in the world that has a negligible number of embassies in Islamic countries.

h) Japanese people are not attracted to Islam at all.
I) Muslims residing in Japan are the employees of foreign companies.
j) Even today, visas are not granted to Muslim doctors, engineers or
managers sent by foreign companies.
k) In the majority of companies it is stated in their regulations that no Muslims should apply for a job.
l) The Japanese government is of the opinion that Muslims are fundamentalist and even in the era of globalization they are not willing to change their Muslim laws.

m) Muslims cannot even think about renting a house in Japan.
n) If anyone comes to know that his neighbor is a Muslim then the wholeneighborhood stays alert.

o) No one can start an Islamic cell or Arabic 'Madrasa' in Japan
p) There is no Sharia law in Japan.
p) There is no Sharia law in Japan.
q) If a Japanese woman marries a Muslim then she is considered an outcast forever.
r) According to Mr. Kumiko Yagi, Professor of Arab/Islamic Studies at Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, "There is a mind frame in Japan that Islam is a very narrow minded religion and one should stay away from it."
s) Freelance journalist Mohammed Juber toured many Islamic countries after 9/11 including Japan. He found that the Japanese were confident that extremists could do no harm in Japan.

My personal estimation of the Japanese has risen dramatically!