THE NEW TERRORIST THREAT . . . ACCORDING TO TSA ANYWAY

We have still yet another video of TRANSPORTATION SECURITY AGENCY personnel going way overboard.  The video is self explanatory:

Yes, this little girl was a real threat alright.  I suppose she had something to hide since she was saying she didn't want to be searched several times.

This is the one that you have probably seen, a little boy being stripped search by TSA agents.

This next video was shows a television news correspondent's three-year-old daughter subjected to an extensive pat search by a TSA agent with the little girl screaming, "Stop touching me!" the entire time.  Just since when can a CHILD NOT SAY NO??  Anyone else could have been arrested for what you are about to see, and this TSA agent should be.  There is no excuse nor justification.

Do you think for one second that an Islamic child would be subjected to anything like this?  Can you find any videos showing it? No you can't because it doesn't happen.  If it did, the entire liberal news media would fly into a rage 24/7 for the next six months with statements condemning the action flying from the Obama administration.  So, just where is the outrage?  Where is the ACLU and their army of lawyers?  Quite silent.

In this next video of a CNN report, please look at this child's face very carefully.  She's the biggest terror threat of them all.  After all, she is on the DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY'S Terror Watch List.  Watch out, she may be coming to an airport near you, teddy bear in hand.

Here's a report from ABC affiliate WMAR-TV in Baltimore, Maryland concerning the use of body scanners on children.

The ACLU did issue a statement on this one saying the body scanners were intrusive and should not be required to show personal details of bodies.  The end.  I guess that is somehow to make us all feel better. 

GOVERNMENT GONE ABSOLUTELY WILD(ER)

This was posted by Sherrie, a fellow blogger on December 1, 2010.  Sherrie writes SHERRIE QUESTIONING ALL, and was the subject of a very bizarre, but not surprising, investigation by Child Protective Services.

Sherrie got a call from CPS stating they had received a complaint possible child abuse.  This alone would rattle anyone.  But it goes downhill from here.  CPS interviewed her daughter at school and asked questions about whether or not her mother had solar panels, EXACTLY where they went camping and hiking, and whether or not they had, get this, STORED FOOD.  Sherrie's daughter was also asked if her mother had any guns, spoke of the end of the world, if the house had been remodeled, and whether or not they had a safe room such as a bomb shelter.  Sherrie also caught the CPS investigator in a lie.  The investigator had told her that she did not know Sherrie's daughter's father did not live with them, but the truth was her daughter had told her that at the school interview.  Sherrie wisely called her sister and some neighbors and asked them to be witnesses during the CPS interview.  Sherrie's sister also videotaped the interview.  Here are the three that clips Sherrie posted.

Now, read Sherrie's account of the entire series of events by clicking HERE.  It's far too lengthy to repost here, but it is vitally important that you read her entire account.

This happened in November, and it was not in another country.  It was right her in America.

The line of questioning here was in perfect alignment with the Department of Homeland Security's REPORT issued on April 7, 2009 classifying anyone who opposed the Obama administration's policies, was a veteran, held Christian beliefs especially those who believe in end-time Bible prophecies, believe in the Constitutional sovereignty of States, stockpiles food and/or weapons as right-wing extremists.  Read the report for yourself, and it will be very obvious that Sherrie has been so classified somewhere along the line.  

This type of information gathering is very convenient for government.  The person being investigated has extremely limited rights and no right to the identity of the complainant.  Very convenient indeed.

I'm not stopping here.  It gets even better as if this wasn't more than enough.  One of her blog readers was investigated by CPS for . . . . feeding his children organic food, drinks non-flouridated water, and had a bug-out bag.  The police were even there during the investigation. This one happened around the end of September 2010.  Click HERE for the story.  I know it will take a while, but please read this one too. It is vital you see what is going on.  The specific allegations here are quite ridiculous.

In the case of Sherrie's reader, this shows the importance of having the facts to back up your position.  It's ludicrous that we have to stand ready for these attacks, but in this form, they come unannounced.  You better be prepared.

There is also something else to keep in mind.  In those instances where you must have dealings with any government agency, be it local, state, or Federal, and regardless of the type of agency, do not give any more information about you, your family, or your activities than you absolutely must in order to conduct the business at hand.  Agencies share information with each other, upon request, and they don't need your permission to do it.  Even in such cases where they do need your permission, any information about you can be shared without your knowledge making it nearly impossible to uncover violations of privacy laws.

LEFTIST JUDICIARY IGNORES THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE

Not that the judicial branch of our government has the Constitutional authority to override the will of "We The People". As you undoubtedly know now, U. S. District judge SUSAN BOLTON all but eliminated Arizona's ANTI-ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION LAW, temporarily anyway.

The overwhelming will of "We The People" in Arizona and nationally was to stop illegal immigration and favored . Passage of the law worked before it's effective date of July 29, 2010. By mid-July, 100,000 illegal immigrants had already left Arizona. Just a little tidbit here: According to a Rasmussen POLL posted on May 20, 2010, showed 71% of Arizona voters supported the law with 24% opposing. Consider this: According to the U. S. Census Bureau REPORT from 2008 which is the latest available, 30.1% of Arizona's population is Hispanic. So, there have to be many Hispanics in Arizona who favor it. Kind of knocks a hole in the liberals' "racist" allegations. But then again, that's where the leftists always go when they have nothing to support their position or simply run out of unfounded allegations. No real surprise there, just overworked.

It is quite obvious this ruling politically motivated. Judge Bolton is a former President Clinton nominee. The Democrats are notoriously well-known for appointing left wingnut activists to the courts. I would go so far to guess that Judge Bolton's mind was already made up before the hearing in her court. Next is that Arizona merely copied Federal law. Arizona's law only gave their state and local law enforcement the ability to enforce it. Furthermore, Judge Bolton's ruling was not at all in line with Federal law. Federal law requires immigrants to carry documentation of their immigration status on them at all times. Judge Bolton's ruling gave immigrants permission to not obey Federal law and told law enforcement they have no right to enforce it. Next comes the first few paragraphs of the law:

"Section 1. Intent

The legislature finds that there is a compelling interest in the

cooperative enforcement of federal immigration laws throughout all of

Arizona. The legislature declares that the intent of this act is to make

attrition through enforcement the public policy of all state and local

government agencies in Arizona. The provisions of this act are intended to

work together to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of

aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United

States."

"Sec. 2. Title 11, chapter 7, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by

adding article 8, to read:

ARTICLE 8. ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAWS

11-1051. Cooperation and assistance in enforcement of

immigration laws; indemnification

A. NO OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR

OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY ADOPT A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR

RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL

EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW.

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY

OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS

STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS

UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,

WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE

PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c)."

Notice something? The very last sentence stated the suspect's immigration status will be verified in accordance with already existing Federal law. Here is what that law says:

§ 1373. Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service

How Current is This?

(a) In general
Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.
(b) Additional authority of government entities
Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, no person or agency may prohibit, or in any way restrict, a Federal, State, or local government entity from doing any of the following with respect to information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual:
(1) Sending such information to, or requesting or receiving such information from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
(2) Maintaining such information.
(3) Exchanging such information with any other Federal, State, or local government entity.
(c) Obligation to respond to inquiries
The Immigration and Naturalization Service shall respond to an inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government agency, seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information.

Click HERE to verify my source which is Cornell University's School of Law.

Here is an excellent discussion about Judge Bolton's ruling entitled, "WHAT JUDGE BOLTON'S INJUNCTION DOESN'T SAY." As you can see, Judge Bolton's ruling has no factual basis whatsoever unless she includes already existing Federal law. That certainly won't happen. A fellow Democrat is in the White House.

There is another matter of much greater importance than the Washington politicians' personal gain from illegal immigrants. That's national security. This is something you will not hear anything about from any of the leftist wingnuts. From fiscal year 2009 through April 2010, according to the Federal Enforcement Integrated Database, 125 people were arrested along the southern U. S. border. Among these were two Syrians, seven Sudanese, and seventeen Iranians. All three nations are classified by the Federal government as state sponsors of terrorism. From what the Federal government classifies as "special interest countries" during the same people, two Afghans, five Algerians, 13 Iraqis, 10 Lebanese, 22 Nigerians, 28 Pakistanis, two Saudis, 14 Somalis, and three Yemenis, were also arrested along the Mexican border. And yes, Arizona had incarcerated in their Florence, Arizona facility 198 illegal Mexican immigrants, 18 Afghan, Iraqi, Iranian, Lebanese, Nigerian, Pakistani, Somalian, Sudanese, and Yemeni illegal immigrants.

Lest you think these illegals from these terrorist nations were just seeking a better life, Texas Border Patrol agents found Arabic clothing patches that read "martyr" and "way to immortality" along with a patch showing a jet flying into a skyscraper.

Still not convinced? A 2006 House Homeland Security Investigations Subcommittee report stated that members of Hezbollah had already entered the U. S. via the southwest border. Click HERE to read the report which includes photos. The report goes into even more detail about the massive quantities of drugs entering the U. S.

The illegal immigrant issue is about far more than poor migrant workers. Border security is of utmost importance in a post-September 11th America.

Judge Bolton was way out of line on this one. The State of Arizona has appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Despite it's typical left-wing extremist rulings, the court has generally made good decisions on immigration. The court will hopefully overturn Judge Bolton.

ENEMY OF THE STATE

I heard a disturbing news item about a report that went out to law enforcement agencies from the Department of Homeland Security on April 7, 2009. We have all heard the focus on returning veterans being basically "ripe for the picking" for so-called right-wing extremist group recruitment. This is history repeating itself. Those of you who have been on this earth for awhile remember this was the same way Vietnam veterans were characterized. They were portrayed as being DINKY DOW and totally off their nut. Because of this, many found it nearly impossible to find a job. After all, if you owned a business, would you want a nutcase working for you? As we all know, this stereotyping was a product of the mainstream news media who lied about nearly everything about the war, and portrayed our troops as being sub-human, baby-killing murderers. When they came home after serving their country, they were cursed, spat upon, and otherwise mistreated and disrespected. We failed to learn from history, so we're now repeating it.

I obtained a copy of this report and will include some quotes directly from it that may shock you. This is the type of thing you have been hearing about mainly from conspiracy theorists. What I'm about to show you is in the here and now. If you want to read the entire report, click HERE.

"Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial, or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

Here's something to consider: it's the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution which says, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." If you believe this, then the Department of Homeland Security considers you a "rightwing extremist". Whatever authority is not specifically given to the Federal government by the Consititution lies with the States and THE PEOPLE. This is an obvious attempt to continue to broaden the power even more of an already bloated federal government by classifying those who simply believe in the Constitution as threats to "homeland security."

If you are Pro-Life, or are against any type of immigration (notice the report made no distinction between legal or illegal immigration), then, according to the Government, you are a threat to "homeland security."

Now we get to an entire section on illegal immigration.

"Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990's with the perception that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to work at significantly lower wages. They also opposed free trade agreements, arguing that these arrangements resulted in Americans losing jobs to countries such as Mexico."

"DHS/I&A (Department of Homeland Security/Intelligence and Analysis) assesses that rightwing extremist groups' frustration over a perceived lack of government action on illegal immigration has the potential to incite individuals or small groups toward violence."

I'm just loving their use of the words "perceived" and "perception". The implication that illegal immigrants taking American jobs and the government's lack of any real action are just figments of everyone's imagination. So, to summarize this section: if you think illegal immigrants have taken American jobs, the government isn't really serious about stopping it, and oppose NAFTA and other free-trade agreements because of the resulting loss of American manufacturing jobs, then you're a "rightwing extremist."

"Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use."

"Perceived" stance? Were these people not listening to Obama during his campaign, like over and over and over again? Guess not. There's no "perceived" to it. Obama was quite clear during his campaign about his stand on immigration, expanding social programs, and private firearms ownership. The term "perceived" here implies that Obama's position on these issues is not really what the "rightwing extremists" think it is. It was OK to be "antagonistic" towards former President Bush and call him everything but a Child of God, but if you oppose President Obama, then you're automatically a "rightwing extremist."

"Antigovernment conspiracy theories and 'end times' prophecies could motivate extremist individuals to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons."

OK conspiracy theorists, there you are. Seems to bear out some of what you guys have been saying. But, you're just "rightwing extremists."

Next, of course, fundamental Christians had to be included. If you believe the Bible and what it says about the end times, then you're now a "rightwing extremist." That's OK - I make no apology for being a Christian, so, Washington, in the words of the liberal left, "GET OVER IT!" Another example of their "tolerance."

Oh, and don't forget - if you stockpile food, ammunition, or weapons, you're in this too. It's perfectly legal for you to do so, but you're a threat to national security.

"Both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move at this time."

Did you see how subtle this one is? If you are, in the government's opinion, a "law-abiding citizen", then you "share a belief" that buying a firearm to protect your family is wise. So, law-abiding citizens are evidently considered a threat. If they're not, then why include them in this report? Remember, this is an advisory to law enforcement agencies throughout the country. This also means the majority of the population since the majority are "law-abiding citizens." The majority of us are a threat?

"Rightwing extremist paranoia of foreign regimes could escalate or be magnified in the event of economic crisis or military confrontation, harkening back to the 'New World Order' conspiracy theories of the 1990's. The dissolution of Communist countries in Eastern Europe and the end of the Soviet Union in the 1990's led some rightwing extremists to believe that a 'New World Order' would bring about a world government that would usurp the sovereignty of the United States and its Constitution, thus infringing on their liberty."

Here we go again. What group of people are the main ones that teach about a "New World Order" and a world government? CHRISTIANS. This is twice in the same report. Again, if you believe the Bible which predicts a one-world government, you are a "rightwing extremist" and a threat. But let's not stop there. Apparently, the government has a problem with people who believe there's a "New World Order" coming.

And the last paragraph of the report:

"The DHS I&A will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political, economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization."

So, to summarize, since I am Christian who believes the Bible, believes endtime prophecy, believes the endtime prophecy predicts a one world government, is a firm believer in States' rights, opposes abortion, opposes illegal immigration, opposes free trade agreements such as NAFTA, oppose the vast majority of the Obama administration's policies, and believe in the right to private ownership of firearms, I am considered an enemy of the state. Fact is, if you believe in any of these ideas, so are you.