Attorney Eric Holder refuses to Prosecute Child Porn

The Department of Justice (DOJ)’s Child Exploitation and Obscenities unit has been, by many accounts, totally disabled under US Attorney General Eric Holder. Mr. Holder even refused to prosecute his own Assistant United States Attorney caught doing child porn on DOJ computers. The IRS wants 4,000 new agents and a $300 million budget to enforce ObamaCare. Instead, these resources should be allocated, entirely, for an IRS Child Exploitation & Trafficking Unit.

With so many police, judges, clergy, state and federal employees across America involved in the child porn industry Americans should be able to turn to the IRS’s Whistleblower program. Richard Weber, Chief of IRS’s Criminal Division in Washington DC, is one point of contact. Apparently, the IRS cares about trafficked children. That’s good news because America’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, does not.

Child trafficking and porn are the fastest growing crimes in America. With billions being 

laundered in black money it makes solid economic sense for the IRS to focus on the child porn industry. Eric Holder’s Department of Justice has demonstrated they have no interest in prosecuting pedophiles, not even their own. The IRS should be given substantial resources to compensate for DOJ’s disgraceful failure. American tax-payers, not to mention America’s children, will reap huge rewards.

Perhaps Senator Grassley will raise his powerful voice in support.

 

http://www.standupamericaus.org/breaking-news/rampant-child-porn-rings-at-government-agencies/ 

WRITE Congress:

http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml 

Letter to my Congressman

30 July 2009

Dear Congressman Nathan Deal:

Hey, got to hear the discussion about Health Care on CSpan3. Very well put. 

I have a comment.  

WHY do the Democrats keep making the Drug Companies, Insurance Companies, and Doctors the "enemy" and attacking them? Don't they understand the economics of Medicine?  

Drug Companies are money making businesses, they spend a lot of years and their profits (and money from stocks) on discovering chemical formulas that result in helpful and healing drugs. There are major expenses for equipment, scientists, the every day costs of running a corporation (utilities, salaries, etc). Drugs don't just fall out of the air. Many take years and years to discover their efficacy. And each year has growing expenses for the Drug Companies. Add to that that many of the larger drug companies now have programs for people who cannot pay for their medicines. Their doctor can complete some forms for them and they get free or lower cost drugs from that company. Drug companies are not the enemy.  

Insurance companies are money making businesses too. They have just as much right as any other business to earn a living and to pay their employees a living wage. They don't sit in their offices and scheme how to dupe people out of their hard earned income. They use mathematics to figure out how much to charge for each insurance policy. Insurance companies don't care if States group together and lower their premium costs by providing a larger pool of people to purchase their insurance. It's NOT the Insurance Companies who are keeping people from forming large groups and purchasing Health Insurance. It's the States and probably (I didn't check) the Federal Government. Insurance Companies are not the enemy.  

Doctors are in business to earn a living for themselves and their staff, too. I've yet to meet a doctor who, if he/she couldn't reduce prices for a low income patient, would not refer that patient to a doctor who charged less. I've met doctors who will provide health care for a chicken. Yes, here in the States, in Suches, Georgia, Dr. Pruitt has been known to accept produce or farm animals in exchange for health care. He also secretly pays some of the costs of medication for his poorer patients whose pride would not allow them to accept "charity." There are some doctors who will forego their payment so that a patient can afford the hospital bill when the patient needs surgery. WHY do Democrats and the President saying that Doctors are in business to get rich? They ARE in business to pay their bills and earn a living, but they have hearts of gold . . . some maybe silver . . . but the vast majority care more about their patients than the President gives them credit for. Doctors are NOT the enemy.  

So who IS the enemy?  

I submit that WE are our own enemy. We meaning the Federal and State and Local Government and Lawyers and Laws. In many schools, children no longer have physical education because "they might get hurt" and their parents might sue. So the children sit all day and get fat. For every "excuse" imaginable, schools no longer teach Home Economics; schools no longer teach good etiquette and good eating habits. I haven't met a teacher since I was in school (about 45 years ago) who does "in room exercises" between classes to help burn energy and calories. School Administrations spend too much money on the salaries of the Administrators and little or none for programs which would educate students in good and healthful living habits. They want to teach small children about "Sam having two daddies" but they don't teach good eating habits. Nor do they have the parents come in for classes in how to prepare nutritious after school snacks. (The Extension Service used to do that when I was a little child 60 years ago.)  

As Adults, we sit and watch TV or sit in front of our Computers instead of getting actively involved in a hobby which would get our bodies moving. WE are responsible for much of our own Medical Problems and Costs. Not all of them, because we don't choose to catch pneumonia or to fall off a horse and break a leg. But we do choose to eat fattening foods and sit all day.  

How can Congress legislate that people quit watching reality television and get involved in some activity? They can't. Neither should Congress be involved in trying to provide Medical Health Coverage for everyone in the USofA.  

The Next thing, Congress will say we have a "right" to a life insurance policy. Where did I put my copy of the Constitution of the United States of America?  

Please bring up my concerns, if you can, and encourage Congress to vote NO on ANY Government Health Care.  

Government Health Care 

Efficiency of FEMA 

Compassion of IRS  

Thank you,  

Retired and with too much time on my hands (lol) 

******PS****** I am not related to any of the businesses listed above and have no Doctors in my close family. A cousin is a Veterinarian and a Cousin-in-law is an RN.

Obama's Health Care Reform = Euthanasia for Elderly

I sent this letter to a number of Senators.

Please read my letter to my family and friends:

Dear One and All:

This is a mass mailing and if you NEVER want to hear from me again, then email me back and tell me so because I am emailing to nearly everyone in my Address Book, because I think this topic is of utmost importance to us all.

I've listened to this interview and made a few notes below. IF you agree, then let your Congress people know that you agree. But if you don't agree, call, snail mail, email your Congress members and tell them so. And you just might want to pass this around to any of your "elderly" friends to read so that they can listen to the interview and do their own research.

This is the reason Obama wants to get this Health Care bill passed before anyone has the opportunity to read it.

Betsy McCaughey Interview Patient Advocate and Founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former lieutenant governor of New York State.

http://fredthompsonshow.com/premiumstream?dispid=320&headerDest=L3BnL2pzcC9tZWRpYS9mbGFzaHdlbGNvbWUuanNwP3BpZD03MzUxJnBsYXlsaXN0PXRydWUmY2hhcnR0eXBlPWNoYXJ0JmNoYXJ0SUQ9MzIwJnBsYXlsaXN0U2l6ZT01

Health Care Bill Page 16, 17 states you CANNOT keep your current health care, you will be forced to buy into a low grade HMO that limits specialists and tests. And the cost will be more for less medical coverage. (This is explained right at the end of the interview.)

The Health Care Bill is half paid for with a 5 Hundred Billion Dollar CUT in health care benefits and services for seniors. They are cutting patient care. How? Keep listening . . . by denying care to the elderly based on "comparative effectiveness treatment" or by taking the cost of treatment and dividing it by number of years patient is likely to benefit. (You might want to meditate on that a while if you're over age fifty.)

On Page 425 of Obama's health care bill, the Congress will make it MANDATORY require EVERYONE who is on Social Security to undergo a counseling session every 5 years with the objective being that they will explain to them just how to end their own life earlier. How to to decline nutrition, to decline hydration, or go into hospice care for medicare recipients.

If an elderly person gets sick between these five year counseling periods, such as cancer, you must have these counseling sessions again, in order to do what is in your family's or society's best interest and cut your life short.

In Feb, slipped in to The Stimulus Bill was something called "comparative effectiveness research" which is a code for denying care based on a patient's birth date. Cost of treatment divided by number of years patient is likely to benefit. Age related treatment is usually denied because they have too few years left. (Such as Macular Degeneration, Alzheimers, Osteoporosis.)

THE DIRTY LITTLE SECRET: The Elderly are going to be especially hit by a Democratic Party that is always trying to scare people about their Social Security benefits. When George Bush was accused of cutting Medicare, they went nuts. This is the biggest crime on the backs of doctors, hospitals and the elderly people in the history of this Country.

An Example of How This Works: in 2006, the British National Health Service issued an edict using "comparative effectiveness research" stating "elderly people with macular degeneration could not get a new drug to save the vision in one eye until the vision in the other eye has been lost because that was the "cost effective way of doing it."

This is where the money is. When Barack Obama talks about saving money "in the long run" where do you think he's going to get those savings? By shortening your father's or mother's life. You can't pay for the treatment for your parents yourself.

In the bill: No one can get more health care by paying for it themselves than anyone else because it would be 'unequal treatment.'

The president's Health Advisor Dr Ezekiel Emanuel (Rahm's brother) says People who have incurable/irreversable illnesses should not be given direct health services. Such as denying basic health care services to a person with dementia. (or a child with cerebral palsy, etc) This will hit the elderly the most.

Betsy's website: http://www.DefendYourHealthCare.us/
(why that didn't highlight I don't know)

Listen again:
http://fredthompsonshow.com/premiumstream?dispid=320&headerDest=L3BnL2pzcC9tZWRpYS9mbGFzaHdlbGNvbWUuanNwP3BpZD03MzUxJnBsYXlsaXN0PXRydWUmY2hhcnR0eXBlPWNoYXJ0JmNoYXJ0SUQ9MzIwJnBsYXlsaXN0U2l6ZT01

This is making me physically sick. I have 86 and 87 year old parents and I myself and turning 65 in a few months. I have NO intention of allowing MR Obama to kill my parents with his Euthanasia-Based Health Care.

Carol


I have asked Senator McConnell to call a news conference with ALL those in Congress who are against this Health Care Bill. READ just those pages in the News Conference. DEMAND that Congress be given time to read all the bills proposed by the President.

This Train Wreck is OUR Country. What are YOU going to do about stopping this insanity? We are headed down a path similar to Hitler's Germany, if you remember your History.

Carol , Retired and NOT planning to allow anyone to tell me when I must die "for the good of society."

Letter To Senators . . . Feel Free To Plagiarize, I did.

If my son were to claim he was better to serve in Congress because he grew up as a poor white dude raised by a single mother and can relate better to the masses, would you be insulted?

If I were to claim that I was better to serve on the Supreme Court because I grew up as a middle class white girl and can better relate to the majority of people living in the USofA, would you be insulted?

Sonia Sotomayor, if just a private citizen, would NOT be able to serve as a Juror if she revealed during 'voir dire' that her determination of the "facts" of the case would be influenced by the litigants' race, gender and national origin! It's ironic that she can serve as a judge after publicly expressing these biases.

What are you guys thinking?

Sonia Sotomayor has already verbally stated her philosophy in public over the past years, over and over again, and you guys are standing there with your palms over your ears. Remember the way the Democrats treated Robert Bork? Well, Republicans need to use the same hard hitting questions for Sonia Sotomayor. I refer you to: http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/bork-hearings-judge-bork-senate-hearing-defense-past-statements-opinions.html

Once on the Supreme Court, there will be no recourse for the litigants of her 80% incorrect/questionable decisions! Sonia Sotomayor says "fidelity to the law" but she has had 80% of her decisions over-ridden by the Supreme Court! There's usually a divorce if there's been 80% infidelity!

How can you approve Sonia Sotomayor, knowing that she is not impartial . . . just listen to her talk . . . listen to how she rolls out her words and changes her pitch. She is being deceitful by her affectation of words and the manner in which she inflects her words.

Not only should she NOT serve on the Supreme Court, she shouldn't serve on the Court of Appeals!

Supreme Court Justices are not elected officials, but Senators who drink the kool-aid and vote for someone so obviously ineligible as Sonia Sotomayor, are. You wouldn't need to consider being reelected if you'd just repeal the 17th Amendment and return to the US Constitution Article 1, Section 3 as the Founding Fathers chose for Senators to be elected.

Why do we have a Dept of Energy?

Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ..... during the Carter Administration?

Anybody?

Anything?

No?

Didn't think so !

Bottom line .. we've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency ...
the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember.

Ready?

It was very simple.... and at the time everybody thought it very appropriate...


The 'Department of Energy' was instituted on 8- 04-1977
TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.

Hey, pretty efficient, huh?


AND NOW IT'S 2009,

32 YEARS LATER ...

AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS
NECESSARY DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR


IT HAS

16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND APPROXIMATELY

100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES

AND LOOK AT THE JOB IT HAS DONE!

THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY

• 'WHAT WAS I THINKING?'

ah, yes, good ole bureaucracy.


God Help Us!

Email Your Senators!!!

Conclusions

I have come to the conclusion that Republicans in general are afraid of confrontation and conflict. They're wussies. They afraid of being attacked personally for the skeletons in their closets.

Democrats on the other hand wear their indiscretions as badges, thinking that it's an honor to be a thief, a whore monger or pro-killing-unborn-babies. They bait those who do not agree with their philosophies and then try to chew them up and spit them out in degraded heaps of human-dung.

Why are Republicans like this? Simple if you spend a few days contemplating all the potential and possible reasons, actually. Republicans are awash in an agendaless sea. The Republican leadership thinks that they can gain more members by becoming all encompassing and "centrist" or luke-warm on issues. Republican leaders think that by becoming "Democrat light" they will win over some of the more conservative Blue Dog Democrats. They know they'll never win over the Yellow Dog Democrats.

The Democrats look at the Republicans and snicker. Democrats have become the party of Socialism by appropriating social activism and when comparing it to capitalism; describing it as the opposite as if there can be no capitalism in social activism and no social activism in capitalism.

And both Parties are destroying the moral fiber of the USofA. To make the Republican Party stronger, the Legislators and their staffs must immerse themselves in the writings of The Founding Fathers. To get the correct mind set, they must study what was happening in American and World History at the time the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and The Federalist Papers were written. They must be able to argue forceably using direct quotes from The Founding Fathers. And they must be alert to the Democrats' ploy of twisting conversations around to become attacks on the person who is speaking rather than on what the person is saying. The Democrats will have no argument to counter anyone who is speaking the truth and using direct quotes from The Founding Fathers. The Republicans must reprimand any Democrat who publicly or privately attacks the personality or character of any Republican. Or of any conservative. This behavior must not be tolerated.

And Republicans MUST NOT ATTACK EACH OTHER in public. A quiet meeting behind closed doors where those who disagree discuss their disagreements and their similarities and resolve their differences is more in keeping with the Founding Fathers' example.

I recently read that there is no one in the USofA who teaches Constitutional Law and that those who teach or have taught classes in Constitutional Law always have had a personal agenda, usually a liberal agenda. Mostly they tried to make The Constitution a "living document." Well, just like the Ten Commandments, The Constitution is set in stone. It's not 'dead' by any means, but it is not something that can be bent and twisted by those with an anti-Constitution agenda. There are no "10 suggestions" and there is no pick and choose Articles and Sections.

What is WRONG in Congress right now . . . and has been for over 100 years, is that Congress has not confronted UnConstitutional legislation and branded it as such. To save our Republic, Congress MUST insist that every piece of legislation pass the "Constitution smell test." And if it doesn't walk like the Constitution, talk like the Constitution and smell like the Constitution, the bill must be scuttled before it reaches the Floor of the House or the Senate.

And I'm passing this along to Chairman Steele, Sen. McConnell and Rep. Boehner and copying it to my other "pages" online.

If a Police Car Pulls You Over . . .

If a police car pulls you over on the highway, you expect the man driving the vehicle to be a police officer. You expect him to show you a badge if you question him. If he IS a police officer, you do as he asks. However, just because the car has flashing lights does not mean that the driver is a duly sworn officer of the law. It could be that someone stole the car, stole a policeman's uniform and is pulling vehicles over to the side of the road to kill the people in the vehicle. The person being pulled over has a right to know if the man wearing the badge is a duly sworn officer of the law or if he is a fraud wearing a policeman's uniform.

Same for the man wearing a Military Uniform. Is the "CIC" a natural born citizen or is he a fraud claiming to be something he knows he's not?

Slow Down, Ya Move Too Fast & Ya Get Burned

Sent to Senators McConnell, Kyle, Chambliss, Isakson and Representatives Boehner, Cantor and Deal.

I have a huge problem, sir. The Current President 'warned that the financial crisis will turn into "a catastrophe" if the [Stimulus] bill isn't passed quickly.' WHY? What's his reasoning? What "catastrophe?" It needs to be elucidated so that Congress and the Voters know exactly what he's talking about. I disagree with his statement.

I don't think The Current President even knows what he's suggesting. There won't be a "financial catastrophe" if Congress slows down and studies each line of the so called, Stimulus Bill. The Bill by any other name is a huge Porkulus Bill. And I hear that some Republicans have tried to get their Pork added to the original Bill. And I hear that Sen Bi-Partisan McCain has been recruited by The Current President to try to "twist a few Republican arms" to go along with this hurried-up Bill.

You are old enough to know that there is a reason behind every "hurry up and do this" Legislation. And that reason usually benefits the author of the Bill or the person demanding that everyone else "hurry up." Let's look at this more closely. Who benefits from the "hurry up?" Why is there so much Pork in this Stimulus Bill. It goes way beyond most Pork-filled Bills. AND because the Pork is so predominant and noticeable, I contend that the Pork has been included in an effort to disguise the real purpose of the Bill.

Look a little deeper into this Bill. Read it all. Read every line. Cross out the Pork and then look at what's left. Who benefits the most? Is there lobbying involved and will they benefit from the Bill? There's something going on here that makes me very suspicious. I hope my letter has helped make you suspicious of the motives behind this "Stimulus Bill" too.

She's NOT the Queen, she's just Speaker of the House

Contact Queen Nancy Pelosi and remind her that Contraception is NOT Health Care, no matter WHAT she says. Tell your CongressCritter to vote NO on the Stimulus Bill if Speaker Pelosi insists on including Contraceptives in that Bill.

Do I laugh or do I cry?

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. I've written all 100 U S Senators in yesterday and today regarding the $700B Bail Out. I am emotionally spent.

Here's the letter I sent to the Republicans:
Dear Senator ____________:

As a Senator, you represent your constituents and you also represent the entire USofA. As a US Senator, you also represent me, even if I don't live in ______________.

NO, no, no, no, no. Please do not vote for the $700B Bail Out!

The people who caused this problem need to bear the expense of fixing up the problem. Let Sen. Dodd and Sen. Obama and Barney Frank and Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi RETURN the money that they got from the lobbyists.

AND NO PROVISION FOR ACORN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ACORN perpetuates fraudulent voter registration practices. Its nothing but a BRIBE to give them ANY of our -- I'm a taxpayer -- MY part of the $700B.

NO, vote NO, vote NO and make some noise about it.

This cannot be allowed to continue. Do NOT give away MY money to fund ACORN or to be skimmed by Paulson and Bernanke and who knows who else. You know it, you know it in your heart of hearts, you know it. And Pelosi and Reid and the Democrats will come out of this the "heroes" with their pockets lined with kickbacks. YOU KNOW IT.

VOTE NO to giving MY taxes to Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Dodd, Obama, Paulson, Bernanke et al.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

S/S

retired and tired of being scammed by Congress.

"If we do not protect life, there is no reason to fight for any other cause."


I think that after I vote this Tuesday (early vote), I am going to take the Month of October off and get away from the computer as much as I can without going into withdrawal. I will be online for the Debates, of course. And after 4 November, I'm going to "get a life" away from politics!

Economic Fix by Changing One Little Accounting Law

Please read Dave Ramsey's Suggestion.

Remember Enron, WorldCom, Adelphia, and other companies had artificially put assets on the books? They'd say something was worth $10M when they bought it, but eventually it decreased in value, and they never updated the value in the books. That was part of the fraud. Under current laws at that time, they were all convicted and put in jail for fraud.

Then we got all mad and made all these new laws that are coming out the wazoo called sarbanes oxley. It's a huge, massive law but the idea is that we were going to mandate ethics to corporate America because apparently they didn't have any, according to the Enron failure. It's now a total pain in the butt to execute it in a publicly traded company.

It didn't work because you can't cause ethics to happen. However, it does make each company each day restate what their assets are worth if sold on the market. This accounting procedure is mark to market accounting--you need to remember that. It's a good concept and keeps companies from having loaded balance sheets.

How This Affects Us Today

However, it's part of what's caused this in the news now. Merrill Lynch was sitting with $30 billion are tied up in sub-prime loans with houses. Stupid! They get what they deserve for doing that, and I'm with you on that. Those houses didn't become worthless all of a sudden because those people couldn't sell their bonds. Since they couldn't sell them, they basically gave them away for 22 cents on the dollar. Now do you think all those houses lost 80% of their value underneath that deal? No, they didn't, so they gave them away for 22 cents on the dollar (about $6 billion total) because there was no market for them. Nobody wants to buy sub-prime bonds because they suck. They're junk bonds. But at 22 cents on the dollar, it's a bargain because even if you foreclosed on every one of the houses in there, you'd probably get $20 billion back out of $30 billion, and so the company that bought those for $6 billion got a deal! But there's no market for them. That's where these companies are stuck. They can't sell this stuff, but accounting-wise, they've had to mark it down to market and it's frozen the marketplace.

Economist Wesberry is saying that if we change that one rule and don't force them to market down to market and just let them hold on to all the stuff, and say just on sub-primes for this period of time you can change that rule -- a temporary change -- that'll free the market up. It's seized right now; it's frozen. This will thaw it out and get it going again. He says that'll solve 60% of the problem ... and I think he's right.

That one accounting rule is what made Merrill Lynch sell out. That one accounting rule is what's driving other ones into the dirt. Would you rather let them change their accounting rule or loan them $700 billion for us to buyout their bad paper?

I'd rather them work their own crap out than change the accounting rule.

I don't like giving them any money or any help with my tax dollars. But I'd rather see that than see the whole thing turn completely upside down in a fruit basket turnover rather than have a whole meltdown or something and freak out here in the middle of the election season. Why don't we just take the FHA insurance program and extend it across these sub-primes? What that means is that you and I are guaranteeing the lender that they're not going to lose as much or any money on those mortgages. Now I don't like guaranteeing them, but I like it better than buying them. In other words, instead of $700 billion in tax-payer debt going out there to bail out these companies, just extend the insurance out. You could probably do that for less than $40 billion. It's like a 95% savings!

If the government insured those mortgages, they would then be marketable. And could sell them. And the companies would stay afloat. And we, the people, don't have to get into the mortgage business. Now we're going to get in there a little bit because of the insurance on those getting foreclosed on. But foreclosures aren't causing this. This is being caused because these companies are frozen and seized up. We've got to let some of the steam come off and put some oil in there to get this thing moving again. We can do that without going into debt $700 billion.

Read HOW to go about this at Dave Ramsey's website.

Contact your Congresspeoples at http://www.senate.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

When is a "ceasefire" not a cease-fire? When it's a "tahadiya" -- read and learn

In Ceasefires in Islam: Not Always What They Seem to Be by Frank Salvato he writes in part:

To say that we in the West are engaged in a clash of civilizations with the fundamentalist Islamic culture would be a fair statement. Hundreds if not thousands of radical jihadist groups are mounting a violent global offensive against Western Civilization in a third attempt at establishing a global Caliphate. This contention is validated by history and we need only be good students of events passed to understand it.

While many hold the common misconception that the conflict with radical Islam started with the attacks of September 11, 2001, the reality is that radical Islam’s current confrontation with the West started in 1983 with Hezbollah’s bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon. Lesser understood is that this conflict is but the third bloody expedition in the quest for a global Caliphate; the first coming in the aftermath of Muhammad’s death in the 7th Century and the second occurring in the 11th Century, spanning the years 1071 to 1683 AD – an aggression that lasted 612 years, almost three times as long as the United States has been a country.

Three aspects of this conflict which we in the West are delinquent in understanding – and there are many others – are in defining the enemy, understanding the culture in which they are generated and familiarizing ourselves with their tools and tactics.

America’s War on Words, Mark Silverberg, Featured Writer states:

The Bush administration has launched a new “outreach” policy reflecting it’s reluctance to discuss jihadism in public. This time, it has targeted language. We are no longer at war with “jihadism”. Rather, we are engaged in a war against “extremism”.

In a document titled: "Words that Work and Words that Don't: A Guide for Counterterrorism Communication” released in March 2008, Federal agencies including the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the National Counter Terrorism Center will now be issued instructions on how not to describe "jihadists”, or the "mujahedeen", or to use any references relating to Islam, Islamic theology or Muslims in the context of our current war. Nor are these the only words to be struck from the government’s political lexicon. Words and phrases like “al Qaeda movement”, “Salafi”, “Wahhabist”, “Sufi”, “ummah” (the Muslim world), “Islamic terrorist”, “Islamist”, “holy warrior” and even “caliphate” are also to be removed from diplomatic discourse.

And ends by stating this fact:

An Administration that continues to transfer hundreds of millions of dollars to the Palestinian Authority and billions of petro-dollars to our enemies should be more concerned with legitimizing jihadists by funding them than they are about nomenclature.

In an article on Terrorism, Basic Projects writes:

Many counterterrorism experts, including former CIA Director James Woolsey and founding member of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center, Dr. Bruce Tefft, agree, it is not a question of “if” there will be another attack on American soil, it is a question of “when.” The only questions left unanswered about this future attack are how lethal it will be, where it will take place and whether we will have had enough foresight to have acquired the information needed to literally help save our own lives.

The issue of terrorism is a deadly serious one. It directly affects every American – as well as every freedom loving citizen of the world, yet accurate, fact-based, first-source information on the threat of terrorism is not readily accessible. Adequate information about the threat we face is not forthcoming from our government nor are we served by an agenda-driven media. Websites that offer accurate information on the threat of terrorism are routinely removed from private sector Internet search engine indexes for mentioning radical Islam’s use of terrorism in jihad, while those who do attempt to educate the public on the origins and activities of terror groups in the United States are either ignored by the mainstream media or smeared by biased special interest groups.

Contact your Congressional Representatives in the Senate and the House. Contact Senator John Sydney McCain, Senator Ronald Ernest Paul, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Senator Barack Hussein Obama. Do not allow Islam in any of its faces to create its Twelfth Caliphate in the USofA. This is no joke and it's not funny. The borders must be closed to unlawful entry by anyone from any nation. Immigrants must undergo a physical and a background check. Remember what occurred on 09/11/01. It would not have happened if we still used Ellis Island for all immigrant entry into the USofA.

Just doin' jobs Americans won't do . . . ?

MINNEAPOLIS — A woman who authorities say is in the country illegally and using an alias was charged Friday with four counts of criminal vehicular homicide and two lesser charges in a school bus crash that killed four children.

Now do you understand how important it is to Build The Fence? Write your Congressmen and demand the fence be built if only to protect your children and grandchildren from illegal aliens driving without licenses and running stop signs. The woman couldn't speak English, could she even read the word STOP or know what it meant?

I did my part, now it's up to you, if you agree.

This letter went out to my two Federal representatives, one State Senator friend, and the Governor of Georgia. Let's see if anyone takes up this cause.

This set of videos is about an hour each, however, the message is important for our day and time.

The USofA is being invaded. Not by humans, but by NON-Native species (and we're not the only Country with this problem). States have the power to work toward eradication of these non-natives and the rehabilitation of native species. But the States (and potentially the Federal Government) needs to act quickly. See my plan below.


(Highlight, copy and paste to your browser)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5333797585907820770

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1443126869678785107

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6464847754910045380

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5413793451378830936


MY Idea:
Begin a "works progress" program for legal immigrants and citizen teenagers to work toward eradication of non-native species where ever they are found. Kudzu in the South comes to mind. With enough man-power, this non-native and invasive species of plant could be eradicated. Treat the teens like the CCC boys of the 1920's (only they'd have to earn more than a dollar a day), train them, test them, and give them certificates as "techs" after their three years with this Program.

Offer the teens Military Service with rank or Peace Corps service in place of Military Service after their 3 years training and hands on work in the USofA. After 4 years in either Military or Peace Corps, offer them a type of "G-I Bill" to complete their education at a 2 or 4 year college.

The USofA HAS the wherewithal to take care of the problem of non-native species. But do they have the commitment, the fortitude, the desire of purpose, the ability to take teens out of the arcade, off the streets and into a "Work Program?"

Please spread the word -- this could be what unifies our Country.

Thank you,
//////signed//////
Retired
http://auntiecoosa.blogspot.com

14 Financial Reasons for Deportation

Here's the "Snopes" for doubters:
http://tinyurl.com/2rsvfy

I hope the following 14 reasons are copy/pasted and forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them. I have included the URL's for verification of the following facts.

1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year. http://tinyurl.com/zob77

2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens. http://tinyurl.com/rfdu5

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens. http://tinyurl.com/rfdu5

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English! http://tinyurl.com/38lry9

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, know n as anchor babies.
http://tinyurl.com/2csyqc

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. http://tinyurl.com/2csyqc

7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens. http://tinyurl.com/2csyqc

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.
http://tinyurl.com/2u94vp

9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
http://tinyurl.com/2ps8zk

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.
http://tinyurl.com/32ompp

11. During the year 2005, there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from terrorist countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroine and marijuana crossed into the U.S. from the southern border. Homeland Security Report: http://tinyurl.com/t9sht

12. The National Policy Institute, "estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion, or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period."
http://tinyurl.com/3xaese

13. In 2006, illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin.
http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm

14. "The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States!"
http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml

The total cost is a WHOPPING $338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR!!!

If this raises the hair on the back of your neck, then copy/paste and forward it to every human in the country, including every representative in Washington, DC four times a week for a month.

Would Congress PLEASE Read This Post?

I have today written two letters to the President and some other members of the Administration including my Senators and Representative. Below are the two letters.

LETTER ONE: S-CHIP
As I have tried to inform you, from my experience working with S-CHIP in the State of Georgia, Congress has not spoken to people who have actually worked with the "working poor." I have and I give my advice freely.

Many of the parents of S-CHIP children do not expect the coverage to duplicate Medicaid. They expected the program to be much like one of the Employer Health Care Coverage Plans that most State Employees have. They expected to pay a monthly fee for their children, based on their income, and then a co-pay at the doctor's office, the pharmacy and the hospital. They are not looking for any kind of "national" or "universal" health care.

Parents who can afford health insurance through their employers usually do not have dental coverage for their children and would like to see S-CHIP offer Dental Coverage for children separate from the Health Care Coverage. They're willing to make a monthly payment for this coverage and pay a co-pay.

S-CHIP does not need to extend coverage for those "reportedly" uninsured children not currently covered. The majority of those children have parents who can obtain Family Health Care Coverage from their employers but who are waiting on the "dole" from the Federal Government because they refuse to budget or reduce their spending habits in order to pay for the Employer offered Health Insurance.

The Bottom Line with this entire situation is that the U.S. Citizen does not know how to live within his net income and expects the Federal Government to be his "Santa Claus" or "Sugar Daddy" and come to his rescue. The Federal Government has my permission not to continue to be an enabler of poor financial planning by families who have access to health insurance coverage through their employers.

Thank you for reading my email.

LETTER TWO: AMNESTY – specifically the Dream Act
As I have tried to inform you, from my experience working with documented (legal green card) immigrants and undocumented immigrants (illegal aliens) and the Medicaid Programs for Children and Pregnant Women in the State of Georgia, Congress has not spoken to people who have actually worked with these families. I have and I give my advice freely.

Nearly 100% of documented immigrants do not support the USofA giving Amnesty to any illegal aliens. Documented immigrants went through the long procedure to obtain green cards for themselves and their spouses and children. They worked for their green card status and they look down on those who enter the USofA without benefit of a green card.

They also believe that in many cases, employers who hire both legal and illegal aliens pay lower wages to the legal aliens because they know the illegal alien has no recourse if he is paid below minimum wages. If the Legal Alien complains, he is summarily dismissed and an illegal alien willing to accept lowered wages is hired. Legal immigrants believe they would be paid better if there were no Illegal Immigrants willing to work for low wages.

Employers are hiring illegal aliens. I live in an area where illegal aliens work in construction, chicken houses, landscaping and greenhouses. And they're paid cash which means the employer doesn't have to account for them, pay any taxes for them, cover them with Worker's Comp, offer Health Care Coverage, retirement benefits, etc.

So my questions are: Why do you want to reward Illegal Aliens and give them benefits that Legal Immigrants often are ineligible for? Why reward what you call "innocent children" just because their parents were too lazy or self-centered to follow the appropriate procedures to gain entry into the USofA?

Charity begins at home. And the USofA is not the home of illegal aliens.

So, now it's your turn to write to your Congresspeople.

OUTRAGED yet? Voice your concerns!

The father of a 14-year-old Texas girl who was raped, sodomized and then strangled with a belt and shoe laces, wants to know why President Bush supports halting the execution of the Mexican national who confessed to killing his daughter and her friend.

"Our daughters are just pawns in a game that we have no control over," Randy Ertman, father of Jennifer Ertman, told FOX News. "What can I say to the president of the United States or the Supreme Court that would make any difference?"

Go here to send an email to Congress, the President, and the Governor of Texas to voice your outrage at the political game being played by our elected officials as they try to appease Mexico and deny justice for two innocent girls -- here's a clincher for you:

The final act of brutality came when the girl's bodies were stomped on to make sure they were dead, court testimony shows.

A Different Approach

So this idea hit me this morning -- how about using the same end result with a different approach? Why not ask every Senator to help build the fence to keep out the invasion of illicit drugs into the USofA via the Southern border? So, that's what I'm doing. 100 Senators and 100 Emails.

Dear Senator:

It shouldn’t matter what side of the aisle you’re on when you’re discussing protecting the United States from invasion. We’ve had all kinds of invasions, from the wooly algid to the pine bark beetle to marijuana, heroin and cocaine. None of those invasions has been good for the United States. Although it’s difficult to stop someone from sneaking an insect into the United States, it’s much easier to stop the criminals who transport marijuana, heroin and cocaine into our Country. The quickest, easiest and most effective way to stop the invasion of illicit drugs including marijuana, heroin and cocaine into the United States of America is to Build The Fence that has already been approved, mandated and financed.

Build The Fence.
Free Ramos and Compean.

Immigration “reform” can come after the fence is built. Stop the insanity of drugs entering our beloved Country. Build The Fence. If no one else will do it, then you stand up on the Senate floor and ask the President why he is protecting drug-runners coming in from Mexico bringing in marijuana, heroin and cocaine.

I sincerely hope that no one in elected office or any elected official’s staff is benefiting from this scourge against the United States. Build The Fence. Stop the drugs at the Southern border.

Sincerely,
/////signed//////
Retired

Changing the U.S. Military Code of Conduct

Below is a copy of the email I just sent to Senators Harkin and Byrd regarding their recent Committee Hearing in D.C.

FoxNews reported that in a recent Senate Hearing the following transpired:
"I would be very willing and able and supportive" to changes to the policy "to continue to allow the homosexual community to contribute to the nation without condoning what I believe to be activity — whether it to be heterosexual or homosexual — that in my upbringing is not right," Pace said.

Pace's lengthy answer on gays was prodded by Sen. Tom Harkin, who said he found Pace's previous remarks as "very hurtful" and "very demoralizing" to homosexuals serving in the military.

In March, the Chicago Tribune reported that Pace said in a wide-ranging interview: "I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way."

Harkin, D-Iowa, said he wanted to give Pace a chance to amend his remarks in light of his retirement.

"It's a matter of leadership, and we have to be careful what we say," Harkin said.

Pace noted that the U.S. Military Code of Justice prohibits homosexual activity as well as adultery. Harkin said, "Well, maybe we should change that."

Does Your Comment "Maybe We Should Change That" mean that you plan to change the U.S. Military Code of Justice to allow both homosexual activity and adultery? Because if you only allow one without allowing the other, you are discriminating. It appears from your comment that you found General Pace's previous comments against homosexuals 'as "very hurtful" and "very demoralizing" to homosexuals serving in the military' and that you plan only to allow homosexual activity in the Military.

There are many adulterers in the military (and in the Space Program) and if you allow only homosexual behavior you are opening the Military for lawsuits from people who have received Military punishment for adultery.

If you allow both homosexual behavior and adultery, doesn't that mean that (ex)Astronaut Lisa Nowak will be one of the first people you notify about the change in status of homosexual and adulterous behavior in the Military?

By allowing adulterous behavior in the Military, doesn't that mean that the former Commander in Chief who had "sex with that woman" can now be exonerated?

Shouldn't you take a poll of Military Personnel first to see how many plan to engage in homosexual activity and/or adultery if the U. S. Military Code of Conduct is changed?

Or maybe do you think you need to do some additional studying of the situation because opening one door without opening the other is "hateful" and "mean spirited" and "selfish" and may cause "great emotional harm" and just may not be best for our Military and our Nation?

Thank you for reading my email.
////Signed////
Retired

If you are unaware of the current U.S. Military Code of Conduct regarding homosexuality, you will find it here.

I completed a word search on Google and found out that adultery is not specifically mentioned in the U.S. Military Code of Conduct. Now, since the Military was nearly 100% men in the past, is there a "manly" reason that adultery is not mentioned? Why the oversight, GUYS??? You have your Adultery and now you want your Homosexual Activities, too?

Kind of eye opening, isn't it? It is obvious to me that Men Make Up The Rules!! Why is Adultery not mentioned in the U.S. Military Code of Conduct??

I'm going to contact my Senators tomorrow and ask this question. If you get an answer before I do, please let me know in the comments section.