"Regime Change
Will Be
Necessary”
click.jpg

Saturday, April 19, 2014

If True, A Very Bad Sign

From WND:
Armed fed raid prompted by safety rules

Critics of the way federal agencies in Montana handled a recent raid on a company that recycles brass for ammunition are calling for an investigation.

Government officials have declined to respond to allegations that armed officers with weapons drawn locked up USA Brass employees, confiscated their cell phones and otherwise violated their rights.

The incident in Bozeman, Mont., drew little attention from media.

To protect against lead contamination, USA Brass had installed filters and added training. The company had passed a subsequent inspection before officers from the Environmental Protection Agency and FBI arrived, apparently with guns drawn....

...[S]ome have explained the event as an “audit,” but then the question is why it escalated into “a full-blown, armed raid.”...
Read the rest HERE.

Now, I'm wary of WND as a reliable source. But the same is true of mainstream news sources.

So, does anybody here at IBA know if the above story is true?

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 8 Comments

Obama Deliberately Emboldening Our Enemies

I Will Use Feigned Incompetence 
To Grind Them Into Dust

All Americans should be aware of some very disturbing events that speak to the state of terrorism, the strength of al Qaeda and our nation’s security. In light of the danger unfolding around us, we also need to question whether or not President Obama’s administration is serious about confronting what is clearly a gathering storm, or whether, in fact, his policies are encouraging those who wish to harm us. 
One of the more shocking events illustrating the growing strength of al Qaeda is the release of a video this week showing what CNN reports as “the largest and most dangerous gathering of al Qaeda in years.” 
It’s what experts think is a recent gathering of the terrorist group’s leadership and more than 100 fighters in Yemen. For an administration that does not hide its eagerness to use drones to kill terrorists, experts and journalists alike were wondering whether our intelligence community knew about this meeting, and if so, why didn’t they take the opportunity to kill the most dangerous of them with one drone strike? 
The terrorists on the video seem strangely unconcerned with their safety, as though there was no need for them to feel at risk. When asked about the brazenness of the gathering, Rep. Mike Rogers, Michigan Republican and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, noted on CNN: “We think that they’re feeling empowered. The less pressure you put on them, the more they take that as a victory … .” 
It now appears al Qaeda was “on the run” in the same way you were able to keep your doctor and hospital. Whether we didn’t know about the gathering, or did and chose to do nothing, it’s another signal to the beasts around the world that no one is home in Washington, D.C. 
The dangerous circus created by the Obama regime’s rules doesn’t stop there... 
 Go read the whole thing.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

The Slow Death of Free Speech


From Mark Steyn:


These days, pretty much every story is really the same story:
  • In Galway, at the National University of Ireland, a speaker who attempts to argue against the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) programme against Israel is shouted down with cries of ‘Fucking Zionist, fucking pricks… Get the fuck off our campus.’
  • In California, Mozilla’s chief executive is forced to resign because he once made a political donation in support of the pre-revisionist definition of marriage.
  • At Westminster, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee declares that the BBC should seek ‘special clearance’ before it interviews climate sceptics, such as fringe wacko extremists like former Chancellor Nigel Lawson.
  • In Massachusetts, Brandeis University withdraws its offer of an honorary degree to a black feminist atheist human rights campaigner from Somalia.
  • In London, a multitude of liberal journalists and artists responsible for everything from Monty Python to Downton Abbey sign an open letter in favour of the first state restraints on the British press in three and a quarter centuries.
  • And in Canberra the government is planning to repeal Section 18C — whoa, don’t worry, not all of it, just three or four adjectives; or maybe only two, or whatever it’s down to by now, after what Gay Alcorn in the Agedescribed as the ongoing debate about ‘where to strike the balance between free speech in a democracy and protection against racial abuse in a multicultural society’.
I heard a lot of that kind of talk during my battles with the Canadian ‘human rights’ commissions a few years ago: of course, we all believe in free speech, but it’s a question of how you ‘strike the balance’, where you ‘draw the line’… which all sounds terribly reasonable and Canadian, and apparently Australian, too. But in reality the point of free speech is for the stuff that’s over the line, and strikingly unbalanced. If free speech is only for polite persons of mild temperament within government-policed parameters, it isn’t free at all. So screw that.
But I don’t really think that many people these days are genuinely interested in ‘striking the balance’; they’ve drawn the line and they’re increasingly unashamed about which side of it they stand. What all the above stories have in common, whether nominally about Israel, gay marriage, climate change, Islam, or even freedom of the press, is that one side has cheerfully swapped that apocryphal Voltaire quote about disagreeing with what you say but defending to the death your right to say it for the pithier Ring Lardner line: ‘“Shut up,” he explained.’
A generation ago, progressive opinion at least felt obliged to pay lip service to the Voltaire shtick. These days, nobody’s asking you to defend yourself to the death: a mildly supportive retweet would do. But even that’s further than most of those in the academy, the arts, the media are prepared to go. As Erin Ching, a student at 60-grand-a-year Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania, put it in her college newspaper the other day: ‘What really bothered me is the whole idea that at a liberal arts college we need to be hearing a diversity of opinion.’ Yeah, who needs that? There speaks the voice of a generation: celebrate diversity by enforcing conformity.
The examples above are ever-shrinking Dantean circles of Tolerance: At Galway, the dissenting opinion was silenced by grunting thugs screaming four-letter words. At Mozilla, the chairwoman is far more housetrained: she issued a nice press release all about (per Miss Alcorn) striking a balance between freedom of speech and ‘equality’, and how the best way to ‘support’ a ‘culture’ of ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusiveness’ is by firing anyone who dissents from the mandatory groupthink. At the House of Commons they’re moving to the next stage: in an ‘inclusive culture’ ever more comfortable with narrower bounds of public discourse, it seems entirely natural that the next step should be for dissenting voices to require state permission to speak.
At Brandeis University, we are learning the hierarchy of the new multiculti caste system. In theory, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is everything the identity-group fetishists dig: female, atheist, black, immigrant. If conservative white males were to silence a secular women’s rights campaigner from Somalia, it would be proof of the Republican party’s ‘war on women’, or the encroaching Christian fundamentalist theocracy, or just plain old Andrew Boltian racism breaking free of its redoubt at the Herald Sun to rampage as far as the eye can see. But when the snivelling white male who purports to be president of Brandeis (one Frederick Lawrence) does it out of deference to Islam, Miss Hirsi Ali’s blackness washes off her like a bad dye job on a telly news anchor. White feminist Germaine Greer can speak at Brandeis because, in one of the more whimsical ideological evolutions even by dear old Germaine’s standards, Ms Greer feels that clitoridectomies add to the rich tapestry of ‘cultural identity’: ‘One man’s beautification is another man’s mutilation,’ as she puts it. But black feminist Hirsi Ali, who was on the receiving end of ‘one man’s mutilation’ and lives under death threats because she was boorish enough to complain about it, is too ‘hateful’ to be permitted to speak. In the internal contradictions of multiculturalism, Islam trumps all: race, gender, secularism, everything. So, in the interests of multiculti sensitivity, pampered upper-middle-class trusty-fundy children of entitlement are pronouncing a Somali refugee beyond the pale and signing up to Islamic strictures on the role of women.
That’s another reason why Gay Alcorn’s fretting over ‘striking the balance’ is so irrelevant. No matter where you strike it, the last unread nonagenarian white supremacist Xeroxing flyers in a shack off the Tanami Track will be way over the line, while, say, Sheikh Sharif Hussein’s lively sermon to an enthusiastic crowd at the Islamic Da’wah Centre of South Australia, calling on Allah to kill every last Buddhist and Hindu, will be safely inside it. One man’s decapitation is another man’s cultural validation, as Germaine would say.
Ms Greer has reached that Circle of Tolerance wherein the turkeys line up to volunteer for an early Eid. The Leveson Inquiry declaration of support signed by all those London luvvies like Emma Thompson, Tom Stoppard, Maggie Smith, Bob Geldof and Ian McKellen is the stage that comes after that House of Commons Science and Technology Committee — when the most creative spirits in our society all suddenly say: ‘Ooh, yes, please, state regulation, bring it on!’ Many of the eminent thespians who signed this letter started their careers in an era when every play performed in the West End had to be approved by the Queen’s Lord Chamberlain. Presented with a script that contained three ‘fucks’ and an explicit reference to anal sex, he’d inform the producer that he would be permitted two ‘crikeys’ and a hint of heavy petting. In 1968, he lost his censorship powers, and the previously banned Hair, of all anodyne trifles, could finally be seen on the London stage: this is the dawning of the age of Aquarius. Only four and a half decades after the censor’s departure, British liberals are panting for the reimposition of censorship under a new ‘Royal Charter’.
This is the aging of the dawn of Aquarius: new blasphemy laws for progressive pieties. In the New Statesman, Sarah Ditum seemed befuddled that the ‘No Platform’ movement — a vigorous effort to deny public platforms to the British National party and the English Defence League — has mysteriously advanced from silencing ‘violent fascists’ to silencing all kinds of other people, like aGuardian feminist who ventured some insufficiently affirming observations about trans-women and is now unfit for polite society. But, once you get a taste for shutting people up, it’s hard to stop. Why bother winning the debate when it’s easier to close it down?
Nick Lowles defined the ‘No Platform’ philosophy as ‘the position where we refuse to allow fascists an opportunity to act like normal political parties’. But free speech is essential to a free society because, when you deny people ‘an opportunity to act like normal political parties’, there’s nothing left for them to do but punch your lights out. Free speech, wrote the Washington Post’s Robert Samuelson last week, ‘buttresses the political system’s legitimacy. It helps losers, in the struggle for public opinion and electoral success, to accept their fates. It helps keep them loyal to the system, even though it has disappointed them. They will accept the outcomes, because they believe they’ve had a fair opportunity to express and advance their views. There’s always the next election. Free speech underpins our larger concept of freedom.’
Just so. A fortnight ago I was in Quebec for a provincial election in which the ruling separatist party went down to its worst defeat in almost half a century. This was a democratic contest fought between parties that don’t even agree on what country they’re in. In Ottawa for most of the 1990s the leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition was a chap who barely acknowledged either the head of state or the state she’s head of. Which is as it should be. Because, if a Quebec separatist or an Australian republican can’t challenge the constitutional order through public advocacy, the only alternative is to put on a black ski-mask and skulk around after dark blowing stuff up.
I’m opposed to the notion of official ideology — not just fascism, Communism and Baathism, but the fluffier ones, too, like ‘multiculturalism’ and ‘climate change’ and ‘marriage equality’. Because the more topics you rule out of discussion — immigration, Islam, ‘gender fluidity’ — the more you delegitimise the political system. As your cynical political consultant sees it, a commitment to abolish Section 18C is more trouble than it’s worth: you’ll just spends weeks getting damned as cobwebbed racists seeking to impose a bigots’ charter when you could be moving the meter with swing voters by announcing a federal programmne of transgendered bathroom construction. But, beyond the shrunken horizons of spinmeisters, the inability to roll back something like 18C says something profound about where we’re headed: a world where real, primal, universal rights — like freedom of expression — come a distant second to the new tribalism of identity-group rights.
Oh, don’t worry. There’ll still be plenty of ‘offending, insulting or humiliating’ in such a world, as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the Mozilla CEO and Zionists and climate deniers and feminist ‘cis-women’ not quite au courant with transphobia can all tell you. And then comes the final, eerie silence. Young Erin Ching at Swarthmore College has grasped the essential idea: it is not merely that, as the Big Climate enforcers say, ‘the science is settled’, but so is everything else, from abortion to gay marriage. So what’s to talk about? Universities are no longer institutions of inquiry but ‘safe spaces’ where delicate flowers of diversity of race, sex, orientation, ‘gender fluidity’ and everything else except diversity of thought have to be protected from exposure to any unsafe ideas.
As it happens, the biggest ‘safe space’ on the planet is the Muslim world. For a millennium, Islamic scholars have insisted, as firmly as a climate scientist or an American sophomore, that there’s nothing to debate. And what happened? As the United Nations Human Development Programme’s famous 2002 report blandly noted, more books are translated in Spain in a single year than have been translated into Arabic in the last 1,000 years. Free speech and a dynamic, innovative society are intimately connected: a culture that can’t bear a dissenting word on race or religion or gender fluidity or carbon offsets is a society that will cease to innovate, and then stagnate, and then decline, very fast.
As American universities, British playwrights and Australian judges once understood, the ‘safe space’ is where cultures go to die.

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 2 Comments

Friday, April 18, 2014

Pentagon Pleads With Obama Regime To Stop New Russian Spy Plane From Flying In American Airspace, John Kerry and His Parade of Pathetic Pussies Want To Approve It


From the Daily Beast:
The Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.S. military and American intelligence agencies have quietly pushed the White House in recent weeks to deny a new Russian surveillance plane the right to fly over U.S. territory. 
This week, the White House finally began consideration of the decision whether to certify the new Russian aircraft under the so-called “Open Skies Treaty.” And now the question becomes: Will the spies and generals get their way? 
As the United States and Russia face off publicly over Ukraine, behind the scenes, President Obama’s national security cabinet is having its own quiet feud over a long-standing agreement to allow Russian surveillance flights over U.S. airspace. The spies and the generals want to deny the Russians the overflight rights for its latest surveillance planes. 
The State Department, which ultimately makes that decision, has favored such certification. On Wednesday an interagency meeting of senior officials failed to reach consensus, delaying the decision until Obama takes it up with the National Security Council, according to U.S. officials involved in the dispute. 
At issue is the Open Skies Treaty. First signed in 1992 and finally ratified in 2002, the treaty adopted by 34 nations allows the safe passage of planes equipped with advanced cameras and sensors that give governments the imagery and data they use to assess everything from compliance with arms control treaties to troop movements. 
On April 15, the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, and the Republican chairman of that panel’s subcommittee that oversees the U.S. nuclear arsenal, Rep. Mike Rogers from Alabama, urged Obama to deny Russia the right to fly its new planes over U.S. airspace. 
In their letter, the two lawmakers write, “We agree with the concerns expressed by the Intelligence Community and the military leadership of the Department of Defense” in their opposition to certifying the new Russian planes under the treaty. 
The State Department on the other hand has argued the United States should live up to the treaty’s obligations and approve the new Russian aircraft. 
The decision to certify the planes and their sensors has been pending since late last year, long before the Ukraine crisis began. One senior U.S. official said, “This isn’t just an issue between the United States and Russia. Our allies and partners depend on this treaty for insight into Russia because they don’t have the same capabilities as the United States.”
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments

A "Christian" Who Sounds Like a Muslim: Russian Vice Speaker Screams at Guards to Rape Pregnant Journalist ‘Hard’



A reporter asked Vladimir Zhirinovsky if Russia should reply to the entry ban recently imposed by Ukraine on Russian men, the politician made a loud and illogical speech, first accusing female politicians from Ukraine of suffering from nymphomania (to which he referred to by the obsolete term “uterine frenzy”), then suggesting that the reporter must have a similar condition. When the woman said she was pregnant, Zhirinovsky affectionately told her to stay home instead of going to work. After this he suddenly pushed one of his aides at the reporter telling the young man that he should “rape the woman hard.” Then he shouted “Christ is risen! Truly he is risen!” and “kiss her!” several times, most likely hinting at the Easter celebrations two days away.
As another female journalist stepped in to defend her colleague Zhirinovsky called her a lesbian and passed several homophobic remarks.

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 2 Comments

Washington Post Lies About Islam

Today, I stumbled across this, originally published on February 3, 2014:
COMMENTARY: Blasphemy charges pervert Islam’s teachings

...Regarding free speech, the Quran recognizes and protects free speech and expression in more than 40 instances....

[...]

Muhammad established the Charter of Medina, a secular constitution between Muslims and Jews. The charter ensured equality, universal religious freedom, and free speech for all Medina’s residents.

Islam limits free speech on the same premise that the U.S. Supreme Court has also banned the utterance of inflammatory speech. Punishment is warranted if an individual threatens the state due his advocacy of terrorism or incitement to pre-emptive war. It is upon this premise that citizens were punished in Muhammad’s time — be they Muslim or Jewish. At least 15 European nations have laws punishing certain types of blasphemy — something Islam’s original sources do not have....
The same kind of CRAP that is published in almost every history book used in the United States and throughout the West.

I note that the article, written by an Ahmadiyya Muslim, garnered few comments.

Not all commenters were fooled by the article. One commenter stated:
...The Washington Post in publishing this half-informed article here, is wittingly or unwittingly, propagandizing for Muslims in true "NewSpeak".

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 3 Comments

Bach
St. Matthew's Passion

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

Yatsenyuk Giving Hitler Salute


Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 4 Comments


Erdogan's Theological Justification for His Dictatorial Stance


From Will at THE OTHER NEWS:

Erdogan's Theological Justification for His Dictatorial Stance.HT: GatestoneInstitute.By Timon Dias.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Today in the Obamanation

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Ronnie Earl & the Broadcasters
Live In Europe (full album)


Ronnie Earl - Guitar
Bruce Katz - Organ & piano
Rod Carey - Bass
Per Hanson - Drums
1. San-Ho-Zay (Freddie King/Sonny Thompson) 0:00
2. Robert Nighthawk Stomp (Earl/Hanson) 5:20
3. Thank You Mr. T-Bone (Earl) 8:50
4. Akos (Earl) 13:49
5. Contrition (Entress/Katz) 19:05
6. Moanin' (Bobby Timmons) 25:28
7. Blues For The West Side (Hill) 29:44
8. The Stumble (Freddie King/Sonny Thompson) 35:48
9. Szeren (Earl) 40:15
10. Blues For Henry (Earl/Sumlin) 44:56
11. Not Now Kovitch (Carey/Earl/Hanson/Katz) 52:34
12. Rego Park Blues (Earl) 57:47

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

Thursday, April 17, 2014


Rev. Franklin Graham: Muslims Who “Want To Practice Sharia Law” Should “Go Back To Where You Came From”

Graham, who oversees the international Christian aid group Samaritan’s Purse, said, “We should be afraid of Sharia law. We should be absolutely afraid of it. No question about it, because there’s no tolerance in Sharia law. It persecutes those that do not believe in Islam.”   
“And I would say to Muslims in this country, if they want to practice Sharia law, go back to where you came from, to those nations that recognize sharia law,” said Graham. “But we have our own laws here.” 
He's absolutely right.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 2 Comments

Whether gracefully dealing with that moron Kanye West at her VMA acceptance speech or happily surprising a fan at her bridal shower Taylor Swift has shown herself to be a class act.

But then what would you expect from someone born and raised in Berks County, Pa.?

h/t The Blaze:


Sweeter Than Fiction


Love Story


Red

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

USA TODAY:Jews ordered to register in east Ukraine

You can always tell who you are by your enemies
Jews in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk where pro-Russian militants have taken over government buildings were told they have to “register” with the Ukrainians who are trying to make the city become part of Russia, according to Israeli media.
Jews emerging from a synagogue say they were handed leaflets that ordered the city’s Jews to provide a list of property they own and pay a registration fee “or else have their citizenship revoked, face deportation and see their assets confiscated,” reported Ynet News, Israel’s largest news website.
Donetsk is the site of an “anti-terrorist” operation by the Ukraine government, which has moved military columns into the region to force out militants who are demanding a referendum be held on joining Russia.
The leaflets bore the name of Denis Pushilin, who identified himself as chairman of “Donetsk’s temporary government,” and were distributed near the Donetsk synagogue and other areas, according to the report.
So sorry, but wasn’t IVAN just claiming that Nazis and the Mossad were behind the UKR gangsters and terrorists?

Godwin's Law suspended on a voice vote RT : Okay, NOW you can make a historical reference to the Nazis:

At 143PM this is most read/viral story on the web.


John Kerry is confirming (so maybe the story this is a provocation is true)
Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 3 Comments

Why does federal government own 84% of Nevada and what can Reid do to give it back?


From Biz Pac Review:
Many say Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid could easily arrange for his home state to get back most of the 84 percent of Nevada territory owned and controlled by the federal government. 
So does the Democrat represent the interests of Nevada, or does he put the interests of the U.S. government and the Democratic Party over his own state’s needs? Nevada would get what it deserves if Reid drafted a measure to treat Nevada the same way as other states. 
The Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives would eagerly vote to treat Nevada like a grown-up. Instead, Reid runs the U.S. Senate with an iron fist, to the detriment of his own voters. 
Renegade rancher Cliven Bundy raised a question during the hair-raising show-down between the Bureau of Land Management and the militia supporting the cattle rancher. Bundy says he was paying grazing fees to Clark County, but that the county stopped accepting his payments. 
Bundy insists that Nevada, not the U.S. government, owns the land where his cattle graze. According to the ranchers’ argument, the federal government “owned” or controlled every territory before it became a state, but once statehood was reached, the land became the property of the new state. 
So how is it that the U.S. government owns 84 percent of Nevada? It certainly looks like Nevada citizens are being treated unfairly. It is almost as if Washington, D.C., is treating Nevada like a child that can’t manage itself.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments

This Week On The Gathering Storm: Midnight Rider!

Listen to The Gathering Storm Radio Show, hosted by WC and Always On Watch.

The show broadcasts live for 30 minutes every Friday beginning at noon, Pacific Time.

The call-in number is 646-915-9870. Callers welcome!

Our scheduled guest this week is Midnight Rider.

Listen to the April 18, 2014 edition of The Gathering Storm Radio Show, live or later, by CLICKING HERE.

UPCOMING SHOWS:
Read more »

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 0 Comments

The Bundy Ranch Cattle Battle

I just found this comprehensive article at the Washington Post web site:
Everything you need to know about the long fight between Cliven Bundy and the federal government
By Jaime Fuller Updated: April 15 at 12:20 pm
One snippet:
April 5, 2014: After decades of trepidation, federal officials and cowboys start rounding up what they think are Cliven Bundy's hundreds of cows. The operation was going to cost $1 million, and reportedly last until May. BLM contends that Bundy owes $1 million in fees, and will also have to pay the round-up expenses. Bundy — who retorts that he only owes $300,000 in fees — says the city folk are only hurting themselves by taking his cows. He told a reporter from the Las Vegas Review Journal that there would be 500,000 fewer hamburgers per year after his cows were towed away; “But nobody is thinking about that. Why would they? They’re all thinking about the desert tortoise. Hey, the tortoise is a fine creature. I like him. I have no problem with him. But taking another man’s cattle? It just doesn’t seem right.”

He also thinks the co-habitating cows and tortoises could have a beautiful, symbiotic relationship if the government would let them. “The tortoises eat the cow manure, too. It’s filled with protein.”
The Cattle Battle has been ongoing since 1993.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 4 Comments

Waterfront

Come in, come out of the rain ...

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 2 Comments

Report: Prince Charles Sided With Iran After They Issued Death Fatwa On Salman Rushdie


Over the years, Prince Charles has shown himself to quite the Islamophile (which is very close to being a Pedophile).

So, this is not a surprise:
Prince Charles had turned his back on India-born Salman Rushdie after a fatwa was issued against him for his controversial novel ‘The Satanic Verses’ because he thought the book was offensive to Muslims, a British author has claimed. 
Martin Amis claims that the Prince of Wales’ views caused a row at a dinner party after Rushdie was issued with the death sentence by Islamic clerics in 1989. 
In an interview with ‘Vanity Fair’ magazine, he claims that the heir to the British throne told him that he would not offer support “if someone insults someone else’s deepest convictions”. 
Amis is quoted as saying: “I had an argument with Prince Charles at a small dinner party. And I said that a novel doesn’t set out to insult anyone: ‘It sets out to give pleasure to its readers,’ I told him. 
“A novel is an essentially playful undertaking, and this is an exceedingly playful novel. The Prince took it on board, but I’d suppose the next night at a different party he would have said the same thing.” 
‘Vanity Fair’, marking 25 years since the fatwa was issued by the Iranian government under Ayatollah Khomeini, has asked a group of novelists here about their memories of the time.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments


Jews in Donetsk, Ukraine Told to “Register or Have Your Property Confiscated”

Anybody up for going to Ukraine and committing some acts of Infidel Jihad?

UPDATE from Will at THE OTHER NEWS --- IT'S THE PRO-RUSSIAN SEPARATISTS WHO ARE THREATENING THE JEWS OF UKRAINE
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 4 Comments

Oversight Committee Responds to New Documents Revealing Lois Lerner and DOJ’s Plan to Persecute Conservative Groups



From Gateway Pundit:
The Oversight and Government Reform Committee released the following statement on thenew documents discussing potential prosecution of tax exempt groups by the Holder DOJ.
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Job Creation and Regulatory AffairsChairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) today released the following statements in response to the release of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) documents showing former IRS official Lois Lerner in contact with the Justice Department about potential prosecution of tax-exempt groups:
“The release of new documents underscores the political nature of IRS Tea Party targeting and the extent to which supposed apolitical officials took direction from elected Democrats,” said Chairman Issa. “These e-mails are part of an overwhelming body of evidence that political pressure from prominent Democrats led to the targeting of Americans for their political beliefs.”
“Now I see why the IRS is scared to give up the rest of Lois Lerner’s emails,”said Chairman Jordan. “Not only do these e-mails further prove the coordination among the IRS, the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the Justice Department and committee Democrats to target conservatives, they also show that had our committee not requested the Inspector General’s investigation when we did, Eric Holder’s politicized Justice Department would likely have been leveling trumped up criminal charges against Tea Party groups to intimidate them from exercising their Constitutional rights.”

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Humpday Blues

Blind Boy Fuller
Meat Shakin' Woman


What's That Smells Like Fish


Rag, Mama, Rag


Get Your Yas Yas Out


Step It Up And Go


Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 3 Comments

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

JW Obtains IRS Documents Showing Lerner in Contact With DOJ about Potential Prosecution of Tax-Exempt Groups

From Will at THE OTHER NEWS:


JW Obtains IRS Documents Showing Lerner in Contact With DOJ about Potential Prosecution of Tax-Exempt Groups


JW Obtains IRS Documents Showing Lerner in Contact With DOJ about Potential Prosecution of Tax-Exempt Groups.HT: JudicialWatch.

May 9, 2013, email reveals IRS plans to meet with Department of Justice over whether to prosecute groups that “lied” about plans for political activity 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released a new batch of internal IRS documents revealing that former IRS official Lois Lerner communicated with the Department of Justice (DOJ) about whether it was possible to criminally prosecute certain tax-exempt entities. The documents were obtained as a result of an October 2013 Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) after the agency refused to respond to four FOIA requests dating back to May 2013.
The newly released IRS documents contain an email exchange between Lerner and Nikole C. Flax, then-Chief of Staff to then-Acting IRS Commissioner Steven T. Miller discussing plans to work with the DOJ  to prosecute nonprofit groups that “lied” (Lerner’s quotation marks) about political activities. The exchange includes the following:
I got a call today from Richard Pilger Director Elections Crimes Branch at DOJ … He wanted to know who at IRS the DOJ folk s [sic] could talk to about Sen. Whitehouse idea at the hearing that DOJ could piece together false statement cases about applicants who “lied” on their 1024s –saying they weren’t planning on doing political activity, and then turning around and making large visible political expenditures. DOJ is feeling like it needs to respond, but want to talk to the right folks at IRS to see whether there are impediments from our side and what, if any damage this might do to IRS programs.
I told him that sounded like we might need several folks from IRS…
I think we should do it – also need to include CI [Criminal Investigation Division], which we can help coordinate. Also, we need to reach out to FEC. Does it make sense to consider including them in this or keep it separate?

Lerner then “handed off” scheduling the issue to Senior Technical Adviser, Attorney Nancy Marks, who was then supposed to set up the meeting with the DOJ.  Lerner also decided that it would be DOJ’s decision as to whether representatives from the Federal Election Commission would attend.

“These new emails show that the day before she broke the news of the IRS scandal, Lois Lerner was talking to a top Obama Justice Department official about whether the DOJ could prosecute the very same organizations that the IRS had already improperly targeted,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

The IRS emails show Eric Holder’s Department of Justice is now implicated and conflicted in the IRS scandal.  No wonder we had to sue in federal court to get these documents.”Read the full storyhere.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Meanwhile, In NYC

From WTOP, dated April 16, 2014:
New York police disband unit that spied on Muslims

...An ongoing review of the division by new Police Commissioner William Bratton found that the same information collected by the unit could be better collected through direct contact with community groups, officials said....
Taqiyya alert? Not likely.

Note the following paragraph:
In Washington, 34 members of Congress had demanded a federal investigation into the NYPD's actions. Attorney General Eric Holder said he was disturbed by reports about the operations, and the Department of Justice said it was reviewing complaints received from Muslims and their supporters.
Yep, the Obama administration had a hand in this.

This wasn't enough to wake America the hell up:

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 1 Comments

It gives me a warm fuzzy to know that the NSA IRS FBI CIA whatever alphabet soup group is so concerned with my well being that they choose to listen to my calls read my emails AND FUCKING MISSED THIS TARGET RICH OPPORTUNITY COMPLETELY

CNN:

Unsettling video shows large al Qaeda meeting in Yemen

Washington (CNN) -- A new video shows what looks like the largest and most dangerous gathering of al Qaeda in years. And the CIA and the Pentagon either didn't know about it or couldn't get a drone there in time to strike.
U.S. officials won't comment on that, but every frame of the video is now being analyzed by the United States.
In the middle of the clip, the man known as al Qaeda's crown prince, Nasir al-Wuhayshi, appears brazenly out in the open, greeting followers in Yemen. Al-Wuhayshi, the No. 2 leader of al Qaeda globally and the head of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, has said he wants to attack the United States. But in the video, he looks unconcerned that he could be hit by an American drone.
The video started appearing on jihadist websites recently, drawing the attention of U.S. officials and global terrorism experts. U.S. officials say they believe it's authentic.
"This is quite an extraordinary video," Paul Cruickshank, CNN terrorism analyst, said.
The video shows al-Wuhayshi addressing more than 100 fighters somewhere within Yemen, Cruickshank said, a restive nation on the southwestern portion of the Arabian Peninsula. The al Qaeda leader, he said, is "taking a big risk in doing this."
But he doesn't mince words about his mission.
In a speech to the group, al-Wuhayshi makes it clear that he's going after the United States, saying "We must eliminate the cross. ... The bearer of the cross is America!"
U.S. officials believe the highly produced video is recent. With some fighters faces blurred, there is worry it signals a new round of plotting.
"The U.S. intelligence community should be surprised that such a large group of al Qaeda assembled together, including the leadership, and somehow they didn't notice," said Peter Bergen, CNN national security analyst.
There is good reason to worry.
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, also known as AQAP, is considered the most dangerous al Qaeda affiliate. The CIA and the Pentagon have repeatedly killed AQAP leaders with drone strikes. But the group is now emboldened.
"The main problem about this group is that it has a bomb maker who can put bombs on to planes that can't be detected," Bergen said.
That bomb maker, Ibrahim al-Asiri, is believed to be responsible for several attack attempts against the United States, including the failed 2009 Christmas Day underwear bomber attack in Detroit.
Al-Asiri doesn't appear in the video. He remains in hiding, and intelligence experts say he and other AQAP leaders have gone back to using couriers to communicate to avoid detection. That makes it even harder to figure out what al-Wuhayshi may order next.
But the terror group leader's goal is clear, Cruickshank said.
"His message to the United States," Cruickshank said, "was very much the same as (former al Qaeda leader Osama) bin Laden's: 'We're coming after you.' "
U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer" that leaks tied to Yemen have affected U.S. intelligence collection, but he said he couldn't say whether U.S. intelligence knew about the meeting.
Asked by Blitzer whether the United States would have sent a drone if officials had known such a large meeting of terrorists was taking place out in the open, the Michigan Republican said it's unclear.
"It really depends," he said. "There are a lot of procedures that one would go through ... to do an airstrike on any large package of individuals."
Seeing such a group of al Qaeda operatives assembled isn't a surprise, he said.
"I think they have these meetings more often than people realize," Rogers said. "It's difficult to get assets in position. You have to know where they are and where they meet at the right time in the right place with the right equipment. That's a lot to do."
The video, Rogers says, is another sign that al Qaeda remains a dangerous threat.
"We think that they're feeling empowered. The less pressure you put on them, the more they take that as a victory, the more that they believe that they can get away with plotting, planning, organizing as you saw there (in the video), finance, training," he said.
"All of the things that they would need to do to strike a Western target, they're going through that process."
Retired Gen. Mark Kimmitt said smaller al Qaeda affiliates are coalescing into a more organized base.
"Sooner or later, if they continue to get better, stronger and more organized," he said, "they will be a direct threat to the United States."
It's unlikely the United States wasn't aware of the meeting shown in the video, Kimmitt told "CNN Tonight."
"The question isn't why didn't we know," he said. "The question is: What are we going to do about it?"

Labels:

Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 3 Comments


Older Posts