ENCUESTAS
ELECCIONES OCTUBRE MARTES 30, 2012
ENVIADAS POR
JESÚS ANGUL0
|
|
Opinion,
News, Analysis, Videos and Polls
|
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html
General Election: Romney vs. Obama
Polling Data
|
Poll
|
Date
|
Sample
|
MoE
|
Romney (R)
|
Obama (D)
|
Spread
|
|
RCP Average
|
10/22 - 10/28
|
--
|
--
|
48.0
|
47.1
|
Romney +0.9
|
|
10/23 - 10/25
|
1000 LV
|
3.1
|
48
|
47
|
Romney +1
|
|
|
10/24 - 10/28
|
1495 LV
|
2.9
|
47
|
47
|
Tie
|
|
|
10/26 - 10/28
|
1500 LV
|
3.0
|
49
|
47
|
Romney +2
|
|
|
10/25 - 10/28
|
1259 LV
|
3.5
|
49
|
49
|
Tie
|
|
|
10/22 - 10/28
|
2700 LV
|
2.0
|
51
|
46
|
Romney +5
|
|
|
10/22 - 10/27
|
930 LV
|
3.5
|
44
|
45
|
Obama +1
|
|
|
10/22 - 10/25
|
1000 LV
|
3.1
|
48
|
49
|
Obama +1
|
Battle for White House
|
|
|
Aprovecho este momento para pedirle a todos los
ciudadanos de Miami Dade que voten. Mis recomendaciones son:
Votar por Romney para presidente.
Votar en contra de los bonos del Departamento de
Educación que nos quieren esquilmar por 1,500 Millones. Basta ya de descaros.
Votar en contra de Joe Garcia y a favor de David
Rivera.
Votar por Connie
Mack y en contra de Bill Nelson
Votar en contra de Gwen Margolis.
Votar en contra de todas las enmiendas de los
Comisionados del Condado Miami Dade y del gobierno del Estado de la Florida.
Pedir que sean sacados de sus posiciones los jueces de la Corte Suprema de la Florida. Estos jueces son super liberales y estan haciendo daño son: R. Fred Lewis - Barbara Pariente - Peggy Quince –CLICKING no FOR THEM TO
CONTINUE AS JUDGES!
“Yo no creo en El Herald” Todo lo que propone es una basura.
Que DIOS bendiga a América y buena suerte a
todos. Lázaro R
González Miño
ACCIÓN QUE DESMIENTE
LAS PATRAÑAS DE LOS HERALDS Y "A MANO LIMPIA"
(10-29-12-5:00PM)
Dejando muy mal
parados a los dos émulos del Granma en Miami (The Miami Herald y El Nuevo
Herald) y al programa "A Mano Limpia", donde se difundiera la patraña
de que los republicanos habían abandonado al congresista David Rivera; hace
unos días 80 mil electores del Distrito 26 de la Florida, recibieron una
llamada de el Senador Marco Rubio, solicitándoles el voto para que David
Rivera retenga su escaño en el Congreso Federal.
Una vez más estos
órganos de difusión son cogidos in fraganti en sus acostumbradas mentiras, con
hechos innegables que prueban como mienten.
Y esta no será la
única mentira que se les ha de descubrir. Pronto, los hechos irán demostrando
como han mentido descaradamente, usando encuestadoras fraudulentas e
informaciones sin fundamento, con el fin de confundir al electorado y ayudar al
partido demócrata y a sus candidatos.
Enviado por Amb.
Armando Valladares.
No creemos en: El Herald, Univisión, Telemundo, Oscar
Haza, Alexis Valdés, Roberto Rodríguez Tejera, Todos cambiándolos por tela metálica
se pierden los huequitos. LRGM
From: romneyonponce@gmail.com
Sent: 10/29/2012 8:22:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Need volunteers
Sent: 10/29/2012 8:22:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Need volunteers
Dear Volunteers:
I need as many of you to please come to our
office this week we have plenty to do. We need our phone banks to be
constantly occupied and have walks, standing at polls
giving out materials, people at polls to assist our elderly, driving our
elderly to polls, delivering supplies to our volunteers at polls, office work,
receptionist, etc.
Thanks,
Romney Outreach Center of Coral Gables.
romneyonponce@gmail.com
Obama Arming Islamic Jihadistsè http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-arming-islamic-jihadists/
www.causes.com
By signing
your name to this petition we are sending a loud and clear message that 'We the
People' have had enough of this president and his administration's LIES and
cover-ups about Benghazi. We ...
Rasmussen: Romney Takes Lead in Ohio, 50-48 è http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/romney-leads-obama-ohio/2012/10/29/id/461902?s=al&promo_code=10872-1
Arrestado
El General Carter Ham Jefe Del Cuerpo
De Los Comandos De Acción
Rápida En África
Por Decir
Que Iba A Acudir En Ayuda Del Embajador
|
Cada Día
Aparecen Mas Pruebas Contra Las Acciones De Obama, Clinton y Panneta, Que
lindan Con TRAICION... y Abandono De Sus RESPONSABILIDADES...
|
La
historia oficial en torno a los acontecimientos del 11 de septiembre de 2012 en
Bengzahi, Libia que dejó cuatro estadounidenses muertos, oficialmente ha venido
abajo.
Después de numerosos fracasos de la administración Obama, que en un principio trató de pintar el incidente como una protesta musulmana sobre un vídeo anti-islámicos, todo el gobierno de los EE.UU., incluyendo dentro de la Casa Blanca, el Departamento de Estado, las agencias nacionales de inteligencia y las FUERZAS ARMADAS han puesto a disposición DE TODA PRENSA detalles impresionantes que sugieren no sólo comandantes operacionales tienen las comunicaciones visuales y de audio en vivo de arriba drones y recursos de inteligencia sobre el terreno, sino que algunos comandantes en el ejército estaban dispuestos a ir-EN AYUDA DE LOS ATACADOS...después de HABER RECIBIDO ORDENES DE LA CASA BLANCA DE " NO HACER NADA ".
Comandos de USA en África, oficial en jefe, EE.UU. general Carter Ham, después de recibir la orden de NO HACER NADA esencialmente el control de la situación a presuntos terroristas de Al Qaeda y dejar que los estadounidenses en la tierra y muere, tomó la decisión unilateral de ignorar las órdenes del Secretario de Defensa y activados equipos de operaciones especiales en su disposición para el despliegue inmediato a la zona.
Según los informes, una vez que el general fue desobedeció fue detenido en cuestión de minutos con su segundo al mando y relevado de su cargo.
"(El) principio básico es que usted no desplegar fuerzas en el camino del peligro, sin saber lo que está pasando, sin tener alguna información en tiempo real acerca de lo que está ocurriendo", dijo Panetta a los periodistas del Pentágono. "Y como resultado de no tener ese tipo de información, el comandante que estaba en esa zona, el general Ham, el general Dempsey y yo tenía muy claro que no podíamos poner en riesgo las fuerzas en esa situación".
La información que escuché hoy fue que el General Ham como jefe de COMANDO EN AFRICA recibido los mismos mensajes de correo electrónico recibidos en la Casa Blanca pidiendo ayuda / apoyo ya que el ataque estaba teniendo lugar. General Ham inmediatamente tenía una unidad de respuesta rápida listo y comunicado al Pentágono que tenía una unidad lista.
General Ham luego recibió la orden de NO HACER NADA. Su respuesta fue “los voy a ayudar de cualquier manera. Dentro de los 30 segundos y un minuto después de hacer el cambio a responder, su segundo al mando PISTOLA EN MANO CON DOS SUBALTERNOS... arrestaron al General Ham y le comunicaron que ESTABA ARRESTADO y sustituido de su mando.
La pregunta ahora es si el pueblo estadounidense va a seguir permitiendo a la CASA BLANCA usar la cadena de mando responsable de dejar a nuestra gente atrás, inventar una historia políticamente conveniente, y seguir vendiendo la mentira ya desaparecida (s), incluso después de todas sus variaciones de la historia eran resultó ser falsa y engañosa.
Un general que tomó la decisión de ayudar a los bienes diplomáticos y de inteligencia sobre el terreno ha sido detenido y probablemente será retirado o peor, mientras que los que ordenaron el retiro de la embajada detalles de seguridad y ordenó a las fuerzas estadounidenses a NO HACER NADA se dejan a seguir sobre sus negocios y vidas más probables de riesgo estadounidenses en el futuro.
En algunos círculos de las acciones de los que están en lo más alto de la estructura de mando durante los ataques Bengzahi sería considerado traidor.
Después de numerosos fracasos de la administración Obama, que en un principio trató de pintar el incidente como una protesta musulmana sobre un vídeo anti-islámicos, todo el gobierno de los EE.UU., incluyendo dentro de la Casa Blanca, el Departamento de Estado, las agencias nacionales de inteligencia y las FUERZAS ARMADAS han puesto a disposición DE TODA PRENSA detalles impresionantes que sugieren no sólo comandantes operacionales tienen las comunicaciones visuales y de audio en vivo de arriba drones y recursos de inteligencia sobre el terreno, sino que algunos comandantes en el ejército estaban dispuestos a ir-EN AYUDA DE LOS ATACADOS...después de HABER RECIBIDO ORDENES DE LA CASA BLANCA DE " NO HACER NADA ".
Comandos de USA en África, oficial en jefe, EE.UU. general Carter Ham, después de recibir la orden de NO HACER NADA esencialmente el control de la situación a presuntos terroristas de Al Qaeda y dejar que los estadounidenses en la tierra y muere, tomó la decisión unilateral de ignorar las órdenes del Secretario de Defensa y activados equipos de operaciones especiales en su disposición para el despliegue inmediato a la zona.
Según los informes, una vez que el general fue desobedeció fue detenido en cuestión de minutos con su segundo al mando y relevado de su cargo.
"(El) principio básico es que usted no desplegar fuerzas en el camino del peligro, sin saber lo que está pasando, sin tener alguna información en tiempo real acerca de lo que está ocurriendo", dijo Panetta a los periodistas del Pentágono. "Y como resultado de no tener ese tipo de información, el comandante que estaba en esa zona, el general Ham, el general Dempsey y yo tenía muy claro que no podíamos poner en riesgo las fuerzas en esa situación".
La información que escuché hoy fue que el General Ham como jefe de COMANDO EN AFRICA recibido los mismos mensajes de correo electrónico recibidos en la Casa Blanca pidiendo ayuda / apoyo ya que el ataque estaba teniendo lugar. General Ham inmediatamente tenía una unidad de respuesta rápida listo y comunicado al Pentágono que tenía una unidad lista.
General Ham luego recibió la orden de NO HACER NADA. Su respuesta fue “los voy a ayudar de cualquier manera. Dentro de los 30 segundos y un minuto después de hacer el cambio a responder, su segundo al mando PISTOLA EN MANO CON DOS SUBALTERNOS... arrestaron al General Ham y le comunicaron que ESTABA ARRESTADO y sustituido de su mando.
La pregunta ahora es si el pueblo estadounidense va a seguir permitiendo a la CASA BLANCA usar la cadena de mando responsable de dejar a nuestra gente atrás, inventar una historia políticamente conveniente, y seguir vendiendo la mentira ya desaparecida (s), incluso después de todas sus variaciones de la historia eran resultó ser falsa y engañosa.
Un general que tomó la decisión de ayudar a los bienes diplomáticos y de inteligencia sobre el terreno ha sido detenido y probablemente será retirado o peor, mientras que los que ordenaron el retiro de la embajada detalles de seguridad y ordenó a las fuerzas estadounidenses a NO HACER NADA se dejan a seguir sobre sus negocios y vidas más probables de riesgo estadounidenses en el futuro.
En algunos círculos de las acciones de los que están en lo más alto de la estructura de mando durante los ataques Bengzahi sería considerado traidor.
La
noticia en Ingles:
Desmiente El Jefe
Del Estado Mayor Que El
Traslado
Del General Ham Antes De Cumplir
Su
Tiempo Este Relacionando Con Libia...
El Caso Es Que El General Tomo El Mandó De Esas Tropas En
Marzo De 2011 Y Se Suponía Que Continuara Hasta Marzo 2014
Su Remplazo Inmediatamente Por Su Subalterno
Directo No Es
PROTOCOLAR Ni La Forma En Que Se Hacen Los Cambios De Mando
He aquí
en Ingles las declaraciones de Jefe del Estado mayor...
Joint
Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey issued a written statement Monday
calling speculation about the reasons for Ham's move "absolutely
false."
Defense
Secretary Leon Panetta announced Oct. 18 that Gen. David Rodriguez is being
nominated to succeed Ham. The Africa Command is responsible for U.S. military
operations and relations in much of Africa.
Last week,
Panetta said he, Dempsey and Ham all felt very strongly that it would have been
a mistake to insert U.S. forces into Benghazi during the attack, which killed
four Americans.
Dempsey
said Monday that Ham's departure is part of "routine succession
planning."
Big Oil Underwrites Anti-Israel Conference è http://www.aim.org/aim-column/big-oil-underwrites-anti-israel-conference/?utm_source=AIM+-+Daily+Email&utm_campaign=867c4a936d-email102912&utm_medium=email
Chas Freeman, President Obama’s controversial pick for National Intelligence Council chairman, was the keynote speaker at the 21st Arab-US Policymakers Conference, or AUSPC, organized by the National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations, and held on October 25-26 in Washington, D.C. Freeman withdrew his nomination when critics noted his connections to a Chinese state-run oil company and his backing from the government of Saudi Arabia. He had been criticized for making anti-Israel statements and blamed the “Israel lobby” for his failed nomination.In his address, “Change Without Progress in the Middle East,” Freeman said that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “has blatantly intervened in the U.S. elections in support of the Republican candidate, who has explicitly committed himself, if elected, to allow Israel to dictate U.S. policy on Iran, Palestine, and other issues in the Middle East.” He added, “Mr. Netanyahu wants America to set red lines for Iran. Everyone else in the region wishes the United States would set red lines for Israel.”
Even more controversial than Freeman, however, was Jeffrey Steinberg, who spoke to this year’s gathering during a panel discussion on “The Palestinian Future.” Steinberg, a close associate of convicted felon and political extremist Lyndon LaRouche, advocated an “American Spring” to change U.S. policy toward the Arab world, including by recognizing Palestine as an independent Arab state with full U.N. membership.
Despite the anti-Israel nature of the event, this year’s AUSPC was sponsored by various American Big Oil companies, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and U.S. corporations such as Boeing. The government of Saudi Arabia and other Arab states were also major sponsors.
Steinberg was identified in the official program as a writer for Executive Intelligence Review; a critic of the “neoconservative movement;” and a contributor to “Middle East journals” such as Al Watan and Al Sharq in Saudi Arabia. Steinberg was also identified in the program as co-author of Dope Inc., which blames international drug trafficking on the British government, and The Ugly Truth About the ADL, described as an “expose of the links between the Zionist lobby and organized crime.”
The ADL stands for the Anti-Defamation League, which labels LaRouche, who began his career as a Marxist, a “notorious American anti-Semite.” Executive Intelligence Review is his publication.
LaRouche is considered the intellectual author of the 9/11 Truth movement because he questioned whether Arabs or Muslims had staged the attack. He said about 9/11, “I don’t think this is an Islamic national operation. I would say the capability, and the motivation, for the intention, does not come from the Arab world. And the isolated Arab groups, which might intend to do something like that, don’t have that capability.” These comments were made in a radio interview that is still available on a LaRouche website.
LaRouche and his current and “former” associates frequently make the assertion that Islamic terrorism does not exist and instead is sponsored by Israel, the U.S. or Britain in “false flag” operations designed to make the Arabs and Muslims look bad.
This panel discussion with Steinberg was covered by the C-SPAN television network, but the moderator of the panel did not mention the more controversial parts of Steinberg’s biography. The moderator was Alison Weir, President of the Council for the National Interest and Executive Director of the group, If Americans Knew. Other speakers were Dr. Sara Roy, Senior Research Scholar at Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Harvard University; Dr. Tamara Sonn, the Wm. R. Kenan Distinguished Professor of Humanities at the College of William and Mary; and Mark Perry, author of Conceived in Liberty, The Last Days of the CIA, and Talking to Terrorists: Why America Must Engage its Enemies.
Steinberg has been a guest on foreign propaganda channels such as Iranian Press TV, where he appeared “on the International Quds Day in support of the Palestinian resistance against the Zionist regime’s occupation of Palestine,” according to the official description of the program. International Quds Day is designed by states such as Iran to condemn the state of Israel and call for its destruction.
Corporate and Institutional Sponsors of the conference on the so-called diamond, platinum, and gold levels included the HRH (His Royal Highness) Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Foundation, Aramco Services Company, The Boeing Company, Chevron, Connoisseur Travel, ConocoPhillips, Embassy of the Kingdom of Bahrain, Embassy of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Embassy of the State of Kuwait, Embassy of the Sultanate of Oman, Embassy of the State of Qatar, Royal Embassy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Embassy of the United Arab Emirates, ExxonMobil, Federation of the GCC Chambers of Commerce, Marathon Oil Company, Qatar Airways, Oxford Business Group, Saudi Basic Industries Corporation (SABIC), United States Chamber of Commerce, U.S. – U.A.E. Business Council, The Washington Diplomat, and The Xenel Group.
Literature at the conference announced a March 9-10, 2013 “National Summit to Reassess the US-Israel ‘Special Relationship.’” One of the “confirmed speakers” is Paul R. Pillar, a 28-year veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency who is now a visiting professor at Georgetown University for security studies. He wrote an article, “We Can Live With a Nuclear Iran.”
EL DESCARO DEL NEW YORK TIME. Ricardo Samitier. Otro Descaro Del New York Time Dice que las elecciones de Ucrania No fuero Honestas Por El “DOMINIO” de los Medios De Comunicación...
Exactamente lo
mismo que tiene Obama Aquí que goza del apoyo de la mayoría de los medios de comunicación... TV y PERIODICOS... Todavía No han
publicado El ARRESTO DEL GENERAL Jefe de los Comandos de RESPUESTA RAPIDA DE
AFRICA... Miren
la Noticia Primera página de hoy Octubre 30 2012: Hoy acusan de que Ganó en Ucrania el Partido de las
Regiones a
través EL DOMINIO DE LOS MEDIOS DE COMUNICACIÓN y el del abuso de los recursos
del gobierno... "Teniendo en cuenta el
abuso de poder, y el excesivo protagonismo de dinero en esta elección, el
progreso democrático ha permitido invertir en Ucrania", dijo Walburga
Habsburg Douglas, un legislador sueco que encabezó una misión de observadores
de la Organización para la Seguridad y la Cooperación en Parlamentaria de
Europa Asamblea.
‘Sharia Killed Ambassador Chris Stevens’ è http://www.aim.org/guest-column/sharia-killed-ambassador-chris-stevens/?utm_source=AIM+-+Daily+Email&utm_campaign=867c4a936d-email102912&utm_medium=email
The headline on this post could just be a statement of fact, derived from an obvious truth, albeit one that our willfully blind government refuses to assimilate despite years of anti-American atrocities.Under the supremacist interpretation of sharia – Islam’s totalitarian societal system – that is regnant in the Middle East, non-Muslim Westerners who seek to implant Western ideas and institutions in Islamic countries are deemed enemies who must be driven out or killed. As U.S. Ambassador to Libya, as an American attempting to transition the former Qaddafi dictatorship into something approximating Western democracy, Christopher Stephens was deemed an enemy worthy of killing; therefore, sharia ideologues killed him, along with three other similarly “culpable” Americans.
That is what happened. It is, moreover, what President Obama and his administration knew happened. They no doubt knew it while it was happening. They undeniably knew it within hours of its happening. And in spite of knowing it, they weaved a web of lies, over a course of weeks, to obscure what happened. They did so in gross violation of the president’s oath of office, and in a willfully anti-Constitutional conspiracy with Islamists against American free expression rights – a conspiracy resulting in the unforgivable prosecution of an American citizen for exercising his First Amendment right to make a video negatively depicting Islam. A video top administration officials, including the president himself, fraudulently portrayed as the catalyst of murderous Islamist savagery, intentionally obscuring the role of sharia.
That could be the explanation for the headline of this post. But it is not.
The headline, instead, is a quote mined from a bull’s-eye column by the American Spectator‘s stellar Jeffrey Lord. “Sharia,” he concludes, “killed Ambassador Chris Stevens.” And unlike anything you’ve read, Jeff compellingly connects some damning dots.
The local al-Qaeda franchise in Libya is called Ansar al-Sharia - literally, the “helpers of sharia.” The organization’s goal, the goal shared by all Islamists, not just those who seek it by violent jihad, is to “impose sharia.” So declares Ansar al-Sharia’s emir, Mohammed Ali al-Zawahi. Entirely consistent with that goal, Lord reports Zawahi’s proclamation that Ansar “is all about doing ‘battle with the liberals, the secularists and the remnants of Gaddafi.’ The terms ‘liberals’ and ‘secularists’ of course mean Americans and Westerners.”
For those who seek to impose sharia, the liberty culture of the West is anathema because Islam prohibits in Islamic lands the licensing of anything sharia forbids and the prohibition of anything sharia permits. This supremacist construction of sharia, deeply rooted in Muslim scripture, exhorts Muslims to drive out or kill Westerners even if those Westerners believe their operations in Islamic countries are for the humanitarian benefit of indigenous Muslims.
That is why, for example, Afghan military and police recruits turn their guns on their American and allied trainers, killing scores of them in just the last two years.
It is why Islamists like Saleha Abedin, the mother of Secretary of State Clinton’s top adviser Huma Abedin, work towards the repeal of Mubarak-era laws that protected women and girls from horrific practices like child marriage and female genital mutilation – practices that are endorsed by sharia and, Islamists insist, may not be banned regardless of how the West may judge them.
Lord marshals the facts: we now know President Obama and his administration knew, in real time, while the Benghazi attack was happening on the eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 atrocities, that Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility for what was obviously a coordinated pre-planned attack. Indeed, I would add, we now finally know that the president told 60 Minutes, within hours of the attack, that the Benghazi operation was not like the protests in Egypt over the video, that it involved aggressors “who were looking to target Americans from the start.” CBS disgracefully excised this statement from the televised edition of the interview, aiding and abetting day after day for five weeks the “blame the video” lie on which the administration had settled.
Lord then refocuses us on another fact – one that the Obamedia, in characteristic suppression of any scent of their guy’s background, has steadfastly avoided covering, but one that was unearthed by the invaluable Walid Shoebat: members of President Obama’s Muslim family in Kenya are exploiting their newfound prominence and connections, particularly with the Saudis, to promote and fund sharia education.
In conjunction with the Saudis, the Obama family established the “Mama Sarah Obama Children Foundation.” The namesake is the president’s grandmother. The foundation’s ostensible purposes are education and the fights against AIDS and poverty. That’s why, Lord observes, it gets “gobs of favorable publicity from groups as varied as the International Reporting Project (in which New York Times editor Jill Abramson plays a key role), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation, Greenpeace, and even the Catholic Relief Services.” Nevertheless, Obama’s cousin Musa Ismail Obama gave an inconvenient interview to al-Jazeera, bragging – as Walid Shoebat summarizes – that: “The bulk of the Sarah Fund … sends little to widows and orphans while the rest goes towards giving free scholarships to studying sharia at the most influential Wahhabist centers in Saudi Arabia.” (Emphasis in original.)
As Lord observes:
Obama has never held a press conference to disavow Granny Sarah – as he did with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Nor has he publicly asked her to stop using the president of the United States as fundraising bait to raise money for what is, in effect, the exact same objective as Ansar al-Sharia as expressed by Mohammad Ali al-Zahawi. That objective? Creating more Sharia fanatics whose sole belief is about imposing Sharia – everywhere. For all we know some Granny Obama-funded Sharia-acolyte could one day well turn up in yet another attack on Americans just like the attack in Benghazi.
You think that’s harsh? Maybe you haven’t heard about Masjid Dar al-Hijra in Virginia – a mosque lionized by the State Department as an exemplar of Islam in America, yet a mosque that has been a hub of al-Qaeda terrorists and the Muslim Brotherhood’s Hamas support network. Maybe you haven’t heard about the Islamic Saudi Academy in Virginia, an incubator of Islamic supremacism whose 1999 valedictorian, Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, seamlessly moved on to al-Qaeda and was ultimately convicted of plotting to murder President George W. Bush. Maybe you haven’t heard about the Muslim Students Association, foundation of the Muslim Brotherhood’s American infrastructure – whose now hundreds of chapters across the U.S. and Canada form a sharia promotion society, a cavalcade of whose top stars have moved on to the promotion and commission of violent jihad. Of course, not everyone reared in classical sharia becomes a sympathizer, much less a practitioner, of violent jihad; but many have, and do. Common sense leaves us no alternative but to conclude that the phenomenon is natural, predictable, and inevitable.
I’ve argued for weeks that the administration’s cover-up of the circumstances surrounding the killing of four American officials – of the jihadist nature of the operation, of the fact that the murders could have been prevented if the administration had not recklessly embraced the illusion of “Islamic democracy” in Libya – is explained by ideologically driven politics. The president’s disastrous Libya policy – the unprovoked, unauthorized war that vested Islamists with political power and Qaddafi’s sophisticated weaponry – is exposed by al-Qaeda’s murder of our officials, as is the campaign myth that because “Obama killed Osama,” al-Qaeda, too, has been mortally wounded. Ambassador John Bolton persuasively makes the case for the “ideology explanation” in interviews with Greta Van Susteren (“There’s this screen over consciousness that prevents them from seeing reality when it’s put right in front of them”) and Lou Dobbs (at about the 5:00 mark: “Reality doesn’t get through to the president often enough and … tragically, this was a case of it”).
Jeff Lord takes it a step further:
[I]n the world of leftist ideology that Barack Obama is using to run the White House, the State Department, and all the rest of the U.S. government, to consider Ansar Al-Sharia a threat of any kind would be an insult. Divisive. Deliberately egging on what the Obama administration likes to call a “man caused disaster” – formerly known as Islamic terrorism. What these leaked State Department emails are doing is raising the obvious point about Obama and Benghazi. If Benghazi is not about incompetence or lying – it’s worse. It’s about a U.S. government that is at its highest levels in some fashion simpatico with a totalitarian ideology. That ideology is Sharia.
Finally, Jeff diagnoses the fatal effects of “spring fever” – of boosting sharia totalitarianism as if it were a striving for Western liberty:
This is, after all, a president who has repeatedly gone out of his way to send a signal to Islamic radicals that he would, as he said in his Cairo University address, “consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.” [Emphasis in original.]
This is a president who blithely said just the other week at the United Nations that Arab youths were “rejecting the lie that … some religions … do not desire democracy.” The lie, of course, is that Sharia – the very Sharia promoted by his own family with his silent acquiescence as well as by Ansar Al-Sharia in Libya (not to mention the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt) does in fact strenuously reject democracy other than as a means of getting power. Once that power is obtained, free elections vanish and, to borrow from Churchill, the Iron Veil descends.
We may not be able to lift the veil descending on the Middle East. It is long past time, though, to lift it from our own eyes.
Supreme Court To Decide If President Can Watch Americans’ Every Move è http://www.exposeobama.com/2012/10/29/supreme-court-to-decide-if-president-can-watch-americans-every-move/
On October 29,the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Clapper v. Amnesty International. The Court will then decide whether Americans have standing to challenge a federal statute that permits the government to intercept their communications without suspicion of any crime,without a warrant,and with virtually no meaningful judicial oversight of any sort. Our law firm had the privilege of filing an amicus curiae brief in the Clapper case on behalf of Gun Owners Foundation,Gun Owners of America,Inc.,U.S. Justice Foundation,Downsize DC Foundation,DownsizeDC.org,and the Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund.The case involves the 2008 FISA Amendments Act (“FAA”),which broadened the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”). For years,FISA has permitted the gathering of “foreign intelligence” outside the traditional legal safeguards associated with criminal law enforcement. Even before the 2008 amendments,FISA has allowed wiretaps so long as there was probable cause to believe that the target of the surveillance was a foreign power,or agent thereof. And,so long as the “target” is legitimate,all “incidental” information that is picked up has been fair game,even if that includes the surveillance of “U.S. persons” (a term which includes U.S. citizens) not suspected of any wrongdoing.
Although FISA is purportedly designed to gather foreign intelligence,seized communications have been used in numerous criminal investigations and trials,even though FISA is not subject (i) to the same “particularity requirements” as traditional warrants (the who,what,where,and when),or (ii) to any customary oversight by an independent court. The only judicial checkpoint is the special Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISC”),which has proven highly compliant with the wishes of the intelligence community.
Seeking still more unfettered authority,the executive branch urged Congress to pass FAA,which eliminates even the need for individual warrant applications. The FAA removes judicial oversight,as FISC is stripped of any substantive role in determining probable cause. Its only role is to make sure “that the government has made the proper certifications” — i.e.,that the right boxes have been checked. Further,under FAA,there is no “ongoing judicial review” of approved surveillance. Instead,federal executive officials police themselves.
As the Clapper plaintiffs in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit put it,the government need only issue an “acquisition order” to capture “[a]ll telephone and e-mail communications to and from countries of foreign policy interest….” The government never challenged that characterization of its power. Who knows — that may be exactly what they have done,and if for one country,why not for every country.
The secret nature of FAA-authorized surveillance enabled the government’s remarkable claim that,because the plaintiffs could not demonstrate with certainty that they had been the subject of surveillance,they had no standing to bring suit to defend their Constitutional rights. If the government wins on this point,the American people will be denied all access to any judicial remedy for clandestine violations of their Constitutional rights.
FAA is not the first such assertion of the power of unlimited,unsupervised,warrantless surveillance of Americans by the federal government. In January of this year,the Supreme Court decided U.S. v. Antoine Jones,rejecting the claim by federal agents that they could install and use a GPS tracking device on a person’s automobile without a warrant,probable cause,or even mere suspicion. The court ruled that,by surreptitiously placing a GPS tracking device on Jones’ Jeep without a warrant,the government violated the Fourth Amendment by trespassing on Jones’ property. This ruling,however,has not deterred the government from tracking our movements without a warrant by means of the GPS chip that the federal government has required to be placed on our cell phones. The government claims that there is no trespass,and no reasonable expectation of privacy,so the Fourth Amendment does not even apply.
Government-installed traffic cameras,security cameras,red light cameras,and plate-scan cameras already monitor us on the streets and in other public places. Additionally,federal,state and local governments are already publically discussing their plans to use increasing numbers of unmanned aerial drones to follow us even on private property. Government agents already interfere with our ability to travel,without,of course,any warrant or suspicion of wrongdoing. TSA agents inspect our toddlers’ toys and grandparents’ diapers at airports,rail stations,and bus terminals. Also,local law enforcement conducts random “sweeps” and searches at public transit locations,like subway stations,and stops vehicles at checkpoints under the pretense of looking for drunk drivers,inspecting drivers’ licenses,or conducting the increasingly popular “routine safety check.”
Amidst this vast web of random,suspicionless,warrantless searches and seizures,not only is our privacy at risk,but just as important,our property. Property rights are meaningless if they do not include the right to exclude others from one’s property (especially the government). The Supreme Court correctly ruled that,since Antoine Jones had a property right in his car,the government was prohibited from trespassing on it to install a GPS tracking device. Likewise,Americans should have property rights in the location data emitted by their cellular phones and the content of their phone calls and emails along with,of course,their tangible “persons,houses,papers and effects.” And yet,all of these rights are being eroded when balanced against the government’s purported interests of “public safety” and “crime detection/prevention.”
Such intrusions may be unprecedented in the United States,but they have not been elsewhere. United States Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson,a close friend and confidant of President Franklin Roosevelt,served as the chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials. While in Germany,he was able to learn first hand how the German people had lost their freedoms. Upon his return,he became a champion of Fourth Amendment rights.
Justice Jackson’s Executive Trial Counsel at Nuremberg,Whitney Harris,discussed part of their shared experience in Germany in his book Tyranny on Trial,explaining that,as with the U.S. Constitution,“[t]he Weimar Constitution contained positive guarantees of basic civil rights. Chief among them were personal freedom …inviolability of the home [and] secrecy of letters and other communications….”
However,the Weimar Constitution also contained an extraordinary provision,Article 48,“under which the Reich President was authorized to suspend basic civil rights ‘if the public safety and order in the German Reich are considerably disturbed or endangered….’” In order to lay the predicate for this suspension of rights,it is generally believed that the Nazis themselves set fire to the Reichstag,which was followed the next day by a Presidential edict that “[personal freedom ... inviolability of the home [and] secrecy of letters and other communications] are suspended until further notice [and] violations of the privacy of postal,telegraphic,and telephonic communications,and warrants for house searches,orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property,are also permissible beyond the legal limits unless otherwise prescribed.”
Having thus suspended the property rights of the German people,and attributing all the nation’s problems to Communist terrorists,the Nazis began a campaign of random searches and seizures in order to flush out “Communist literature and illegal weapons.” Constitutional lawyer and Second Amendment scholar Steven Halbrook explains the process in his article,Nazi Firearms Law and the Disarming of the German Jews. Two days after Hitler took power,the Berlin police,in response to a shooting of a Nazi official,“closed off the street to all traffic while at the same time criminal detectives conducted extensive raids in the houses. Each individual apartment was searched for weapons.” A little over two months later,“[h]aving disarmed and mopped up the ‘Communists” with such raids …the Nazis …turned their attention more toward the Jews” and in one case “[a] large force of police assisted by Nazi auxiliaries raided a Jewish quarter in Eastern Berlin,searching everywhere for weapons and papers.” In order to further “enforce this [campaign of] repression,telephones were tapped and informants lingered in cafes.”
Upon his return to the high court,Justice Jackson wrote a ringing dissent in Brinegar v. United States,warning of the dangers associated with the erosion of property rights. Ranking Fourth Amendment rights as being of the highest order,Justice Jackson wrote that “[a]mong deprivations of rights,none is so effective in cowing a population,crushing the spirit of the individual and putting terror in every heart. Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government. And one need only briefly to have dwelt and worked among a people possessed of many admirable qualities but deprived of these rights to know that the human personality deteriorates and dignity and self-reliance disappear where homes,persons and possessions are subject at any hour to unheralded search and seizure by the police.”
Just because the United States Constitution has no provision allowing a President to suspend the Fourth Amendment and other civil liberties does not mean that something akin to what happened in Nazi Germany cannot happen here. Congress has already deferred to the arbitrary exercise of unenumerated Presidential powers based on the wartime rationale of necessity that could lead to the same dark and dangerous place. Too many Americans think that it “can’t happen here.” No doubt,many Germans felt the same way under the Weimar Republic. But Justice Jackson’s warnings must not go unheeded.
The U.S. Supreme Court has already taken a first step on the road back to liberty by its ruling in Jones that the Fourth Amendment protects the right of the American people to possess their private property to the exclusion of the federal government. The next step would be for the Court to recognize that the People have the same property right to exclude the government from seizing their private communications,however transmitted. In order for the Court to do that,it must recognize that the lawyer and journalist plaintiffs in Clapper have standing to seek judicial protection of their proprietary interests in their private communications with their clients and their information sources.
If the Supreme Court denies the Clapper plaintiffs legal standing,then there will be no judicial check upon the federal government’s voracious appetite to devour the Fourth Amendment protection of our property interests in our “persons,houses,papers,and effects.” If,on the other hand,the Court grants legal standing,then the Clapper plaintiffs will have a singular opportunity to urge the justices to heed Justice Jackson’s warning that a government possessing the uncontrolled power to search and seize the people’s property “cows” the people,“crushes” the individual spirit,and “terrorizes” even the most stout-hearted amongst us.
Bill Olson has practiced law in the Washington,DC area for 36 years,and served in three positions in the Reagan administration. Herb Titus taught constitutional law for 26 years,concluding his academic career as founding dean of Regent Law School. They now practice constitutional law together,defending against government excess,at William J. Olson,P.C. They can be reached at wjo@mindspring.com or followed on Twitter @Olsonlaw.
ENVIEN “EN MI OPINION” A SUS CONTACTOS
Lázaro R González Miño
“Salmo109”
7-Cuando fuere juzgado salga culpable; 8-Sean sus días pocos; tome otro su
oficio,
Porque
tuyo es El Reino, El Poder y La Gloria Eterna. AMEN“ WE OWN THIS COUNTRY, DON’T DARE TEST US”
¡HOY SE ROMPE EL COROJ0!
No comments:
Post a Comment