BILL'S TWITTER PAGE

Thursday, May 2, 2013

Pentagon backs down on 'religious proselytizing' statement

Pentagon backs down on 'religious proselytizing' statement: The Pentagon is backing down on a Tuesday statement indicating members of the military could be subject to court-martial for religious proselytizing. The Department of Defense has issued a new statement, saying that "Service members can share their faith, or evangelize, but must not force unwanted, intrusive attempts to convert others of any faith or no faith to one's beliefs."

Pentagon backs down on 'religious proselytizing' statement

Posted by Chad Groening (American Family News) - May 02, 2013
UPDATE (May 2, 2013 - 1:30 p.m. Central) - The Pentagon is backing down on a Tuesday statement indicating members of the military could be subject to court-martial for religious proselytizing.
The Department of Defense has issued a new statement, saying that "Service members can share their faith, or evangelize, but must not force unwanted, intrusive attempts to convert others of any faith or no faith to one's beliefs."
On Tuesday it was revealed that Lt. Commander Nate Christensen issued a statement on behalf of the Pentagon that court-martials for “proselytizing” would be considered on a case-by-case basis. The statement outraged the Christian community, including current and former members of the armed services.
The question arose as to whether members of the military lose their First Amendment rights at the point at which they enter the military.

Original story ...
The Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty is asking the Air Force for equal time after an anti-Christian extremist was allowed to meet with high-level officials about “religious intolerance” in the military.
Brietbart.com reported Wednesday that a Pentagon statement confirms that soldiers in the U.S. armed forces could be prosecuted for promoting their faith. “Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense ...,” reads the statement. “Court-martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis.”
Last week Mikey Weinstein and other leaders with the Military Religious Freedom Foundation met with senior Air Force officials with the stated purpose of crafting new court-martial guidelines that, if adopted, would greatly restrict the religious liberty of Christians. Weinstein told Associated Press the Pentagon should crack down on officers who suggest theirs is the true faith. “We can court-martial people and make an example of them that this kind of unconstitutional bigotry, old-school prejudice, marginalizing, dehumanizing, trivializing, humiliating people will not be tolerated,” he said.
Col. Ron Crews (USA-Ret.) served as an Army chaplain for 28 years and now serves as a spokesman for the Chaplain Alliance For Religious Liberty.
"Even if an officer has a Bible on his desk, that's a form of proselytization, according to Mikey Weinstein,” he tells American Family News. “And I had an Air Force officer just recently contact me because he did have a Bible out on his desk – and he was told by a senior officer, Take that Bible off your desk because that could be inflammatory just by having your Bible. This is getting insane."

Crews says if the Air Force wants to be serious about religious liberty, its sole and exclusive meeting should not be with a man who calls religious service members “spiritual rapists” or "human monsters."
"[Mikey Weinstein] is not the person to talk about religious liberty,” he states. “So we're asking for a meeting with senior Air Force officials to [request that] if they're going to revise their policy, we want to make sure that the religious liberty of all the airmen who are serving courageously in the Air Force gets maintained."
The Alliance spokesman says he hopes it does not come to a point when service members must make a choice between God and serving in the military, which he believes some in the military are advocating. As he told AP, faith should not be a forbidden topic in the military. “[For] people who come from evangelical backgrounds, part of that faith is sharing their faith,” said Crews.
Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin (USA-Ret.), executive vice president of the Family Research Council, has similar remarks about Weinstein’s objectives.
"His agenda is to eliminate all vestiges of Christianity from the U.S. military,” states Boykin. “And the fact that they would even meet with him to discuss religious liberty is just appalling, because he is one who is determined to eliminate religious liberty – particularly as it applies to Christians."

Weinstein recently penned a scathing editorial in the far-left Huffington Post entitled "Fundamentalist Christian Monsters: Papa's Got A Brand New Bag," in which he accuses the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, and the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty of being “bandits” that have at the basis of efforts “horrific hatred and blinding bigotry.”
Boykin likens the column to "the rantings of a madman.”
“His hatred for Christianity is so visceral that when he writes such deplorable terms for those of us who have kind of been in the lead in the Christian faith, it’s is an indication to me that he's just very unstable."
Boykin says the FRC has launched a petition drive hoping to create a groundswell of support from people willing to stand and say such anti-Christian bigotry cannot go any further. He says they plan to submit the petition to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel.

- See more at: http://www.instantanalysis.net/latest-headlines-from-american-family-news/2013/05/02/report-court-martials-may-await-soldiers-who-share-their-christian-faith#.UYLPuIWEX-s.facebook

P P S I M M O N S: Poll: 29% of Registered Voters Believe Armed Revolution Might Be Necessary

P P S I M M O N S: Poll: 29% of Registered Voters Believe Armed Revolution Might Be Necessary


Thursday, May 2, 2013

Poll: 29% of Registered Voters Believe Armed Revolution Might Be Necessary

Twenty-nine percent of registered voters think that an armed revolution might be necessary in the next few years in order to protect liberties, according to a Public Mind poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University.


The poll, which surveyed 863 registered voters and had a margin of error of +/-3.4, focused on both gun control and the possibility of a need for an armed revolution in the United States to protect liberty.
The survey asked whether respondents agreed, disagreed, neither agreed nor disagreed or did not know or refused to respond to the statement: "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties"
Twenty-nine percent said they agreed, 47 percent said they disagreed, 18 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed, 5 percent said they were unsure, and 1 percent refused to respond.


Results of the poll show that those who believe a revolution might be necessary differ greatly along party lines:
  • 18 percent of Democrats
  • 27 percent of Independents
  • 44 percent of Republicans
The poll found that 38 percent of Americans who believe a revolution might be necessary support additional gun control legislation compared to 62 percent of those who don't think an armed revolt will be needed.

http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/poll-29-registered-voters-believe-armed-revolution-might-be-necessary

Bob Cesca: Fox News Craps Its Cage: Eric Holder Is Clearly With the Terrorists

Bob Cesca: Fox News Craps Its Cage: Eric Holder Is Clearly With the Terrorists


Bob Cesca

GET UPDATES FROM BOB CESCA

Fox News Craps Its Cage: Eric Holder Is Clearly With the Terrorists

Posted: 05/02/2013 3:27 pm

Fox News Channel amplified its crusade against the president this week, implying that the same administration that killed Bin Laden and much of al Qaeda's leadership, and the same administration that boasts a considerable record of killing terrorist operatives with targeted attacks using an escalating number of drone strikes is apparently composed of terrorist sympathizers who are only concerned with enabling and sympathizing with the "jihadis."
The network's mission on this front is to engage in a Southern Strategy-style campaign to exploit conspiracy theories around the president's name and background in order to confirm the paranoia of Fox News' viewers who believe the president is connected to al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood while spearheading the effort to usurp the Constitution with Sharia law. Actually, the Fox News approach is more or less the "lite" version of unmitigated cage-crapping on the extreme right: Alex Jones and his cult recently accused the president of being the official leader of al Qaeda.
In its most recent manic episode, however, Fox News suggested that the president and his attorney general, Eric Holder, care more about preemptively thwarting hate crimes against Muslims than condemning perpetrators of the Boston Marathon bombing.
Some background. During a speech to the Anti-Defamation League, an organization that's committed in part to preventing hate crimes, Holder spoke about the Boston Marathon bombing and then, naturally, segued into a section about preventing hate crimes against Muslim Americans in the wake of the tragedy -- a kneejerk and deadly reaction we've seen too many times before. Among other things, Holder said:
"I also want to make clear that - just as we will pursue relentlessly anyone who would target our people or attempt to terrorize our cities - the Justice Department is firmly committed to protecting innocent people against misguided acts of retaliation."
As you can plainly see, Holder is with the terrorists. At least, that's what Fox News wants its people to believe. In a FOX NEWS ALERT! HOLY SHIT: JIHAD! segment the other day, Megyn Kelly asked one of her guests the following question -- a question that wasn't a question at all, of course, but a statement about Holder's obviously outrageous condemnation of attacks against innocent people:
"Um. Jay [Sekulow of the American Center for Law & Justice], if you take those remarks and put them on paper and just disconnect them to the Boston marathon bombings they're not controversial at all. But to have the attorney general of the United States get up and focus on backlash against Muslims?!"

Kelly continued by reporting that she's unaware of any attacks against Muslims since Boston, so why on earth would Holder mention something that hasn't even happened?
Two things on this point. First, Raw Story's Eric W. Dolan pointed out: "Following the Boston Marathon bombing earlier this month, frequent Fox News guest Erik Rush called for all Muslims to be killed. Three days later, a man assaulted a Muslim woman in Boston and screamed, 'Fuck you Muslims! You are terrorists!'" Second, what's wrong with being proactive and attempting to prevent further anti-Muslim crimes? Kelly would clearly prefer that Holder wait and to warn people against hate crimes after the crimes have already happened. So how many people, according to Kelly's requirements, are supposed to be stalked, beaten or killed before it's okay for the top law enforcement official in America to say something about it?
Later, Kelly brought in anti-Muslim flamethrower Michelle Malkin clearly because the network hadn't sufficiently featured enough bigotry at that point and decided to go to 11. Malkin, for her part, endorsed an earlier anti-Holder rant by human-sinus hybrid Mark Levin, and continued by saying that Holder should've praised the "restraint" and "fairness" of the American people for not resorting to terrorist attacks against Muslims -- the technique, Malkin said, that "jihadis" used against Americans. Put another way, Malkin is proud of the fact that Americans evidently don't resort to terrible violence against "jihadis" (except that we've been at war against jihadists for 12 years now).

Yep. Holder spoke to a hate crimes group and condemned further hate crimes. Shocking! This is a massive controversy inside the Fox News bubble, worthy of a FOX NEWS ALERT: COMMENCE PANTS-POOPING! and several segments in which a team of bug-eyed weirdos ridicule the attorney general and, by proxy, the president of for defending American citizens who happen to be (or appear to be) Muslim -- a religion, like all the others, that's protected by the First Amendment.
Nevertheless, the following Holder remark attracted the harshest rebuke from Kelly, Malkin and Levin:
"America rejects bigotry. We reject every act of hatred against people of Arab background or Muslim faith. America values and welcomes peaceful people of all faiths -- Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu and many others. Every faith is practiced and protected here, because we are one country. Every immigrant can be fully and equally American because we're one country. Race and color should not divide us, because America is one country."
Whoops! Correction. That wasn't a Holder quote. It was spoken by President Bush on April 30, 2002, and no one at Fox News Channel or the conservative entertainment complex criticized him for it because, among other reasons, any such criticism was considered to be a treason-worthy trespass during the months following 9/11, according to, well, everyone. Fact: President Bush condemned violence against Muslim Americans and defended the Islamic faith on at least 25 different occasions between September 17, 2001 and the end of 2002.
Meanwhile, hate crimes against Muslim Americans increased dramatically throughout the last 12 years in spite of remarks from Bush, Obama and Holder. Contrary to Kelly's anecdotal observations, law enforcement is correctly worried about retribution against Muslims for more than just Boston, but for Boston plus 9/11 and other attacks. So, yes, anti-Muslim violence is real. In December, a man named Sunando Sen was waiting for a subway in New York City when an assailant shoved him onto the tracks where he was struck and killed by a train.
The culprit, Erika Menendez, later confessed to the police, "I pushed a Muslim off the train tracks because I hate Hindus and Muslims... Ever since 2001 when they put down the Twin Towers, I've been beating them up."
Sen was an Indian immigrant and wasn't even Muslim, but he made the deadly error of looking like one. Is Holder supposed to wait for more of these tragedies to occur and only then use the FBI and other agencies to prevent further attacks? Within the frightened walnut-sized lizard-brains of Kelly, Malkin and Levin, yes -- Holder should wait until after more attacks happen before condemning them. And what does that say about these Fox News anti-Muslim fire-eaters? We have to seriously question whether they'd prefer to see Muslim Americans targeted by vigilantes like Menendez, and therefore we have to seriously question whether Fox News is contributing to anti-Muslim hate crimes by demanding that our government turn a blind eye.
By way of an epilogue, the day after Fox News denied the existence of anti-Muslim violence, a cab driver in Virginia was allegedly beaten by a man who was shouting the following epithets:
"If you're a Muslim, you're a [expletive] jihadist," the passenger says. "You are just as bad as the rest of them."
The video ends with a blur of motion and audio of Salim asking, "Why are you punching me? Sir, why are you punching me?"
The passenger replies: "You're a [expletive] Muslim."
The cab driver, Mohamed A. Salim, is an American Iraq War veteran who also served at Guantanamo.
Cross-posted at The Daily Banter.
Click here to listen to the Bubble Genius Bob & Chez Show podcast.
BobCesca.com Blog with special thanks to John Yannone.
Subscribe to the uncensored and totally raw Bob & Chez Show After Party podcast.
 

Follow Bob Cesca on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bobcesca_go

Russia delivers another al-Qaida warning to U.S. Jihadists purportedly being armed by Obama administration « Klein Online

Russia delivers another al-Qaida warning to U.S. Jihadists purportedly being armed by Obama administration « Klein Online

Russia delivers another al-Qaida warning to U.S. Jihadists purportedly being armed by Obama administration

image
By Aaron Klein
Russia delivered to the Obama administration a list of the names of Syrian rebels who are members of al-Qaida groups and who are receiving arms shipments coordinated by the U.S., according to informed Middle Eastern security officials.
The list, the officials added, demonstrates how the U.S. is failing in its due diligence of vetting the rebels being supported by the West for ties to al-Qaida and other jihad groups.
The information comes amid scores of news media reports that the Obama administration is aiding the rebels, including by coordinating Arab arms shipments.
The arming of Syrian rebels is considered highly controversial. A major issue is the inclusion of jihadists, including al-Qaida, among the ranks of the Free Syrian Army and other Syrian opposition groups.
Just last week, KleinOnline broke the story that the U.S. in recent weeks aided in the transfer of shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles, or man-portable air-defense systems, to the Syrian rebels, according to informed Middle Eastern security officials.
The Middle Eastern security officials speaking to KleinOnline said the latest U.S.-facilitated weapons transfers signify the most advanced deliveries yet to the Syrian rebels.
Confirming KleinOnline’s exclusive reporting for over a year, the New York Times last month reported that since early 2012, the CIA has been aiding Arab governments and Turkey in obtaining and shipping weapons to the Syrian rebels.
While the Times report claims most of the weapons shipments facilitated by the CIA began after the latest presidential election, Middle Eastern security officials speaking to KleinOnline have said U.S.-aided weapons shipments go back more than a year, escalating before the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. facilities in Benghazi.
In fact, the Middle Eastern security officials speaking to KleinOnline since last year describe the U.S. mission in Benghazi and nearby CIA annex attacked last September as an intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels in the Middle East, particularly those fighting Syrian Assad’s regime.
The aid, the sources stated, included weapons shipments and was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Earlier this month, Reuters further reported Obama allegedly signed a secret order in 2012 authorizing U.S. agencies such as the CIA to provide support to rebel forces in Syria.
The support includes helping to run a secret military communications command center in Turkey to aid rebel groups. The Reuters article also said U.S. citizens are training rebels and possibly giving them equipment, at least since the summer.
The New York Times and Reuters both report the U.S. is working to vet the rebels for inclusion of al-Qaida, but it is not immediately known how successful such vetting has been and whether the rebels directly armed by the U.S. will share their weapons with jihadists within their ranks.

Oregon Teachers Traumatized by Unannounced Shooter Drill

Oregon Teachers Traumatized by Unannounced Shooter Drill

Oregon Teachers Traumatized by Unannounced Shooter Drill

Kimberly Paxton
www.TheDailySheeple.com
May 1st, 2013
Reader Views: 3,948
pine eagle
Panic erupted on Friday at Pine Eagle Charter school in rural Oregon when two masked men carrying handguns burst into a teachers’ lounge and opened fire.
After the initial chaos, the terrified teachers realized the guns were firing blanks and that they were the subject of an unannounced shooter drill.
The little school in Halfway, Oregon was having an in-service day, so the children were at home at the time of the drill. The terrifying action has drawn criticism from many but Principal Cammie DeCastro has defended it, saying, ”For us not to know how we were going to respond is leaving us open”.
Principal Cammie DeCastro said it became clear very quickly just how many of the school’s 15 teachers would have survived. The answer: “Not many,” she said.
Elementary teacher Morgan Gover, 31, said only two teachers would have lived to tell the tale. She admitted being scared, and also acknowledged she would have been among the casualties, having taken several fake direct hits from the shooters.
“I’ll tell you, the whole situation was horrible,” she said. “I got a couple in the front and a couple in the back.”
The surprised staff had received training from the Union County Sheriff’s Office on active shooter scenarios. They had been told they had some options, such as not rushing out of their classrooms when gunfire erupted, and locking and barricading their doors.
They weren’t expecting a drill like this, and they were caught by surprise when the two men entered and began firing.
“There was some commotion,” DeCastro said.
The goal of the drill was to learn how people would react, so better emergency plans could be made, she said. (source)
In light of the fear-mongering by the mainstream media after the Sandy Hook school shooting last December, some people feel that this “drill” increases fearfulness.
The school administration plans to take what they’ve learned from the drill to better prepare.
The district’s Safety Committee and the School Board now will critically evaluate policies and procedures and decide what to do next, said DeCastro.
Armed teachers is one possible outcome, she said. Or the district may get armed and trained volunteers from the community to watch over the school in shifts, she said. Tougher doors and better locks are other options.
Had one of the teachers in that lounge already taken the time to prepare, the unannounced drill could have had tragic results.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

Contributed by Kimberly Paxton of www.TheDailySheeple.com.
Kimberly Paxton, a staff writer for the Daily Sheeple, is based out of upstate New York.
This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.TheDailySheeple.com.

My Way News - Obama to pitch immigration overhaul in Mexico

My Way News - Obama to pitch immigration overhaul in Mexico
Obama to pitch immigration overhaul in Mexico
 Email this Story

May 2, 3:03 AM (ET)
By JIM KUHNHENN

(AP) In this April 30, 2013 file photo, President Barack Obama answers questions during his new...
Full Image

Google sponsored links
No Illegal Alien Amnesty - Don't let the government give amnesty to illegals. Sign petition!
Townhall.com/No-Amnesty
 
Windows Vista DriversWindows Vista Driver Downloads. Microsoft Certified. (Recommended)
Windows-Vista.DriverUpdate.n
 

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama is headed to Mexico with a domestic ambition at the top of his travel agenda. To sell his immigration overhaul back home, he needs a growing economy in Mexico and a Mexican president willing to help him secure the border.
Obama was to fly to Mexico City on Thursday to meet with President Enrique Pena Nieto, eager to promote Mexico's economic success and the neighboring country's place as the second largest export market for U.S. goods and services. Mexicans will be hanging on the president's words, but Obama also has in mind an important audience back in the United States.
Though the role played by Latino voters in last year's U.S. presidential election gets much credit for the current momentum for changing immigration laws and providing a path to citizenship for 11 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally, another reason for the change in attitudes is that stronger border protections and the recession have been disincentives to cross into the U.S. As a result, illegal immigration has declined.
"With Mexico, first and foremost, they are critical to our ability to secure the border," said Ben Rhodes, an Obama deputy national security adviser. "All the immigration plans that have been contemplated put a focus on securing the border as an essential priority and starting point for immigration reform."
Even better than a strong border is an economy that keeps people from fleeing.
"If the Mexican economy is growing, it forestalls the need for people to migrate to the United States to find work," Rhodes added.
Eager to focus on the economy and immigration, the administration is downplaying Pena Nieto's recent steps to end the broad access Mexico gave U.S. security agencies to help fight drug trafficking and organized crime under his predecessor, Felipe Calderon. Still, the changes are likely to be a subject during the two leaders' private talks. Obama said this week he wouldn't judge the new moves until he heard directly from Mexican officials.
Pena Nieto took office in December, and for Obama the trip is an opportunity to take his measure of the Mexican leader early in his tenure.
"It's really important to go there while this new president is forming his own plans and judgments about what he's going to do about the border, about where he's going to be on immigration, about where he is on trade," U.S. Chamber of Commerce President/CEO Thomas Donohue said in an interview.
The chamber long has worked to improve U.S.-Mexico trade, noting that now about 6 million U.S. jobs depend on commerce with Mexico.
Striking the right note on border security is key, Donohue said, because it is a central to winning support in Congress for the rest of the immigration legislation.
"That's what everybody wants to hear, and we have to do that in a way that makes these guys down there feel like we're doing it in conjunction with them and for them, so we can do this thing on immigration well, so we can expand our trade, so we can deal with our political issues as they are trying to deal with theirs," Donohue said.
Still, with 33 million U.S. residents of Mexican origin, Obama's message in Mexico is also bound to resonate in the U.S., where Latinos could increase pressure on Congress to act.
"It helps keep these passions alive as far as an issue to promote for the administration," said Carl Meacham, a former senior Latin America adviser on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
But Meacham, now director of the Americas program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, cautioned that despite some bipartisan support to create a path to citizenship in the immigration bill, there is skepticism in Latin America. "They've been brought to the altar so many times by different American administrations that there's a little bit of a lack of trust," he said.
For Pena Nieto, Obama's visit is a chance for him to showcase his country's economic gains. After suffering along with the U.S. during the recession, its economy is now growing at a better clip than that of the U.S. Per capita income has gone from an annual $7,900 two years ago to $10,146. But Diana Negroponte, a Latin America expert at the Brookings Institution, says corruption remains endemic, human rights are still a problem, and efforts to change and improve the judicial system have been too slow.
"There is concern on our side of the border that greater help needs to be given in order for Mexico to reform its system," she said.
Pena Nieto's changes in the security relationship with the U.S. have prompted some U.S. officials to speculate that the new president might be embracing the policies of his Institutional Revolutionary Party, which long has favored centralized political and bureaucratic control.
Among those watching the new steps is Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who has held up $228 million sought by the Obama administration for Mexico under a security cooperation agreement. Under the agreement, known as the Merida Initiative, Congress has already given Mexico more than $1.9 billion in aid since 2008.
But Leahy, chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the State Department budget, has been a critic of how the money has been used and with the results.
"Congress has been asked for a significant new investment, but it's not clear what the new Mexican government's intensions are," Leahy said in a statement to The Associated Press. "We're in a period of uncertainty until we know enough to be able to reset that part of our relationship. I'm not ready to sign off on more money without a lot more details."