Liberty: Compromised

The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

Our liberty has been compromised.  No, this didn't happen overnight; it has been a slow, methodical takeaway by what used to be an invisible force that some of us knew was there, but could never quite put our finger on it.  Until now.

The "voice of the people" is weak, faded, broken, ignored.  The vote doesn't seem to matter anymore, not when judges legislate from the bench.  The courts tell us what the law is, or what it means, how it is applied...no matter the outcome of the vote of the people.

Never mind trying to educate yourself on the topic at hand, or the candidate running for office.  Both parties seem to have the same goal(s).  Socialist wolves in sheep's clothing.

Our government is no longer working for us.  Congress votes themselves a raise, then tell us how we are to be taxed.  When we finally have the intestinal fortitude to speak up, the grievances we make fall on deaf ears.

Our legislative branch has run amuck.  It has lost its power, its purpose.  It has no direction; nor has it a moral compass.  Those who cry foul are instantly outcasts, shunned from the herd.

The executive branch has become one of tyranny; suspending or delaying, enforcing illegally written laws as it sees fit.  Who needs the legislative branch anyway?  They're too busy investigating the numerous scandals, chasing the invisible force down an infinitely deep rabbit hole.

"We the people" have become immune.  Over the recent years, we have allowed the morals and principles that historically defined our once great nation as "the land of opportunity" to be slowly replaced with shameful, perverted ideals that had been considered immoral for thousands of years, since the beginning of time - all at the sound of applause.

The threat of tyranny is no more.  It is no longer looming just over the horizon.  It is here.  And it is not hiding.  Tyranny has taken over.  It has taken over our banks, our educational institutions, the auto industry, the media, our government, etc.  Look around.  It has opened our borders; weakened our economy and military, our security and defenses.

Tyranny is here; therefore liberty must go.  For it is impossible that the two coexist.

Once liberty has finally vanished into the night, so will our rights.  Our once sacred Constitution - meaningless, gone.  Freedom of speech, right to bear arms, state's rights, etc. - "liberated."

Like a thief in the night, this socialist, evil, tyrannical ideology, that past generations have fought and sacrificed to protect us from, has crept into our homes, our schools, courtrooms, capitol buildings.  It is a deadly virus.

Tyrannical monarchy is not the "hope and change" this country needs, but neither is anarchy.  The American people MUST insist on turning back to the Constitution, the "law of the land" for the last 200+ years, the protector of our God-given liberties.

Will the people of this country seek out once again their moral standing, their religious virtues?


“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” (Benjamin Franklin)


Will those who have sworn the "oath of office" realize that they made a covenant, not a contract, with the [people]?

Somehow, we, as Americans, must get this runaway, derailed train back on track.  Our government exists to serve us, not visa versa.

Snowden: Friend or Foe?

The answer is yes. Edward Snowden is regarded as either friend or foe, depending on which side of the issue are willing to take.

With Snowden leaking information about some of the NSA's top secret information-gathering programs comes many questions; some relating to the job he had, and some questions about why the program even exists.

Here's the deal...the program does exist.  Now what Congress and the adminstration need to do is answer to  the American people about why they think collecting this amount of information from folks who are not a national security threat is so important.  But, to address Snowden leaking secret NSA information, I have to wonder...why does a government contractor have this kind of access to sensitive information about a top secret program;  why didn't he use his "chain of command";  why did he run off to Hong Kong;  and my big question is why didn't the NSA know about this before we did?

The Snowden leak scenario, in my opinion, has to be the biggest slap in the face to those who support the NSA's information-gathering program.  The fact that he was able to get data a take it out of the office with him proves that the security measures in place to protect the data are second-rate.  The data is simply not safe.

Whatever your opinion, the bottom line is that Snowden took an oath to protect the program and the contents therein.  If he was not comfortable with the program, there are measures in place for whistle blowers to use.  Am I glad he leaked information about the program?  You bet.  However, I wish he had gone about it in a way that did not jeopardize national security.

New Look for Taliban Office in Qatar?

Reports are in that the Taliban have opened an office in Doha, Qatar for the sole purpose of meeting with U.S., Afghan, and Qatar officials for discussions on the war efforts in Afghanistan..

Actually,  there's nothing new about the Taliban having an office in Doha...here's a little background:

I was at a military location near Doha nearly two years ago for a "vacation".  During the vacation, I frequently read a well-known newsletter called "Stars and Stripes".  An article that I held on to was one that concerned me a little.  The article discussed the fact that Janet Napolitano was traveling to the area to meet with Talban officials to discuss a "trade".  The talks were to take place at the Taliban office located in Doha, Qatar, and the "trade" talk subject was one that consisted of the U.S. trading Taliban prisoners at Gitmo in return for the Taliban easing up on the attacks on U.S. and Coalition forces in Afghanistan.

I thought this was somewhat non-standard - sending Janet Napolitano to Doha...why?  She was, and still is, the head of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).  What business does she have going to the Middle East?

Something else I thought was a little weird...since when does the U.S. negotiate with terrorists?  Depends...

You see, the U.S. State Department has a counter-terrorism division.  The CT division is responsible for identifying, reporting, and tracking the activities of terrorist groups that meet a certain set of criteria (threat to U.S. national security, etc.), with the approval of Congress, of course.  These groups are called Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO).  Here is a link to the State Department's site, go look for yourself:

http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm

On this page, you should notice who is not on the list: the Taliban.  Good tactic, I guess.  By leaving the Taliban off the list, the administration can still negotiate with them without breaking the U.S. policy of "we don't negotiate with terrorists".

There's the resounding question of "why is the U.S. negotiating with these terrorists?" when the real question that needs to be asked is "why the hell isn't this group a U.S.-recognized FTO?".

I suspect it's for the same reason that the White House stopped it's investigation and prosecution of the over 100 unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation case in Texas. Go have fun reading up on that one too!

Where's the "Off" Switch?

Will someone close to John McCain PLEASE ask him to shut up about supporting the rebels in Syria?!  The U.S. has NO business aiding either side.

Chemical weapons were used? Approximately 150 or so people died from sarin gas?  This is the "red line" we're willing to go to war with Russia and Iran over?  What about the other 93,000 people that Assad's regime executed before he decided to use sarin gas?  Iran is sending 4,000 ground troops to support the Assad regime?  Who cares!

Why does the U.S. need to get involved at all?  There is NOTHING to gain...except that a loss for Assad would indeed place another Muslim Brotherhood Islam extremist in power - in very close proximity to Israel, by the way...

We're Not at War with Islam?

In April 2009, Obama gave a speech in Turkey and made (what I see) two points that seemed to slip right through the short attention span of most Americans.

Original article posted here.

First, he decides and states that"The United States is not and will never be at war with Islam." Where the hell have you been Mr. O?  Islam is at war with us. Remember 9/11?  Either 9/11...pick one.  Even the Egyptian official caught on hot mic last week (Muslim Brotherhood member) has made it abundantly clear that the U.S. (and Israel) are the enemy, despite all the military assets and monetary assistance this administration has delivered.

Here's a link to the Fox News YouTube video.

Second, Mr. O tells the people of Turkey that he basically sees the country of Turkey as an example for other Middle Eastern countries to follow.  Why would he say that?  The Muslim Brotherhood is in control in Turkey, that's why.

How come there is no talk of sending help to the rebels in the current secular country of Turkey that are trying to stand up the the Islamist ideology?  How come we are promising to send military aid to the Al Quaeda in Syria to fight the Assad regime?

Mr. O made it known in the beginning that he would side with his Muslim brothers if faced with the choice.

The Enemy of My Enemy is My...What?

Now that the use of WMDs in Syria has been confirmed by the U.S., the administration is making plans to arm the rebels in Syria?  This is about to turn into a train wreck.

Here's a few things I'd like to point out:

• The Asad regime in Syria is backed by mother Russia.  A war with Asad is a war with Russia.
• The rebels we are about to arm have pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda, NOT the U.S.

What could possibly go wrong here?!  A few other thoughts: 

• A loss for Asad in the civil war in Syria WILL result in a Mulsim Brotherhood takeover of the country.
• An Al Qaeda-led victory will usher in new leadership from the Islamic extremist group, with it's anti-Jewish beliefs just next door to Israel.
• The U.S. does not have a dog in this fight...EXCEPT...
• Are these the same WMDs that Saddam smuggled out of Iraq during the U.N. inspection debacle?

What does the U.S. have to gain by engaging in this civil war?  Dunno.  Why, given the chance, does the current administration choose the side that seems to be anti-Israel?  Dunno that either.  Maybe it's just par for a Muslim...

...And the Hits Keep on Coming

So, how many scandals have to surface before supporters of the current administratin realize they made a mistake by voting the way they did...twice?  Elections mean everything!

This administration is so out of control that it isn't funny any more, nor can it be ignored any longer.  They seem to want all the control, yet defer all responsibility.  And the kicker is that no one seems to have any answers when questioned about any of the recent scandals!

How many supporters of this regime still believe that the birth certificate is real?!  Isn't it appearant that this administration has done nothing but lie to you, the American people, from day one?