Wednesday, August 14, 2013

This is islam...always going backwards...

Stop And Frisk Decision Based On Tortured Reading Of The Constitution

By Dick Morris

The U.S. District Court decision striking down New York City’s stop and frisk law may condemn the nation’s largest city to a return to the days of crime and mayhem which preceded the administration of Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Since 1992, the number of homicides in the Big Apple has dropped from almost 2,000 a year to about 400.

The ability to stop and frisk men lingering on street corners in the middle of the night in high drug and crime areas has played a key element in reducing the murder rate. Particularly in concert with New York’s mandatory minimum three year sentence for possession of an unlicensed, loaded firearm within the city, the law has forced guns off the street and driven down the murder rate appreciably.

To measure the impact of the stop and frisk and mandatory minimum gun sentence laws, compare New York with Philadelphia. Both have lots of poverty — 21% in New York and 25% in Philadelphia. The per capita police presence in each place is comparable. But Philadelphia, with a population of 1.5 million, had 334 homicides last year while New York, with 8.5 million had only 450.

But the Court decision threatens to take away the weapon that has kept the city free of deadly weapons and to send the gun murder rate skyward again. Liberals who push for gun controls, which do little to stop crime, should be hollering bloody murder (literally) about the court decision which puts guns back on the streets in New York. But they are not. It wouldn’t be fashionable.

More to the point, the unconstitutionality of the stop and frisk law hinges not on the standards police use to conduct searches, but on the number of minorities searched. So even if cops use racially neutral measurements like presence on a high crime corner, dress, the hour of day, but these criteria generate a disproportionate number of black and Latino stop and frisks, they are unconstitutional.

So even if the criteria are constitutional, if the result of their application is disproportionate the demographic concentrations, it violates the constitution, according to the Court. By this logic, the entire criminal justice system is unconstitutional since, while each measure taken by courts, prosecutors, cops, judges, defense lawyers, and juries may pass constitutional muster, the outcome is clearly to convict minorities at a ratio higher than their percentage of the population. Never mind that they commit more of the crimes!

The Obamacare Fiasco

by / Personal Liberty Digest

The Obamacare Fiasco
Obamacare— aside from being a deathcare trap that locks you into a system of medicine that treats symptoms rather than providing cures; doses you down in pharmaceuticals that often do more harm than good and cause more symptoms that must be treated by more pharmaceuticals; limits your treatment options; and was written by the medical-industrial complex to ensure a steady stream of new customers and guaranteed payment from government coffers— is fraught with little nuggets showing that the whole system as designed is a huge fiasco. And it probably is the biggest fraud perpetrated on the American people since Social Security:
  • The IRS, which was recently uncovered to be sharing private data of Tea Party group members and conservative political donors, is in charge of compiling and securing data on all Americans and ensuring compliance.
  • Security testing for the Obamacare database, entrusted to the aforementioned and obviously criminal IRS, is months behind schedule and won’t be completed before Obamacare kicks in this fall.
  • IRS employees, tasked with overseeing Obamacare, have asked to be exempted.
  • That promise “If you like your current health plan, you can keep it,” was a lie.
  • Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is shaking down companies the HHS might regulate.
  • Despite the delay in implementation of the employer mandate (an unConstitutional action by Obama fiat), employer fines will continue to grow at rates far greater than inflation.
  • Young people, considered the linchpin of the Obamacare Ponzi scheme because they will be paying into the system but using few of the benefits, are learning what it’s going to cost them and are saying they want no part of it.
  • The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates employers will pay around $106 billion in penalties between 2014 and 2022 for not meeting the law’s insurance requirements. That’s $106 billion employers won’t have for growing their businesses and creating more job opportunities.
  • The “Cadillac tax” provision included in the bill is going to send more cities, already struggling with high-cost pension plans and insurance coverage for its employees, into bankruptcy.
  • A rule establishing a maximum limit in the out-of-pocket expenses people may have to spend on their own health care will be delayed until 2015. This means those with chronic illnesses like cancer and severe disabilities may incur thousands of dollars a year in out-of-pocket expenses.
  • More Americans than ever—a significant majority–oppose it.
Other than that, what’s not to like? And oh yeah, Senator Harry Reid has as much as admitted the failure of Obamacare is a planned one. All the better to drive us toward a single payer socialist healthcare system.
Dear Readers, Social Security is a hot topic for young and old alike. And as with any frequently discussed issue, there's a lot of misinformation out there. So whether you plan to collect benefits soon or are worried there won't be anything for you to collect by the time you reach retirement, take a look at these 10 common myths and misunderstandings about Social Security. It's always best to have the facts! 
1) I should start taking Social Security benefits as soon as I'm eligible.

This sounds good on the surface, but to max out your benefits, you need to dig a little deeper. Yes, you may be eligible to start collecting Social Security at age 62, but your benefit will be permanently reduced. Wait until what the SSA calls your "full retirement age" or FRA (66 if you were born between 1943 and 1954), and you'll get a larger monthly benefit. Plus, benefits increase by 8 percent for every year you wait to collect between your FRA and age 70. That's an extraordinary risk-free return in this interest rate environment! Benefits do max out at 70, so don't wait longer than that.

2) It's always best to wait as long as possible before taking benefits.

This is the flip side of number one. And while it generally makes financial sense to wait to collect benefits, it depends on your situation -- and your expected longevity. If you collect early, you get a smaller payment for a longer time period. Collect later and you get a larger payment for a shorter time period. So you have to do the math and consider your options. Also note that a spousal benefit doesn't increase past your full retirement age. So if you're collecting on your spouse's earnings record, take it at your FRA.

3) I'm not eligible for Social Security if I'm still working
Yes, you are -- but with some strings attached depending on your age. If you file at age 62, in 2013 $1 in benefits is withheld for every $2 you earn above $15,120. The year you reach your FRA, $1 is deducted for every $3 you earn above a higher limit, currently $40,080. But this reduction is temporary, similar to withholding. At your FRA, your benefit is recalculated and you'll get the money back in the form of a higher monthly payment. Once you reach your FRA, there's no reduction.

4) If my spouse earns more than I do, I should take the spousal benefit.

The spousal benefit can be a real boost for a nonworking or low-earning spouse. But remember, it's only 50 percent of the higher-earning spouse's benefit. Once you file, the SSA will automatically give you the larger of either the spousal benefit or your own benefit.

5) Once I marry, I'll always be able to collect based on my spouse's record.

If your own benefit would be lower than the spousal benefit, generally you can collect on your spouse's earnings record. But there are a few things to be aware of. First, you generally must be married for one year to collect spousal benefits. To collect survivor's benefits, you must have been married for at least nine months. And if you get divorced, you must have been married 10 years to collect on your ex's record.

6) You don't pay income taxes on SS benefits.

This is a big misconception. In reality, 50 to 85 percent of benefits may be taxed depending on your modified adjusted gross income. Currently, the income range is $25,000 to $34,000 for single filers and $32,000 to $44,000 for married filing jointly.

7) If I'm disabled, I can collect SSDI along with SS benefits.

Unfortunately, there's no double dipping. If you've been collecting SSDI benefits, you're automatically switched to your SS retirement benefit once you reach your FRA. You don't receive both.

8) Benefits are based on your 10 highest earning years.

While it takes a minimum of 10 years to qualify for SS benefits, your individual benefit is based on your average indexed monthly earnings (AIME) in your 35 highest-earning years after age 21. These figures are tallied at age 62 and then indexed for inflation (meaning past earnings are converted to current dollars). If you worked fewer than 35 years, the missing years are counted as 0, bringing your average down. In other words, it's best to work a minimum of 35 years to receive the highest benefit.

9) Social Security is only for the elderly.

Not true. About 36 million retired workers receive benefits, but so do 2.9 million spouses and children of retired workers. Another 8.7 million people receive benefits as disabled workers, and 2.1 million children and spouses of disabled workers receive benefits. A total of 3.3 million children under age 18 receive Social Security. Plus, in 2013, the SSA paid benefits to 6.3 million survivors of deceased workers, including 2 million children.*

10) Social Security is going broke.

I put this last, but it's probably the most common concern. According to the SSA, Social Security had a surplus in 2012 and projects surpluses through 2020. A recent report states that full benefits can be paid until 2035. Let's hope changes will be made to increase revenue before then, but even if no changes are made, payroll taxes at current rates are projected to cover about 75 percent of all future benefits.

Why is it that natural gas sells in the U.S. for $3.94 per 1,000 cubic feet and in Europe and Japan for $11.60 and $17, respectively? Part of the answer is our huge supply.

With high-tech methods of extraction and with discovery of vast gas-rich shale deposits, estimated reserves are about 2.4 quadrillion cubic feet. That translates into more than a 100-year supply of natural gas at current usage rates. What partially explains the high European and Japanese prices is the fact that global natural gas markets are not integrated. Washington has stringent export restrictions on natural gas.

Naturally, the next question is: Why are there natural gas export restrictions? Just follow the money.

According to, The Dow Chemical Co. "posted record lobbying expenditures last year, spending nearly $12 million, and is on pace to eclipse that number this year." The company has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars contributing to the political campaigns of congressmen who support export restrictions. Natural gas is a raw material for Dow. It benefits financially from cheap gas prices, which it fears would rise if Congress were to lift export restrictions. Dow argues, "Continuing optimism for U.S. manufacturing is founded on the prospect of an adequate, reliable and reasonably priced supply of natural gas." Of course, Dow and other big users of natural gas get support from environmentalists, who are anti-drilling and anticipate that export restrictions will serve their ends.

Big natural gas users and environmentalists have foreign allies, suggested by the statement of Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, who told Saudi Arabia's oil minister, Ali al-Naimi, that rising American shale gas production is "an inevitable threat." Nigeria's oil minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke, agrees, saying that U.S. shale oil is a "grave concern." In light of these foreign "concerns" about U.S. energy production, one wonders whether foreign countries have given financial aid to U.S. politicians, environmentalists and other groups that are waging war against domestic oil and natural gas drilling. It would surely be in their interests to do everything in their power to keep the West dependent on OPEC nations for oil and gas.

Natural gas producers would like to export some of their product to Europe and Japan to take advantage of higher prices. One effect of those exports would be to raise natural gas prices in the U.S. and lower them in the recipient countries. Industrial giants such as Dow, Alcoa, Celanese and Nucor are members of America's Energy Advantage, a lobby group that says it is unpatriotic to allow unlimited natural gas exports. It argues that export restrictions keep natural gas prices low and give U.S. manufacturing companies a raw material advantage, which allows them to produce goods at lower prices.

I'd like to ask Dow, Alcoa and other companies that lobby against natural gas exports whether their argument applies to them. After all, they ship a lot of their domestic product overseas. For example, Alcoa exports tons of aluminum. Export restrictions on aluminum would lower domestic aluminum prices, thereby benefiting the aircraft industry, as well as making other aluminum-using manufacturers more competitive. Unfortunately, I doubt whether Alcoa would see it that way. In general, it is poor economic policy to encourage domestic American industry through costly and inefficient methods such as export restrictions.

But there's another effect of the natural gas export restrictions. The huge supply and resulting low prices have begun to act as a deterrent to future energy exploration and production. According to a Wall Street Journal article by Dr. Thomas Tunstall, research director for the Institute for Economic Development at the University of Texas at San Antonio, titled "Exporting Natural Gas Will Stabilize U.S. Prices" (May 29, 2013), natural gas production at three major shale oil fields in Texas has flattened out at 2012 output levels.

Tunstall concludes, "Over the long haul, market dynamics -- which include the ability to export without undue uncertainty or restriction -- will best manage global supply and demand curves for natural gas." I agree.

Fort Hood jihad mass murderer: "I don’t think what I did was wrong because it was for the greater cause of helping my Muslim brothers"

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

In everything Hasan says about his murders, he links them to his Islamic faith. Yet anyone who dared to suggest that perhaps the texts and teachings of the Islamic faith should be examined so as to understand his motives and goals more fully would be denounced as "Islamophobic."

"Fort Hood Gunman Told Panel That Death Would Make Him a Martyr," by Manny Fernandez for the New York Times, August 12 (thanks to Kenneth):
KILLEEN, Tex. — One year after he waged a deadly shooting rampage at the Fort Hood Army base here in November 2009, Major Nidal Malik Hasan told a panel of military mental health experts that he wished he had been killed during the attack because it would have meant God had chosen him for martyrdom. 
His statements to the panel, detailed in documents released by Major Hasan to The New York Times through his civilian lawyer, provided the first account of the shooting in Major Hasan’s own words and suggested that he believed the Army’s pursuit of the death penalty offered him salvation. Paralyzed by police officers who ended the attack when they shot him four times, he viewed the possibility of death as a badge of honor, according to the documents.
“I’m paraplegic and could be in jail for the rest of my life,” Major Hasan told the panel. “However, if I died by lethal injection I would still be a martyr.”
Major Hasan, 42, an American-born Muslim of Palestinian descent whose long-delayed court-martial began last week in a Fort Hood courtroom, said in the documents and in previous statements in and out of court that he carried out the attack to wage jihad for what he has called the illegal and immoral wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the documents, he described in blunt and unapologetic terms how he killed soldiers as he stepped into a medical processing building on Nov. 5, 2009. He said he wore earplugs to muffle the sound of his semiautomatic weapon, and shot into areas that had the “greatest density of soldiers.” In the end, 13 people were dead.
I don’t think what I did was wrong because it was for the greater cause of helping my Muslim brothers,” he told the military panel.
The three pages of documents were from a 49-page report of a military panel known as a sanity board, which concluded that Major Hasan was fit to stand trial.
The civilian lawyer who released the pages, John P. Galligan, used to represent Major Hasan in the case but was released by him in 2011. Mr. Galligan continues to provide legal assistance to Major Hasan and meets with him regularly. He has provided other documents at Major Hasan’s request, including other pages of the sanity board report, to Fox News. Army prosecutors were given a summary of the report, but Mr. Galligan said that they had not seen these newly released pages.
The documents shed light on the dispute that has developed between Major Hasan and his team of Army defense lawyers. Major Hasan has split from the lawyers and is representing himself, though the judge overseeing his military trial ordered them to remain as standby counsel. Last week, Major Hasan’s former lead Army defense lawyer, Lt. Col. Kris R. Poppe, asked the judge to limit their role because Major Hasan’s goal was a death sentence and helping him reach that goal violated their moral and professional responsibilities. The judge ordered the lawyers to continue in their current role. The lawyers are appealing.
In court, Major Hasan denied that he had a death wish. He wanted to elaborate, but the judge closed the session. The documents suggested that Colonel Poppe had accurately depicted Major Hasan’s desire to be put to death.
In the report, Major Hasan told the panel that he went to morning prayers at a Killeen mosque that day and then returned to his apartment, where he shredded his birth certificate and other documents. He said he would not need the documents because he would either be killed or in jail.
Major Hasan said he wanted to get to the medical processing building before 3 p.m. when a large number of people would be there, according to the report. He drove to the base, wearing fatigues with his rank and name tag. Major Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, said he had no doubts about his plan, but expressed reservations about some of the consequences, like the end of his medical career.
He said he walked into the building around 1 p.m. with a cellphone to his ear, pretending to talk to someone. Members of the sanity board panel asked him what he would have done had he seen someone he knew.
“I don’t know,” Major Hasan said. “I may not have aimed at them.”
He said he did not want to kill civilians and so told a civilian working at a front desk that the officer in charge needed her. Once she left, he shouted “Allahu akbar,” Arabic for “God is great,” and started firing his FN Five-Seven handgun.
He then went outside to a nearby auditorium to “shoot more targets,” but when he realized there was a graduation ceremony taking place he decided not to go inside because in the gowns, civilians were indistinguishable from soldiers, he said.
He told the panel he did not hear the officers coming toward him because of his ear plugs. He denied having remorse and justified his actions by saying that the soldiers he killed were “going against the Islamic Empire.”
Benghazi comes back to haunt...and rightly so
By: Diane Sori

The Obama so-called ‘phony scandal’ known as Benghazi keeps getting more and more interesting, as it now seems that 400 surface-to-air missiles were “diverted to Libya” during the attack and fell into the hands of “some very ugly people,” according to one of the lawyers representing one of the Benghazi whistleblowers.

400 surface-to-air missiles gone ‘missing’…NOT good folks as we now know that Obama had 35 armed CIA operatives in Benghazi that fateful night, and that they were ‘working’ on (smuggling is more like it) an under-the-radar hush-hush operation to supply said supposed ‘missing’ missiles to the al-Qaeda backed Syrian rebels. And these were the very same missiles discovered missing from Libyan armories…hmmmm..

400 armed CIA operatives on the ground in Benghazi who did NOTHING to help save Ambassador Stevens and the others, and 400 missiles 'missing' from Libya’s armories…

NO ‘phony scandal’ here…direct grounds for treason is more like it.

And you can bet that these missiles…surface-to-air missiles with the capability of bringing down an airliner…are now in the hands of al-Qaeda itself NOT in the hands of any ‘supposed’ rebels. And this is what Benghazi was about…this was (I believe) Obama’s plan all along…a plan to arm the enemy for America’s enemies are his friends and allies…blood brethren and blood ties are stronger than any allegiance to America in Obama’s eyes.

‘Aiding and abetting the enemy’…life in prison or the firing squad…either one will do.

And I have said this since day one…before any of the political pundits and tag along politician said so in public…said that Benghazi was all about guns and weapons running…said it because the pieces of the puzzle were easy to put together…that is for those of us NOT blinded by the ‘anointed ones’ liberal media created aura.

And now that very same liberal media…Obama PR people in actuality…are trying to spin this to once again deflect the truth and consequences away from this Obama ILLEGAL weapons running operation…and the CIA is complicit in this. Claiming that these now in the spotlight ‘missing’ missiles were either going to be used to shoot down an airliner...or that one of the shoulder-held missiles could be used to shoot into an the story de jour that the media is force feeding us as the reason why Obama ordered the closing of all those the US embassies last week.

The media can spin this anyway they want but they NO longer can hide the fact that missiles were being stored in the Benghazi embassy compound and that information was indeed ‘leaked’ out (by Obama himself perhaps) about those missiles, and that in and of itself is all the proof needed as to why the compound was attacked in the first place…as in ‘the weapons are yours (meaning al-Qaeda) after you silence Stevens’.

Not just murder but cold-blooded targeted assassination.

Seven hours the attack went on…seven long hours with 35 Obama sanctioned and armed CIA operatives right there on the grounds of the compound doing NOTHING… obviously ordered to ‘stand down’ hours and four dead Americans with surface-to-air missiles now in the hands of the enemy…treason thy name is Obama.

And so the plot…the lies…the cover-ups…thickens…a plot hatched by Obama and crew to hide their weapons running and fed into and aided along by the media…the media who happily follows in lockstep with their monstrous creation.

And they started their cover of Obama way back when he gave…against our Constitution’s War Powers Clause…anti-aircraft missiles to the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya, thus kicking off the whole nightmare that came to known as the Arab Spring. And now that very Obama controlled liberal media wants us to believe that CIA operatives were in Benghazi to try to get those weapons back…’We the People’ are NOT that gullible…at least we patriots are NOT.

Bottom line…Barack HUSSEIN Obama deliberately and with malice towards the Unites States of America turned a US embassy into a weapons smuggling warehouse…a warehouse supplying our enemies with stolen heavy weapons from the Libyan government arsenals…weapons supplied by both Obama himself and from Qaddafi’s left-over stock of about 20,000 portable heat-seeking missiles (SA-7 surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles)…missiles that are now in the hands of al-Qaeda backed Syrian rebels if NOT al-Qaeda itself.

But the question still remains did Ambassador Stevens know about this weapons running and was he going to go public with it or was he part of it…I prefer to believe the former as it seems he was targeted to be taken out and someone complicit would NOT need to be taken out.

And so it comes full circle with everything this administration does leading back to Benghazi…every motive…every cover-up… everything...with every other scandal paling in comparison to Benghazi…and NO other scandal can bring Obama down like Benghazi can.

Now if only the liberal media would get on board with the truth and stop covering and lying for this most miserable of men, because with the media’s help Barack HUSSEIN Obama could be arrested, tried, convicted, and sentence carried out for treason...and the liberal media could drop the liberal before its name and get back in the good graces of 'We the People' again.

Just something I wish they would think about...