Treatment of US Soldiers by Barack Obama During Shutdown – A Disgrace Worthy of Impeachment

It is unconscionable. It is rude, insensitivity, callus and unacceptable. With the news that family members of fallen soldiers killed in Afghanistan are not only being denied death benefits, but are being denied transportation to Dover AFB for the arrival of the caskets containing the remains of their loved ones, the Obama Administration has crossed a “red line” with the American people. Progressives in Washington and across the nation, you are now on notice: We – regular, rank-and-file, hard-working American every-men and -women – are not going to take the “pain” of your ideological agenda anymore.

obama.military-550x412Few things are sacrosanct among all Americans, the proper treatment and respect of the men and women of the Armed Forces – and their families – one such thing. But Mr. Obama, his administration, and the sycophants who voted for and support them have disrespected and caused unnecessary pain for these patriots, both fallen and family. Just as in the 1960s, these very same people and people of the same mindset, are once again spitting in the faces of the American soldier, this time extending that vile discontent to the survivors and their children.

FOX News reports:

It’s another ugly symptom of Mr. Obama’s partial government shutdown — and this time it impacts the families of soldiers who are dying for their country.

The Pentagon confirmed Tuesday that, as long as the budget impasse lasts, it will not be able to pay death benefits to the families of troops who’ve been killed in combat.

“Unfortunately, as a result of the shutdown, we do not have the legal authority to make death gratuity payments at this time,” said Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a Defense Department spokesman.

House lawmakers, though, are planning to vote Wednesday on a bill to restore funding for the payments. And Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), on Tuesday accused the Obama administration of needlessly withholding the money…

The Pentagon says it has specific instructions from its budget office not to make payments for deaths that occurred after 11:59pm on Sept. 30, 2013.

And that’s about enough…We should all demand – demand – the name of the imbecile who made this decision (I am certain that it came from Mr. Obama’s inner-circle) and demand – demand – that person’s resignation, terminating that person’s governmental career complete with withheld benefits.

President Obama is the Commander in Chief and that position mandates a responsibility to care for the whole of the military family. This responsibility is absolute and non-discretionary. That this situation even exists must – must and without question – rest on Mr. Obama’s shoulders personally.

In fact, if one of the duties of the Presidency is being Commander in Chief, this abdication of responsibility to our soldiers and their families (they are considered military families and many live on military bases, shop at military base PXs, etc.) for political purposes should be deemed an impeachable offense; disavowing any aspect of the position of Commander in Chief must be considered a “high crime and misdemeanor.”

We, as a nation, have been subjected to the arrogance and bully-tactics of Mr. Obama’s Chicago Progressive political mindset long enough. We have been subjected to the sycophancy of a Progressive mainstream media continuously lobbing softball questions to this president; ignoring not only the execution of poor government, but scandals that – in more than one case – have cost Americans their lives. I contend that this is too high a price for a country to pay just because Progressive ideologues insists on executing the politically correct, “social justice,” Marxist transformation of our nation, purely for power, fame and fortune.

It is time to define Progressivism for what it is: a destructive force that is antithetical to our Founders’ vision of a limited government and a free people. It is also time to confront Progressivism at every level, in every governmental chamber, on every street corner and in every individual.

Progressivism is not unlike Islamo-fascism in that the ideology is not – not –compatible with the Natural Law right to individual liberty and the overall concepts of self-reliance and freedom. It also stands as just as lethal a threat to our nation.

That Mr. Obama has not already addressed the subject of getting the fallen soldiers’ families their promised death benefits and respectful transportation to Dover AFB for the arrival of the caskets is beyond disgraceful. If Mr. Obama had a shred of decency; an ounce of honor, he would have already ordered a solution to this problem from the available Pentagon funding (and yes, there is money there to satisfy this situation). That he hasn’t should result in his resignation from office…immediately.

About Frank Salvato

Frank Salvato is the Executive Director for BasicsProject.org a non-partisan, 501(c)(3) research and education initiative focusing on Constitutional Literacy and the threats of Islamic jihadism and Progressive neo-Marxism. His writing has been recognized by the US House International Relations Committee and the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention. His organization, BasicsProject.org, partnered in producing the original national symposium series addressing the root causes of radical Islamist terrorism. He is a member of the International Analyst Network and has been a featured guest on al Jazeera’s Listening Post, Radio Belgrade One, ITN Production’s Truthloader Program in the UK and on Russia Today. Mr. Salvato sits on the board of directors for Founders Alliance USA, a solutions-oriented non-profit organization. He also serves as the managing editor for The New Media Journal.

A letter to America from the Tea Party

Dear Patriot,

Barack Obama has done it again. He has gone on the attack against the Tea Party. During his speech about the non-existent negotiations regarding the partial government shutdown.
I’m not going to do it until the more extreme parts of the Republican Party stop forcing John Boehner to issue threats about our economy.
 
That’s right. You’re extreme. Ted Cruz is extreme. Mike Lee is extreme. Rand Paul is extreme. What makes you an extremist in the eyes of Barack Obama? You support and stand for the Constitution. How disgusting is that! The President of the United States despises those who support the Constitution.
And if Barack Obama wants to find an extremist, he need only look in the mirror. Imagine, we have a president who sought out the Marxist professors and who taught the ‘Rules for Radicals’, a book dedicated to Lucifer, tactics of Saul Alinksy! And he wants to call us radicals????
We must fight against the extreme radical Marxist Barack Obama and his minions who are determined to destroy this nation. But, we cannot do it without you. In order to win, we must match his deep pockets. We cannot afford to lose this fight. If you want freedom in America, then now is the time to stand with us.

Thank you,
Jennifer Burke
Senior Writer

TSA To Roll Out “Covert Surveillance” Vans

Details of snooping technology kept secret

Paul Joseph Watson
September 26, 2013

In another indication of how the TSA is expanding its turf way beyond airport security, the federal agency is about to roll out high-tech vehicles that will utilize secret technology to conduct “covert surveillance operations” in cities around the country.

Image: DHS Surveillance Van.

According to a synopsis posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website (PDF), the TSA is set to purchase technology to retrofit three vans in Arlington, VA, Chicago, IL, and San Francisco, CA in order to convert them into surveillance vehicles that will “conduct covert surveillance operations in the course of investigations.”

Precisely where such covert surveillance will take place is not mentioned, although in 2010 it was revealed that US government agencies were already using roving street surveillance vans that deployed backscatter x-ray vision technology to inspect other vehicles.

In 2011, the Electronic Privacy Information Center also revealed plans for the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA to roll out mobile surveillance vans that had long-distance X-ray capability and eye movement tracking.

TSA Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) teams are responsible for around 10,000 checkpoints every year in the US, and have expanded from airports to bus & train terminals and even highways despite the fact that there is “no proof that the roving viper teams have foiled any terrorist plots or thwarted any major threat to public safety,” according to the L.A. Times.

The total cost of outfitting just three vans with the covert surveillance technology will be a jaw-dropping $160,000 dollars.

Despite their tax dollars paying for such equipment, American citizens are not privy to any detailed information on what this surveillance system will actually entail.

Image: “Access Denied” on details of snoop tech.

The TSA vehicles will be fitted with Crime Point IP Network Surveillance technology. When attempting to access details of the technology via the Crime Point website, the user is met with the message, “Due to its sensitive nature, the product content on this website is restricted to law enforcement professionals and government agencies only,” and a password is required to go any further.

Although the general public is barred from scrutinizing specific details, the company says that it provides “covert outdoor video systems” that “incorporate the latest emerging technologies.”

Crime Point provides surveillance vans of its own but, like details of the surveillance systems, that information is also restricted.

The legality of the TSA conducting “covert surveillance” of Americans, whether it be at transport hubs or on highways, conflicts with the Fourth Amendment, which protects the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

Infowars.com

IRS Watchdog: $67 Million Missing from Obamacare Slush Fund

 

The IRS is unable to account for $67 million spent from a slush fund established for Obamacare implementation, according to a TIGTA report released today.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The IRS is unable to account for $67 million spent from a slush fund established for Obamacare implementation, according to a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) report released today.

The “Health Insurance Reform Implementation Fund” (HIRIF) was tucked into Obamacare in order to give the IRS money to enforce the tax provisions of the healthcare law.  The fund, totaling some $1 billion of taxpayer money, was used to roll out enforcement mechanisms for the approximately 50 tax provisions of Obamacare. 

According to the report:  “Specifically, the IRS did not account for or attempt to quantify approximately $67 million [from the slush fund] of indirect ACA costs incurred for Fiscal Years 2010 through 2012.”

The report also found several other abuses of taxpayer funds, including:

Travel abuse:  The report states, “Specifically, we identified 38 IRS employees in two judgmentally selected business units whose travel was charged to the HIRIF in FY 2012, but no portion of their salary and related benefits was charged to the HIRIF.” In short, the IRS was not making sure that employee travel reimbursements had anything to do with the purpose of the fund. This is not the first time that IRS employee travel has created a scandal for the agency.

1,272 IRS Obamacare enforcement agents: The report estimates that total slush fund spending cost taxpayers the equivalent of 1,272 new full time IRS agents.

The IRS requested an additional 859 IRS Obamacare enforcement agents for Fiscal Year 2013: According to the report, “The IRS informed us that it requested $360 million and 859 FTEs for FY 2013 to continue implementation of the ACA. However, the IRS did not receive this requested amount for FY 2013.”

To add insult to injury, the IRS has told the Inspector General that it will comply with the recommendations made in the report; unfortunately, the slush fund has been fully spent, making that promise meaningless.

Lib’s want to control what you may read!

Drudge hates new shield bill, but is defining ‘journalist’ really ‘fascist’?

A media shield law approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee defines a “real reporter” deserving of extra protection. Bloggers, “citizen journalists,” and others cry “foul!”

By Staff writer / September 14, 2013 in The Christian Science Monitor

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. asks questions during a hearing on Capitol Hill. Sen. Feinstein says a “17-year-old blogger” doesn’t deserve a legal shield.

In its attempt to define who’s a journalist and who’s not, is the US Senate trying to say that Thomas Paine, a corset-maker, wouldn’t have deserved the same protections from government heavy-handedness as a newspaper publisher like Ben Franklin?

The first version of a media shield law that handily made it through the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday defined for the first time what constitutes a “real reporter” deserving of extra protection versus what Sen. Dianne Feinstein called a “17-year-old blogger” who doesn’t deserve a legal shield.

While Mr. Paine eventually edited magazines in the United States, he’s best known for his pamphleteering days, when he self-published “Common Sense,” one of the American Revolution’s most poignant calls to arms. Modern bloggers often see themselves as the inheritors of the pamphleteering tradition, and many wondered on Friday whether Paine would be covered under the proposed law.

That Congress is attempting to define “journalist” at all in order to expand protections after a number of high-profile leak cases and ensuing Justice Department prosecutions caused blog impresario Matt Drudge to call Ms. Feinstein a “fascist” on Twitter, suggesting that the law would subvert a free press by giving institutional advantage to government-approved media outlets.

“Federal judge once ruled Drudge ‘is not a reporter, a journalist, or a newsgatherer,’” Mr. Drudge, proprietor of the massive news aggregator site Drudge Report, Tweeted Friday. “Millions of readers a day come for cooking recipes??!”

On its face, the proposed shield law doesn’t affect the First Amendment, which at any rate doesn’t guarantee anybody’s right to publish whatever they want. The bill simply adds extra protections against being forced to testify about sources for established reporters and freelancers with a “considerable” amount of publishing experience. It also allows a judge to make a declaration as to who’s a journalist and who’s not in an attempt to build the shield as wide as possible.

“All we’re doing is adding privilege to existing First Amendment rights, so there is, logically, zero First Amendment threat out of this,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, (D) of Rhode Island.

‘Manchurian president’ ushering in Islamic caliphate?

WND EXCLUSIVE

Published: 22 hours ago

‘A tidal wave of change already reaping disastrous results

Since assuming office, President Obama has weakened America both domestically and abroad by emboldening U.S. enemies and tacitly supporting Muslim Brotherhood revolutions that have empowered Islamic radicals, charges a new book.

In “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office,”New York Times bestselling authors Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliott demonstrate that Obama’s policies have been helping to install Muslim Brotherhood-friendly regimes to the detriment of U.S. national security and world stability.

“Obama’s policies are installing political Islam throughout the Middle East and North Africa in a tidal wave of change already reaping disastrous results for those regions as well as for U.S. interests there,” write Klein and Elliott.

The authors compare Obama’s actions to the policies of Jimmy Carter, which weakened the secular Shah’s regime in Iran, arguably ushering in a Shiite Islamic revolution that continues to this day to support and carry out acts of terrorism worldwide.

Aaron Klein’s “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office” is available now, autographed, at WND’s Superstore

Klein and Elliott spotlight the central role Obama played in the downfall of U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak, citing information that indicates elements of the anti-Mubarak uprising in 2011, particularly political aspects, were being coordinated with the U.S.

“Impeachable Offenses”presents new information the Obama administration worked behind the scenes with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood to facilitate a transfer of power after Mubarak’s resignation.

Islamic caliphate?

Mubarak was only the beginning, write Klein and Elliott. Obama’s support for a U.S. ally’s ouster and replacement with radical Islamic elements would be repeated numerous times in the Middle East and North Africa, to the great detriment of the American war on terror, the authors write.

“Impeachable Offenses” spotlights Obama’s role in the downfall of Tunisian President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, who fled Tunisia Jan. 14, 2011. Ben Ali largely was seen as an ally of the West, even working behind the scenes with Israel on occasion.

Another U.S. ally forced to step down after mass protests was Yemen’s president Ali Abdullah Saleh, who was considered a crucial ally in the U.S. fight against al-Qaida in his country and throughout the Middle East.

Klein and Elliott present evidence Obama was involved in Saleh’s ouster, which brought the Muslim Brotherhood-founded Islah party to rule.

The U.S. similarly has called for the king of Morocco, Mohammed VI, one of the most Western-oriented leaders in North Africa, to open his monarchy to a power-sharing agreement with a new parliament to be voted on by the people.

While the king still retains vast powers, he now shares in a coalition government with the Justice and Development Party, which won a plurality of the vote, the first under the country’s new constitution. The party advocates a society governed by Islam and has been described as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Book makes impeachment case

Klein and Elliott bill their book as a well-documented indictment of Obama based on major alleged violations.

Among the alleged offenses enumerated in the book:

  • Obamacare not only is unconstitutional but illegally bypasses Congress, infringes on states’ rights and marking an unprecedented and unauthorized expansion of IRS power.
  • Sidestepping Congress, Obama already has granted largely unreported de facto amnesty to millions of illegal aliens using illicit interagency directives and executive orders.
  • The Obama administration recklessly endangered the public by releasing from prison criminal illegal aliens at a rate far beyond what is publicly known.
  • The president’s personal role in the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi attack, with new evidence regarding what was transpiring at the U.S. mission prior to the assault – arguably impeachable activities in and of themselves.
  • Illicit edicts on gun control in addition to the deadly “Fast and Furious” gun-running operation intended, the book shows, to collect fraudulent gun data.
  • From “fusion centers” to data mining to drones to alarming Department of Homeland Security power grabs, how U.S. citizens are fast arriving at the stage of living under a virtual surveillance regime.
  • New evidence of rank corruption, cronyism and impeachable offenses related to Obama’s first-term “green” funding adventures.
  • The illegality of leading a U.S.-NATO military campaign without congressional approval.
  • Obama has weakened America both domestically and abroad by emboldening enemies, tacitly supporting a Muslim Brotherhood revolution, spurning allies and minimizing the threat of Islamic fundamentalism.

This is Klein and Elliott’s fourth book investigating the Obama administration. The other titles are “Fool Me Twice,” “Red Army” and “The Manchurian President.”

Defense Department training manual characterizes Founding Fathers as ‘extremists’

Defense Department training manual used by thousands of troops characterizes Founding Fathers as ‘extremists’

By Michael Zennie in MailOnline

|

A Defense Department training manual for a course taken by thousands of U.S. service members refers to the Founding Fathers as extremists and, critics say, implies that many political conservatives are also extreme.

The document is part of a lesson plan for the Defense Equal Opportunity Advisers Course, a 12-week class for servicemen who are trained on how to spot discrimination on military bases and tell commanders about things that are ‘inappropriate’ for maintaining diversity in the military.

So far this year, about 3,200 soldiers from all branches of the military have taken the class that used the training manual in question, Bryan Ripple, public affairs officer for the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute, told MailOnline.

Furthermore, the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute stood by the assertion that the colonists who took up arms against the British were extremists. Extremists? The Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute stands by a training document's claim that the colonists - including the Founding Fathers - were 'extremists'

Extremists? The Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute stands by a training document’s claim that the colonists – including the Founding Fathers – were ‘extremists’

The documents were among 133 pages related to ‘extremist groups’ that were obtained by the conservative group Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act request filed earlier this year.

Chris Farrell, the research director of Judicial Watch, said the training manuals seem to single out conservatives.

‘They deliberately pick on and attempt to demonize persons who hold lawful legitimate viewpoints that are different than theirs.

The training manual was published by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute, a services school responsible for diversity training at Patrick Air Force Base near Cocoa Beach, Florida.

Under a section in the study guide labeled ‘Extremist Ideologies,’ the course study guide reads: ‘In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.’

Mr Ripple told the MailOnline that DEOMI – which was responsible for writing the training manual – stands by the characterization of the Founding Fathers as extremists.

‘We’re not saying that’s a bad thing, but we’re saying they went against the British government and if you follow the definition of the term, the colonists meet the definition of extremists,’ he said.

The training manual was written by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute

The training manual was written by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute, a service academy that trains military and personnel on how to deal with diversity issues

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch – which made public the training guide – said the language used in the manual seems to target conservative members of the armed forces.

‘The Obama administration has a nasty habit of equating basic conservative values with terrorism.  And now, in a document full of claptrap, its Defense Department suggests that the Founding Fathers, and many conservative Americans, would not be welcome in today’s military,’ he said.

Later, it goes on to make reference to the KKK and notes that Equal Opportunity Advisers should watch out for different behaviors these days when looking for white supremacists.

‘Nowadays, instead of dressing in sheets or publicly espousing hate messages, many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights and how to make the world a better place,’ the document reads.

States rights and individual liberties are core values of many Tea Party groups and other libertarian-leaning political organizations.