Bin Laden: Alive? or Speaking from the grave via memorex?

Here is a VERY interesting video where Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto states very casually that Bin Laden was killed…..of course, she was murdered not long after this interview.

Below is the caption from the video:

“Tried to email Al-Jazeera for clarification of this claim. As yet NO response. After the BBC censored this clip and then reinstated it, then some of them now claiming they NEVER censored it, the mystery DEEPENS. With Benazir Bhutto assassinated the motive arises in that she quite clearly leads not only her death to the door of the Pakistanis but also responsibility for the 9/11 attacks are implicated as well. Aired on 2nd November 2007,David Frost the presenter did not challenge her on her assertion (2:14) that Bin Laden was murdered, so maybe he was and the West has not announced it.
It would make sense that the West would cover up such a truth, as Bin Laden is needed as a “bogeyman” to continue the farcical “War on Terror””

Did she KNOW too much?

Another State Of The Union Address preceded by the phantom menace

Steve Watson
Monday, Jan 25, 2010

A purportedly new audio tape of Osama Bin Laden claiming responsibility for the failed Christmas Day underwear bombing attempt has surfaced, once again, at the most politically opportune time for the White House, with the State of The Union Address now just 48 hours away.

The voice on the tape, claiming to be Bin Laden, personally addresses the president with the opening “From Osama to Obama.”

The tape, aired by Al Jazeera yesterday, praises the actions of “the heroic warrior” Omar Farouk Abdulmutallab, and warns that “God willing, our attacks against you will continue as long as you maintain your support to Israel.”

It is unclear as to why Bin Laden waited over four weeks to deliver his message at a time when the underwear bomber story has all but dropped out of the headlines.

One thing is certain however, Al Qaeda seem to like running P.R. for the White House. Previously tapes have been released hours before the State of The Union Address in both 2006 and 2007. Bin Laden also previously popped up on the eve of the 2004 election, leading the late Walter Cronkite to muse that the whole farce was a Karl Rove orchestrated set-up.

With the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq still at the height of unpopularity, Obama has found his approval rating lower at this stage than for any US president since Eisenhower…….”

Skin Cream made from Human Fetal Tissue? Is Cannibalism next?


Stem Cell research paid for by our tax dollars provided by Obama.

It appears this story first ran in Nov, 09. However, this is the first I’ve seen of it and thought perhaps others may not have seen this story either.

“A company well-named Neocutis now offers a skin cream made from human fetal tissue. To quote the company’s Web site: ‘Inspired by fetal skin’s unique properties, Neocutis’s proprietary technology uses cultured fetal skin cells to obtain an optimal, naturally balanced mixture of skin nutrients.’ This outfit, it may not surprise Gentle Reader to learn, is based in San Francisco, and says its product can ‘turn back time to create flawless baby-skin again.’ What good news for those suffering from dry skin — and who doesn’t this time of year? … But there’s sure to be some reactionary who objects to progress, and a niggling objection did indeed surface here and there to this latest advance in the commodification of the unborn. In its defense, Neocutis issued a statement to all concerned: ‘Our view — which is shared by most medical professionals and patients — is that the limited, prudent and responsible use of donated fetal skin tissue can continue to ease suffering, speed healing, save lives and improve the well-being of many patients around the globe.’ And improve the company’s balance sheet, too. Call it another benefit from the ever-growing abortion industry. And another triumph of supply-side economics! Create the supply and demand will follow. It does make one wonder why, if the use of human fetuses for such purposes is so unalloyed a good, the company feels the need to assure us that the practice is ‘limited, prudent and responsible.’ Is that a faint echo of some vestigial conscience?” –Arkansas Democrat-Gazette editor Paul Greenberg

Below is from their website.


NEOCUTIS technology platform relies on the use of cultured fetal skin cells obtained from a cell bank for treating differing skin conditions.

The dedicated cell bank was originally established for wound healing and burn treatments using a single biopsy of donated fetal skin following a one-time medical termination.

The cultured cells can be used to produce skin constructs for wound healing or can be incorporated as cell lysate in a topical carrier for use in dermatology and skin care.

To date, the cultured cells originating from this cell bank are used in research and product development in the following areas:

• acute and chronic wound healing
• eczema and psoriasis, and
• vulvodynia, vulvar vestibulitis

Having developed a topical preparation for different skin conditions, the use of this preparation for daily skin care became apparent. Today this same cell bank also provides a lasting supply of cells for producing Neocutis’ proprietary skin care ingredient Processed Skin Cell Proteins (PSP®).


Cosmetic distribution company located in San Francisco with own sales fore targeting skin professionals such as doctors, plastic surgens and estheticians with high technology cosmeceutical skin care line based on biotechnology.

Similar items


<!–NKY LAB ,–><!–Pt Konnexa ,–><!–World Business Group,–><!–AMRE GROUP ,–><!–Softto Company Limited,–><!–Avenue ,–>NKY LAB ,Pt Konnexa , World Business Group ,AMRE GROUP , Softto Company Limited ,Avenue ,




Neocutis Deceiving the Public about Aborted Fetal Material in Skin Products

Contact: Children of God for Life, 615-898-1070,

TENNESSEE, Nov. 3 /Christian Newswire/ — In response to Children of God for Life’s press release October 27, 2009, Aborted fetal material used in anti-wrinkle cream, (See ) thousands of angry consumers have begun taking action. Many have called or written to Neocutis to complain and unfortunately, they are receiving jaded, if not patently false responses from the company President, Mark Lemcko.

“Neocutis is not being honest with the public about the abortions involved in their skin cream products,” stated Debi Vinnedge, Executive Director of Children of God for Life, who researched the questionable products after they received an inquiry from a concerned consumer.

For example, Neocutis responded to one inquiry that there was only one abortion involved when in fact their own website shows that “The Laboratoire de Médecine Foetale at the Medical School of the University Hospital of Lausanne has worked extensively with fetal cells since 1995 and resulted in several patent applications.”

Neocutis states they were formed in 2002 as spin-off of the University Medical School and began working to protect “the intellectual property of their proprietary technology.”

Yet the abortion used to provide the fetal material for their products was done in 2004.

In what can only be called suspect at best, Neocutis also stated that the 2004 abortion was done because the “pregnancy could not come to term” and that “the mother’s life was in danger.” But Experimental Gerontology 44 (2009 208-218) makes no mention of this at all.

What the research paper states is that the fetal material was obtained from a 14 weeks gestation male baby “after pregnancy termination” in which they “obtained informed and written consent.” Considering that they dedicated an entire section to the “Ethical Aspects of working with human fetal cells” in which they attempted to sanitize what they were doing, if the abortion was somehow medically needed, it would have been documented as such.

Even more appalling was Mr. Lemcko’s note to another letter writer that he “felt comfortable with his decision” after studying the 2005 statement by the Pontifical Academy for Life, Moral Reflection on Vaccines Prepared From Cells Derived from Aborted Human Foetuses.

“It is unconscionable that Mr. Lemcko would use the Vatican statement to defend his actions,” Vinnedge stated. “We are talking apples and oranges here — health vs. pure vanity.”

Both the Pontifical Academy for Life and Pope Benedict XVI’s December 2008 encyclical, Dignitas Personae, cautiously noted that parents could use the vaccines in question “on a temporary basis” and in situations of “grave inconvenience” or “considerable danger” to the health of their children and society.

“What do you suppose the Vatican would say about using these cosmetic creams?” asked Vinnedge.

Children of God for Life is urging the public to take action by contacting the company and they have posted an area where people can “sound off” on their website.  Further information is available at

Story source:


Removal of Bush Era Restrictions Raises Moral and Ethical Questions

President Barack Obama has signed an executive order overturning the August, 2001 ban on federal funding for certain kinds of embryonic stem cell research. How one feels about the decision depends on how one feels about when human life begins…….


Related Posts:


Some News on Israel: Interesting point of Views regarding Zion

An important message to two-faced trolls that still lurk about: Ghost in the machine–the REAL deceiver, Thanks for spotlighting this VERY important revelation I discovered. Sorry I no longer allow ping backs to paid political trolls. Maybe your time would be best spent elsewhere, as you are not making money off my participation anymore. Thank the Lord I found out the truth and you really should move on with your troll self. I want NO PART of your deception or lies.

Folks: Now for the GOOD stuff—please also read the comments as allot of information was collected and shown there. {This is a collection of information and comments over a period of time. I apologize if it seems a bit sporadic, but this was a learning process and moment of TRUTH unfolding. I will leave it as written in hopes that another who questions these things also finds the TRUTH as I did. Take this all to prayer to our Heavenly Father for discernment.}

Report: Greek deputy prime minister likens IDF action in Gaza to Nazi armies

22 January 2010

According to the ‘Jerusalem Post’, Greek Deputy Prime Minister Theodoros Pangalos has returned an Israeli gift of three bottles of Golan wine in protest against Israel’s “illegal occupation” and the military action in Gaza.

The Israeli Embassy in Athens had sent the wine to Pangalos, who is in charge of coordinating Greek foreign and defense policy as well as economic and social policy, as a gift for the festive season. In a letter sent to the Embassy together with the returned wine, Pangalos said he had been taught not to steal or accept products of theft. “So I cannot possibly accept this gift and I must return it back to you. As you know, your country occupies illegally the Golan Heights which belong to Syria, according to international law and numerous decisions by the international community,” Pangalos was quoted by the ‘Jerusalem Post’ as writing to Israel’s ambassador in Greece, Ali Yihiye.

Referring to Nazi atrocities in Greece and Poland during World War II, Pangalos went on to state that the actions “of the Israel military in Gaza remind the Greek people of holocausts such as in Kalavrita, or Doxato, or Distomo, and certainly in the ghetto of Warsaw.” He called for an end to Hamas’s terrorist activities but also likened Israel’s actions in Gaza to those of Nazi Germany. “I take the opportunity to express my hope that Israel will find security into its internationally recognized borders and the terrorist activities against Israel territory by Hamas or anybody else will be contained and made impossible, but I also hope that your government will cease practicing the policy of collective punishment, which was applied on a mass scale by Hitler and his armies.”

In the 1960s, Pangalos fought against the military dictatorship in Greece, and in 1968, the junta deprived him of his Greek citizenship, which was later restored. Between 1996 and 1999, he served as Greece’s foreign minister. Pangalos is famous for his colorful language and his derogatory comments about foreign dignitaries. During the 1990s he described the Turkish establishment as “murderers, rapists and thieves”.

Holocaust-denying bishop sheds doubts on Israel’s legitimacy

21 January 2010

The ultra-traditionalist Catholic Bishop Richard Williamson, whose denial of the extent of the Holocaust created an uproar a year ago, in a French video clip has called the discussions between the Vatican and his Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) a “dialogue of the deaf.” Williamson is one of the four SSPX bishops whose excommunication was lifted by Pope Benedict only days after his controversial views on the Holocaust were broadcast on Swedish television. In an interview conducted in French and published on the video-sharing website ‘Dailymotion’, Williamson said the two sides had “absolutely irreconcilable” positions.

He discussed a number of issues with Pierre Panet, a man identified by the French Catholic newspaper ‘La Croix’ as a far-right politician. When asked about the negotiations under way with the Vatican to reintegrate the SSPX into the Roman Catholic Church, the British bishop said in fluent French:  “I think that will end up as a dialogue of the deaf. The two positions are absolutely irreconcilable… Either the SSPX becomes a traitor, or Rome converts or it is a dialogue of the deaf.”

The SSPX, which rejects the Second Vatican Council and the Catholic Church’s reconciliation with the Jews, broke from Rome in 1988 when Archbishop Lefebvre disobeyed Pope John Paul II and consecrated four bishops, including Williamson. Pope Benedict lifted the excommunications of the four in January 2009 and started negotiations aimed at finding a way to reintegrate the traditionalists into the Catholic Church. Recently , Benedict expressed hope that he would be able to reestablish full communion with the SSPX.

Williamson pointed out that for a real Catholic, only the Catholic faith was true, and all other religions were “more or less true and more or less false” and that hence there could be no agreement between the faiths on a religious level.

When Panet asked for him his views on Israel, Williamson said: “A lot of people think this state is legitimate, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is.” He also declared that the biblical notion of a “chosen people” had changed with the advent of Jesus Christ and that since then only those who had faith in Jesus were part of the chosen people.

The bishop also called Hamas and other groups in the Middle East “resistance movements” and said that the situation in the Middle East was “particularly difficult since 1947.” In that year, the United Nations adopted a plan to create a Jewish and an Arab state in Palestine.

Meanwhile, a court spokesman in Germany said that the trial of Williamson in the city of Regensburg on charges of incitement and Holocaust denial would not commence before mid-March.

Official denies saying that Hamas Charter calling for Israel’s destruction will be changed

21 January 2010

Hamas is reportedly ready to accept Israel’s right to exist and prepared to nullify its charter which calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, according to Aziz Dwaik, Hamas’s most senior representative in the West Bank and the elected speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council. According to the ‘Jerusalem Post’ Dwaik made these remarks during a meeting in Hebron with British millionaire David Martin Abrahams, who maintains close ties with senior Israeli and British government officials.

However, the Hamas politician later on Thursday denied that he had made any such statements. Dwaik was quoted on the Hamas website as saying that the report was “inaccurate” and that Hamas would never recognize the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands.

Abrahams told the ‘Jerusalem Post’ that he would urge Milliband to “consider the implications of Hamas’s positive overtures.”

“The [Hamas] charter was drafted more than 20 years ago,” Dwaik was quoted by the newspaper as saying, adding that “No one wants to throw anyone into the sea.”


I decide to research MORE and have come across several links that I found compelling and thought to share those findings here.

One google asking where did the term Nazi come from produced a STARTLING interpretation!!!

“Do we know where the NAZI-SS comes from? Who are the ASHKENAZI Jews?”

It is NOW apparent to me, that not ALL JEWS believe the SAME things,  therefore,  as I look back to my growing up years and remember how we were told without question, that it was America’s DUTY to protect Israel and the jews because they were God’s Chosen People., I  find now, that I MUST question the WHY of it all. (Thanks P and H—you opened my mind by your accusation)

Also, if they wanted a “Nation”, why did they not use the one established in 1928 FOR those European “Jew” Converts?  Birobidzhan is STILL there and waiting.

Was the messege stamped into our minds as a blind ideology to consider them ONE AND THE SAME?  I think MORE research is in order to hopefully understand WHY we American’s just assume that All Jews follow the same “doctrine”.

I think that cruelty and mass murder of or by ANY race to be considered wrong!  And I also find it naive for some to NOT believe or understand that rival tribes DO KILL one another for various reasons. I mean for starters, Cain Killed Abel….

I have a faint memory of Pres. Jimmy Carter being against the “Nationhood making” of Israel….perhaps he is not as “Anti-Semitic” as the media portrayed him to be…..but I need to research this and post the findings another day.

KENITES: Offspring of Cain who is the son of Satan “serpent seed’  & Eve  Gen 3

Disguised as our brother Judah but are NOT Judah (Not to say all Jews are Kenites, but there are those who have infiltrated the tribe of Judah and have disguised themselves & claim a heritage which is not theirs.)  Rev 2:9; Rev 3:9  Marking the sons of Cain for documented proof using the KJV Bible proving this infiltration.

Matt 13:24-43 Parable of the Wheat and Tares

 Jer 24 Good and Bad Figs return to Palestine…the generation of the FIG TREE



Jews United against Zionism


A collection of Zionist Hate Playlist:


Some Interesting Videos I found:


Israel calls UN Gaza report ‘anti-Semitic’

(AFP) – 18 hours ago

JERUSALEM — A UN report on Israel’s 22-day offensive against Hamas-controlled Gaza is anti-Semitic, an Israeli government minister said, as the Jewish state prepares to formally respond to its allegations of war crimes. (When did the Jewry become Semites aka ARABS? and HOW can disagreeing with Jewry be considered Anti -Semite? Oh, I get it. If you DON’T agree with Jewry, or if they are held accountable for their wrong doings, then of course, you are an Anti-Semite!)

“The Goldstone Report … and similar reports, are simply a type of anti-Semitism,” Diaspora and Information Minister Yuli Edelstein told the YNet news agency ahead of a trip to New York, where he will present Israel’s rebuttal on Thursday.

YNet’s report suggested the Israeli leadership is planning an all-out attack on the report to coincide with Wednesday’s anniversary of the 1945 liberation of Auschwitz……


Greece in the News again!

Greek government slow to respond to rising anti-Semitism

By Jean Cohen
Published: Friday, January 29, 2010 1:09 AM EST

ATHENS, Greece (JTA) — Until recently, Greece had gone a long time without violent anti-Semitism.

The few manifestations of anti-Semitism here appeared mostly in the form of graffiti, racist screeds in marginal, neo-fascist publications, or the occasional verbal epithet leveled against a Greek Jew.

But then came the Gaza war a year ago, inflaming passions against Jews and setting off a series of anti-Semitic incidents.


Progressives: MLK was a RADICAL SOCIALIST?? OMG?


The Progressives are NOW attempting to change the history of MLK and what he STOOD FOR in order to pave the way and give credence for their RADICAL PROGRESSIVE movement.  These hate filled communist will stop at nothing, even corrupting the GREAT Christian MLK  Peaceful civil rights movement to do it.

Glenn goes over a radio interview with NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, where he basically states Martin Luther King Jr. was a “somewhat” radical Socialist!

NAACP was headed by WHITE Zionist for YEARS, now they have handed it over to a majority of RADICAL PROGRESSIVES…..that are attempting to CHANGE the movement of MLK….
They are attempting to HI-Jack his Peace movement—to change HISTORY, just as they did the Democrat Party, to mold it into their communist/progressive agenda by LINKING the  TRUE CHRISTIAN GREATNESS of Spirit of MLK,  to that of the Radical PROGRESSIVE agenda being led by Barack Hussein Obama. Un-freaking believable!!!!

I believe the same organization that murdered JFK, ALSO,  murdered  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr,  because of his Civil Rights PEACE Movement.

The Shadow Government aka Powers that Be aka BIG MONEY LENDERS, WANTED a race war amongst us  (Another Civil War) in order to divide our great nation so THEY could take over every aspect of our society, strip our country of not only it’s wealth, but the values, principals, and pride that made our Republic strong and unique in the world.

Looking at the racial rhetoric aspect  from the past election of 2008, looks like the “Money Lenders” are leading us to our own destruction…Americans HOLD TRUE to the principals of great men like JFK and MLK, stand UNITED and REFUSE to buy into The Money Lenders revolutionary war games.


MLK–”Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning….The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.”

But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone.


Possible Related Posts:

Should Presidental interpretation “supersede” judical court rulings?

Will Barrack Hussein Obama now activate his Regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein, in order to figure out a “Backdoor”  to overthrow our Supreme Court?

I find this statement ominous in the extreme!

“…We are going to talk with bipartisan congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision.” –Barack Obama

Supreme Court Ruling

WASHINGTON – A closely divided Supreme Court on Thursday swept away long-standing limits on campaign spending by unions and corporations.

In a much-anticipated 5-4 decision, the court’s conservative majority declared that the limits on so-called independent expenditures by corporations violate First Amendment free-speech rights. The decision means more money can be spent on federal elections, including this year’s midterm congressional elections.

“The government may regulate corporate political speech through disclaimer and disclosure requirements, but it may not suppress that speech altogether,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority.

The decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission does not affect direct corporate or union contributions to candidates. Those still will be banned. Nor does it cover spending from any of the thousands of political action committees set up by special interests.

Instead, the decision frees corporations and unions to spend from their own treasuries on ads and other advocacy efforts. It does so in several ways.

The decision strikes down part of a 2002 campaign finance law, which banned direct corporate spending on “electioneering communications” within 60 days of a general election and 30 days of a primary. The decision also reverses a 1990 Supreme Court decision that had upheld a broader federal ban on corporate campaign spending.

“Were the court to uphold these restrictions, the government could repress speech by silencing certain voices,” Kennedy wrote.

Corporations and unions still will have to disclose their sponsorship of ads run close to an election.

Justice John Paul Stevens, however, writing for the four dissenters, warned that the ruling would harm the political system as well as the court’s own reputation. In striking down certain corporate campaign spending limits, the court reversed its own precedents.

“The court’s ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the nation,” Stevens wrote.

Advocates and skeptics of the election spending limits agreed that the court’s 57-page majority opinion merits the term “landmark.” They disagreed sharply, though, over who will benefit.

League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski quickly warned that the ruling “will open the floodgates for oil companies like Exxon to spend vast sums of money to influence the outcome of federal elections.” More sanguine, legal scholar Ilya Shapiro of the libertarian Cato Institute insisted that “more spending – more political communication – leads to better informed voters.”

“This case will lead to more spending, and that’s a good thing,” agreed former Federal Election Commission member Bradley Smith.

Even the decision’s release suggested history in the making. Kibitzers waited on the Supreme Court’s steps, as justices convened in a rare special session. Stevens took the unusual step of reading aloud part of his 90-page dissent from the bench.

“The court’s ruling dramatically enhances the role of corporations and unions, and the narrow interests they represent … in determining who will hold public office,” Stevens wrote.

Kennedy was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts and associate justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

Associate justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined Stevens in dissent….


Part of Obama response to the ruling:

“With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. … We are going to talk with bipartisan congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision.” – President Barack Obama.


Statements made by the Regulatory Czar–Cass Sunstein

‘Beliefs and commitments’ of nation’s leader should supersede judges – The interpretation of federal law should be made not by judges but by the beliefs and commitments of the U.S. president and those around him, according to President Obama’s newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein.

“There is no reason to believe that in the face of statutory ambiguity, the meaning of federal law should be settled by the inclinations and predispositions of federal judges. The outcome should instead depend on the commitments and beliefs of the President and those who operate under him,” argued Sunstein.

This statement was the central thesis of Sunstein’s 2006 Yale Law School paper, “Beyond Marbury: The Executive’s Power to Say What the Law Is.” The paper, in which he argues the president and his advisers should be the ones to interpret federal laws, was obtained and reviewed by WND. Sunstein debated the precedent-setting 1803 case, Marbury v. Madison, which determined it is “emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” He lamented multiple recent examples of U.S. presidents interpreting law only to have their interpretations overturned by the Supreme Court.


As I see it, Obama broke his word to McCain about accepting Public Campaign Finance because he ended up getting over $744 MILLION dollars in private donations, much of which it came from,  is STILL unaccounted for!

After McCain accepted the public Finance, he ONLY got $84 Million! Now tell me who made out like a bandit here by LYING about accepting the public financing? The end justifies the means I’d say! (SEE COMMENT Section for MORE LINKS)

In November 2007, Obama answered “Yes” to Common Cause when asked “If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?”

Obama wrote: “In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election. My proposal followed announcements by some presidential candidates that they would forgo public financing so they could raise unlimited funds in the general election. The Federal Election Commission ruled the proposal legal, and Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has already pledged to accept this fundraising pledge. If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”

Not so “aggressively,” according to the McCain campaign, which argues that Obama did not discuss this or try to negotiate at all with the McCain campaign, despite writing that he would “aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”

The Obama campaign disputes this. Obama campaign counsel Bob Bauer met with McCain campaign counsel Trevor Potter and, according to Obama spox Bill Burton, Potter “immediately made it clear there was no basis for further discussion,” that they weren’t interested in any sort of agreement. “McCain and the RNC had spent months raising and spending money for the general election, and their basic attitude was ‘You’ll catch up,'” Burton says, suggesting that the Republicans were also turning a blind eye to the activities of 527s.

In April Obama seemed to be preparing an argument to opt out, as we noted at the time.

“We have created a parallel public financing system where the American people decide if they want to support a campaign they can get on the Internet and finance it, and they will have as much access and influence over the course and direction of our campaign that has traditionally been reserved for the wealthy and the powerful,” Obama said at the time.

Today he said something similar, telling supporters, “Instead of forcing us to rely on millions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs, you’ve fueled this campaign with donations of $5, $10, $20, whatever you can afford. And because you did, we’ve built a grassroots movement of over 1.5 million Americans. …You’ve already changed the way campaigns are funded because you know that’s the only way we can truly change how Washington works.”

Obama said, “I’m asking you to try to do something that’s never been done before. Declare our independence from a broken system, and run the type of campaign that reflects the grassroots values that have already changed our politics and brought us this far.”

Declaring independence from a “broken system”  by breaking a promise. Obama hopes you’ll care more about the former than the latter.

– jpt

UPDATE: McCain campaign communications director Jill Hazelbaker emails: “Today, Barack Obama has revealed himself to be just another typical politician who will do and say whatever is most expedient for Barack Obama. The true test of a candidate for President is whether he will stand on principle and keep his word to the American people.  Barack Obama has failed that test today, and his reversal of his promise to participate in the public finance system undermines his call for a new type of politics. Barack Obama is now the first presidential candidate since Watergate to run a campaign entirely on private funds. This decision will have far-reaching and extraordinary consequences that will weaken and undermine the public financing system.”


McCain and Obama both declined public financing in the primary contests, thus avoiding the spending limits that come attached to the money. McCain had initially applied for the money, however, and has been in a dispute with the Federal Election Commission over whether he needs commission approval to decline the primary election funds. The FEC insists that he does….”While presidential candidates have rejected public financing in primaries, no major party candidate has bypassed the system in the general election.”


Judge Napalitano weighs in on the ruling.

Related Links:


Possible Related Links:

2nd Amendment VIOLATION by Feds In Austin TX!! WTF?? Perry Where the HELL are YOU?


The Feds have OVERSTEPPED the bounds of OUR  2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights in Austin, Texas at a local gun show exhibit and sale!!

Anti gun, Anti-meat eaters, Anti-Tobacco, Healthcare with death panels, Anti-state rights, do we see a PATTERN developing here yet folks? Our Nation is under attack by a TYRANT Administration that is beginning to look allot like Hitler!!!!


Wake the Hell Up and SMELL the Dictatorship!!!!

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson

The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first. -Thomas Jefferson

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one.” – Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist in 1764. That was 230 years ago. -Thomas Jefferson

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.


BATF Notice Bans Private Gun Sales In Texas

There is no law to prevent private sales without a license, police issue “direction” on orders of Feds

Steve Watson
Monday, Jan 18, 2010

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is actively issuing directions banning private sales of guns without licenses at gun shows in Texas, despite there being no law to justify such demands.

A caller to the Alex Jones show brought attention to BATF notices handed out at the entrance of the Texas Gun And Knife Show, on North Lamaar, in Austin this past weekend.

The flyers (Click Here) state that anyone selling a firearm “will be asked to comply with” conditions including operating through a licensed FFL dealer. (See this report for highlights)

The notice also states that “Selling firearms in the parking lot will not be permitted.”

“The lady at the front desk used her ‘mommy voice’ to get everyone’s attention.” Scott from Austin told The Alex Jones show, noting that the owners of the private building where the gun show was held were contacted by the APD and the BATF and directed to hand out the notices.

Scott also told listeners that a petition in protest of the directions was being handed around at the show……(Go to Prison Planet  link below for the whole story!!!!!!!)


Bill HR 45



Update Jan 19,2010


They claim it was just a “Recommendation”??? Right!!! LOL

Judge for yourself—Go here to view the Flyer!

APD makes recommendations on illegal sales at gun shows
1/19/2010 7:36 PM
By: News 8 Austin Staff

The Austin Police Department said in the last year, eight people were arrested and convicted for illegal gun possession.

All of them were convicted felons or illegal immigrants, and all bought their weapons from unlicensed dealers at shows at the North Austin Event Center, on North Lamar Boulevard.

Now APD is making recommendations to crackdown on illegal sales at gun shows.

It’s not illegal for an unlicensed dealer to sell at the shows, but APD is urging promoters and property owners to require their vendors to have a license.

“There have been questions posed to us about whether or not we are trying to create new rules regarding the private sales of guns. We are not. We are just making recommendations to the property owner and how he can control the activity on his property in order to avoid ongoing violations of the law,” APD Detective TJ Vineyard said.

APD also recommends that promoters provide onsite security, so that sales are prohibited from taking place in parking lots.

So far, police said all property owners and managers have agreed to follow the recommendations.


New research into Adolf Hitler’s use of firearms registration lists to confiscate guns and the execution of their owners teaches a forceful lesson — one that reveals why the American people and Congress have rejected registering honest firearm owners.

After invading, Nazis used pre-war lists of gun owners to confiscate firearms, and many gun owners simply disappeared. Following confiscation, the Nazis were free to wreak their evil on the disarmed populace, such as on these helpless Jews from the Warsaw Ghetto.


t would be instructive at this time to recall why the American citizenry and Congress have historically opposed the registration of firearms. The reason is plain. Registration makes it easy for a tyrannical government to confiscate firearms and to make prey of its subjects. Denying this historical fact is no more justified than denying that the Holocaust occurred or that the Nazis murdered millions of unarmed people.

I am writing a book on Nazi policies and practices which sought to repress civilian gun ownership and to eradicate gun owners in Germany and in occupied Europe. The following sampling of my findings should give pause to the suggestion that draconian punishment of citizens for keeping firearms necessarily is a social good.

At the time of the Nazi attack on Jews known as Night of the Broken Glass, Heinrich Himmler, head of the Nazi SS and Police, ordered Jews disarmed (click for closeup). People’s Observor (Völkische Beobachter), Nov. 10, 1938.

Jews Forbidden to Possess Weapons
By Order of SS Reichsführer Himmler

Munich, November 10 [1938]

The SS Reichsführer and German Police Chief has issued the following Order:

Persons who, according to the Nürnberg law, are regarded as Jews, are forbidden to possess any weapon. Violators will be condemned to a concentration camp and imprisoned for a period of up to 20 years.

The Night of the Broken Glass (Kristallnacht)–the infamous Nazi rampage against Germany’s Jews–took place in November 1938. It was preceded by the confiscation of firearms from the Jewish victims. On Nov. 8, the New York Times reported from Berlin, “Berlin Police Head Announces ‘Disarming’ of Jews,” explaining:

The Berlin Police President, Count Wolf Heinrich von Helldorf, announced that as a result of a police activity in the last few weeks the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been “disarmed” with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment.1

On the evening of Nov. 9, Adolf Hitler, Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, and other Nazi chiefs planned the attack. Orders went out to Nazi security forces: “All Jewish stores are to be destroyed immediately . . . . Jewish synagogues are to be set on fire . . . . The Führer wishes that the police does not intervene. . . . All Jews are to be disarmed. In the event of resistance they are to be shot immediately.”2

All hell broke loose on Nov. 10: “Nazis Smash, Loot and Burn Jewish Shops and Temples.” “One of the first legal measures issued was an order by Heinrich Himmler, commander of all German police, forbidding Jews to possess any weapons whatever and imposing a penalty of twenty years confinement in a concentration camp upon every Jew found in possession of a weapon hereafter.”3 Thousands of Jews were taken away….

Searches of Jewish homes were calculated to seize firearms and assets and to arrest adult males. The American Consulate in Stuttgart was flooded with Jews begging for visas: “Men in whose homes old, rusty revolvers had been found during the last few days cried aloud that they did not dare ever again return to their places of residence or business. In fact, it was a mass of seething, panic-stricken humanity.”4

Himmler, head of the Nazi terror police, would become an architect of the Holocaust, which consumed six million Jews. It was self evident that the Jews must be disarmed before the extermination could begin….


Nazi Animal Rights Protection

Goebbels, Nazi Minister of Propaganda, noted:

“The Fuhrer is deeply religous, though completely anti-Christian. He views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so. It is a branch of the Jewish race… Both [Judaism and Christianity] have no point of contact to the animal element, and thus, in the end, they will be destroyed. The Fuhrer is a convinced vegetarian, on principle. His arguments cannot be refuted on any serious basis. They are totally unanswerable.”

Irrespective of whether Hitler, Goebbels or other leading Nazis were, in fact, devout vegetarians, their self-serving rhetoric, claiming the moral high ground, is consistent with that which has appeared from time to time on In that newsgroup, we have seen omnivores characterized as “barbarians,” “animal-killers,” “murderers,” and so forth. Clearly, many contemporary vegetarians regard themselves as ethically superior to omnivores…..


Hitler’s Anti-Tobacco Agenda

The state performer in antismoking propaganda was Adolf Hitler. As one magazine put it: “brother national socialist, do you know that our Führer is against smoking and think that every German is responsible to the whole people for all his deeds and emissions, and does not have the right to damage his body with drugs?”


Part 4

Part 5

Part 6


Possible Related Posts:


America Under Attack! Sunstein’s Unconstitutional Idealogy in our Court System?

Cass Sunstein is an animal rights activist with some pretty extreme views including banning hunting and eating meat, who also wants, not only regulations on the internet of what we can view, but to re-enact the Fairness Doctrine, to restrict what we can hear. And to top it off, he wants to control and revise property rights of which we own. Add to this, the promotion and advocacy of the Economic Bill Of Rights by FDR, his comparing the Institution of Traditional Marriage to that of a membership at a country club, harvesting organs from people without permission, saying an adult dog is more rational than a baby, claiming fetus “Use women as Incubators”, then what do you have?

UN-AMERICAN Sociopath is what I’d call it.

Plain and simple, un-american ideology which goes against everything our forefathers fought and died for!

Sunstein concludes that the Internet is in need of regulation because free choice does not always produce genuine freedom. Nothing characterizes Sunstein’s concept of freedom more than Rousseau’s injunction that men must be forced to be free(Jan.27,2009)…


Exclusive: Ellis Washington highlights czar’s disregard for liberty, Natural Law

“What Mussolini, Stalin and Mao did in the light to harm their citizens and deny them their fundamental human rights, Cass Sunstein, as Obama’s regulatory czar, will do in the night by slowly, irrevocably regulating America to death.”


Obama ‘Regulatory Czar’ has Secret Animal-Rights Agenda, Says Consumer Group Cass Sunstein supports outlawing hunting, phasing out meat eating, giving animals the right to file lawsuits; expert available for comment Washington, D.C. (PRWEB) January 15, 2009 — The nonprofit Center for Consumer Freedom ( said today that Cass Sunstein, the Harvard University Law School professor tapped by President Obama to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, has a secret aim to push a radical animal-rights agenda in the White House. Sunstein supports outlawing sport hunting, giving animals the legal right to file lawsuits, and using government regulations to phase out meat consumption. In a 2007 speech at Harvard University, Sunstein argued in favor of entirely “eliminating current practices such as … meat eating.” He also proposed: “We ought to ban hunting, I suggest, if there isn’t a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It’s time now.” Sunstein wrote in his 2004 book “Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions ” that “animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives … Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian-like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients’ behalf.” The Center for Consumer Freedom’s Director of Research, David Martosko, is available to discuss Cass Sunstein’s likely impact on typical elements of American life that involve the use of animals. Sunstein’s work could spell the end of animal agriculture, retail sales of meat and dairy foods, hunting and fishing, biomedical research, pet ownership, zoos and aquariums, traveling circuses, and countless other things Americans take for granted. Mr. Martosko said: “Cass Sunstein owes Americans an honest appraisal of his animal rights agenda as America’s top regulator. Americans don’t realize that the next four years could be full of bizarre initiatives plucked from the wildest dreams of the animal-rights fringe.

*Think about every outrageous idea PETA and the Humane Society of the United States have ever had, and imagine them all having the force of federal law. *

This doesn’t look good for hunters, ranchers, restaurateurs, biomedical researchers, or ordinary pet owners.” For an interview with Mr. Martosko about how Cass Sunstein’s appointment will serve the radical animal rights movement’s agenda in the White House, or for more information, contact Sarah Kapenstein at 202-463-7112.


Sunstein urges: Abolish Marriage, Adviser compares Institution to country club membership

Posted: October 23, 2009   12:30 am Eastern By Aaron Klein © 2009 WorldNetDaily

The U.S. government should abolish its sanctioning of marriage, argued Cass Sunstein, President Obama’s regulatory czar.

Sunstein proposed that the concept of marriage should become privatized, with the state only granting civil union contracts to couples wishing to enter into an agreement.

Sunstein explained marriage licensing is unnecessary, pointing out people stay committed to organizations like country clubs and homeowner associations without any government interference.

“Under our proposal, the word marriage would no longer appear in any laws, and marriage licenses would no longer be offered or recognized by any level of government,” wrote Sunstein and co-author Richard Thaler in their 2008 book, “Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness.”

In the book – obtained and reviewed by WND – Sunstein explains his approach would ensure that “the only legal status states would confer on couples would be a civil union, which would be a domestic partnership agreement between any two people…..”

Also by Sunstein—Get READY for this folks!!!!

He also strongly pushed for the removal of organs from deceased individuals who did not explicitly consent to becoming organ donors.

Sunstein and Thaler discussed multiple legal scenarios regarding organ donation. One possibility presented in the book, termed by Sunstein as “routine removal,” posits that “the state owns the rights to body parts of people who are dead or in certain hopeless conditions, and it can remove their organs without asking anyone’s permission.”

“Though it may sound grotesque, routine removal is not impossible to defend,” wrote Sunstein. “In theory, it would save lives, and it would do so without intruding on anyone who has any prospect for life.”

More on Cass Sunstein at WND

Previous stories:

Sunstein: Take organs from ‘helpless patients’

Sunstein: Economic crises could usher in socialism

Sunstein: Americans too racist for socialism

Sunstein: Government must fund abortion

Sunstein: Fetuses ‘use’ women, abortion limits ‘troublesome’

Sunstein: Force broadcasters to air ‘diversity’ ads

Holdren says Constitution backs compulsory abortion

Sunstein picked for sharing Obama’s radical positions?

Obama science chief: Abortion can save planet

Sunstein: Obama, not courts, should interpret law

Cass Sunstein wants to spread America’s wealth

Cass Sunstein drafted ‘New Deal Fairness Doctrine’

Obama chief: Embryos are ‘just a handful of cells’

Obama’s regulatory chief pushes new ‘bill of rights’

Regulatory czar: Adult dog more ‘rational’ than baby


Obama is ALSO against Animal Breeders and Hunters!! Senator Barack Obama has been endorsed by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) the wealthiest animal rights organization in the country with a well-known anti-hunting, anti-breeding agenda. After years of issuing anti-hunting statements, HSUS has transformed their campaign to end hunting calling it “the Wildlife Abuse Campaign”, claiming they are merely fighting cruelty. HSUS leaders are highly skilled at presenting their animal rightist views and restrictive legislation under the label “humane” in order to advance their agenda, and Senator Obama appears to have fallen in line with their scheme. Senator Obama and HSUS have courted each other since he was endorsed and funded for the Illinois senatorial race in 2004. Viewing the Humane Society Legislative Fund 2007 Presidential Questionnaire, Senator Obama answered “yes” nearly across the board, pledging support for HSUS initiatives.


Obama’s Favorite For Supreme Court Justice Sunstein Wants To Ban Guns, Free Speech

Steve Watson
Friday, Jan 15, 2010

“Cass Sunstein, president Obama’s appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, and the man who outlined a plan for the government to infiltrate “conspiracy groups” in order to undermine them, is in direct line for a promotion to Supreme Court Justice.

Sunstein, already in an advanced position of power in the White House as Regulatory czar, has already called for strict restrictions on gun ownership, an internet “Fairness Doctrine”, and an effective ban on free speech where dissenting opinions to those of the government are expressed.

Suntein’s name was on various shortlists to replace Justice David Souter last year following his retirement, and prior to the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor. Sunstein’s name was also touted for the Supreme Court before Obama even took office in November 2008.

His close personal relationship with Obama should set alarm bells ringing for anyone who values the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, particularly as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, now aged 75, is likely to take retirement soon following illness, and with Justice John Paul Stevens now aged 90.

Sunstein and Obama go way back from their faculty days at the University of Chicago law school and are firm friends. Sunstein worked as an advisor to Obama during his presidential campaign and was drafted into the White House soon after Obama won the election.

As Obama’s “Information Czar”, Sunstein effectively interprets the law for the Executive. Sunstein operates in a similar, but much more elevated, role to that of former Justice Department lawyer John Yoo, who infamously re-interpreted the law to legally sanction torture under the Bush Administration.

As we highlighted in our article yesterday, Sunstein has outlined plans for the government to infiltrate “conspiracy groups”, including the 9/11 Truth Movement, in order to undermine them via postings on chat rooms and social networks, as well as real meetings.

Sunstein has effectively penned the blueprint for a Cointelpro “provocateur” style program to silence what have become the government’s most vociferous and influential critics.

The specifics of the plans must be read in full in order to gauge their extreme nature and the threat Sunstein poses to the freedom in America.

On page 14 of Sunstein’s January 2008 white paper entitled “Conspiracy Theories,” he proposed that “under imaginable conditions” the government “might ban conspiracy theorizing” and could “impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories.”

In effect, Obama’s information czar wants to tax or ban outright, as in make illegal, opinions and ideas that the government doesn’t approve of.

Sunstein’s definition of a “conspiracy theorist” encompasses those who question manmade global warming and, most bizarrely, anyone who believes that sunlight is healthy for their bodies.

Presumably if Sunstein had been in power in the latter middle ages he would have attempted to tax and then ban the work of Galileo Galilei for subscribing to the theory that the Earth was not the centre of the universe and that it actually revolved around the Sun….”

(Go to link below for the whole indepth story)


“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one.” – Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist in 1764.

The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” -Thomas Jefferson

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” -Thomas Jefferson

Related Links:

Bill HR 45

Related Posts: