Monday, June 27, 2016





Democrats Attack Bill of Rights to Destroy Political Enemies



Are you a “potential terrorist” on a secret watch list?

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Democrats are waging a war on due process, the rule of law, and the principle of legal rights going back to the Magna Carta.
Clause 39 of the Magna Carta issued by John of England in 1215 declares: “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.”
For Democrats in the House and Senate, lawful judgment is no longer relevant. In their zeal to outlaw firearms and demolish the Second Amendment, Democrats and their progressive fellow travelers are striving to dismantle laws and legal proceedings for Americans included on secret lists compiled and held by the state. This represents the very essence of a police state.
“The Democrats demand that Americans be stripped of their Second Amendment rights with no attention paid to the Fifth Amendment, to due process,” writes Kevin Williamson. “They propose that Americans be stripped of their legal protections under the Bill of Rights even when they have not been charged with, much less convicted of, a crime. They propose that this be done on the basis of a series of secret government lists, whose contents, criteria, and keepers are treated as state secrets.”
Orwellian Potential Terrorists
Democrats now demand “potential terrorists” be stripped of their rights. Bernie Sanders has joined Senator Dianne Feinstein and the Democrat leadership and echoes their call for further authoritarian action:
According to the Obama administration, the nation faces a terror threat perpetuated by “individuals motivated by anti-government animus.” Muslims do not figure prominently in the government’s terror equation.
“Justice officials have indicated that home-grown ‘right wingers’ are possibly more numerous and dangerous than the jihadists,” Assistant Attorney General John P. Carlin said in October during an event co-sponsored by the George Washington University’s program on extremism and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Carlin said the Justice Department’s recently formed “domestic terrorism counsel” will “analyze legal gaps that need to be closed.”
Gun Laws Target Government’s Political Enemies
“I’m sure it’s gun laws,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, in response to Carlin’s remarks. He noted the Justice Department has teamed up with the Southern Poverty Law Center to “go after” the Obama administration’s political enemies while downplaying the threat of Islamic terrorism.
In February, the Department of Homeland Security released an intelligence assessment focused on the supposed domestic terror threat from sovereign citizen groups, a threat the government insists overshadows jihadi and Islamic State terrorism. The assessment followed a DHS report leaked to the alternative media in 2009 that targeted veterans as a domestic terror threat.
The DHS report said local law enforcement’s primary concern should be the high volume of gun and ammunition purchases. The document equates Americans who stockpile ammunition to “right wing terrorists.” Moreover, stockpiling (merely purchasing) ammunition is an indication of involvement in “paramilitary training exercises” and potential terrorist activity, according to the government.
It is uncertain how many “right-wing extremists” are included on the government’s secret terror watch lists, but considering Carlin’s remarks in October and the formation of “domestic terrorism counsel” focused on demonizing the political enemies of the state, we can assume more than a few are.
“Are you a conservative, a libertarian, a Christian or a gun owner?” asks Michael Snyder. “If you answered yes to any of those questions, you are a ‘potential terrorist’ according to official U.S. government documents… We are moving into a very dangerous time in American history. You can now be considered a ‘potential terrorist’ just because of your religious or political beliefs. Free speech is becoming a thing of the past, and we are rapidly becoming an Orwellian society that is the exact opposite of what our founding fathers intended.”
Due process is also rapidly becoming a thing of the past. Government invariably targets its political enemies. Islamic terrorism does not pose a serious political threat to the elite. In fact, it can be argued much what now passes for Islamic terrorism is a creation of the state, a tool used—as we have witnessed since September 11, 2001—to destroy the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The real target—the target that must be disarmed and stripped of legal protection—is the American people.


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Defense plans to soon lift the nation’s ban on openly transgendered persons serving in the military, according to reports.
“[Defense Secretary Ash Carter] has indicated that he expects to make a final decision soon, and that’s exactly where we are,” Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook told reporters this past week.
As previously reported, last July, Carter announced that a six-month study would be conducted to determine whether lifting the ban could have any adverse effect on battle preparedness.
“The Defense Department’s current regulations regarding transgender service members are outdated and are causing uncertainty that distracts commanders from our core missions,” he said in a statement.
The study was to encompass a variety of aspects, such as how transgenders will be housed, what uniforms they will wear, what bathrooms they will use, and what physical fitness/training standards they will be held to as a person that now seeks to be known as the opposite gender.
Officials also planned to consider whether the government will pay for “gender reassignment” surgeries and other treatments sought by those who identify as transgender.
According to the Washington Post, acting personnel chief Peter Levine outlined last month that there was a lack of consensus among Pentagon officials on how to solve the questions presented in the study, but that it was decided that the ban would be lifted during Obama’s tenure.
“We’re going to work through that .. and we’re going to do it expeditiously so that we can do it in this administration,” he said.
The Department of Defense has banned those who have gender identity disorders from serving in the military since the 1960’s, and those who seek to identify as the opposite sex can be dismissed on medical grounds. Defense Department Instruction 6130.03 allows for the discharge of those who have been diagnosed with “psychosexual conditions, including but not limited to transsexualism, exhibitionism, transvestism, voyeurism, and other paraphilias.”
But following the 2010 decision to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” some have been pushing for a lift on the transgender service ban. Last year, the Pentagon decided that only high-ranking officials in the military would be permitted to have the discretion to discharge those diagnosed with gender dysphoria.
But some remain concerned over the rush to lift the ban before the November election.
“Secretary Carter has put the political agenda of a departing administration ahead of the military’s readiness crisis,” Mac Thornberry (R-TX), the chairman of the Congressional Committee on Armed Services, said in a statement on Friday. “The force is exhausted from back-to-back deployments and spending their home-station time scrambling to get enough equipment and training before they deploy again. My focus is on helping the troops now—to be the most effective, deployable force possible.”
“Consistent with that philosophy, when we learned DOD was looking at new policies on the service of transgender individuals, the Committee posed a number of questions to DOD. In particular, there are readiness challenges that first must be addressed, such as the extent to which such individuals would be medically non-deployable,” he said. “Almost a year has passed with no answer to our questions from Secretary Carter.”
It is believed that there are currently at least 2,000 military members that identify as transgender who have been hiding their condition in order to remain in the service.


Pope Says Roman Catholic Church 
Should Ask Forgiveness From Sodomites 
For Past Treatment
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE (Reuters) – Pope Francis said on Sunday that Christians and the Roman Catholic Church should seek forgiveness from homosexuals for the way they had treated them.
Speaking to reporters aboard the plane taking him back to Rome from Armenia, he also said the Church should ask forgiveness for the way it has treated women, for turning a blind eye to child labor and for “blessing so many weapons” in the past.
In the hour-long freewheeling conversation that has become a trademark of his international travels, Francis was asked if he agreed with recent comments by a German Roman Catholic cardinal that the Church should apologize to gays.
Francis looked sad when the reporter asked if an apology was made more urgent by the killing of 49 people at a gay club in Orlando, Florida this month.
He recalled Church teachings that homosexuals “should not be discriminated against. They should be respected, accompanied pastorally.”
He added: “I think that the Church not only should apologize … to a gay person whom it offended but it must also apologize to the poor as well, to the women who have been exploited, to children who have been exploited by (being forced to) work. It must apologize for having blessed so many weapons.”
The Church teaches that homosexual tendencies are not sinful but homosexual acts are, and that homosexuals should try to be chaste.
Francis repeated a slightly modified version of the now-famous “Who am I to judge?” comment he made about gays on the first foreign trip after his election in 2013.
“The questions is: if a person who has that condition, who has good will, and who looks for God, who are we to judge?”
Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said that the pope, by saying “has that condition”, did not imply a medical condition but “a person in that situation”. In Italian, the word “condition” can also mean “situation”.
“We Christians have to apologize for so many things, not just for this (treatment of gays), but we must ask for forgiveness, not just apologize! Forgiveness! Lord, it is a word we forget so often!” he said.
Francis has been hailed by many in the gay community for being the most merciful pope toward them in recent history and conservative Catholics have criticized him for making comments they say are ambiguous about sexual morality.
He told reporters on the plane “there are traditions in some countries, some cultures, that have a different mentality about this question (homosexuals)” and there are “some (gay) demonstrations that are too offensive for some”.
But he suggested that those were not grounds for discrimination or marginalization of gays.
The pope did not elaborate on what he meant by seeking forgiveness for the Church “having blessed so many weapons”, but it appeared to be a reference to some Churchmen who actively backed wars in the past.
In other parts of the conversation, Francis said he hoped the European Union would be able to give itself another form after the United Kingdom’s decision to leave.
“There is something that is not working in that bulky union, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water, let’s try to jump-start things, to re-create,” he said.
He also denied reports that former Pope Benedict, who resigned in 2013, was still exercising influence inside the Vatican.
“There is only one pope,” he said. He praised Benedict, 89, for “protecting me, having my back, with his prayers”.
Francis said he had heard that when some Church officials had gone to Benedict to complain that Francis was too liberal, Benedict “sent them packing”.

‘Pope Francis’ Says Roman Catholics, Christians Should Seek Forgiveness From Homosexuals


Gender Non-Conforming’ Lesbians Try to Force Toddler to Be Gender Neutral: Video
SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

An online video has gone viral that features a “gender non-conforming” lesbian woman and her partner who explain how they have tried to force their toddler son to be gender neutral and blur the lines between male and female.
The video, entitled “I Am a Gender Non-Conforming Parent,” centers on Dashiell and Michelle, and a two-year-old boy named Atticus, who Michelle conceived via a sperm donor.
“My understanding about gender is that it ultimately doesn’t mean anything,” Michelle asserts in the footage.
Dashiell explains that she identifies as “genderqueer” due to her childhood tomboy tendencies, and therefore presents herself as a mix of male and female. She says that she relates to Atticus’ boyish interest in sports because of her male tendencies, while Michelle has tried to push feminine interests on the child.
“I’m constantly like trying to queer my relationship with him and get him to wear tutus,” Michelle outlines in the nearly five-minute piece. “He hates it. He’s just like, ‘no.”
She said that she has been trying to keep Atticus from distinguishing boys from the girls, or thinking of boys and girls in certain ways.
“He’s taking in kind of kid media. And he has this great book that’s just pictures and words. But when you open it up, it’s a picture of a girl and a picture of a boy, and it’s like, ‘girl,’ ‘boy,’ and I’m just like, ‘child,’ ‘child,’” Michelle outlines.
“This is where he starts learning what things are. And so I hate the idea that he’s getting it imprinted on him that people who look like this are boys, and people who look like that are girls,” she says.
Michelle states that she doesn’t like children’s programming portraying boys and girls with certain distinguishing characteristics.
“And even something that’s like progressive like ‘Sesame Street,’ all the monsters are boys unless they have like a bow in their hair or a sparkly necklace on,” she says. “Like, why is ‘Old McDonald’ a guy? Why couldn’t it be a lesbian farmer?”
Michelle remarks that sometimes she and Dashiell feel it is best to “ignore gender completely,” and asserts that every parent should push the boundaries in terms of gender.
“He’s being raised by a gender non-conforming person. So, just the existence of Dashiell is gong to be a huge piece of information about what gender is or isn’t,” she states.
“Everybody needs to be reconsidering the way that they’re presenting gender to their kids,” Michelle contends. “It’s not even whether Atticus is personally going to be a genderqueer or genderfluid person. Atticus could grow up and be a completely traditionally cisgendered male, and he needs to understand the variety of genders that are out there so he can be a respectful human being.”
But some have expressed concern after viewing the video, finding the boy’s upbringing to be troubling.
“They’re trying too hard to make their child ‘neutral’ and aren’t respecting what makes his special,” one commenter wrote. “They’re making his life more complicated than it has to be and making up their own parenting thinking about themselves and their ‘statement’ rather than respecting how he was created. I hope that poor child doesn’t need therapy later on.”
“Did they really just get offended that old McDonald is a man? What? Forcing him into a tutu?” another marveled. “You say you want your kids to grow up as their gender, so let them. You say you’re against people trying to force their kids to be straight, but you’re doing the opposite? Hypocrites.”
“The parents themselves acknowledge that in their opinion, the child dislikes wearing the tutu. Why keep trying to make him wear it if he doesn’t like it?” a third commeter asked. “If they are so focused on letting him be who he wants to be, should that not be enough to stop them from attempting to force their beliefs and preferences on to him? … If this is the way it works in their family, they are no better than the society they are claiming to be against. They are just the other side of the coin.”
“This is what we’ve come to?” a fourth lamented. “Woe to those who call good evil, and evil good. We need you God.”




Franklin Graham: Obama’s LGBT Landmark a ‘Monument to Sin’

SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Rev. Franklin Graham is sharply critical of President Obama’s decision to dedicate a national monument to “the struggle for gay rights,” calling the landmark a “monument to sin.”

“Flaunting sin is a dangerous move,” Graham—the son of world-renowned evangelist Billy Graham—wrote in a Facebook post.
President Obama has selected the Stonewall Inn in New York’s Greenwich Village neighborhood for the first-ever national monument commemorating the battle for gay rights, reportedly because it is “the birthplace of America’s modern gay liberation movement.”
“War heroes deserve a monument, our nation’s founding fathers deserve a monument, people who have helped to make America strong deserve a monument — but a monument to sin?” asked Graham.
“That’s unbelievable,” he said.
In his post, Graham suggested that a move of this sort is indicative of the nation’s moral decline. “I can’t believe how far our country has digressed. I hope that the president will reconsider,” he wrote.
Graham is no stranger to LGBT activism, and has been an outspoken critic of efforts to legalize gay marriage as well as recent attempts to offer crossdressing men legal access to women’s bathrooms and locker rooms.
After the passage of a Charlotte, North Carolina’s city ordinance permitting transgender residents to use either a men’s or women’s restroom, Graham called the bill “wicked” and “filthy” and accused Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts of putting the LGBT agenda above the protection and well-being of children, women and families.
Graham also said that “businesses and organizations shouldn’t be forced by law to allow men pretending to be women to use women’s restrooms.”
In 2015, when the Supreme Court ripped the question of same-sex marriage out of the hands of the American people and imposed it on the fifty states in its Obergefell v. Hodgesruling, Rev. Graham went on Sean Hannity’s radio show to denounce the decision. “Homosexuality is sin. Same-sex marriage is a sin against God,” he said.
At the same time, Graham was quick to insist that he wasn’t trying to single out homosexuality, but was just reacting to the move to legalize wicked behavior.
“I’m not here to throw stones at you because you want to marry someone of the same sex,” Rev. Graham said. “I just want to warn you, and I do this in love, that God will judge sin.”
“Lying is a sin, stealing is a sin, committing adultery [is a] sin. We’re all sinners, Sean, and Franklin Graham is a sinner,” he said.
“Our country has been slipping every year further and further away from the God of the Bible — the foundation that our nation was built on. We’re slipping away from that. And I believe that we need to do everything we can to warn people of the consequences of sin,” he said.
Rev. Graham is not the only leader to decry President Obama’s attempts to equate the LGBT cause with the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s.
“President Obama is a disgrace to the black community,” said Rev. William Owens of the Coalition of African American Pastors (CAAP) after Obama compared the movement for same-sex marriage to Civil Rights activism.
“He is rewriting history. We didn’t suffer and die for gay marriage. We marched for opportunity, equality, justice, freedom from oppression. We are the true heirs of the civil rights movement. We have a new movement to reclaim the ‘real’ civil rights movement,” he said.


Published on Jun 25, 2016
During Saturday’s Weekly Address about the designation of the Stonewall Inn as a national monument, President Obama stated America’s “story of progress” was written by people such as “Farmers and blacksmiths who chose revolution over tyranny. Immigrants who crossed oceans and the Rio Grande. Women who reached for the ballot, and scientists who shot for the moon. The preachers, and porters, and seamstresses who guided us toward the mountaintop of freedom.”

Transcript as Follows:

“Hi everybody. The story of America is a story of progress. It’s written by ordinary people who put their shoulders to the wheel of history to make sure that the promise of our founding applies not just to some of us – but to all of us.

Farmers and blacksmiths who chose revolution over tyranny. Immigrants who crossed oceans and the Rio Grande. Women who reached for the ballot, and scientists who shot for the moon. The preachers, and porters, and seamstresses who guided us toward the mountaintop of freedom.

Sometimes, we can mark that progress in special places – hallowed ground where history was written – places like Independence Hall. Gettysburg. Seneca Falls. Kitty Hawk and Cape Canaveral. The Edmund Pettus Bridge.

One of these special places is the Stonewall Inn. Back in 1969, as a turbulent decade was winding down, the Stonewall Inn was a popular gathering place for New York City’s LGBT community. At the time, being gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender was considered obscene, illegal – even a mental illness.

One night, police raided the bar, and started arresting folks. Raids like these were nothing new – but this time, the patrons had had enough. So they stood up, and spoke out, and over the course of the next several days, they refused to be silenced. The riots became protests; the protests became a movement; the movement ultimately became an integral part of America.

Over the past seven years, we’ve seen achievements that would have been unimaginable to the folks who, knowingly or not, started the modern LGBT movement at Stonewall. Today, all Americans are protected by a hate crimes law that includes sexual orientation and gender identity. ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is history. Insurance companies can no longer turn you away because of who you are. Transgender Americans are more visible than ever, helping to make our nation more inclusive and welcoming for all. And one year ago this weekend, we lit the White House in every color – because in every state in America, you’re now free to marry the person you love.

There’s still work to do. As we saw two weeks ago in Orlando, the LGBT community still faces real discrimination, real violence, real hate. So we can’t rest. We’ve got to keep pushing for equality and acceptance and tolerance.

But the arc of our history is clear – it’s an arc of progress. And a lot of that progress can be traced back to Stonewall. So this week, I’m designating the Stonewall National Monument as the newest addition to America’s national parks system. Stonewall will be our first national monument to tell the story of the struggle for LGBT rights. I believe our national parks should reflect the full story of our country – the richness and diversity and uniquely American spirit that has always defined us. That we are stronger together. That out of many, we are one. That’s what makes us the greatest nation on earth. And it’s what we celebrate at Stonewall – for our generation and for all those who come after us.

Obama Compares Gays to Immigrants' "Struggle"
 America’s ‘Story of Progress’ Written By ‘Immigrants Who Crossed Oceans and the Rio Grande’

Obama Makes Stonewall Inn a National Monument to Gay Rights


Published on Jun 24, 2016
Almost five decades after the Stonewall Riots in New York City's West Village neighborhood, the tavern uprising which sparked the LGBT rights movement in the U.S. is now a national landmark.
President Barack Obama designated the Stonewall Inn and the surrounding streets as the nation's first monument for gay rights.
President Obama added that the national parks should reflect the country's full story, incorporating the rich and diverse American spirit.
Known as the Stonewall National Monument, the historic site incorporates almost eight acres of the local community such as Christopher Park.

Obama LGBT Monument: Will He Take All of NYC?
Published on Jun 27, 2016
Obama has declared Stonewall National Monument in NYC, site of the 
Stonewall riots that began the gay rights movement. If he abused the 
110 year old “Antiquities Act” in NYC, as he’s done in rural areas, he 
would take all of NYC. We look at his LGBT agenda and how he applied 
the law for the gay monument and compare it to his monumental fraud — 
his UN Agenda 21 (now renamed the 2030 Agenda for Sustainability) 
taking millions of acres under the pretense of the monument act.