President Barack Obama stepped carefully when talking for the first time about the conservative tea party movement, acknowledging it has legitimate concerns about federal reach and spending, but he contended the core of the loose anti-government network is “on the fringe.”

The latest political phenomenon, barely a year old, has leaders on both sides of the political spectrum puzzled.

Republicans want to co-opt the passion — and votes — of tea party disciples to help them oust Democrats from congressional control in the fall midterm elections, without losing other voters in the process. As for Democrats, they have focused mainly on trying to marginalize and ignore them. For instance, several Democratic officials say there’s no apparent strategy yet at the White House for combatting the network’s growing influence.

But the leaderless coalition, born in communities from coast to coast shortly after Obama’s inauguration last year, seems to have some staying power.

A Washington Post poll taken last week showed that more people view the movement favorably than unfavorably — and that 62 percent believe it has either the right amount or not enough influence on the Republican Party.

The group is decidedly conservative and libertarian, but otherwise diverse, divided over most everything except the need for limited government, less spending and an end to Obama’s policies. Those in the coalition have allegiance to no political party, with independent voters and even moderate Democrats among their ranks.

All that was reflected in Obama’s cautious handling of the topic, when asked about it Monday by a television interviewer.

The president said on NBC’s “Today” show that the movement is built around a “core group” of people who question whether he is a U.S. citizen and believe he is a socialist. Beyond that, however, he said he recognizes that the movement involves people with “mainstream, legitimate concerns” about the national debt, government expansion and big spending.

“I wouldn’t paint in broad brush and say that everybody who is involved or have gone to a tea party rally or meeting are somehow on the fringe,” Obama said. “I think that there’s a broader circle around that core group of people who are legitimately concerned about the deficit, who are legitimately concerned that the federal government may be taking on too much.”

He said he hopes that as “we’re tackling things like the deficit, imposing a freeze on domestic spending, taking steps that show we are sincere about dealing with our long-term problems, that some of that group will dissipate.”

Obama has talked a lot recently about anger in the electorate, particularly in the wake of the surprise victory in Massachusetts by Republican Scott Brown for a Senate seat. But it was the first time he had talked specifically about the group.

Some Democrats close to the White House think it may be a good thing for Obama and his team to mostly keep their distance. Engaging tea party activists too directly or aggressively could backfire by energizing them even more, many think.

The administration knows the tea party movement could help Republicans in the short-term by increasing the intensity of their voters. But the White House also is betting the activists’ influence could also be harmful, by yanking GOP candidates to the right — and farther away from the middle-of-the-spectrum voters who can decide elections, according to one official close to the president. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal administration thinking.

___

Associated Press writers Ben Feller and Liz Sidoti contributed to this report.

Source: New World Order Report

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

“Tea Party: The Documentary Film”

Subverted Tea Party Movement Told to Embrace Republican Platform

Tea Party Purge — A Cause Without a Rebel

The Southern Poverty Law Center (or as I like to call it, ADL South), has published a post on yet another group of people it hates (because it doesn’t fit into the SPLC’s socialist view of the world): FEMA conspiracy theorists. Of course, SPLC’s “expert” sources for the condemnation of the theorists are the highly-esteemed scholarly journals Popular Mechanics and Newsweek, CNN’s “American Morning” show, and (drum roll, please) the latest Establishment pseudo-Libertarian shill Glenn Beck. Well, if those New World Order/One World Government media puppets say that there is no truth to the government building FEMA detention camps for political prisoners, that cinches it for me. That’ll show those conspiracy nuts. Or does it?

It seems that a rogue Establishment public broadcast station, KBDI Colorado Public Television, had the temerity to air a documentary called Camp FEMA: American Lockdown three times. The film explores the possibility that the government is building FEMA detention camps for political prisoners. This has ruffled the fascist feathers of the SPLC. The SPLC post also disparages the late Libertarian Aaron Russo’s documentary on the secret history of the Fed that KBDI aired alongside the FEMA documentary. The SPLC proclaims that Russo’s documentary was “debunked” by the “Federal” Reserve Banksters’ own personal mouthpiece, The New York Times. (That’ll show those conspiracy nuts again.) And, of course, where would any post on “hate” groups be without it throwing in the anti-hate warning du jour that some groups are anti-Jewish. Yep, it’s in this SPLC post also. Phew! Now we can all sleep better.

[Thanks to Chris Ciancio]

Source: LewRockwell

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

The Southern Poverty Law Center bunches in WeAreChange with “Hate” groups

MSNBC Continues Propaganda Campaign Against Patriot Groups

Active ‘Patriot’ Groups in the United States in 2009

The new Health Care Bill, H.R. 3200, just passed by Congress has within it the requirement that all people thereunder shall be microchiped. The plans for this microchipping has been in the hooper going back to December of 2004.

Witness the actual FDA (Food and Drug Administration) document dated December 10, 2004 entitled “Class II Special Guidance Document: Implantable Radiofrequency Transponder System for Patient Identification and Health Information. This ten page document may be read on the FDA website at
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm072191.pdf

Now witness the wording within H.R. 3200, “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009” found on Congresses’ House Ways and Means website,
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/111/AAHCA09001xml.pdf

On page 1001 is “Subtitle C – National Medical Device Registry” which states,

“The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that … is or has been used in or on a patient…”

In other words, everyone microchipped pursuant to the new Health Care Bill must be registered with the Secretary. The “Secretary” is defined as the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The date by which this registry is to begin is mandated on page 1006, which is 36 months after the Health Bill becomes law.

(2) EFFECTIVE DATE. – The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish and begin implementation of the registry under section 519(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as added by paragraph (1) by not later than the date that is 36 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, without regard to whether of not final regulations to establish and operate the registry have been promulgated by such date.

Therefore, under the law of H.R. 3200 recently passed by Congress, microchipping of Americans must begin by the year 2013.

I cite to my often quoted Biblical Scripture in Revelation 13:16 and 17, “And he [the AntiChrist] causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”

Numerous times I have stated that our current Income Tax system shall be replaced with a tax upon all trade, and that everyone will have automatically deducted from every transaction of buying and selling a tax. But this tax is not the significant part. Along with this government-granted “privilege” of buying and selling, will be the required worship of the Man of Sin, that every knee shall bow and that every tongue shall confess that he is god to the glory of himself. Those refusing shall be certainly executed post haste!

Now you know what is behind the new Health Bill, H.R. 3200.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq3vtjXEGy8&NR=1

Source: RBN

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Ex-IBM Employee Reveals TV Abandoned Analog Band to Make Room for RFID

Intel Wants Brain Implants in Its Customers’ Heads by 2020

Health Link markets Verichip implant in television commercial, for your safety

With House Democrats poised to pass the Senate health care bill with some reconciliation changes later today, it is worthwhile to take a comprehensive look at the freedoms we will lose.

Of course, the overhaul is supposed to provide us with security. But it will result in skyrocketing insurance costs and physicians leaving the field in droves, making it harder to afford and find medical care. We may be about to live Benjamin Franklin’s adage, “People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.”

The sections described below are taken from HR 3590 as agreed to by the Senate and from the reconciliation bill as displayed by the Rules Committee.

1. You are young and don’t want health insurance? You are starting up a small business and need to minimize expenses, and one way to do that is to forego health insurance? Tough. You have to pay $750 annually for the “privilege.” (Section 1501)

2. You are young and healthy and want to pay for insurance that reflects that status? Tough. You’ll have to pay for premiums that cover not only you, but also the guy who smokes three packs a day, drink a gallon of whiskey and eats chicken fat off the floor. That’s because insurance companies will no longer be able to underwrite on the basis of a person’s health status. (Section 2701).

3. You would like to pay less in premiums by buying insurance with lifetime or annual limits on coverage? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer such policies, even if that is what customers prefer. (Section 2711).

4. Think you’d like a policy that is cheaper because it doesn’t cover preventive care or requires cost-sharing for such care? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer policies that do not cover preventive services or offer them with cost-sharing, even if that’s what the customer wants. (Section 2712).

5. You are an employer and you would like to offer coverage that doesn’t allow your employers’ slacker children to stay on the policy until age 26? Tough. (Section 2714).

6. You must buy a policy that covers ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services; chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.

You’re a single guy without children? Tough, your policy must cover pediatric services. You’re a woman who can’t have children? Tough, your policy must cover maternity services. You’re a teetotaler? Tough, your policy must cover substance abuse treatment. (Add your own violation of personal freedom here.) (Section 1302).

7. Do you want a plan with lots of cost-sharing and low premiums? Well, the best you can do is a “Bronze plan,” which has benefits that provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 60% of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan. Anything lower than that, tough. (Section 1302 (d) (1) (A))

8. You are an employer in the small-group insurance market and you’d like to offer policies with deductibles higher than $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families? Tough. (Section 1302 (c) (2) (A).

9. If you are a large employer (defined as at least 101 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employee, then you will pay a $750 fine per employee (It could be $2,000 to $3,000 under the reconciliation changes). Think you know how to better spend that money? Tough. (Section 1513).

10. You are an employer who offers health flexible spending arrangements and your employees want to deduct more than $2,500 from their salaries for it? Sorry, can’t do that. (Section 9005 (i)).

11. If you are a physician and you don’t want the government looking over your shoulder? Tough. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to use your claims data to issue you reports that measure the resources you use, provide information on the quality of care you provide, and compare the resources you use to those used by other physicians. Of course, this will all be just for informational purposes. It’s not like the government will ever use it to intervene in your practice and patients’ care. Of course not. (Section 3003 (i))

12. If you are a physician and you want to own your own hospital, you must be an owner and have a “Medicare provider agreement” by Feb. 1, 2010. (Dec. 31, 2010 in the reconciliation changes.) If you didn’t have those by then, you are out of luck. (Section 6001 (i) (1) (A))

13. If you are a physician owner and you want to expand your hospital? Well, you can’t (Section 6001 (i) (1) (B). Unless, it is located in a country where, over the last five years, population growth has been 150% of what it has been in the state (Section 6601 (i) (3) ( E)). And then you cannot increase your capacity by more than 200% (Section 6001 (i) (3) (C)).

14. You are a health insurer and you want to raise premiums to meet costs? Well, if that increase is deemed “unreasonable” by the Secretary of Health and Human Services it will be subject to review and can be denied. (Section 1003)

15. The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry. If you are a pharmaceutical company what you will pay depends on the ratio of the number of brand-name drugs you sell to the total number of brand-name drugs sold in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the brand-name drugs in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2.3 billion, or $230,000,000. (Under reconciliation, it starts at $2.55 billion, jumps to $3 billion in 2012, then to $3.5 billion in 2017 and $4.2 billion in 2018, before settling at $2.8 billion in 2019 (Section 1404)). Think you, as a pharmaceutical executive, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 9008 (b)).

16. The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers. If you are a medical device maker what you will pay depends on your share of medical device sales in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the medical devices in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2 billion, or $200,000,000. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for R&D? Tough. (Section 9009 (b)).

The reconciliation package turns that into a 2.9% excise tax for medical device makers. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 1405).

17. The government will extract a fee of $6.7 billion annually from insurance companies. If you are an insurer, what you will pay depends on your share of net premiums plus 200% of your administrative costs. So, if your net premiums and administrative costs are equal to 10% of the total, you will pay 10% of $6.7 billion, or $670,000,000. In the reconciliation bill, the fee will start at $8 billion in 2014, $11.3 billion in 2015, $1.9 billion in 2017, and $14.3 billion in 2018 (Section 1406).Think you, as an insurance executive, know how to better spend that money? Tough.(Section 9010 (b) (1) (A and B).)

18. If an insurance company board or its stockholders think the CEO is worth more than $500,000 in deferred compensation? Tough.(Section 9014).

19. You will have to pay an additional 0.5% payroll tax on any dollar you make over $250,000 if you file a joint return and $200,000 if you file an individual return. What? You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9015).

That amount will rise to a 3.8% tax if reconciliation passes. It will also apply to investment income, estates, and trusts. You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Like you need to ask. (Section 1402).

20. If you go for cosmetic surgery, you will pay an additional 5% tax on the cost of the procedure. Think you know how to spend that money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9017).

Source: Information Liberation

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Will Americans Reclaim Our Nation in 2010 From the Thugs and Con Artists?

Nurses explain how health bill could make crisis worse

Kiss Your Freedoms Goodbye If Health Care Passes

Only thing that will repeal Obamacare will be bankruptcy of the United States, warns Congressman

Texas Congressman Ron Paul warns that last night’s passage of the health care reform bill will prompt the government to hire thousands of new IRS agents who will be used to steal money from taxpaying Americans to fund the new program.

Paul also told Fox News that the passage of Obamacare will only be repealed once the United States enters bankruptcy as a result of its exploding national deficit and runaway spending.

“Any time a government tries to give you a service or something of substance, they have to steal it from somebody else, so the whole process is immoral because it’s based on government theft, that’s why they’re hiring 16,000 more new IRS agents, because they have to steal more money,” stated the Congressman, referring to an analysis by the Joint Economic Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee that found “Up to 16,500 new IRS personnel will be needed to collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses,” under the health care bill.

Paul said that the passage of Obamacare will precipitate a deepening of the economic crisis that will be “defined by the destruction of the dollar,” meaning government won’t be able to pay for anything.

“You cannot spend this kind of money, borrow this money and create new credit to finance this debt….medical care will get worse and this country will go into bankruptcy,” added Paul

“This idea of an executive order amending the bill just is such an outrage,” said the Congressman, slamming Obama’s intention to bar federal funding for abortion after the vote as both misplaced and completely unconstitutional.

“To think that we’ve gotten to a point where we allow our presidents just to write an executive order as the law of he land, there’s nothing conceivable about that being Constitutional,” said Paul.

Throughout his campaign, Obama promised not to use executive powers and signing statements to change laws, a principle he has completely abandoned in pursuit of his big government agenda.

Congressman Paul warned that apparent efforts to prevent health care money being used to fund abortions were utterly ineffectual, saying that hospitals and clinics are just going to shift money around to fudge evidence of where the funds are being used.

On the wider argument behind government providing health care, Paul stated, “Central economic planning, if anything the 20th century proves, central economic planning fails, every country in the world today is on the verge of bankruptcy….and we’re marching on to a worldwide economic catastrophe if we’re not careful.”

Watch the clip below.

Source: Prison Planet

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

The CIA and NSA Want You to Be Their Friend on Facebook

FBI wants records kept of Web sites visited

Subverted Tea Party Movement Told to Embrace Republican Platform

Source: ABC Nightline

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Washington Times Covers 9/11 Controversy

Ventura’s Conspiracy Theory: 9/11 Episode exposes ‘found’ black boxes

The Media Response to the Growing Influence of the 9 /11 Truth Movement

‘I think they’re going to let it ride, hoping some judge throws out case’

A fifth state – South Dakota – has decided that guns made, sold and used within its borders no longer are subject to the whims of the federal government through its rule-making arm in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and two supporters of the growing groundswell say they hope Washington soon will be taking note.

South Dakota Gov. Mike Rounds has signed into law his state’s version of a Firearms Freedom Act that first was launched in Montana. It already is law there, in Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming, which took the unusual step of specifying criminal penalties – including both fines and jail time – for federal agents attempting to enforce a federal law on a “personal firearm” in the Cowboy State.

According to a report in the Dakota Voice, the new South Dakota law addresses the “rights of states which have been carelessly trampled by the federal government for decades.”

“As the federal government has radically overstepped is constitutional limitations in the past year or so, an explosion of states have begun re-asserting their rights not only with regard to firearms, but also in shielding themselves against government health care, cap and trade global warming taxes, and more,” the report said.

South Dakota’s law specifically notes “any firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in South Dakota and that remains within the borders of South Dakota is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.”

The provisions are nearly a mirror of the original law penned in Montana as well as those adopted in subsequent decisions by Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming.

Gary Marbut of the Montana Shooting Sports Association spearheaded the Montana law and now describes himself as a sort of “godfather” to the national campaign.

He told WND the issue is not only about guns but about states’ rights and the constant overreaching by federal agencies and Washington to impose their requirements on in-state activities.

Here are answers to all your questions about guns, ammunition and accessories.

He said he’s pleased South Dakota has become No. 5, and noted Alaska, Idaho and Oklahoma all have legislation that is approaching the stage of being presented to a governor to be made into law.

The Firearms Freedom Act website also reveals that other states either with pending legislation or pending plans include Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington and West Virginia.

Map showing 5 states adopting gun exemptions (in green)

Marbut said Washington appears to be reacting the same way it did when states legalized marijuana or rejected the REAL ID national plan: by ignoring it.

“Ultimately we hope there will be lawsuits in other federal circuits, because there are two things that predispose the U.S. Supreme Court to take a case: the national scope of the issue and differing appellate decisions,” he told WND.

Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center said Washington likely is not anxious for a confrontation.

“I think they’re going to let it ride, hoping some judge throws out the case,” he said today.

“When they really start paying attention is when people actually start following the [state] firearms laws,” he said.

WND reported earlier when Wyoming joined the states with self-declared exemptions from federal gun regulation.

But when Democratic Gov. Dave Freudenthal signed his state’s bill into law, it included penalties for any agent of the U.S. who “enforces or attempts to enforce” federal gun rules on a “personal firearm” in Wyoming including up to two years in prison and up to $2,000 in fines.

The bellwether likely is to be a lawsuit pending over the Montana law, which was the first to go into effect.

As WND reported, the action was filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Montana Shooting Sports Association in U.S. District Court in Missoula, Mont., to validate the principles and terms of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, which took effect Oct. 3, 2009.

Marbut argues that the federal government was created by the states to serve the states and the people, and it is time for the states to begin drawing boundaries for the federal government and its agencies.

The government’s filing in the case demands its dismissal, citing a lacking of “standing” for the plaintiffs and the court’s lack of “jurisdiction,” as well as the Constitution’s Commerce clause. The government filing argues, “The Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit have repeatedly held that even purely intrastate activities, such as those the MFFA purports to exempt from federal law, do affect interstate commerce and thus are within Congress’ power to regulate. As a result, even if plaintiffs had standing and jurisdiction existed, plaintiffs’ amended complaint fails to state a claim and must be dismissed.”

The Commerce Clause, however, can be interpreted to have been amended by the 10th Amendment, which is part of the Bill of Rights, adopted subsequent to the U.S. Constitution, Marbut explains.

His organization said, “The Commerce Clause was amended – by the 10th Amendment. It is a bedrock principle of jurisprudence that for any conflict between provisions of a co-equal body of law, the most recently enacted must be given deference as the most recent expression of the enacting authority. This principle is ancient. Without this principle, laws could not be amended or repealed.”

Learn what you can do about your nation. Get “Taking America Back,” Joseph Farah’s manifesto for sovereignty, self-reliance and moral renewal

For example, U.S. courts repeatedly affirmed slavery before it ultimately was rejected.

There’s no question that the components of the Bill of Rights have authority: Just look at the First Amendment, Marbut explained.

In an analysis by the Tenth Amendment Center, the gun laws were described as a nullification.

“Laws of the federal government are to be supreme in all matters pursuant to the delegated powers of U.S. Constitution. When D.C. enacts laws outside those powers, state laws trump. And, as Thomas Jefferson would say, when the federal government assumes powers not delegated to it, those acts are ‘unauthoritative, void, and of no force’ from the outset,” Boldin wrote.

“When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned. Implied in such legislation is that the state apparatus will enforce the act against all violations – in order to protect the liberty of the state’s citizens,” he continued.

Source: World Net Daily

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

International Effort to Grab Your Guns

ATF Seizes 30 Toy Guns, Says “They Can Be Converted Into Machine Guns”

When the Military Serves as Police

I sat down seven years ago this month with my son Adam and told him about the tragic death of a brave American woman named Rachel Corrie. As I informed him who she was, where and how she died, he stared at her two photographs in the paper and said, “Daddy, I will name my first daughter Rachel.” Adam was only nine years old, and I couldn’t have been more proud of him.

Rachel Corrie had a heart bigger than Texas. She paid the ultimate price fighting to uphold the international law that bans collective punishment.

Rachel was a 23 year-old Evergreen State College student from Olympia, WA. Rachel responded to the U.S. and Israeli rejection of a UN Resolution recommending an International Peace Keeping Force be sent into Palestine to serve as a human rights monitor there by enlisting in the International Solidarity Movement (ISM).

ISM is a group of international volunteers who partake in non-violent direct action resistance to the Israeli occupation. Members of the group live in Palestinian communities and experience first-hand the violence to which Palestinians are subjected every day by the Israeli military.

Rachel Corrie shared the Palestinian suffering and took some of the risks they are unfortunately forced to live with. Rachel dashed off to the Rafah refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. It was important for her to show that the world had not forgotten these people, and that individuals from all over the world are willing to interrupt their comfortable lives to come and risk themselves for the sake of the Palestinians and draw international attention to their plight.

In Rafah, Rachel acted as a human shield, escorting people to water wells and school children between their homes and schools in order to discourage Israeli soldiers from firing at them. Rachel also helped Palestinian children with their homework and with their English language. She was also setting up a sister-city relationship between her home town of Olympia and Rafah. Sadly, her dream vanished on March 16, 2003 when her life was cut short in a savage way.

According to 21 year-old eyewitness Joseph Smith, an ISM member from Missouri: “On that tragic day, Rachel stood in the pathway of an Israeli military bulldozer attempting to demolish the house of a Palestinian physician who was a friend of Rachel and her group, and in whose house Rachel and other activists often stayed.

Rachel was wearing a fluorescent-orange jacket with reflective stripping and armed with a megaphone. Rachel sat in the pathway of the bulldozer. She was 8-10 feet in front of the bulldozer and began waving. The bulldozer continued driving forward, headed straight for Rachel. When it was so closed that it was moving the earth beneath her, Rachel climbed onto the pile of rubble being pushed by the bulldozer. She got so high onto it that she was at an eye-level with the cab of the bulldozer. Her head and upper torso were above the bulldozer’s blade. The driver and co-operator could clearly see her. Rachel was crushed to death under the 10-ton U.S.-made machine.”

Israel claimed the driver didn’t see her. However, eyewitness accounts and Associated Press photos show Rachel standing in direct view of the bulldozer driver, dressed in a bright orange jacket and speaking into a megaphone. The driver would have to be blind and deaf not to notice that!

The next day, Palestinians in Rafah flew the U.S. flag for the first time during a memorial service held in honor of Rachel. Even that did not stop Israeli soldiers from raiding and disrupting the service.

Seven years later, Israel has failed to provide any proof that the Palestinian family, any of their children, Rachel and/or ISM has any link to terrorism. Nor there was a tunnel underneath the house to smuggle weapons. In fact, Israel demolished the house that Rachel tried to protect. And ISM is now nominated to receive the Nobel Peace Price with special recognition to Rachel Corrie. In her memories many streets in Palestine were named after her, so were new-born baby girls, and women’s empowerment centers. Documentaries about her life were made in every country, even Israel.

America acted cold-blooded in the death of Rachel Corrie, but screamed bloody murder regarding the kidnapping and death of Jewish-American reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002. I remember the outrage, public condemnations, and call for justice. Mr. Pearl was equally killed in a brutal way. The master mind of his murder is now in U.S. custody. In 1985, when a 69 year-old Jewish-American, Leon Klinghoffer was murdered aboard the hijacked Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro in the Mediterranean, U.S. fighter jets intercepted the Egyptian plane carrying his killer and forced it to land in Italy. His killers are now serving jail time. In 2003, US special forces in Iraq arrested the master-mind of the cruise ship hijacking. He died later of a heart attack in US custody.

Every red-blooded American should have been outraged by the death of Rachel Corrie. Her picture never made it to the front page, and even a Maryland College newspaper cartoonist depicted her as a stupid girl. The Wall Street Journal shamelessly accused her of being a terrorist sympathizer. The truth of the matter is, Rachel was a brilliant and brave American who stood for peace and justice. She had a rare courage and unflinching determination.

It is about time that our government stopped catering to Israel and its powerful lobby in the United States. It is a travesty of justice that an American citizen was killed in cold blood by Israel with no condemnation or investigation. Who will hold Israel responsible and call for a full and transparent investigation in the tragic death of Rachel Corrie? Justice delayed is justice denied!

As her former teacher said, “Rachel had a big heart that was hard to carry.” A heart that is bigger than Texas. Rachel Corrie deserves the Congressional Medal of Honor.

Source: RBN

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

To War, to War, America’s Going to War—with Iran

Adam “Pearlman” Gadahn lived with ADL board member Grandpa when he converted to Islam

U.S. Intelligence Found Iran Nuke Document Was Forged

Josh Gerstein over at Politico sent Threat Level his piece underscoring once again President Barack Obama is not the civil-liberties knight in shining armor many were expecting.

Gerstein posts a televised interview of Obama and John Walsh of America’s Most Wanted. The nation’s chief executive extols the virtues of mandatory DNA testing of Americans upon arrest, even absent charges or a conviction. Obama said, “It’s the right thing to do” to “tighten the grip around folks” who commit crime.

When it comes to civil liberties, the Obama administration has come under fire for often mirroring his predecessor’s practices surrounding state secrets, the Patriot Act and domestic spying. There’s also Gitmo, Jay Bybee and John Yoo.

Now there’s DNA sampling. Obama told Walsh he supported the federal government, as well as the 18 states that have varying laws requiring compulsory DNA sampling of individuals upon an arrest for crimes ranging from misdemeanors to felonies. The data is lodged in state and federal databases, and has fostered as many as 200 arrests nationwide, Walsh said.

The American Civil Liberties Union claims DNA sampling is different from mandatory, upon-arrest fingerprinting that has been standard practice in the United States for decades.

A fingerprint, the group says, reveals nothing more than a person’s identity. But much can be learned from a DNA sample, which codes a person’s family ties, some health risks, and, according to some, can predict a propensity for violence.

The ACLU is suing California to block its voter-approved measure requiring saliva sampling of people picked up on felony charges. Authorities in the Golden State are allowed to conduct so-called “familial searching” — when a genetic sample does not directly match another, authorities start investigating people with closely matched DNA in hopes of finding leads to the perpetrator.

Do you wonder whether DNA sampling is legal?

The courts have already upheld DNA sampling of convicted felons, based on the theory that the convicted have fewer privacy rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that when conducting intrusions of the body during an investigation, the police need so-called “exigent circumstances” or a warrant. That alcohol evaporates in the blood stream is the exigent circumstance to draw blood from a suspected drunk driver without a warrant.

Source: Wired

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

Suit possible over baby DNA sent to military lab for national database

The government has your baby’s DNA, and you don’t even know it

Tasing to get DNA?

At least it sure looks like it according to this news release. It seems that the United States has shipped 387 “Blu” bombs to a U.S. military base on the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. These “Blu” bombs are used specifically for destroying hardened and underground structures (like, uh, allegedunderground nuclear bomb facilities in Iran?).

“They are gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran,” said Dan Plesch, director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the University of London, co-author of a recent study on US preparations for an attack on Iran. “US bombers are ready today to destroy 10,000 targets in Iran in a few hours,” he added. The preparations were being made by the US military, but it would be up to President Obama to make the final decision. He may decide that it would be better for the US to act instead of Israel, Plesch argued. [emphasis mine]

This should certainly “endear” us even more to the Muslims in the Middle East. Oops, I keep forgetting: Middle Eastern Muslims don’t hate us because of our interference in their political affairs, they hate us because we are rich. (By the way, since Iran does not have the capability to bomb the United States, when exactly did the United States’ Department of Defense become the Department of Israeli Defense?)

Source: Lew Rockwell

Other stories at We Are Change Colorado Springs

U.S. Intelligence Found Iran Nuke Document Was Forged

Osama bin Laden’s missing family found in secret compound in Iran

The Real Axis of Evil: Washington, the Fed, and Wall Street