Scheduled Tax Day TEA Parties nearing 2K as the day of infamy fast approaches: Be there!

TEA has in this generation suddenly taken on the usefulness of a simple acronym signifying Taxed Enough Already, a rather uninspiring sort of a slogan meant to rally concerned citizens to organize and attend various TEA parties in cities around the country as mentioned in this WND report. The report cites numbers collected from Don Wildmon's American Family Association (AFA) claiming that nearly 1,600 individual tax day TEA parties are currently scheduled to convene in unison on the date with more being added daily in spite of the lack of inspiration in the slogan. Nonetheless,...

Will you be in attendance at one of these rallies? If so, will you, or have you invited others in your circle to be in attendance with you?

Think about it: if each scheduled tax day TEA party manages to rally merely an average of 100 people, and if we assume that 2,000 TEA parties will be organized and held on April 15, then 200,000 citizens will have gathered themselves in various cities around the United States for the express purpose of conducting a unified protest of the illegitimate "change" policies of the Obama administration and the leftist-socialist Congress. Which policies include, but are not limited to (of course) indebting future generations of Americans (our children and grandchildren) to the tune of trillions of dollars due to our insatiable appetite for increasingly living above and beyond our ability and means to fund our extravagant lifestyles so prevalent among our citizens in our generation. Which the socialists call "stimulus," and in exclusion of which the pitifully dependent among us cannot imagine a future worth living; a future in which the full faith and credit of the United States and of her people will have been utterly and irreparably destroyed.

But who cares about that, right? Better to destroy the reputation of the United States in attempting to temporarily maintain our current lavish lifestyles than to hunker down and tighten up our collective belt as an exercise of self-sacrifice intended to save America's reputation, its full faith and credit among the nations of the world, thus extending the blessings of liberty to our posterity. That seems to be the prevailing attitude currently in America, does it not? But some of us do care, enough to be in attendance at an upcoming rally near us though it may be a temporary inconvenience. On the other hand, some of us do not. You know who you are.

Of course, if there were an event scheduled for the day that certain individuals really cared about beyond an inclination to offer patriotic lip service in a half-hearted show of support of the movement (you know, a really important event like a college football game or something), then those people wouldn't have any trouble making the necessary arrangements to be in attendance enthusiastically cheering on their team, particularly if attendance at the event was to cost them nothing above the price, perhaps, of a half of a tank of gas -- reckon how many millions of Americans manage to make provision to attend the college football game of their choice on a given Saturday during the fall of each year, not to mention those who tune their team's games in on their televisions? How many of these people at least pay lip service to the principles undergirding the TEA party rallies? What is a mere 200,000 people in comparison?

Am I speaking of people like you? If what I've said above has elicited in you angry emotions, then very probably yes. If not, then probably not, with no apologies in any case forthcoming. As they say, "if the shoe fits, wear it." If it doesn't, then why are you offended?

Read More

Chuck Baldwin on the killing of the M.I.A.C Report

In a footnote added to his follow-up article on the M.I.A.C. Report, Chuck Baldwin -- named among three third-party presidential candidates, supporters of whom the report declared to be "prone to violence" and "militia membership," as I wrote about here -- observes that the means utilized to bring about the rapid death of this report can and must be used wherever we find the tentacles of tyranny positioning themselves to crush our beloved liberties.

Baldwin writes:

*Notice, too, that we did not need the major media to achieve this victory. We cut off this one branch of the tyranny tree without the help of ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX NEWS (with the exception of Glenn Beck), or even the Drudge Report. Victory was achieved with the weapons of talk radio, syndicated Internet columns, Internet blogging, local news media, and word of mouth.

You see, folks, we can achieve victory without the major media. But we must stay focused and actively involved in our respective State governments. "We the people" are still the power of this country. And don't let anyone deceive you into believing anything else. Therefore, take heart in knowing that your diligence convinced the State of Missouri to rescind its atrocious MIAC report. Now, don't let it stop there. Let's faithfully cut off the tentacles of tyranny wherever we find them. Amen?

The main article is posted here. (H/T: OutragedPatriots.com)

Additionally Bob Unruh of WND has filed a similar report critical of the MIAC report and its contents:

Citing ALIPAC, Unruh writes:

The 'Missouri Documents,' as they came to be called, listed over 32 characteristics police should watch for as signs or links to domestic terrorists, which could threaten police officers, court officials, and infrastructure targets.

"Police were instructed to look for Americans who were concerned about unemployment, taxes, illegal immigration, gangs, border security, abortion, high costs of living, gun restrictions, FEMA, the IRS, The Federal Reserve, and the North American Union/SPP/North American Community. The 'Missouri Documents' also said potential domestic terrorists might like gun shows, short wave radios, combat movies, movies with white male heroes, Tom Clancey Novels, and Presidential Candidates Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and Chuck Baldwin!" ALIPAC wrote.

I don't know about you, but this to me reads more like a list of items that would be of concern to your typical All-American native son (or daughter). That is, when he wasn't busying himself with playing or coaching baseball, eating grandma's apple pie at a family gathering, instructing his children in the art of self-government, or doing volunteer work for his local church and his local community. Or, of course, writing at a political blog. ;-)

Read More

How do you plead?

Chuck Baldwin writes at NewsWithViews.com My Response to M.I.A.C. Report:

By now, readers should be familiar with the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report dated 02/20/09 and titled, "MIAC Strategic Report: The Modern Militia Movement." In this dreadfully malicious and slanderous "law enforcement sensitive" secret police report, Governor Jeremiah (Jay) Nixon; John Britt, Director of the Missouri Department of Public Safety; James Keathley, Colonel, Missouri State Highway Patrol; and Van Godsey, Director of MIAC categorize certain citizens as being potential violence-prone "militia members." I would venture to guess that more than 75% of the entire population of the United States would fit the MIAC's broad definition of someone who would fall into the aforementioned category.

According to the MIAC report, if you oppose any of the following, you could qualify for being profiled as a potential dangerous "militia member":

The United Nations
The New World Order
Gun Control
The violation of Posse Comitatus
The Federal Reserve
The Income Tax
The Ammunition and Accountability Act
A possible Constitutional Convention
The North American Union
Universal Service Program
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)
Abortion
Illegal Immigration

Again, I would bet that at least 75% of the American people would oppose at least one or more items on the above list. Well, according to the MIAC report, that is sufficient to make them potential dangerous "militia members."

Uh, yeah, count me among the 75% ... several times. Indeed, count about 98.9% of everyone I know among the 75% who disagree with one or more of these, perhaps in most cases fewer times than I, or maybe not to the extent or with the same passion that I oppose many of the items on the forgoing list, but opposed they are to better than 50% of the named items nonetheless.

I must be particularly dangerous given that I strongly oppose virtually every single item on the list, though I've never been a member of any militia group and don't know any members of any militia group, at least to my knowledge. And I didn't vote for Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, or Bob Barr in the late election. In fact, I didn't vote in the presidential election at all. But if these three are indeed on this list, then I imagine I'll vote for one of 'em in the next election if I have to write his name in, and of course, if I'm still a free man at that point. Yet more evidence that I'm a particularly particularly dangerous individual, "prone to violence" and militia membership. I'm feeling kind of special right now, can you tell?

So much for pleading the fifth, eh?

Read More

Mark it down on your calendars

Date: Wednesday, April 15th (Tax Day), 2009. Time: Time of individual gatherings varies from late morning to late afternoon. Place: A city or town near you. Event: "Tea Party" - protesting the tax-and-spend socialist policies of the Obama administration and the Socialist-Democrat Congress.

Unlike the last Tea Party gatherings, this event is planned a month in advance which should be ample time for most of us to make plans and arrangements to attend the event to be held nearest us. My family and I will likely be attending the Tea Party in Tulsa on this date. Please let me know in a comment to the entry whether you intend to attend the Tea Party gathering on this date nearest you.

Note also that some organizations have planned Tea Parties on other significant dates such as July 4th. A great day to have one. I can't think of anything better, or more American, to do on Independence Day than to shun the detested policies of a government consisting of leftist ideologues whose opposing colleagues are generally way more about show than they are about go.

The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America:

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Read More

First Amendment Terrorism

I've written before about Paul Sperry's book Infiltration, How Muslim Spies and Subversives have infiltrated Washington. Below is an excerpt from the book's Afterword:

Years ago in Philly, the FBI secretly recorded suspected Hamas operatives stating that the United States provides a secure legal base and a perfect haven from which to operate, because they can disguise their activities as religious activities protected by the Constitution and no one will question them because of the politically tolerant culture.

I.e., liberalism. I present to you exhibit A.

Read More

How to accomodate a 30% Arab-American/Muslim population

This story first came to me via Don Wildmon's AFA Action Alert. After doing a rather hasty internet search to verify the story, I ran across this from Free Republic, and this story from CBS 2 Chicago, the latter of which tells of the 30% figure.

Thoughts?

rest of post here

Read More

Bush, Pentagon, FBI, all drop the ball

As I've mentioned at least a couple of times recently, I've been reading Paul Sperry's explosive book, Infiltration, How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington.

I highlight the subtitle here because I want to emphasize it; I want you to take a moment and think about the implications, if Sperry is right, of what this means for the United States, our internal security, or the lack thereof. And I'm not talking about what it appears to mean just on the surface. I'm talking about what it means at the depths; what this means for loyal Americans who understand the dangers inherent to granting Muslims equal protection under the first amendment, of which, Islam, by its very nature and its teachings, cannot abide either religious provision established therein...

The obvious question is, if Islam is subversive and hostile to the religious provisions of the first amendment - both the establishment, and the free exercise provisions - not to mention the rest of the first amendment, the whole of the bill or righs, and of the whole of the U.S. Constitution, then what in the name of all that is good and holy are we doing allowing liberals and Muslims to determine how these provisions are to be applied in the case of Muslims?

But before I get too far off topic here, let me get back to Sperry's book and the reason for which I mention it here again...

In addition to corroborating what Raymond Ibrahim says, recently discussed at VFR, concerning the non-translated messages Muslim operatives direct to one-another, as opposed to those they direct to the United States and Western nations, Sperry also reveals that many of these documents go untranslated because of Muslim subversives we have working within the FBI and the Pentagon.

It seems as though shortly following the events of 911, the FBI and the U.S. government were in such a rush to hire Arabic speaking translators, that they abandoned standard hiring and security protocols, opting rather to take their chances -putting national security at risk- by quickly filling these positions with Muslims recommended by such questionable groups as CAIR. In fact, not only did the government, according to Sperry, seek the assistance of questionable Muslim groups to fill these positions, they actually hired them in preference to Arabic speaking Jews who had also applied for the positions. According to Sperry, not one of the dozens of Arabic speaking Jewish applicants was ever hired. Instead, all positions were filled by Muslims.

But here again, it is the implications of these revelations that I'm most interested in. With the Patriot Act in mind, and going beyond the obvious implications as to how these internal spies and operatives are in positions which allow them to conduct espionage operations right under the government's nose, consider the fact that they're also in a position and empowered to conduct their own undercover sting operations against the loyal citizens of this country, particularly those who, as I said before, understand the incompatible nature of Islam and seek to expose it. In other words, those who these Islamists find to be threatening to their purposes.

Mull that over for awhile. And yes, I'm taking Sperry's book with me on my trip, during which time I hope to finish it. But there's sure to be another upcoming post on this, so y'all stay tuned.

Read More