Posts Tagged ‘United States’

Aaron Dykes
Prisonplanet.com
November 16, 2012 

Opponents of Agenda 21′s local implementation in the United States have begun mounting a notable resistance. At state capitals and city councils, activists are showing up to educate and lobby their elected representatives about the implications of this United Nations’ plan for sovereignty, property rights and the future development of the country.

It has become such a widespread phenomenon that media outlets everywhere are spinning into damage control in effort to ridicule the anti-Agenda 21 movement, hoping that it will go away before the general population understands the issue.

But their efforts are fruitless. Coverage across the country begrudgingly notes that groups are opposing local “sustainability” initiatives and fighting back against plans to concentrate growth into dense urban centers under emerging “mega-regions.”

Now, a case in Georgia has triggered an all-out media frenzy, after a local group convinced the state’s Senate Majority Leader, Chip Rogers (R – Woodstock), to hold an information session on Agenda 21 attended by several other GOP senators and representatives. Conspicuously negative coverage is being used to pressure these politicians to avoid supposedly fringe elements in their constituency.

The progressive, sustainability group Better Georgia released video of the meeting, and blasted the ‘extremist’ views presented, that included comparing Obama’s socialist vision with the plans of Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao, which resulted in famine and genocide.

Worse, according to the portrayals, is the involvement of one Field Searcy, who helped present the slideshow. Searcy had been booted from his Tea Party group for recommending people visit Infowars.com and tune into Alex Jones. The tea party group formally objected to Searcy’s activities in “actively promoting issues and beliefs derived from conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.” As such, his presence at the clandestine Agenda 21 meeting was presented as particularly damning.

11 Alive, the NBC affiliate in Atlanta, covered the meeting, mocking the conspiracy and “global control” theorists attempting to expose Agenda 21, telling viewers that the groups and politicians involved think people who believe in “environmentalism and sustainability” are part of the problem.

Meanwhile, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution published multiple articles on the Agenda 21 presentation, including an op-ed titled, “Agenda 21: The lunacy infiltrating state leaders.” Regional papers promised that state Senator Chip Rogers would face “blowback” for hosting the information session, and otherwise insinuated that Rogers had been stung by the “secret” video that had “surfaced”.

Further, liberal websites with national reach latched onto the opportunity for ridicule, distorting part of the presentation that discussed the use of Delphi Technique, crafted at the RAND Corp. for consensus building. Mother Jones published, “Top Georgia GOP Lawmakers Host Briefing on Secret Obama Mind-Control Plot,” complete with an image of Obama in front of a hypnotic backdrop. Raw Story and the Huffington Post mimicked the mocking mind control mantra, as did Slate who also noted the rising popularity of “UN panic” it linked with Deep South politics of fear.

One author at the Examiner took it further, linking it to the secessionist movement now in the news cycle, with suggested overtones of racism, civil war and a ‘South will rise again’ mentality.

This video shows 52 minutes taped from the presentation that reportedly lasted four hours: Go here to watch video.

Speaking out against Agenda 21 is quickly becoming a component of the larger states’ rights movement. Americans are waking up to the undue power concentrated at the Federal government level, as well as to the larger takeover by foreign corporatist interests, including those that created the United Nations and have used it as a nose under the tent to create world government and rule through regulations and taxes implemented on the pretext of environmentalism.

Locales from Casper, Wyoming to Los Angeles and Napa, California, among others, are being inundated with activists objecting to plans being sold under the guise of “smart growth,” “sustainability” and other buzz terms.

“Stop Agenda 21″ groups have cropped up nationwide, and several government bodies have embraced the issue, to the chagrin of the establishment. Alabama passed statewide legislation banning Agenda 21 policies, and New Hampshire passed a similar measure through the House. The Texas GOP officially put Agenda 21 on its party platform, while Chip Rogers, the Georgia Senator mentioned above, attempted to introduce Agenda 21 legislation but was defeated.

Infowars.com did a series of reports exposing the local groups in Central Texas implementing Agenda 21 by stealth, with funding from President Obama’s Partnership for Sustainable Communities, which is issuing planning grants through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Obama’s initiative is a continuation of President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development, set up in 1993 to implement the United Nations’ 1992 Agenda 21. During one of the meetings, the bureaucrats became uneasy at repeated questions from local residents who objected to the development “vision,” while anti-Agenda 21 groups attended other meetings in protest.

Wary of true grassroots movements of any stripe, the system is frantically trying to discredit a very real and important issue, while using the controversy to shame politicians from listening to voices coming from outside of the establishment controlled debate. The media harped on several county commissioners in Pinellas County, Florida who voted to remove fluoride. The contrived controversy was used to push them out of office, and their replacements are moving swiftly to re-fluoridate the water. Media outlets then bragged about the victory in intimidating the politicians and removing them from their posts.

A similar effort is now underway in Georgia to hold these GOP figures “accountable” for hearing out their anti-Agenda 21 constituents.

 

Advertisements
This image was selected as a picture of the we...

This image was selected as a picture of the week on the Malay Wikipedia for the 26th week, 2010. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

During this year, you have heard such stories of President Obama leaving out the word “Creator” from the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence.  I was watching a box set to the Looney Tunes one day, and an episode of Porky Pig and Uncle Sam taking a stroll through Washington D.C. came on.  At the end, they recited the Preamble; however, they left out the word “Creator”.

I have looked through YouTube and cannot find it.  But what I did find was Porky reciting the Pledge of allegiance and leaving out “One nation under God”.  So, Porky did it first!

I chose this year not to give the two-party system the satisfaction of having my television tuned into a superfluous debate; although, I did read about them.  I have friends on Facebook putting up things such as “we want our country back” and little pictures of Mitt Romney with “so-and-so likes Mitt Romney”.  Change will not come until we change the idea of government, and government changes its philisophical idea of why it was created.  So many bureaucrats.  So much red tape.  Do you actually think that one man who is a flip-flopper can change all of this?

I read the transcript of the foreign policy debate and it was so superficial, it was ridiculous!  They aren’t discussing different ideas of foreign policy – only technicalities.  Two issues were never brought up in the debates – and thus far, haven’t been – that I wish were:

One, is that President Obama seems to think he has the authority to assassinate American citizens.  And Mitt Romney doesn’t disagree.

“Those who would sacrafice essential liberty and freedom for temporary safety, deserve neither.”
– Benjamin Franklin

Another is that the Pentagon authorized the flying of drones over U.S. soil.  And since it isn’t brought up in the debates, no American thinks another thought of the matter.

“The truth is the most important value we have.  If the truth does not endure – if the government murders truth – if we cannot trust the hearts of these people, then this is not the country I was born in, and it is certainly not the country that I want to die in.”
– Kevin Costner, JFK

This issue is a hot item up in northeast Indiana; there isn’t a news segment that isn’t devoted to the subject.  My wife asked me the other day why the Air Force would want to get rid of the A-110 at the 122nd Fighter Wing.  Isn’t it obvious?  They want to be able to spy on the American people at will.

Since September 11, 2001, Americans have been targeted as potential terrorists – or Enemies of the State.  Now I see the hilarity behind the Family Guy episode when Lois Griffin was running for mayor; when faced with an issue she had no way to address (instead of spouting some nonsensical word), she simply said, “9/11”  Get it?

Most Americans will have no problem with this.  Afterall, they’re not planning to blow up the government.  Well, neither am I, but at least I care for my rights. 

U.S. citizens are now the primary target of the war on terror

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, February 10, 2012

With the announcement that 30,000 drones are expected to fill American skies within ten years, the U.S. government has officially declared war on the American people, turning to technology normally used to hunt down insurgents abroad as the whole arsenal of the war on terror is re-focused domestically.

The State Has Declared War On The American People 19271

“The Federation Aviation Administration said up to 30,000 drones could be in airspace shared with airliners carrying passengers,” reports UPI.

Once signed by president Obama, the FAA Reauthorization Act allows for the FAA to permit the use of drones and develop regulations for testing and licensing by 2015.

Some types of surveillance drones are already being used by police departments across the country, including in Montgomery County, Texas, where the Department of Homeland Security recently gave the go-ahead for law enforcement in the United States to deploy the ShadowHawk mini drone drone helicopter that has the ability to taze suspects from above as well as carrying 12-gauge shotguns and grenade launchers.

US law enforcement bodies are already using drone technology to spy on Americans. In December, a Predator B drone was called in to conduct surveillance over a family farm in North Dakota as part of a SWAT raid on the Brossart family, who were suspects in the egregious crime of stealing six missing cows. Local police in this one area have already used the drone on two dozen occasions since June last year.

The DHS also recently announced a plan to spend up to $50 million dollars on a spy system that has been used to hunt insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan for the purposes of “emergency and non-emergency incidents” within the United States.

While preparing the use of surveillance drones against Americans, the U.S. government is also keen to characterize a myriad of behaviors and activities, no matter how normal or mundane, as potential indicators of terrorism, encouraging citizens to spy on each other in a chilling throwback to how people were hired as informants under the East German Stasi.

As part of its Communities Against Terrorism program, the FBI is encouraging business owners from across the spectrum to spy on their customers.

Lists of examples of “suspicious behavior” being sent out to everything from Internet Cafes to tattoo parlors define things like paying for a cup of coffee with cash, buying food in bulk, and showing an interest in online privacy as evidence of potential terrorist activity.

The DHS has also released numerous PSAs that depict routine activities as potential signs of terrorism, including using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application.

The federal agency attracted much derision last week when it announced that Super Bowl vendors, including hot dog sellers, had been trained to spot terrorists under the First Observer program.

Even more chilling, the feds have also begun to characterize perfectly legitimate political and economic beliefs as those held by terrorists, effectively denouncing them as thought crimes.

As Reuters reported on Monday, authorities are now treating those who “believe the United States went bankrupt by going off the gold standard” as extremists who are a potential violent threat to law enforcement. The DHS has also previously characterized returning veterans, Ron Paul supporters, gold investors, and people who display political bumper stickers as potential domestic terrorists.

All this serves to underscore the fact that the American people have now been targeted as the number one terror threat in the eyes of the authorities. The state has declared war on U.S. citizens. Not only will they be subject to surveillance and intimidation campaigns, but with the recent passage of the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA, the government has afforded itself the power to hold Americans without trial.

Awhile back, a friend had asked why I put Revelation 18 on her Facebook page in response to an open question she posted in reference to President Obama.  The following is my response in its entirety.

 If I remember correctly, you asked openly if President Obama missed the National Day of Prayer, and to that, someone commented that the President said that “America (I’m paraphrasing) is no longer just a Christian nation, but a Hindu, a Bud…dist, and Muslim nation.” In short, while America cannot officially claim Christianity as it’s religion – to do so would be in violation of the First Amendment – the United States has been prodominantly a Christian nation for a very long time.

 
When our parents were children, and even our age, God was seen as infallible and His Word as the Truth. Fast forward to today and God is veiwed as not-so-infallible and His Truth not-so-true. By doing this, the enemy has been able to weaken the christians in this country and make them complacent. God was very stern when he told the Israelites “if you obey my laws, your enemies will come at you in one direction and flee in seven. If you don’t obey my laws your enemies will come at you in seven and leave in one.”

America’s problem does not lie with the politicians, although, that is a conundrum. Trust in a politician and you will be surely dissapointed. Our problem rests with our morals. For as Revelation 18 says “her sins are piled up to heaven.”

Now to answer your question. Revelation is considered the bloodiest, most violent, most horrific book in the Bible. Even the most skilled of Bible scholars cannot decipher it’s cryptic messages entirely. In Revelation 18, Babylon is seen as an “evil spirit” residing in a nation or nation’s. “She has become a dwelling for demons, every unclean bird, every detestable animal, and a haunt for every impure spirit.”

What nation does this sound like to you?

Thanks to the sexual revolution of the 1960’s, America is filled with homosexuality, drug and alchohol use, wide spread divorce, and as Carmen put it, “pornography that floods our streets like open sores.”

Rather than view sin as an affront to God, the people of the world see it simply as living in a free and open society. Revelation 18 says that the “merchants of the world will mourn over her because no one buys her cargoes”. “In one hour your doom has come” (v.10)

Consider for a moment that Revelation 18 also says that “she will be thrown down, never to be found again” (vs. 21-24). To help further your understanding – if you haven’t done it yet – I strongly urge you to read Revelation 18 in it’s entirety. However, there is no reason to fear, Jesus Christ is our Savior, and He will always be with us.

 
At this juncture in the post, I would be remiss not to point out the Seven Letters to the Seven Churches in Revelation 1-3 (just for clarification, it is Revelation, not “Revelations”) are seven actual churches.  Also, they represent seven church ages (in the Bible the number seven means “fulfillment”).  And, we today, live in the Seventh Church Age; whereas Jesus Christ said in Revelation 3:14-18, “These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. 15 I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16 So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. 17 You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. 18 I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.”
 
The very real fact that Jesus Christ our Lord knows these inequities and feels this way should shake every christian to their core in reverent fear of God.
 
The American Dream
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Is Christianity in decline in America?  When you examine the cold, hard numbers it is simply not possible to come to any other conclusion.  Over the past few decades, the percentage of Christians in America has been steadily declining.  This has especially been true among young people.  As you will see later in this article, there has been a mass exodus of teens and young adults out of U.S. churches.  In addition, what “Christianity” means to American Christians today is often far different from what “Christianity” meant to their parents and their grandparents.  Millions upon millions of Christians in the United States simply do not believe many of the fundamental principles of the Christian faith any longer.  Without a doubt, America is becoming a less “Christian” nation.  This has staggering implications for the future of this country.  The United States was founded primarily by Christians that were seeking to escape religious persecution.  For those early settlers, the Christian faith was the very center of their lives, and it deeply affected the laws that they made and the governmental structures that they established.  So what is the future of America going to look like if we totally reject the principles that this nation was founded on?

Overall, Christianity is still the largest religion in the world by far.  According to the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, there are currently 2.2 billionChristians in the world.  So Christianity is not in danger of disappearing any time soon.  In fact, in some areas of the globe it is experiencing absolutely explosive growth.

But in the United States, things are different.  Churches are shrinking, skepticism is growing and apathy about spiritual matters seems to be at an all-time high.

Before we examine the data, let me disclose that I am a Christian.  I am not bashing Christians or the Christian faith at all in this article.  In fact, I consider the decline of Christianity in America to be a very bad thing.  Not everyone is going to agree with me on that, but hopefully this article will help spark a debate on the role of religion in America that everyone can learn something from.

Unfortunately, the reality is that most Americans spend very little time thinking about religion or spiritual matters these days.

Just consider the following quote from a recent USA Today article….

“The real dirty little secret of religiosity in America is that there are so many people for whom spiritual interest, thinking about ultimate questions, is minimal,” says Mark Silk, professor of religion and public life at Trinity College”

This is backed up by the numbers.  For example, a survey taken last year by LifeWay Research found that 46 percent of all Americans never think about whether they will go to heaven or not.

To most Americans, faith is simply not a big deal.  This is particularly true of our young people.  Those under the age of 30 are leaving U.S. churches in droves.  The following comes from a recent CNN article….

David Kinnaman, the 38-year-old president of the Barna Group, an evangelical research firm, is the latest to sound the alarm. In his new book, “You Lost Me: Why Young Christians Are Leaving Church and Rethinking Faith,” he says that 18- to 29-year-olds have fallen down a “black hole” of church attendance. There is a 43% drop in Christian church attendance between the teen and early adult years, he says.

But it isn’t just young people that are leaving American churches.  The proportion of Americans that consider themselves to be Christians has been steadily declining for many years.  Back in 1990, 86 percent of all Americans considered themselves to be Christian.  By 2008, that number had dropped to 76 percent.

Meanwhile, the number of Americans that reject religion entirely has absolutely soared.  According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of Americans with “no religion” more than doubled between 1990 and 2008.

So what is going to happen if these trends continue?

Dave Olson, the director of church planting for the Evangelical Covenant Church, has made some really interesting projections regarding what is going to happen to church attendance in America if current trends continue.

According to Olson, only 18.7 percent of all Americans regularly attend church right now.  If this number continues to decline at the current pace, Olson says that the percentage of Americans attending church in 2050 will be about half of what it is today.

Other research has produced similar results.

According to a study done by LifeWay Research, membership in Southern Baptist churches will fall nearly 50 percent by the year 2050 if current trends persist.

If you are a Christian, you should be quite alarmed by these numbers.

But what is happening to the faith of our young people should be even more alarming for Christians.

The American Religious Identification Survey by the Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society & Culture at Trinity College is one of the most comprehensive studies on religion in America that has ever been done.

According to that study, 15 percent of all Americans say that they have “no religion”.

That is up from 8 percent in 1990.

That is quite a change.

But the move away from religion is particularly pronounced among our young people.

One recent survey found that 25 percent of all Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 say that they have no religion.

Obviously the Christian faith is not winning the battle for the hearts and the minds of our young people.  The cold, hard truth is that in America today, the younger you are, the less likely you are to consider yourself to be a Christian.

Large numbers of young Americans that went to church while they were growing up are now leaving U.S. churches entirely.  A recent study by the Barna Group discovered that nearly 60 percent of all Christians between the ages of 15 and 29 are no long actively involved in any church.

But not only have they left the church, our young people have also abandoned just about all forms of Christian spirituality.

Just check out the results of one survey of young adults that was conductedby LifeWay Christian Resources….

•65% rarely or never pray with others, and 38% almost never pray by themselves either.

•65% rarely or never attend worship services of any kind.

•67% don’t read the Bible or any other religious texts on a regular basis.

If this does not get turned around, churches all over America will be closing their doors.  When the survey above first came out, the president of LifeWay Christian Resources stated that “the Millennial generation will see churches closing as quickly as GM dealerships.”

But it is not just church that our young people are rejecting.

The reality is that they are also rejecting the fundamental principles of the Christian faith.

One survey conducted by the Barna Group found that less than 1 percent of all Americans between the ages of 18 and 23 hold a Biblical worldview.

The Barna Group asked participants in the survey if they agreed with the following six statements….

1) Believing that absolute moral truth exists.
2) Believing that the Bible is completely accurate in all of the principles it teaches.
3) Believing that Satan is considered to be a real being or force, not merely symbolic.
4) Believing that a person cannot earn their way into Heaven by trying to be good or by doing good works.
5) Believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth.
6) Believing that God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the world who still rules the universe today.

Less than 1 percent of the participants agreed with all of those statements.

That is staggering.

But it is not just young adults that are rejecting the fundamentals of the Christian faith.

Even large numbers of “evangelical Christians” are rejecting the fundamental principles of the Christian faith.

For example, one survey found that 52 percent of all Americans Christians believe that “at least some non-Christian faiths can lead to eternal life”.

Another survey found that 29 percent of all American Christians claim to have been in contact with the dead, 23 percent believe in astrology and 22 percent believe in reincarnation.

Without a doubt, the religious landscape of America is changing.

Over the past several decades, church attendance has been steadily declining, the percentage of Americans that consider themselves to be Christians has been going down, and the number of people that hold traditional Christian beliefs has been dropping like a rock.

So what does all of this mean for the future of America?

The horrendous spectacle that we here in the United States have come to call “a political debate” was more along the lines of gerry mandering the focus of the debate to none other than Mitt Romney.  The candidates took turns blasting President Obama.  Newt Gingrich was neither here nor there.  Rick Perry just reminds me of George W. Bush’s idiotic genius.  You don’t have to delve deep into Mitt Romney’s political past to see that he is a flip-flopper (was once pro-aborion, now isn’t; was once pro-gay; was once pro-gun control, now isn’t).  Am I missing something here?

I was absolutely appalled to find that candidates were for the use of torture!  Are you kidding me?  Torture is illegal in the United States; it is against international law, and most importantly, it’s immoral.  Why are we so supportive of something that, we ourselves, would be against when used on our own soldiers?  It never seems to amaze me that the proponents of torture seem to stoop to the level of a snail by using a “hypothetical situation” on me.  Okay, this is reality.  This is not Inglorious Basterds.

Perhaps we should take a page out of history from John McCain.  Despite the fact that I don’t like him, he lived throught Vietnam, endured torture, and has lived to oppose it.

If I could define torture, it would be like this: An act or procedure that places the victim under extreme duress, cause bodily harm, or possibly death.   

Finally, once Mitt Romney (he is no longer a governor, so stop calling him that) answered the question about the President of the United States having the authority to assassinate American citizens, I waited with rapt attention for Ron Paul’s turn to speak.  However, due to the major media blackout, he never got his chance.  How can we say our men are “fighting for our freedoms” and “freedom isn’t free” if we are so willing to forfeit those in the face of danger?  Your rights, your freedoms, do not come from ideals or corruption imposed on the world by American weapons of war – they come from the Constitution of the United States!

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety.”
– Benjamin Franklin

Now to the news.

Leaked email to Bachmann campaign indicates decision to limit air time for certain candidates was deliberate CBS News policy

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
November 13, 2011

Ron Paul Gets 89 Seconds To Speak In CBS Debate

Congressman Ron Paul was a victim of what later transpired to be a deliberate policy on behalf of CBS News to restrict the air time of certain candidates during last night’s Republican debate, after he was afforded just 90 seconds of speaking time during the course of the event in South Carolina last night.

Paul’s campaign reacted furiously to the Texan being limited to 90 seconds in what was a 90 minute-long debate, with Campaign Manager John Tate blasting out an email entitled “What a Joke,” in which he stated, “It literally made me sick watching the mainstream media once again silence the one sane voice in this election. The one dissenter to a decade of unchecked war. The one candidate who stands for true defense and actual constitutional government. Ron Paul was silenced, in perhaps the most important debate of the cycle.”

A scientific study undertaken by the University of Minnesota last month confirmed that Ron Paul had been given the least speaking time out of all the Republican candidates during the debates, even less than the likes of John Huntsman and Rick Santorum, who have routinely been beaten by Paul in national polls.

As Marc Fortier points out, an email inadvertently sent to Michelle Bachmann’s campaign clearly indicates that certain candidates were given less air time as a result of a deliberate CBS policy.

When a CBS staffer referenced how Bachmann’s campaign had made representatives available for an after-debate webshow, CBS News political analyst John Dickerson responded by saying, “Okay let’s keep it loose though since she’s not going to get many questions and she’s nearly off the charts in the hopes that we can get someone else.”

Dickerson’s admission that CBS had deliberately ensured Bachmann was “not going to get many questions” during the debate indicated “a planned effort to limit questions to Michele Bachmann at tonight’s CBS/National Journal Debate,” the Bachmann campaign said in a statement.

Obviously, that policy of limiting air time to certain candidates was also applied to Congressman Ron Paul, despite the fact that he has consistently won straw polls and proven himself as a top tier candidate in national polls.

As we have documented, despite his popularity the establishment media has deliberately downplayed and sidelined Paul’s campaign.

After Ron Paul finished a close second to Bachmann in the highly regarded Ames straw poll, and was subsequently blacklisted by the corporate press, Politico’s Roger Simon said the reason for him being ignored was that “the media doesn’t believe he has a hoot in hells chance of winning the Iowa caucuses, the Republican nomination or winning the presidency, so we’re gonna ignore him.”

“We are in the business of kicking candidates out of the race,” CNN host Howard Kurtz responded.

The Loss of American Citizenship and Assassinaitons

America beware if Romney should get elected.

“You sit down with your attorneys and tell you what you have to do, but obviously the president of the United States has to do what’s in the best interest of the United States against a potential threat.” –on whether he would consult Congress about invading Iran

The American Dream
October 31, 2011

At this point, it appears very likely that Mitt Romney is going to be the Republican nominee for president in 2012.  He has raised far more money than any of the other candidates, he is leading or is near the lead in all of the early states, the mainstream media have anointed him as the frontrunner and a number of recent polls show that most Republicans fully expect Romney to win the nomination.  So will Mitt Romney be the next president of the United States?  Well, he certainly fits the part.  He looks like a president and he speaks very well.  But when you look at what he really stands for that is where things become very troubling.  The truth is that Mitt Romney is either very wrong or very “soft” on every single major issue.  It would be a huge understatement to refer to Mitt Romney as a RINO (“Republican in name only”).  When you closely examine their positions, there is very, very little difference between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.  Sure, Romney and Obama will say the “right things” to the voters during election season, but the reality is that a Romney administration would be so similar to an Obama administration that you would hardly know that a change has taken place.  What you are about to read about Mitt Romney should alarm you very much.  Mitt Romney would be a an absolute disaster for this country, and America cannot afford another disastrous presidency.

The fact that Barack Obama looked sharp and could give inspiring speeches helped him go a long way back in 2008.  Well, it is the same thing with Romney.  The guy looks very presidential and he sounds very presidential.  When backed into a corner, he is extremely slick.  He rarely makes mistakes and he is very polished.

Mitt Romney is a “politician” in the worst sense of the word.  As his past has demonstrated, he will do and say just about anything in order to get elected.  The positions he has taken during this campaign season have been carefully calculated to help him win both the Republican nomination and the general election.

That is why so many call Mitt Romney a “flip-flopper”.  Romney will take just about any political position if he thinks that it will help him.  Mitt Romney’s wife, Ann Romney, once made the following statement about her husband….

“He can argue any side of a question. And sometimes you think he’s really believing his argument, but he’s not.”

So keep that in mind while reading the following information.  Mitt Romney is trying to claim that he is a “conservative” and that he is looking out for the American people, but those claims simply are not true.

The following are 16 reasons why Mitt Romney would be a really, really bad president….

#1 Obamacare was one of the worst pieces of legislation ever passed by the U.S. Congress.  Mitt Romney says that he would repeal Obamacare, but the reality is that Romneycare was what Obamacare was based on.  In fact, a recent MSNBC article brought to light some new information about the relationship between Romneycare and Obamacare….

Newly obtained White House records provide fresh details on how senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney’s landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney’s own health care advisers and experts to help craft the act now derided by Republicans as “Obamacare.”

The records, gleaned from White House visitor logs reviewed by NBC News, show that senior White House officials had a dozen meetings in 2009 with three health-care advisers and experts who helped shape the health care reform law signed by Romney in 2006, when the Republican presidential candidate was governor of Massachusetts.

Mitt Romney continues to defend Romneycare, but the reality is that it really is a total nightmare for Massachusetts.  The following is how one blogger summarized some of the key points of Romneycare….

• Punitive To Individuals. Everyone must buy health insurance or face tax penalties equal to 50% of cost of standard policy.
• Hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on free hospital care were converted into subsidies to help the needy buy insurance.
• A health insurance “exchange” was established to help connect the uninsured with private health plans at more affordable rates.
• Health plans can offer consumers higher deductibles and more restrictive physician and hospital networks in order to lower costs.
• Punitive to Businesses with 11 or more workers that do not offer insurance must pay a $295 per employee fee.
• Established payment policy advisory board; one Board member must be from Planned Parenthood. No pro-life organization represented.
• Provides Taxpayer-Funded Abortions for copay of $50.

So what have been the results of Romneycare in Massachusetts?  According to the Daily Caller, health care costs and health insurance premiums have gone up dramatically in Massachusetts….

Since the bill became law, the state’s total direct health-care spending has increased by a remarkable 52 percent. Medicaid spending has gone from less than $6 billion a year to more the $9 billion. Many consumers have seen double-digit percentage increases in their premiums.

All of that certainly sounds a whole lot like Obamacare.

Unfortunately, the other Republican candidates have not taken advantage of this weakness.  According to one brand new poll, 6 times as many Republicans view Romneycare unfavorably as view it favorably.  This is something that the other candidates should be jumping on big time.

#2 During his time as governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney significantly raised taxes. The following is an excerpt from a CBS News article….

Mitt Romney’s Harvard MBA and gold-plated resume convinced many business leaders he would follow in the tradition of corporate-friendly Republicans when he was elected governor of Massachusetts in 2002.

Within three years, some had a vastly different opinion, after Romney’s efforts raised the tax bill on businesses by $300 million

The same article also notes that Romney jacked up “fees and fines” on Massachusetts taxpayers substantially….

Romney and lawmakers also approved hundreds of millions in higher fees and fines during his four years in office.

Many in the Massachusetts business community were quite disgusted with Romney by the end of his tenure.  Peter Nicholas, the chairman of Boston Science Corporation, says that “tax rates on many corporations almost doubled because of legislation supported by Romney.

#3 Government spending in Massachusetts increased significantly under Mitt Romney.  An advocate of smaller government he most definitely is not.

This was especially true for the last two budgets passed under Romney.  In fiscal year 2006, government spending in Massachusetts increased by 7.6 percent.  In fiscal year 2007, government spending in Massachusetts increased by a whopping 10.2 percent.

#4 It turns out that Mitt Romney is a believer in the theory of man-made global warming.  In fact, Al Gore recently praised on Mitt Romney on his blog. In a post entitled “Good for Mitt Romney — though we’ve long passed the point where weak lip-service is enough on the Climate Crisis“, Al Gore lavished the following praise on the former Massachusetts governor….

“While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party”

Not only that, it is also very important to remember that while Mitt Romney was governor, Massachusetts became the very first state to pass a law to regulate carbon emissions.

#5 If Mitt Romney becomes president, we may actually have “cap and trade” shoved down our throats.  While campaigning for president in 2007, Mitt Romney said that he would support a “cap and trade” carbon tax scheme for the entire world….

“I support Cap-and-Trade on a global basis but not the USA going alone. I want to do it with other nations involved and on a global scale.”

#6 Mitt Romney had a horrible record of creating jobs while governor of Massachusetts.  According to Boston Herald business reporter Bret Arends, only one state in the entire country was worse at creating jobs while Romney was in office….

“During the four years Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, it had the second worst jobs record of any state in America…it wasn’t a regional issue. The rest of New England created nearly 200,000 jobs.”

#7 Mitt Romney was a very enthusiastic supporter of the Wall Street bailouts.  When the time comes for more Wall Street bailouts it seems almost certain that Mitt Romney will bail them out again.

#8 If Romney becomes president, get ready for a flood of liberal judges.  While he was governor of Massachusetts, there were actually significantly more Democrats among his judicial appointments than there were Republicans.

#9 Mitt Romney is incredibly soft on illegal immigration.  Back in 2007, Mitt Romney made the following statement….

“But my view is that those 12 million who’ve come here illegally should be given the opportunity to sign up to stay here”

#10 While he was governor, Mitt Romney received advice on global warming and carbon emissions from the man who is now the top science adviser to Barack Obama.  His name is John P. Holdren, and he has some very, very disturbing ideas.  For example, he once wrote the following….

“A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.

The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”

Holdren also believes that compulsory abortion would be perfectly legal under the U.S. Constitution….

“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”

So if this is the kind of person that Mitt Romney relied on for “scientific advice” while he was governor, what kind of people would Romney bring in to his administration once he is president?

#11 Mitt Romney has been a huge supporter of gun control laws.  When he was running for governor in Massachusetts, he made the following statement….

“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts- I support them…I believe they help protect us, and provide for our safety.”

#12 Mitt Romney once claimed that he was more “pro-choice” than Ted Kennedy, but now he claims that he is pro-life.  In a recent article for WorldNetDaily, Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt explained why so many voters are still skeptical….

This year he’s the only major Republican presidential candidate who has yet to sign the Susan B. Anthony List pledge to defend life and defund Planned Parenthood nationwide. Candidates Bachmann, Perry, Gingrich, Paul, Pawlenty and Santorum all signed the pledge, although it should be noted Herman Cain supports everything in the pledge except the Fetal Pain Act. (Cain is not fully pro-life, either.) And who can forget Mitt’s famous 2002 campaign debate bragging repeatedly that he’s more pro-choice than Ted Kennedy?

#13 During this campaign season, Mitt Romney has stated that he only supports partnership agreements for gay couples and not gay marriage, but what Romney actually did while governor of Massachusetts suggests otherwise.  In the WorldNetDaily article referenced above, Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt detailed how Mitt Romney aggressively implemented gay marriage in the state of Massachusetts….

When the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decided in 2003 to recognize homosexual “marriage,” ignoring the voters and the Constitution, the court admitted it did not have power to issue licenses or force participation by justices of the peace to solemnize the weddings. But as governor, Romney didn’t wait for the legislature to act, he just ordered the marriage licenses and weddings to go forward, all by himself. Earlier this month, Romney said in New Hampshire, “What I would support [nationwide] is letting people who are of the same gender form – if you will – partnership agreements.”

#14 As late as 2007, Mitt Romney was a member of the Republican Main Street Partnership.  The following is what romneyexposed.com says about this organization….

They often work in conjunction with the pro-abortion group, Republicans for Choice, and the Republican homosexual group, the Log Cabin Club.  They also opposed the nomination of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and set up a 527 campaign committee that received funding from far left funder George Soros.

#15 According to the Huffington Post, Mitt Romney has raised more money from lobbyists than all of the other Republican candidates combined.

So if Mitt Romney becomes president, who do you think he is going to listen to – the American people or the lobbyists?

#16 Mitt Romney is a big time Wall Street insider.  It is estimated that Romney has a personal fortune of approximately a quarter of a billion dollars, and Wall Street money is being absolutely showered on his campaign.

In a recent article entitled “The Big Wall Street Banks Are Already Trying To Buy The 2012 Election“, I detailed how numbers compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show that Mitt Romney is getting far more money from the “too big to fail” Wall Street banks than all of the other Republican candidates combined.  The following is an excerpt from that article that shows how much money employees of those banks (and their wives) have been giving to Romney so far this year….

*****

Goldman Sachs

Mitt Romney: $352,200
Barack Obama: $49,124
Tim Pawlenty: $25,000
Jon Huntsman: $6,750
Rick Perry: $5,500
Ron Paul: $2,500

Morgan Stanley

Mitt Romney: $184,800
Tim Pawlenty: $41,715
Barack Obama: $28,225
Rick Perry: $20,750
Jon Huntsman: $9,750
Newt Gingrich: $1,000
Ron Paul: $1,000
Herman Cain: $500

Bank of America

Mitt Romney: $112,500
Barack Obama: $46,699
Tim Pawlenty: $12,750
Jon Huntsman: $4,250
Ron Paul: $3,451
Rick Perry: $2,600
Thad McCotter: $2,000
Herman Cain: $750
Michele Bachmann: $500
Newt Gingrich: $250

JPMorgan Chase

Mitt Romney: $107,250
Barack Obama: $38,039
Rick Perry: $27,050
Tim Pawlenty: $16,750
Jon Huntsman: $7,500
Ron Paul: $5,451

Citigroup

Mitt Romney: $56,550
Barack Obama: $36,887
Tim Pawlenty: $5,300
Rick Perry: $3,000
Herman Cain: $1,465
Michele Bachmann: $1,000
Ron Paul: $702

As you can see, no other Republican candidate even comes close to Romney at any of these big Wall Street banks.

In fact, of the candidates that are left in the Republican race, Mitt Romney has raised 13 times as much Wall Street money as anyone else has.

The following are the overall donation numbers from employees of the big Wall Street banks and their wives….

Mitt Romney: $813,300
Barack Obama: $198,874
Tim Pawlenty: $101,515
Rick Perry: $58,900
Jon Huntsman: $28,250
Ron Paul: $13,104
Herman Cain: $2,715
Michelle Bachmann: $1,500
Newt Gingrich: $1,250

These numbers paint a very disturbing picture.  Even though Romney’s poll numbers are in the mid to low 20s most of the time, employees of the big Wall Street banks gave him $813,300 during the first 9 months of this year and they only gave $105,719 to the rest of the Republican candidates combined.

*****

It is quite obvious that the “establishment” is in love with Mitt Romney.

But if the American people elect Mitt Romney, they will get someone who believes in big spending, big government, bank bailouts, health care mandates, climate change legislation, liberal judges, gun control laws, amnesty for illegal aliens and making things as comfortable for the fatcats on Wall Street as possible.

Yes, Barack Obama has been absolutely horrible, but the answer is most definitely not Mitt Romney.

Look, the truth is that another four years of Barack Obama would be a complete and total nightmare.

But so would four years of Mitt Romney.

America deserves better than the “lesser of two evils”.

Unfortunately, the American people have been dead asleep and have been sending incompetents, con men and charlatans to Washington D.C. for decades.

Right now it looks like the Republican Party is going to nominate yet another establishment “politician” in 2012.

Hopefully people will wake up to the truth about Mitt Romney while there is still time.

 

The New American

Elements of al-Qaeda and other Islamic extremist groups were known to be key players in the NATO-backed uprising in Libyafrom the beginning, but now it appears that prominent Jihadists and terrorists are practically leading the revolution with Western support.

One terror leader in particular, Abdelhakim Belhaj, made headlines around the world over the weekend after it emerged that he was appointed the chief of Tripoli’s rebel Military Council. Prior to leading rebel forces against Gaddafi’s regime, Belhaj was the founder and leader of the notorious Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG).

Eventually the terror “Emir,” as he has been called, was arrested and tortured as an American prisoner in the terror war. In 2004, according to reports, he was transferred to the Gaddafi regime — then a U.S. terror-war ally.

By 2010, Belhaj was freed by Gaddafi under an amnesty agreement for “former” terrorists. And more recently, the terror leader and his men were trained by U.S. special forces to take on Gaddafi.

“We proudly announce the liberation of Libya and that Libya has become free and that the rule of the tyrant and the era of oppression is behind us,” Belhaj was quoted as saying by ABC after his forces sacked one of Gaddafi’s compounds. His leadership is now well established.

While most news reports about Belhaj acknowledged that the LIFG has been designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department, many accounts inaccurately downplayed the group’s links to terror and al-Qaeda. But evidence suggests the two terrorist organizations actually merged several years ago.

According to a study by the U.S. military, the organization had an “increasingly cooperative relationship with al-Qa’ida, which culminated in the LIFG officially joining al-Qa’ida on November 3, 2007.” And even before that, former CIA boss George Tenet warned the U.S. Senate in 2004 that al-Qaeda-linked groups like the LIFG represented “one of the most immediate threats” to American security.

A few reporters, however, have highlighted the seriousness of the problem. Journalist Pepe Escobar, one of the first to report the news of Belhadj‘s rise to power in Tripoli, explained in the Asia Times: “Every intelligence agency in the US, Europe and the Arab world knows where he’s [Belhadj’s] coming from. He’s already made sure in Libya that himself and his militia will only settle for sharia law.”

Escobar also noted that the repercussions would be widespread. “The story of how an al-Qaeda asset turned out to be the top Libyan military commander in still war-torn Tripoli is bound to shatter — once again — that wilderness of mirrors that is the ‘war on terror,’” he noted. It will also compromise “the carefully constructed propaganda of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO’s) ‘humanitarian’ intervention in Libya.”

Israeli intelligence group Debka also drew attention to the situation in a recent analysis. “Belhadj is on record as rejecting any political form of coexistence with the Crusaders excepting jihad,” the organization noted in a piece entitled “Pro-Al Qaeda brigades control Qaddafi Tripoli strongholds seized by rebels.”

Belhadj, of course, is hardly the only al-Qaeda terrorist leading rebel forces in the NATO-backed takeover of Libya. Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, another key insurgent military commander, has also boasted of his links to terror groups and his battles against U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Countless other “former” terrorists, many of whom are well-known to American officials, are also deeply embedded in the new rebel regime. And according to CNN, hundreds of al-Qaeda-linked Islamic extremists have been set free from Libyan prisons in recent days and weeks by rebel forces.

“Nobody knows what these released prisoners are going to do next,” explained Noman Benotman, identified as a “former Libyan Jihadist” and senior LIFG leader. “Will they take part in the fighting and if they do will they join pre-existing rebel brigades or form a separate fighting force?”

On top of that, because the rebel government has already been recognized by Western governments, it will soon be receiving billions of dollars that were seized from the Gaddafi regime. Massive aid packages and overwhelming military support have been flowing to the rebels for months.

Al-Qaeda fighters and other Islamic extremists are also now in possession of huge stockpiles of advanced military weaponry including missiles and possibly even weapons of mass destruction. Concern about chemical agents falling into their hands is growing quickly.

NATO powers, which secretly armed the rebels before Western intervention became official, also flooded the nation with arms. And Gaddafi’s stockpiles have been thoroughly raided, adding even more fuel to the fire as the weapons begin to flow toward Jihadists around the world.

And the battle is indeed expanding. Al-Qaeda is now targeting regimes that did not back the Libyan rebellion. After an attack on an important Algerian military academy that left 18 dead, for example, a statement released by al-Qaeda said the strike was due to Algeria “continuing to support the Libyan dictator Gadaffi to fight against our brothers.”

As The New American reported in March, top al-Qaeda figures actually backed and praised the rebellion in Libya from the very beginning. Many key terrorist leaders were known to be intimately involved with the NATO-backed uprising.

Ironically perhaps, Gaddafi claimed from the start that the rebels were Western agents and al-Qaeda leaders. But despite U.S. Senators McCain and Lieberman having praised the regime several years earlier as an “ally” in the terror war deserving of American weapons, Gaddafi’s statements were dismissed by most analysts.

Eventually, however, even top U.S. officials confirmed that there were at least “flickers” of al-Qaeda among the rebel leadership. Now it is becoming increasingly apparent that they are firmly in control. And evidence of widespread war crimes by NATO and its extremist proxies on the ground is mounting by the day.

Congressman and GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul warned that the worst for Libyans may be yet to come. “We face a situation where a rebel element we have been assisting may very well be radical jihadists, bent on our destruction, and placed in positions of power in a new government,” he said in a statement released last week. “Worse still, Gadhafi’s successor is likely to be just as bad, or worse, than Gadhafi himself.”  

The aftermath of NATO’s Libya war will almost certainly be bloody and fraught with problems. And even though the truth is difficult to discern amid a web of lies emanating from both sides, what has been learned doesn’t paint a bright picture for the future.

Sharia law is enshrined in the draft Constitution, and the violence shows no signs of easing thus far. The rebel “Transitional Council” also announced early on that it had created a Western-style central bank to take over from Gaddafi’s state-owned monetary authority.

Even as Libya spirals deeper into chaos and Gaddafi vows to fight on for years, NATO may well be planning further “regime change” missions for other Middle Eastern nations. Islamic extremists, meanwhile, are arming and preparing themselves for more violence as they exploit the situation to gain more power. Analysts say the nightmare is only beginning.