(coachisright.com) - Our friends at Americanfreedomfighters.com have examined hundreds of US Government documents and developed a clear list of characteristics Barack nObama’s Administration thinks are “red flag” indications that make us terrorists in their eyes.

     All of these characteristics can be fully examined using the links provided by the authors.

     All of the following “forbidden” thoughts or actions will make you suspect in nObama’s eyes.

     Barack nObama thinks you are a terrorist threat if you talk about individual rights; support the idea of states’ rights; want to make the world a better place; identify with the colonists who fought the American Revolution; want to defeat Communism; believe America’s interests are separate from those of other nations; consider the state unnecessary; are intolerant toward other religions; are anti-Gay, anti-immigrant and/or anti-Muslim.

     Further, anyone aligned with the following thoughts or organizations is suspect in nObama’s mind: the patriot movement; against equal rights for Gays/Lesbians; the Family Research Council or the American Family Association; believes there is a conspiracy to establish a North American Union; have joined a citizens border patrol – an immigration reform group, the Tennessee Freedom Coalition or the Christian Action Network.    

     The red flags continue with: opposing the “New World Order;” seeing conspiracies in government programs; opposing Agenda 21and/or FEMA camps; fearing gun confiscation; joining a militia movement; belief in citizen sovereignty, not paying taxes and speaking out against “bias” in our public life.      

     Here are more red flags: doubts the “value of mainstream” ideas; attending rallies nObama doesn’t like; showing religious “intolerance”; holds a “personal” grievance; suddenly acquires “weapons;” organizes a protest supporting “extreme ideas” nObama doesn’t approve of; being a “right wing extremist;” having patriotic or anti-UN bumper stickers; fierce nationalism; being afraid of attacks by government agents; believing religion should not be part of our government; or and being a member of the Army of God.

     The “List” concludes by citing those who are anti-abortion; anti-Catholic; anti-nuclear; pro Second Amendment; support Ron Paul; Chuck Baldwin; and/or Bob Barr; who fly the “Don’t Tread on Me” flag; those that believe in “end of times” prophecies and of course Evangelical Christians.

     If you are NOWHERE on this list you are probably not reading this on a conservative website, meaning you are quite possibly part of the problem, not part of the solution.

http://www.coachisright.com/big-target-government-put-back/

     For the Islamic State and other Muslims, this gesture signifies allegiance to Islam’s absolute monotheism. Whatever nObama may have meant by it, the revelation that he had made the gesture — coming so soon after his renewed refusal at his “Countering Violent Extremism” summit to identify Islamic jihadists as Islamic — raised new questions about nObama’s relationship with Islam. Why won’t nObama identify Islam as having anything to do with the jihadis, when they themselves consistently explain and justify their actions solely in Islamic terms? Why won’t he do anything about mosques in the U.S. with ties to jihad terror? Why does he coddle the Muslim Brotherhood? Why, in sum, does he seem to love Islam so much, even if he isn’t a practicing Muslim?

     And it does seem most likely that nObama is indeed not a practicing Muslim, despite the remarkable persistence of rumors and suspicions to the contrary. It is extremely unlikely that a Muslim would publicly proclaim himself a Christian over and over, as nObama has. While it is possible that this would be justified under Islam’s doctrines of deception, there is no evidence that Muslims have ever behaved this way. Ground Zero Mosque imam Faisal Abdul Rauf did say several years ago, “I am a Jew,” but he only said it once, in the context of ecumenical generosity; he didn’t try to pass himself off as one. There is a way in which a Muslim could say he is a true Jew or true Christian because he follows the true teachings of the Torah and the Gospel, but there is no known case of a Muslim behaving this way in a sustained manner. If nObama were a secret Muslim, he would be the first Muslim to carry out such a sustained deception of claiming not to be a Muslim.

     There is little doubt, however, given his consistent policies throughout his presidency, that nObama holds Islam in high regard, for whatever mix of personal affection (his father and stepfather were both Muslims) and political calculation (he may believe that calling the jihadis Islamic will alienate Muslim allies of the U.S., such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan, however unreliable those alliances have been). His Administration backed the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt with such loyalty that Egyptian protesters held signs accusing nObama of supporting terrorism. He aided Islamic jihadis to overthrow Gaddafi in Libya and continues to aid those trying to overthrow Assad in Syria. (He insists that those he is backing in Syria are “vetted moderates,” but they have ransacked churches, terrorized Christians, and collaborated with the Islamic State too often for that to ring true.) He has repeatedly called for self-censorship to conform with Islamic blasphemy laws, most memorably declaring at the United Nations, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

     And while his Justice Department aggressively pursues businesses and educational institutions to compel them to grant special privileges and accommodations to Muslims, it has shown no similar energy regarding terror-tied mosques in the U.S. Not only do these mosques remain open and their leaders uninvestigated and unprosecuted, but all too often the only contact law enforcement officials have with them is for “outreach.”

     Only nObama knows what he may be thinking in all this, but a few conclusions seem obvious: he is afraid that speaking honestly about the jihadis’ motives and goals will alienate actual and potential Muslim allies. Since he believes Islam to be a peaceful religion, he doesn’t accept the idea that Muslims become jihadis because the Qur’an and Sunnah exhort them to do so. That leaves only the grievances that Islamic advocacy groups (and jihad groups) endlessly retail as the fundamental engine of the “radicalization” of Muslims – so nObama apparently sees redressing those grievances as the primary means of preventing Muslims from becoming terrorists.

     This has led to foreign and domestic policies of accommodation and appeasement, along with an ominously cavalier stance at best toward the First Amendment’s protection of the freedom of speech. Coupled with a dogmatic refusal to identify properly those who have vowed to destroy the United States and address their belief system and ideology, nObama’s stance toward Islam is a recipe for catastrophe. The United States is weaker and more vulnerable for it.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/robert-spencer/why-obama-wont-call-the-jihadis-islamic/?utm_source=FrontPage+Magazine&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07cfab4966-Mailchimp_FrontPageMag&utm_term=0_57e32c1dad-07cfab4966-156509103

     With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu heading to Capitol Hill next week to argue against the deal, Mr. Hanoi Kerry told lawmakers not to judge the deal until it is completed.

     "I caution people to wait and see what these negotiations produce," Mr. Hanoi Kerry said in response to news reports suggesting that the administration is close to a deal in which Iran would be allowed to increase its nuclear activities after a 10-year period of restrictions and inspection from outside powers.

     "Anybody running around right now, jumping in to say, 'Well, we don't like the deal' doesn't know what the deal is. There is no deal yet," Mr. Hanoi Kerry told a Senate Appropriations subcommittee Tuesday morning during the first of two State Department budget hearings.

     He told a subsequent Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing that the administration's policy is still to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon but to do so diplomatically, in a way that avoids a military confrontation.

     Mr. Hanoi Kerry's plea seemed to have little effect on critics, including some Democrats.

     Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey, the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, told Mr. Hanoi Kerry that he was concerned about news "leaking from the negotiations" that Iran will be left with "a vast majority of its nuclear infrastructure" under the proposed deal.

     Any deal that relieves Iran of Western sanctions while allowing it to "go from being a threshold to an actual nuclear weapons state is no deal at all," Mr. Menendez said.

     Noting that the nObama administration suggested a 20-year pact with Tehran, Mr. Menendez said, "Now we're talking about a 10-year time frame - if it's true - and with relief in the five latter years of the 10 years. That's problematic."

     Mr. Hanoi Kerry insisted that the administration and its negotiating partners - Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China - want a long-term deal under which Iran's pathways to a bomb are "closed off." Specifically, he said, inspections would prevent any weapons development activity at Iran's Natanz, Arak and Fordow nuclear facilities.

     "Covert, of course, is the hardest," Mr. Hanoi Kerry said. "You need to have verification and intrusive inspection to be able to find covert" facilities.

Cheating accusations

     While Mr. Hanoi Kerry spoke, an Iranian dissident group that exposed past Iranian nuclear deceptions was arguing that the problems with inspection and verification would remain - that Tehran hasn't come clean about its nuclear programs.

     That Iran's government has been lying for years to United Nations nuclear inspectors, the National Coalition of Resistance of Iran asserted that scientists in the Islamic Republic have been running a secret uranium enrichment operation at a facility buried deep beneath the ground in the northeastern suburbs of Tehran since 2008.

     The facility, known as "Lavizan-3," has been used for clandestine nuclear program research and development, as well as for enrichment with advanced IR-2m and IR-4 centrifuge machines, according to the resistance coalition.

     Its claim was not immediately verifiable, and the dissident group has a controversial history in Washington. However, the group is thought to have deep sources inside Iran's nuclear community, and its members are credited with making game-changing revelations about Tehran's activities in the past.

     The group said its latest claims were the result of a 10-year "detailed, risky and complex" intelligence gathering effort by members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq. The "MEK" is a main component of the coalition of resistance but has long drawn scrutiny in Washington because the State Department had listed it as a terrorist organization until 2012.

     Although the MEK appears to be virulently opposed to the regime in Tehran, U.S. officials have said the group's terrorist listing was related to attacks its members carried out against U.S. interests in the Middle East decades ago.

     The National Coalition of Resistance of Iran said Tuesday that MEK operatives have "highly placed sources within the Iranian regime as well as those involved in the nuclear weapons projects."

Iranian officials have long argued that their nuclear program is for purely peaceful and civilian purposes. The U.S. and its allies say Tehran has secretly tried to build a bomb in violation of orders from the U.N. Security Council, and Western powers for years have leveled economic sanctions and pursued a global embargo on Iranian oil.

     The resistance coalition's accusations did not come up at either of Mr. Hanoi Kerry's congressional hearings Tuesday.

     Apart from Iran, the hearings covered a range of issues facing the nObama administration's foreign policy, including the Islamic State, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Cuba and the president's $50.3 billion budget request for the State Department and USAID through next year.

     One key difference from the last fiscal year budget request is a $3.5 billion line item for State Department efforts - separate from those of the Pentagon - to counter the Islamic State.

     Mr. Hanoi Kerry took issue Tuesday with lawmakers who raised questions about the seriousness of the nObama administration's commitment to defeating the extremist group. "The president's goal is to degrade and destroy" the Islamic State forces, he said.

     He defended comments from department spokeswoman Marie Harf citing the need for economic development and jobs for young people in the Middle East as part of the effort to combat terrorism.

     "She never set out to say the solution is give them jobs," Mr. Hanoi Kerry said. "She talked about a much broader array of things we have to do. And if we can't have a serious conversation about this, without politicizing it on cable TV and making it a scoring point for one day, we're in trouble."

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0215/kerry_defends_Iran_deal.php3

     (jewishworldreview.com) - Jury deliberations were set to begin Friday in the case of Sokolow v. PLO, in which U.S. citizens who were injured or whose family members were killed in terrorist attacks in Israel have sued the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) for damages.

     “They would come into court, filing motions to dismiss,” says Darshan-Leitner, whose office’s tag line is “Bankrupting Terrorism—One Lawsuit at a Time.” The defendants “say they have sovereign immunity and thus don’t have to litigate the case,” she explains, but “a plaintiff can go after them to enforce judgment even if they don’t appear in court.”

     On the other side of the courtroom, the PA and PLO denied that senior officials of the organizations, including the late PLO leader Yasser Arafat, aided Hamas and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, saying the attacks were carried out by low-level employees without approval.

     “This case, the first in the U.S. to go to full trial will be a test of the effectiveness of the Anti-Terrorism Act which was enacted following the Achille Lauro hijacking episode, specifically to address the brutality of Palestinian terrorism against Americans traveling abroad,” Darshan-Leitner said in a statement emailed to Newsweek after the closing arguments were completed Thursday. “The families and their counsel are hopeful that they can achieve a measure of justice and some closure in their lives.”

     The case could also set a precedent for future legal action. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, the decision may set the stage for future terrorism trials in American courts. It would make “a very clear statement,” Darshan-Leitner says, that “nobody can kill American citizens and go free.”

     From the Israeli perspective, she adds, “we’ll prove that the Palestinian Authority was responsible for the suicide bombings and terror attacks taking place during the years of intifada and now have to pay for it.”

     “I think the significance of this ruling would be to deter the Palestinian Authority from ever getting involved again with supporting terrorism,” Darshan-Leitner says. It will “teach the Palestinian Authority that it’s too costly.”

     Darshan-Leitner predicts the jury will return with a verdict in Sokolow v. PLO early next week. 

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0215/terrorism_law_suit.php3

     Noting that the case does not involve either a law passed by Congress or an executive order signed by President nObama, Judge Hanen noted, as my eBook explains, that the White House promoted the idea that President nObama had signed an executive order by having nObama fly to Las Vegas on Nov. 21, 2014, the day following the public address to the nation on immigration, where following his speech at Del Sol High School, nObama invited the press to witness his signing of two presidential executive orders on unrelated immigration issues.

     “Finally, both sides agree that the President in his official capacity has not directly instituted any program at issue in this case,” Judge Hanen noted. “Regardless of the fact that the Executive Branch has made public statements to the contrary, there are no executive orders or other presidential proclamations or communiqué that exist regarding DAPA [Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents]. The DAPA memorandum issued by Secretary Johnson is the focus in this suit.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6RY3GtPlSg

     In granting the injunction to the twenty-six states, led by Texas, that brought the case to court, Judge Hanen made clear his opinion that the DHS memorandum signed by DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson on November 20, 2014, was unconstitutional in that the DHS does not have the authority to grant millions of “DREAMER Parents” what amounts to amnesty by extending to them the deferred prosecution by extending to them the protection to remain in the United States lawfully established for the DREAMER children when in 2012 then-Secretary of DHS Janet Napolitano created the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals [DACA] program.

     “The DHS was not given any ‘discretion by law’ to give 4.3 million removable aliens what the DHS itself labels as ‘legal presence,’ ” Judge Hanen concluded wrote in issuing an injunction. “In fact, the law mandates that these illegally-present individuals be removed. The DHS has adopted a new rule that substantially changes both the status and employability of millions. These changes go beyond mere enforcement or even non-enforcement of this nation’s immigration scheme.”

     But no matter how intent Barack nObama is to cause a constitutional crisis with the courts to get his way in declaring amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants, these technical but fatal flaws will dog and defeat White House attorneys trying to overturn Judge Hanen’s injunction.

     The truth is that nObama as president does not have the authority to ignore or over-rule a federal court, which is why amnesty is headed to the Supreme Court.

     But last week, we got more evidence nObama and his open-borders supporters on the radical left are determined to legitimate with an amnesty decree millions of illegal immigrants that have broken U.S. laws to enter the country and remain here.

     Approximately 2,000 illegal alien inmates in a Texas prison near the border rioted and set off fires last week in a disturbance that required a massive mobilization of Texas law enforcement to secure the border and restore order.

     Local Texas television reported the uprising began at a federal prison in Raymondville, Texas, when a group of prisoners became agitated about the medical services in the private prison facility.

     According to Breitbart News, this occurred after the illegal immigrant rioters broke out of the housing areas and set fires in three separate units of the facility, while tearing down tents used for their housing and shaking the perimeter fence as they chanted their grievances.

     These are the lawbreakers that President nObama wants to give amnesty, Social Security numbers, work permits, a full range of state and federal welfare payments including food stamps, the right to apply for state driver’s licenses and the right to vote?

     Maybe nObama has become desperate to get his amnesty approved by the courts because the Democratic Party has realized their presidential candidate will lose in 2016 unless nObama can get millions of illegal immigrants the same right to vote that citizens enjoy, to counterbalance with lawless illegal aliens the tens of millions that are finally seeing through nObama’s socialist Cloward and Piven plan to destroy the United States from within.

     Two weeks ago, Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, urged Congress to shut down the Department of Homeland Security if that is what it takes to stop funding for Barack nObama’s unconstitutional amnesty executive actions.

     “nObama is now talking about allowing all those people to whom he’s given unconstitutional amnesty the ability to bring in extended family members,” Gohmert said. “They’ll call it immediate family, but the five million could turn into 20 million or 25 million once you start bringing in all the other family members. That’s part of nObama’s plan to fundamentally transform America.”

     My eBook has 9 Chapters that I believe you will find important to understanding the nObama secret plan for using illegal immigration to destroy America.

     Tea Party Loyalists must let the new GOP majority in Congress know where we stand.

     We are the last line of defense for the Constitution and the rule of law in America.

     We must encourage House Speaker backstabber John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McCon-nell to hold firm, defunding the Department of Homeland Security, if that is what it takes to strip nObama of the money the administration needs to implement his unconstitutional amnesty executive actions.

     Tea Party Loyalists are the last line of resistance to “America’s Fraud President” who is attempting to deprive us of our Constitutional rights in his effort to debase America to a police-state maintaining order in a second-class nation.

Our voices must and will be heard.

     We must say “No To Amnesty!” by reminding Congress they owe allegiance first to the U.S. citizen and the legal immigrant.

     In November 2014, Tea Party Loyalists issued a strong statement that we are prepared to repeat in November 2016, defeating any and all incumbent members of Congress – Republicans and Democrats alike – who do not stand with us to defend the United States of America.

http://www.teaparty.org/obama-determined-defy-federal-courts-amnesty-85198/