Fate is on our side as shown by the folowing (and many other instances in our country's history).
Dinner with Hitler...
In 1933, a beautiful, young Austrian woman took off her clothes for a movie
director. She ran through the woods... naked. She swam in a lake... naked.

The most popular movie in 1933 was King Kong. But everyone in Hollywood was
talking about that scandalous movie with the gorgeous, young Austrian woman.
Louis B. Mayer, of the giant studio MGM, said she was the most beautiful
woman in the world. The film was banned practically everywhere... which of
course made it even more popular and valuable. Mussolini reportedly refused
to sell his copy at any price.  

The star of the film, called Ecstasy, was Hedwig Kiesler. She said the
secret of her beauty was "to stand there and look stupid." In reality,
Kiesler was anything but stupid. She was a genius. She'd grown up as the
only child of a prominent Jewish banker. She was a math prodigy. She
excelled at science.  As she grew older, she became ruthless, using all the
power her body and mind gave her.

Between the sexual roles she played, her tremendous beauty, and the power of
her intellect, Kiesler would confound the men in her life... including her
six husbands, two of the most ruthless dictators of the 20th century, and
one of the greatest movie producers in history.

Her beauty made her rich for a time. She is said to have made - and spent -
$30 million in her life. But her greatest accomplishment resulted from her
intellect... and her invention continues to shape the world we live in
today.
                             

You see, this young Austrian starlet would take one of the most valuable
technologies ever developed right from under Hitler's nose. After fleeing to
America, she not only became a major Hollywood star... her name sits on one
of the most important patents ever granted by the U.S. Patent Office.
                             

Today, when you use your cell phone or, over the next few years, as you
experience super-fast wireless Internet access (via something called
"long-term evolution" or "LTE" technology), you'll be using an extension of
the technology a 20- year-old actress first conceived while sitting at
dinner with Hitler.
                             

At the time she made Ecstasy, Kiesler was married to one of the richest men
in Austria. Friedrich Mandl was Austria's leading arms maker. His firm would
become a key supplier to the Nazis.
                             

Mandl used his beautiful young wife as a showpiece at important business
dinners with representatives of the Austrian, Italian, and German fascist
forces. One of Mandl's favorite topics at these gatherings - which included
meals with Hitler and Mussolini - was the technology surrounding
radio-controlled missiles and torpedoes. Wireless weapons offered far
greater ranges than the wire-controlled alternatives that prevailed at the
time. Kiesler sat through these dinners "looking stupid," while absorbing
everything she heard...
                             

As a Jew, Kiesler hated the Nazis. She abhorred her husband's business
ambitions. Mandl responded to his wilful wife by imprisoning her in his
castle, Schloss Schwarzenau. In 1937, she managed to escape. She drugged her
maid, slipped out of the castle wearing the maid's clothes, and sold her
jewelry to finance a trip to London. (She got out just in time.

In 1938, Germany annexed Austria. The Nazis seized Mandl's factory. He was
half Jewish. Mandl fled to Brazil. Later, he became an advisor to
Argentina's iconic populist president, Juan Peron.)
                             

In London, Kiesler arranged a meeting with Louis B. Mayer. She signed a
long-term contract with him, becoming one of MGM's biggest stars. She
appeared in more than 20 films. She was a co-star to Clark Gable, Judy
Garland, and even Bob Hope. Each of her first seven MGM movies was a
blockbuster.
                             

But Kiesler cared far more about fighting the Nazis than about making
movies. At the height of her fame, in 1942, she developed a new kind of
communications system, optimized for sending coded messages that couldn't be
"jammed." She was building a system that would allow torpedoes and guided
bombs to always reach their targets. She was building a system to kill
Nazis.
                             

By the 1940s, both the Nazis and the Allied forces were using the kind of
single- frequency radio-controlled technology Kiesler's ex-husband had been
peddling. The drawback of this technology was that the enemy could find the
appropriate frequency and "jam" or intercept the signal, thereby interfering
with the missile's intended path.
                             

Kiesler's key innovation was to "change the channel." It was a way of
encoding a message across a broad area of the wireless spectrum. If one part
of the spectrum was jammed, the message would still get through on one of
the other frequencies being used. The problem was, she could not figure out
how to synchronize the frequency changes on both the receiver and the
transmitter. To solve the problem, she turned to perhaps the world's first
techno-musician, George Anthiel.
                             

Anthiel was an acquaintance of Kiesler who achieved some notoriety for
creating intricate musical compositions. He synchronized his melodies across
twelve player pianos, producing stereophonic sounds no one had ever heard
before. Kiesler incorporated Anthiel's technology for synchronizing his
player pianos. Then, she was able to synchronize the frequency changes
between a weapon's receiver and its transmitter.
                             

On August 11, 1942, U.S. Patent No. 2,292,387 was granted to Antheil and
"Hedy Kiesler Markey," which was Kiesler's married name at the time.
Most of you won't recognize the name Kiesler. And no one would remember the
name Hedy Markey. But it's a fair bet than anyone reading this newsletter of
a certain age will remember one of the great beauties of Hollywood's golden
age ~ Hedy Lamarr. That's the name Louis B. Mayer gave to his prize actress.
That's the name his movie company made famous.
                             

Meanwhile, almost no one knows Hedwig Kiesler - aka Hedy Lamarr - was one of
the great pioneers of wireless communications. Her technology was developed
by the U.S. Navy, which has used it ever since.
                             

You're probably using Lamarr's technology, too. Her patent sits at the
foundation of "spread spectrum technology," which you use every day when you
log on to a wi- fi network or make calls with your Bluetooth-enabled phone.
It lies at the heart of the massive investments being made right now in
so-called fourth-generation "LTE" wireless technology. This next generation
of cell phones and cell towers will provide tremendous increases to wireless
network speed and quality, by spreading wireless signals across the entire
available spectrum. This kind of encoding is only possible using the kind of
frequency switching that Hedwig Kiesler invented.
                             

 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr>
We need another "Hedy" VS Obama NOW...

You need some work done be in plumbing or electrical or any tradesman jobs  do not hire a union guy of a union shop to do your work !

no one else available postpone the work !

Make the unions bleed

Despite Harm to the Environment and the Economy, Fiscal Cliff Deal Fuels Continuing Corporate Welfare 

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2010/04/134881/#EQeRw8uwGbKO6Bo1.99

Fox News’, Sean Hannity, in a special report he called “Boomtown,” informed his audience that Washington, the reemergence of European aristocracy, lives on the backs of the taxpayers while the average worker struggles to exist on his take-home pay. The object of Washington is to divide us.  The political parties are together on this class warfare. Don’t expect it to change, says Hannity.

Our freedoms are not automatic, we should know by now.  We can’t serve two masters. Almighty God resides in Washington. Our God-given rights are internal. If we don’t personally act to protect them, they don’t last. We lose them one by one.  

Our Constitution gives us a Bill of Rights, and government for this that—actually anymore, bills without rights.  With every right lost, we become more subservient to the Almighty in Washington. We should know by now that government is not here to pass out rights. We have as much right to health care as a haircut--anything that requires the service of others. 

   In our Bill of Rights, in the Fifth Amendment, with regard to federal taxes, we have the Due Process Clause, which gives each of us the right to be heard in a meaningful way in a meaningful place. Actually, we are not heard. Legal precedence prevails. We were heard in 1946. The U. S. Court of Appeals ruled that tax was not take.  Tax took me to the cleaners. Conveniently, according to our makers and keepers of the law, one suit fits all. The law of "might makes right" prevails. The IRS got away with confiscating my property. But that didn’t stop me. Finally, a federal judge decided to hear me.  The IRS admitted that it had wrongly taxed me and gave back what the aristocracy in Washington confiscated--for the good of all, with a fat cut for Washington.

Then the IRS, for the good of all,  proceeded to my bank, and to take every cent I had in my bank account. The judge that heard me refused to reopen the case. A piece of paper without even a signature allowed Washington's aristocracy, lawlessly, to take my rent and grocery money.  

I took the piece of paper without the signature and the court record to the the news media. The IRS admitted on the front page that it had “mistakenly” taken my property. They said they meant no harm. 

Take a look at the king in the above picture, and his woman with her boobs popping out, and her skirt about to fall to her knees--the President and First Lady of the United States.  This joker and worman look harmless enough.  Yea! Your complaints and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee. The American people would vote for a brass monkey if it meant something in their pockets. 

I'm no different than you. In 1986, I forced the Almighty God residing in Washington to eat crow. Now it is up to you. I'm government entitled.

Unless you people act, Almighty Washington, in union with the Muslim Brotherhood, will take you back to feudal times.  The government entitled, I can tell your from personal experience, come ahead of producer rights.  Your taxpayer problem is Washington’s bonanza.  Washington has a duty to those dependent on Washington. As a taxpayer, do you not have a personal stake? This Chicago style con, the biggest of all times, will continue to worsen until you people are slaves. You have no choice but to act, and now.  

 I’ve written and self-published a book on how I dealt with the confiscation of my property, In Earth as It Is in Heaven 2012: an Explanation for the underlying Mechanism of Creation, now available at Amazon.  Mysteriously, all of my dreams have come true, and the same can be true for you, if you act.  And if you don't--well, I'll let you answer that.   

http://blackroberegimentpastor.blogspot.com/2013/01/what-does-obama-clintons-lance.html

“What Does Obama, The Clinton's, Lance Armstrong And Manti Te'o All have in Common ?"

“What Does Obama, The Clinton's, Lance Armstrong And Manti Te'o All have in Common ?

With all the attention of the latest news about all of those mentioned in the title of this article, you probably have guessed; “lying.” While the “jury” is still out about Manti Teo's imaginary girlfriend and whether he really believed she existed, well I'm not so sure we will ever really find out. I can tell you that beyond all these folks lying, America has a problem. I kind of touched on this subject matter in previous article entitled; “Lying, When Is It Ever Allowed ? “ (http://blackroberegimentpastor.blogspot.com/2012/08/when-is-lying-ever-allowed.html). There is the root issue however of lying and how well people lie these days that has yet to be identified. Indeed, many people in America and around the world have rejected Jesus Christ and the Bible and thus has created a vacuum or sorts. That “vacuum” is of lack of morality and has led to what can only be described as an American society and as well, a world problem with pathological liars everywhere.

As what my friend Bill Windsor, who is a documentary film producer and director of Lawless America(I've mentioned Bill in a few articles now) has sadly found by his work with some self-proclaimed “victims” of abuse, corruption and other horrible crimes... not everyone tells the truth. I don't know Bill well enough to say for sure, but I feel confident at this point, and after meeting him; it would seem Bill is much like me, he is willing to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. That attitude of openness to everyone and willingness to want to see the best in people has gotten me in trouble in the past. Bill has also seemingly suffered like I have because, well... people can and do lie and are just so convincing sometimes and we fall prey to those who appear to be sincere(yep...”looks can be deceiving). I don't think wanting to believe people's stories regarding personal or other matters on the onset is such a bad thing. I am however tired of getting “burned” by the liars.

I have seen people in my lifetime, and without a bat of the eye, a flinch in the face, or absolutely no crack or variance in their voice; tell some of the most outrageous of lies(and get away with it !). There are people with hearts so black that they have actually become expert liars. Now, I'm not talking about someone who is simply in denial or in the need for acceptance whether someone else is telling the truth, No---What I am sharing about are people who willfully, deceitful and make a conscious effort to destroy someone, or something. It can be a marriage partner, a co-worker, a friend, an associate, whomever. The bottom line is that there are actual people in this world who are lying their butt's off just so they may gain an upper hand and or destroy someone/persons or something.

Folks, it's getting mighty scary out there in relation in who we can trust and believe. As some of you have shared with me publicly as well as in private; the so called “Church” is not immune from bold-face liars as well. There are many wolves in the pulpits that if you were not knowledgeable of the Bible, you could really start believing many of their half-truths that they spew every Sunday morning. That's the thing as well... These are dangerous times, many Christians don't know their Bibles and they get caught up with these wolves quite easily(2Cor. 11:14). Sadly, it would seem in fact, that Christians who do get confronted with Biblical truth in regards too wrongly taught(usually feel good, touchy-feely, “mo' money” theologies) not only willing refuse to acknowledge error, they willingly protect the wolf who taught the willful error as well !

What can be said about “protecting” evil and enabling wicked acts by anyone in society; in or outside the Church ? I mean the Bible is full of “Do Not's” and “avoids” regarding keeping away from evil/wickedness and the like. I could also rattle off a couple dozen Bible Scriptures right here proving my point(s), but I won't. I will just state “for the record” that we as people who know better, must expose this gross sin and attitude that is so prevalent in our wold today. Obama, the Clinton's many people like them just lie and lie and the cannot and be allowed to influence us nor our families. It's like these type's have an auto pilot “lie button” switch on them somewhere. With a straight face these people lie and have no intention of stopping. The news media, whole segments of society, and others willingly enable such lies by not only not holding liars like them accountable, and what is even more sick is that these enablers know the lying occurs but actually encourage that twisted immoral act and want our children to act the same way!

What could we as a nation and a world ever do with so many liars and enabling of evil ? I mean we cannot incarcerate millions of liars can we ?. That would cost trillions of dollars and would take years and years of work to eradicate. Besides, you cannot legislate an evil heart. Haven't we learned that with our drug laws ? If people want to kill themselves, murder their minds, ruin their children's minds and ruin their own family relationships with drugs, we can make all the laws we want but that won't stop people. Should we just give in to sin and wickedness then allow “legalization” of drugs, and other harmful things like lying to become also to become “legal”? No... That would only enable sin and wickedness and God's judging hand would be even heavier upon us than it already is. The issue as all problems are; that what we suffer is a matter of the heart. Here's the issue in a nut shell...our world has many sick hearts and that needs mending. Only one person can mend a heart and His name is Jesus Christ of the Bible. Truth be known; If we focused on what the Bible said instead of self serving desires, we would already have dealt properly with these liars(probably as children)long ago and we wouldn't have this pervasive problem(s) plaguing our society and world as we now see it.

Healthy people don't need to lie, they don't need drugs or alcohol, they don't need to steal, kill, maim or murder. Healthy folks don't enable evil acts as well. In fact, healthy people know how to set healthy boundaries and say “no”(when the heck was the last time you heard that word in a healthy context ????). In our entitlement and relativistic driven societies, when was the last time you actually did hear a parent, a citizen or a government agent(like a judge or a cop) for that matter say “no” to evil and wicked behaviours? I am looking at the rems of video files sent to me with factual allegations that judges and cops(and others like them) have, and continue to partake in immoral and even illegal behavioir... all gone unchecked of course. There is little to no accountability for liars and evil doers in our world any longer including those who are supposedly people put in authority over us. In fact, for the most part, the majority of folks around us just keep voting in the same(type) of bad people who lie,cheat and steal on a regular basis, just as if there was nothing wrong with “lying, cheating or stealing.” What does that say about us ? Yes... I said “us” because many of “us” who grumble, complain but “we” do many of the same(or similar) things that those whom we complain about ! Like I said, “many are sick” but won't admit to it. The Bible calls that behaviour as being “hypocritical.”

There once a time when a man's word and a handshake on a promise was all that was needed in this world. That time however is long-gone. Many people today will shake your hand and promise you things that they never have any intention on keeping(anyone got a Filipina Migration Marriage Scammer in their life ?). We should have all along done what the Christian Bible teaches us, and that is to keep (force ourselves if necessary)ourselves and others in being accountable. Lying must be brought to a place once again where it is viewed as unacceptable behaviour and there must also be consequences for that bad behaviour. So, the days of looking the other way, or burying your head as what most supposed “Christians” do, is as it always has been; completely and Biblically speaking-unacceptable.

What is your intention in making sure that liars and those who willfully act in sinful and wicked acts like lying, especially for leaders of our government, media, and others who are influential among us are held accountable ? I hope and pray it is more than with typed or empty words or rhetoric. I also hope to see you standing or sitting at my side, whether on the streets or in the offices, but vividly in some form of action against those who need to be confronted of such pathologically and willful evil behaviours as lying.

Learn to say “No” in a healthy way and no longer tolerate lies.

Isn't that right Nenette ?

Rev. Paul P. Waldmiller~Black Robe Regiment Pastor

By Oscar Y. Harward

The radical ‘left’ in politics and the ‘mean-stream’ Medias are manipulating Americans on proposed changes in laws to outlaw our rifles, shotguns, pistols, and its’ accessories.  Their ill-promoted campaigns are to deceive Americans that all hunters, sportsmen/sportswomen, and/or others will not be affected by their legislation; but only to eliminate victims of all guns.

Our Founding Fathers were well aware most men were hunters who went out to kill wildlife in providing meat to feed themselves and their families.  Hunting for food with guns was no concern for creating the Second Amendment.

Read the US History http://cap-n-ball.com/fathers.htm! The primary purpose of the Second Amendment was and is to make sure Americans were never to be denied adequate weapons to compete in a battle against a ‘mutinous government’.

Who should or would want to own a weapon with a magazine that holds 40 cartridges?  Anyone who wishes to protect himself/herself, his/her family, our Constitutional freedoms, and wishes to maintain whatever is necessary for these protection(s), and/or when any of us foresee the potential(s) who may decide to overrule our Constitutional freedoms and when mutinous government official(s) have weapons with a magazine that holds 40 cartridges.  This is when you and I must demand that we, too, be allowed to compete in the battle with weapons against any individual(s), group(s), government(s), etc. for the protection of our lives, our families, and our Constitutional freedoms.

Look around. Talk to your family, friends, and neighbors.  Many are now in fear of a potential mutinous government right here.  Many elected and appointed officials are ignorant, ignoring, and/or disobeying our Constitution, US Code, and many other laws as they choose; without even being investigated, arrested, and/or prosecuted.

Do not be misled by the ‘left’ in politics and/or by the ‘main-stream’ Medias.  Become more educated by our Founding Fathers. http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndfqu.html

We must keep and protect our Second Amendment.  It was and is intended to protect Americans from a mutinous government.

KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE BALL!  The Second Amendment’s intent was and is to protect Americans from a ‘mutinous government’, not just allowing sportspersons to hunt for wildlife.

A look at Agenda 21 in the United States

On June 9, 2011, an Executive Order established the White House Rural Council with 25 executive branch departments including Defense, Justice, Homeland Security, National Drug Control, Environmental Quality, Labor, Commerce, Interior, EPA, Housing, Health, Education to name just a few.

The order covers 16% of the American population who lives in rural counties because they “supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. ”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_juUVKKBw-k

Executive Order 13575 of June 9, 2011

Establishment of the White House Rural Council

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America and in order to enhance Federal engagement with rural communities, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy.

Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.

To enhance the Federal Government’s efforts to address the needs of rural America, this order establishes a council to better coordinate Federal programs and maximize the impact of Federal investment to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in our rural communities.

Sec. 2. Establishment.

There is established a White House Rural Council (Council).

Sec. 3. Membership.

(a)
The Secretary of Agriculture shall serve as the Chair of the Council, which shall also include the heads of the following executive branch departments, agencies, and offices:

(1)
the Department of the Treasury;

(2)
the Department of Defense;

(3)
the Department of Justice;

(4)
the Department of the Interior;

(5)
the Department of Commerce;

(6)
the Department of Labor;

(7)
the Department of Health and Human Services;

(8)
the Department of Housing and Urban Development;

(9)
the Department of Transportation;

(10)
the Department of Energy;

(11)
the Department of Education;

(12)
the Department of Veterans Affairs;

(13)
the Department of Homeland Security;

(14)
the Environmental Protection Agency;

(15)
the Federal Communications Commission;

(16)
the Office of Management and Budget;

(17)
the Office of Science and Technology Policy;

(18)
the Office of National Drug Control Policy;

(19)
the Council of Economic Advisers;

(20)
the Domestic Policy Council;

(21)
the National Economic Council;

(22)
the Small Business Administration;

(23)
the Council on Environmental Quality;

(24)
the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs;

(25)
the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or the Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate.

(b)
A member of the Council may designate, to perform the Council functions of the member, a senior-level official who is part of the member’s department, agency, or office, and who is a full-time officer or employee of the Federal Government.

(c)
The Department of Agriculture shall provide funding and administrative support for the Council to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations.

(d)
The Council shall coordinate its policy development through the Domestic Policy Council and the National Economic Council.

Sec. 4. Mission and Function of the Council

The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration’s engagement with rural communities. The Council shall:

(a)
make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America;

(b)
coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, health-care providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America;

(c)
coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas; and

(d)
identify and facilitate rural economic opportunities associated with energy development, outdoor recreation, and other conservation related activities.

Sec. 5. General Provisions.

(a)
The heads of executive departments and agencies shall assist and provide information to the Council, consistent with applicable law, as may be necessary to carry out the functions of the Council. Each executive department and agency shall bear its own expense for participating in the Council.

(b)
Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)
authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)
functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c)
This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(d)
This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Image credit: Will Lovell

A recent article in Washington Post appeared with the innocuous title, “What we need: Smarter growth plans.” The author is Roger K. Lewis, a practicing architect and professor emeritus at the University of Maryland. Who can possibly object to “smarter growth plans?” Except that “smart growth plans” is the euphemism used by the United Nations for its Agenda 21, a direct assault on private property rights and American sovereignty.

Roger K. Lewis suggests that “smart growth” was designed by market forces driven by “green building.” He makes no mention of Agenda 21 and ICLEI objectives and intrusion into our society since the early 1970s or the agreement signed in 1992 that went under the radar of the American people’s understanding of the complex negative ramifications for our economy and our liberties.

I have not met Americans who think, “sprawl-producing planning, zoning and mortgage templates are obsolete” as the author claims. Would Americans willingly give up their land and homes with or without compensation in exchange for a move to a densely populated high-rise, with no parking garages, no access to cars, like rats fenced in a grey concrete maze?

Communist “social engineering” confiscated land and homes for agriculture. People were forced to move into many-storied, tiny cinder block apartments without any compensation for the land or homes bulldozed. They were forced to commute by bicycles or public transit.

Lewis deems subdivision developments with low-density, detached, single-family homes as outdated. He calls the areas educationally dysfunctional and unsafe. American suburbia was built, he says, on four assumptions that have lost validity today:

1. Unlimited supply of land
2. Inexpensive and inexhaustible supply of oil
3. Homogenous land use
4. The American dream to own and inhabit a mortgaged house.

I am not sure on what research Lewis based his conclusions, but we have huge domestic oil reserves if permits were issued to drill. We also have a vast land mass. Some areas have 70 or less inhabitants per square mile. Americans still want to own their own home and want to live in a homogeneous community of other homeowners. Just because power hungry bureaucrats at the United Nations have decided to “preserve” land and the environment for the future of the planet and its animals, neglecting the future of humans, does not mean Americans agree to this vision.

“Much of America’s land cannot and should not be developed.” Who are you to decide for us, Mr. Lewis and why? Last time I checked we were free people who determined their own life choices.

“Dependency on oil and limitless use of cars pose daunting environmental, economic, and geopolitical problems.” Who is going to decide the limit to our car use? Is it going to be done by law, more regulations, or executive order?

A handful of environmentalists, the EPA, and the United Nation’s dictators, using faulty debunked data from the University of East Anglia or phony research are trying to separate Americans from their land use, cars, trucks, and the open-wide roads.

Lewis continues his Agenda 21 fallacy. “The traditional nuclear family—mom, dad, two to three kids and one or two pets—is now a minority of America’s households.” I am positive that this man is not describing America that I know and see every day. His statements continue, “Today a majority of households are people, young or old, living alone; couples or sets of unrelated individuals of various ethnicities, ages and tastes.”

Agenda 21 and Mr. Lewis suggest building high-rises in “designated areas within municipalities where new development and re-development is feasible and desirable.”Affordable housing is a priority and so are environmental standards.

It is obvious that “smart growth plans” or Agenda 21 designed by United Nations will affect our future choices in how we live and where. EPA will be involved and will twist the arms of those who do not adopt “smart growth plans,” denying grants to states and cities and levying other penalties. By the time Americans realize the implications of Agenda 21“smart growth,” they will lose their homes and lands with no compensation. At least people who lost property under Eminent Domain have been compensated.

The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) is a conglomerate of 600 national, regional, and local government associations who promote “sustainable development” and protection of the environment because of man-made global warming that does not exist.

“Sustainable development” is the United Nations effort to contain and limit economic development in developed countries and thus control population growth. It is “sustainable de-growth,” plain and simple. The focus is “low-income agriculture” and to set limits on the developed world.

United Nations and its affiliates believe that first world countries polluted significantly during their development while urging third world countries to reduce pollution thus impeding their growth. Implementation of“sustainable development” would revert our society to a pre-modern lifestyle.

ICLEI wants to keep the environment as pristine as possible through “ideal-seeking behavior.” These euphemisms are not clearly defined in terms of what or who will evaluate or set the standards for this “ideal-seeking behavior.”

Agenda 21 sets up the global infrastructure to manage, count, and control assets. It is not concerned with protecting the environment or the world’s resources. Agenda 21 wants change from old sector-centered ways of doing business to new approaches. The “desired future state” should be to pursue “economic prosperity, environmental quality, and social equity.”

“Social equity” is the new euphemism for “social justice” the Marxists in our government have been using a lot lately. Who gave them the authority and the mandate to initiate such change? I do not remember the American people being asked through a referendum whether we wanted our way of life to be fundamentally changed according to mandates set up by the United Nations. How will population growth control be achieved in order to protect the precious environment?

Image credit: Johann Dreo

There are four tiers to UN’s “sustainable development” plan:

1. Environmental sustainability
2. Economic sustainability
3. Socio-political sustainability
4. Cultural diversity.

In 2001 UNESCO, in The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, stated that cultural diversity is as important as biodiversity in the sense of a more satisfactory, intellectual, emotional, moral, and spiritual existence. Who is to decide the level and quality of the population’s satisfaction, intellectual, emotional, moral, and spiritual existence? Human needs must be met while preserving the environment for the future. Again, who will decide what our needs are in order to preserve the future?

In February 2011 in Nairobi, Kenya, ICLEI attended a United Nations conference as representative of the interests of local governments. “In collaboration with partners such as UN-Habitat, Cities Alliance and ICLEI, UNEP (United Nations Environmental Protection) is working to make cities more livable, better prepared for the multiple environmental challenges they are facing, as well as giving them a stronger voice in the international climate negotiations.” Last time I checked, global warming has been debunked as a hoax and UN rapidly changed its name to climate change, continuing the attempt to fleece developed countries. In addition, who decides these international climate negotiations and why? What are we negotiating? Carbon credits?

In October 2009 in Bangkok, ICLEI stated, “local governments are offering national governments our partnership in the fight against climate change.” ICLEI wants local governments to collaborate with national governments to fight against climate change, the very change that has been scientifically debunked.

Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution states clearly, “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation, …No State shall,… enter into an Agreement or Compact with another State or with a foreign power…” The counties and cities that are members of ICLEI in the U.S. through its national organization are attempting to implement foreign policy, which our Constitution forbids. What mayors and municipal governments are doing is plain unconstitutional.

“Mayors and local governments set forth the following commitments to implement sub-national, national, and international frameworks by providing resources, authority, and mandate to carry forward climate protection roles and responsibilities.”

There is no law or act of Congress to authorize the aiding and abetting of foreign policy globalism by state and local governments. We have to protect our sovereignty by banning cities and counties to be members of ICLEI, an organization that promotes United Nation’s Agenda 21/“smart growth” which is detrimental to American economic interests, liberty, and sovereignty.

“No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto law, or Law impairing the obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.” -Article 1, Section 10, The United States Constitution. That Section of the Constitution prevents membership of states, cities and counties in an organization called International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)…

But I’ll bet many of you reading this live in a city, town, or county that belongs to ICLEI because ICLEI has more than 600 active members throughout the United States. Those members are cities, counties, and states, not individuals. Westchester County is a member of ICLEI. Think we have a problem? To see if your city, town or county is affiliated with ICLEI go here: http://www.icleiusa.org/about-iclei/members/member-list

Tags: Agenda 21, ICLEI, United Nations, United States

Gun Dealers Have Problems With Credit Card Processors

by Chris Cannon

LEIPER'S FORK, Tenn. - A Williamson County gun dealer recently learned a credit card processing company no longer wants to do business with him.

"We go through all the hoops and all the steps and at the end of the day it's still a struggle to get the same services anybody else would," said Nick McMillan.

He owns Leiper's Fork Firearms. It is a small gun dealership McMillan runs out of his home.

"We're set up like a business, just like every other small business out there," he said.

McMillan is a has a federal firearms license and is heavily regulated by both the state and federal governments.

But McMillan received an email from Intuit Payment solutions informing him the company was no longer interested in processing his credit card sales.

"They either reviewed several accounts, or it was a company wide policy, because I wasn't the only federal firearms license dealer that got pushed out the other day," McMillan said.

In the email the company wrote "Intuit does not support the services you are providing" and then the reason stated was firearms, ammunition, gun parts and accessories sales not sold in a face-to-face environment with the credit card being swiped.

McMillan does not know the exact reason behind the policy change, but speculated the nationwide gun debate may be behind the move.

"I think companies like this are so afraid of any negative publicity they'd rather not participate," McMillan said.

The small business owner said the move by Intuit will not stop him from selling guns.

"Intuit Processing isn't my only option, I am set up with another company that's a lot more friendly to the industry," said McMillan.

He does feel as if the company is discriminating against federally licensed gun dealers.

"It's up to them who they provide the service to, at the end of the day, which is fine. But, it does seem like we get discriminated against a little bit," McMillan said.

NewsChannel 5 tried contacted Intuit to get a comment about the company's email to McMillan. No one from Intuit returned messages.

email: ccannon@newschannel5.com

Contact Intuit Payment Systems on their Twitter account to Protest !  @GoPayment

The 2nd. Amendment is the cornerstone upon which all of our other freedoms and liberties are protected and reinforced. Without it, the rest are just hollow words with no way of enforcing them except trough legal action which is and will always be violated by those that do not prescribe to the law.

There are only 2 methods to get anyone to take action, reason and force and if you cannot force me to act then you must reason me with your argument. The progressive socialists have been manipulating a segment of the population in this Nation for well over 100 years through their arguments that create an emotional response that forces a controlled reaction that obscures intellectual action. They use the heated moment of emotional response to get their myopic misanthropes to jump and then propagate the discord with a continual barrage of Pavlovian response words that they have ingrained into the modern populace through the media and educational systems they control.

They also understand that they have a very narrow window to motivate this group because after about 3 weeks even the average double digit modern American who redefines the term low information citizen, starts to lose the emotional motivation and moves back towards complacency, more concerned with their daily doldrums and escaping their pitiful existence than staying engaged in their masters rage.

So once you remove the rhetoric that is always flamed by emotion, the progressive socialists hatred of the 2nd. Amendment becomes what is in the first paragraph, the teeth that bite back when you infringe on all of the Bill of Rights.

How can you have freedom of speech, religion or gathering or to redress grievances with government if they do not respect those rights as is evidenced by the attacks of the progressive socialists against all of those freedoms for far too many decades? (yes I know I left out freedom of the press they no longer deserve that freedom because they are complicit in their guilt to deny us ours) How can you keep your property rights and to be free from illegal search and seizure if there is no fear of a force reprisal? How can there be enumerated powers liming the power of government both state and federal and placing that power with their bosses WE THE PEOPLE if they do not fear the reciprocity of that decision or action?

The left wants us unarmed because Conservative America does not respond to their dogma, does not accept their agenda for America, does not jump to their emotional argument. Conservative’s function through fact based logic and reasoning based on that. We read, we watch, we learn, we observe, we gather information from multiple sources and then create our own conclusions based on empirical methodology that leads us to a definitive fact based summation. We do not accept the emotional argument without facts, we do not accept because talking heads say so, we do not blindly agree because media personalities decry, we do not aimlessly accept because entertainers tell us to.

We are very much of the Midwest mindset so eloquently associated with the residents of Missouri SHOW ME!

So if the progressive socialist ruling class in the District of Corruption can’t reason with us which they know they cannot because our core DNA is kryptonite to their rhetoric; then they must force us. And they fear the truth of that action will present the one picture that will perfectly and permanently identify who and what they are and what they really are trying to accomplish with their agenda. The total subjugation of the United States and the end of all ENUMERATED POWERS in the Constitution and The Bill of Rights.

Now I know that 90% of those that will read this understand the implications and I am proud to say that more than 100 million Americans are now armed. But remember our freedoms and liberties that have already been lost have been removed more by slow erosion than outright ban. The DC socialist progressives know that the last time this was done the Dems paid dearly and lost the house and senate in 1994 midterm elections forcing Clinton to have to paly nice with others and find other activities to occupy his time in office.

We have to constantly remind all elected officials at all level’s of government that not only do elections have consequences but so does defense of our rights and their fidelity to defending those rights as defined by our Founding documents.

I do not hold much faith in the 2 party political system that we now suffer at the hands of as many of you know. Their track record is undeniable and it is anything but pro-liberty or pro-freedom and I will continue to espouse my mantra that IT IS TIME TO END THE TWO PARTY POLITICAL REIGN OF TERROR IN AMERICA!

Again back to the original idea of this writing is the only way you can force action is by reason or force and for 158 years we have reasoned with the 2 party ruling class elites that we have elected; WELL AMERICA HOW’S THAT WORKING FOR YOU?

One of my life long hero’s said that “ insanity is doing the same thing the same way each and every time and expecting different results” Albert Einstein

And you don’t have to be a Quantum Physicist or Rocket Scientist to figure that one out!

ps. (it doesn’t hurt either)

In Freedom,

Dr. Keith C. Westbrook Ph.D.                                                                                                       

Vice Chmn./Pres. Conservative Party-FL.

10. "No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something." –making an off-hand joke during an appearance on "The Tonight Show", March 19, 2009 (Obama later called the head of the Special Olympics to apologize)

9. "I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about doing any seances." -–after saying he had spoken with all the living presidents as he prepared to take office, Washington, D.C., Nov. 7, 2008 (Obama later called Nancy Reagan to apologize)

8. "The reforms we seek would bring greater competition, choice, savings and inefficiencies to our health care system." –in remarks after a health care roundtable with physicians, nurses and health care providers, Washington, D.C., July 20, 2009

7. "What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith..." –in an interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, who jumped in to correct Obama by saying "your Christian faith," which Obama quickly clarified, Sept. 7, 2008

6. "UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? It's the Post Office that's always having problems." –attempting to make the case for government-run healthcare, while simultaneously undercutting his own argument, Portsmouth, N.H., Aug. 11, 2009

5. "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." -- defending his tax plan to Joe the Plumber, who argued that Obama's policy hurts small-business owners like himself, Toledo, Ohio, Oct. 12, 2008

4. "The Cambridge police acted stupidly." —commenting on a white police officer's arrest of black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. at his home in Cambridge, Mass., at a news conference, July 22, 2009. Obama later had to convene a "Beer Summit" at the White House to help tamp down the controversy stirred by his remark

3. "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." –speaking at a San Francisco fundraiser about his troubles winning over some small-town, working-class voters, April 11, 2008

2. "One such translator was an American of Haitian descent, representative of the extraordinary work that our men and women in uniform do all around the world -- Navy Corpse-Man Christian Brossard." –mispronouncing "Corpsman" (the "ps" is silent) during a speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, Washington, D.C., Feb. 5, 2010 (The Corpsman's name is also Christopher, not Christian)

1. "I've now been in 57 states — I think one left to go." —at a campaign event in Beaverton, Oregon, May 9, 2008

WASHINGTON — During a lengthy and at times emotionally wrenching news conference, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California on Thursday announced legislation that would ban the sale and manufacture of 157 types of semiautomatic weapons, as well as magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammuniti

The bill, which Ms. Feinstein introduced in the Senate later in the afternoon, would exempt firearms used for hunting and would grandfather in certain guns and magazines. The goal of the bill, she said, is “to dry up the supply of these weapons over time.”

Surrounded by victims of gun violence, colleagues in the Senate and House and several law enforcement officials, and standing near pegboards with several large guns attached, Ms. Feinstein acknowledged the difficulty in pursuing such legislation, even when harnessing the shock and grief over the shooting of 20 schoolchildren in Newtown, Conn., last month. “This is really an uphill road,” Ms. Feinstein said.

Since the expiration of a ban on assault weapons in 2004, lawmakers have been deeply reluctant to revisit the issue. They cite both a lack of evidence that the ban was effective and a fear of the gun lobby, which has made significant inroads at the state and federal levels over the past decade in increasing gun rights.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, recently said that he was skeptical about the bill. Ms. Feinstein immediately called him to express her displeasure with his remarks.

Many lawmakers, including some Democrats, prefer more modest measures to curb gun violence, like enhanced background checks of gun buyers or better enforcement of existing laws.

One such measure has been introduced by Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who will begin hearings next week on gun violence. Among the witnesses will be Wayne LaPierre, the chief executive of the National Rifle Association.

“Senator Feinstein has been trying to ban guns from law-abiding citizens for decades,” said Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for Mr. LaPierre. “It’s disappointing but not surprising that she is once again focused on curtailing the Constitution instead of prosecuting criminals or fixing our broken mental health system.”

More legislation is expected to arise over the next week or two, and some of it will have bipartisan support. Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand, Democrat of New York, and Senator Mark Kirk, Republican of Illinois, have agreed to work together on gun trafficking legislation that would seek to crack down on illegal guns. Currently, federal law does not define gun trafficking as a crime.

Mr. Kirk is also working on a background check proposal with Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, who is considered somewhat of a bellwether among Democrats with strong gun-rights records.

Mr. Leahy’s bill would give law enforcement officials more tools to investigate so-called straw purchasing of guns, in which people buy a firearm for others who are prohibited from obtaining one on their own.

Ms. Feinstein was joined on Thursday by several other lawmakers, including Representative Carolyn McCarthy of New York, who will introduce companion legislation in the House, and Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, who emotionally recalled the day when the children and adults were gunned down in Newtown. “I will never forget the sight and the sounds of parents that day,” he said. Several gun violence victims, relatives of those killed and others gave brief statements of support for the bill.

Ms. Feinstein’s bill — which, unlike the 1994 assault weapons ban, would not expire after being enacted — would also ban certain characteristics of guns that make them more lethal. More than 900 models of guns would be exempt for hunting and sporting.

Such a measure is vehemently opposed by the N.R.A. and many Republican lawmakers, as well as some Democrats. “I don’t think you should have restrictions on clips,” said Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, who has said he welcomes a Senate debate on guns. “The Second Amendment wasn’t written so you can go hunting, it was to create a force to balance a tyrannical force here.”

Proponents of the ban argue that in spite of claims to the contrary, the 1994 measure, of which Ms. Feinstein was a chief sponsor, helped curb gun violence. “The original bill, though flawed, had a definite impact on the number of these weapons faced by the police on streets and used in crimes,” said Adam Eisgrau, who helped write the 1994 ban while serving as Judiciary Committee counsel to Ms. Feinstein. The new bill, with more explicit language on the types of features on banned weapons, “is far more respectful of firearms for recreation uses,” he said.

Bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines were among the proposals unveiled by President Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. last week. Mr. Biden took the campaign for tougher gun laws to the Internet on Thursday in an online video chat that was part of an effort by the White House to build public support for its guns package. Mr. Biden, who developed the plans embraced by Mr. Obama, will host a round-table event in Richmond, Va., on Friday, and officials have said that Mr. Obama will travel at some point to promote the package.

First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.
First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.
First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United State.
First President to violate the War Powers Act.
First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
First President to defy a Federal Judge's court order to cease implementing the Health Care Reform Law.
First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
First President to spend a trillion dollars on 'shovel-ready' jobs when there was no such thing as 'shovel-ready' jobs.
First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.
First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S., including those with criminal convictions.
First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
First President to terminate America 's ability to put a man in space.
First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.
First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke-out on the reasons for their rate increases.
First President to tell a major manufacturing company n which state it is allowed to locate a factory.
First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.
First President to fire an inspector general of Ameri-Corps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials his office.
First President to golf 73 separate times in his first two and a half years in office, 90 to date.
First President to hide his medical, educational, and travel records.
First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
First President to go on multiple global 'apology tours'.
First President to go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends paid for by the taxpayer.
First President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.
First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.
First President to repeat the Holy Qur'an tells us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.
First President to take a 17 day vacation.

Democrats Admit Their Racist, Sexist Strategies Have Failed in Texas

by
Bryan Preston

Bio

Politico reports on a new Obama-led, top-down effort to build a “grassroots” effort to turn red Texas blue. The effort will be built around some of the usual suspects, including shadow party honcho Matt Angle, and some new ones astroturfed by Obama’s personal political force, Organizing for Action.

Republicans in the state should and will take the new effort seriously, for three reasons: It will be well-financed, and some of its top officers will have learned quite a bit from losing so many races, so consistently, for so long. No Democrat has won a statewide race here since 1990. The third reason is the most significant: As Texas grows, more blue-state refugees move here and the state’s demographics are changing rapidly. So far those demographics have not changed the state’s voting patterns. It’s redder today than it was 10 years ago, with more Republicans elected to local and higher offices overall than ever before. The Democrats failed to mount a serious challenge for the open Senate seat last year, a sign that if anything that party’s atrophy has not been remedied.

Democrats involved in the turn-Texas-blue effort have, at last, begun to admit that their racist strategies have not paid off for them.

Democratic Houston Mayor Annise Parker said her party couldn’t afford to wait passively for population change to turn Texas blue. Instead, they should dig in for a longer, harder campaign to make it a swing state.

“We have been waiting in Texas for a very long time for the Latino vote to come into its own and turn the tide. But many of us have decided that we can’t wait for that. We have to do the old-fashioned work of going out and talking to Texans,” said Parker, who didn’t rule out a statewide campaign “when I am done [being] mayor.”

This has been the Democrats’ problem for a generation. They refuse to admit that the state’s conservative, small-government policies have helped Texas become the economic powerhouse that it is. They refuse to acknowledge that they lose because their values are wildly out of step with the majority of the state. They refuse to acknowledge that their policies would be as bad for Texas as they have been for California. They run on race and gender, not issues, and when they lose, they blame the majority of Texas who vote against them, not themselves.

And they refuse to learn. Take their approach to last year’s open Senate seat.

The party fielded a strong candidate for governor in 2010, former Houston Mayor Bill White, only to see him lose by 13 points to incumbent Gov. Rick Perry. Two years later, Democrats recruited retired Gen. Ricardo Sanchez into the open-seat Senate race, presenting him as a candidate who could appeal to conservative voters and energize Latinos. Sanchez withdrew several months later after raising a paltry sum for the race.

Sanchez flopped, and Texas Republicans nominated Ted Cruz, who went on to win and is already a massive star after just a few weeks in Washington. Sanchez would never have resonated with the state’s majority. It has nothing to do with his skin color or name (obviously, as Cruz won the seat) but because of his role in the Abu Ghraib scandal and because Democrats wanted to run him solely based on his skin color and his Hispanic name.

Some Democrats admit that race and gender are what they have tended to focus on, not qualifications or issues.

“We do need to have a good team, and we do need to have a good ticket. We’ve had too many go-it-alone candidacies that just weren’t able to do it on their own,” [Democrat consultant Ed Espinoza] said. “Coordination should focus on things like who can raise money, who can build structure and who can build votes. Too often we say, ‘Well, this person’s brown, so they can win brown votes, and this person’s a woman, so she can win women’s votes.’”

To any reasonable person not imbibing the leftist Kool-Aid–

Obama Administration Silent After Egyptian Constitution Restores Slavery

Posted by Jim Hoft on Saturday, December 1, 2012, 10:43 AM

It’s no secret that Egyptian slavery is as old as the pyramids.
It’s also common knowledge that Barack Obama’s ancestors owned slaves.

Slaves in Africa – in the early 20th century.

So it’s really no surprise that he helped usher in a radical Egpytian regime that is restoring slavery.
According to the AP Egypt’s new constitution has dropped its ban on slavery:

Omissions of certain articles, such as bans on slavery or promises to adhere to international rights treaties, were equally worrying to critics of the new draft, who pulled out from the panel before the vote.

The Obama administration declined to criticize Egypt’s constitution despite its slavery clause.

MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD IN THE WHITE HOUSE (NAMES & BIO’S DISCLOSED)

• Federal Power Grab
• By: Anthony Martin
• Subscribe

Janet Napolitano's Department of Homeland Security is supplying its federal law enforcement division with 500 million rounds of hollow point bullets.

Credits: 

(Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

Related topics

• Agenda 21

Advertisement

A news report has been quietly making its way around the alternative media, under the radar screen, concerning a Delaware legal decision to strip county sheriffs of their arrest powers in the state.

The mainstream media has not reported the story, but the son of Vice President Joe Biden, who serves as Attorney General for the state of Delaware, has issued a mandate to county commissioners informing them that sheriffs in the state's three counties no longer have arrest powers.

When the information reached this reporter late yesterday evening, further investigation revealed that there is a nationwide effort to strip local sheriffs of most of their enumerated powers that are mandated in the state constitutions of the various states. Such a move would have the net effect of abolishing local sheriffs departments and strengthening the power of federal law enforcement agencies.

And this is not the first time such an effort has been launched.

In the 1970s an initiative was launched by county supervisors in California to eliminate the office of sheriff, but one supervisor instead was able to persuade two state legislators to get a question placed on the California ballot as to whether or not the office of the sheriff should be an elected office. The measure passed overwhelmingly, and the mandate for elected sheriffs was placed in the state constitution.

And in 1935 President Franklin D. Roosevelt was set to eliminate all of the 48 states in order to implement nine regional governments that would operate as extensions of the federal government. All local law enforcement would be eliminated. The plan failed, but the fact that it was attempted points to an ever present, insidious stealth plan on the part of some within the federal government to take away the right of the people and the states to elect their own local law enforcement and to vastly strengthen the hand of the numerous federal law enforcement agencies that currently operate throughout America.

Proponents of such unconstitutional measures desire to forge a world government of sorts under the control of the United Nations. Various methods are used to expedite this plan, including the infamous 'Agenda 21' that has raised the alarm among some citizens.

The key to the success of the implementation of such plans is enforcement. How would the federal government insure compliance among the states and their citizens?

Dozens of federal agencies have their own law enforcement divisions, and those divisions are growing quickly under the Obama Administration. Homeland Security is purchasing 450 million rounds of hollow point bullets. The IRS will need roughly 16,500 new employees to implement ObamaCare. The White House has just sent $500 million to the IRS to enforce the new healthcare law. The EPA's recent penchant for using heavy handed tactics outside the authority given to it by Congress has placed businesses under the gun and stymied economic recovery. Citizens complain that the agency regularly violates private property rights.

And then there are such agencies as the FBI, ATF, DEA, ICE, and others that are under suspicion for widespread corruption in the Fast and Furious scandal, a fact that has not hampered Congressional Democrats from calling for massive new funding and expanded powers for these agencies.

The move to weaken and dismantle sheriffs offices around the country is viewed by Constitutional watchdogs as an ominous signal in a broader attempt to usurp the rights of citizens on the local level in lieu of an expanded nationalized police force under the control of a federal bureaucracy.

When is this socialistic pig going to go away? When will the people of this nation wake up and see what his true goals are? He will not be happy till he completely   destoys this country.