Where Constitutional Truth & Spirit Unite
Warning…there is a split second video clip from a leftist blogger, Perez Hilton, that uses the “B” word which is aired a few times…
Students of “ALL” ages interested in true conservative values, the intent of the “Original” Republican Party of the Founding Fathers, economics, government policies and ethics can learn more at:
I haven’t done a lot of research into this group, however, what I have found out is that they are the Elite of the Elite, and they have high hopes of getting “their way” to keep their coffers full and in control of the world stock markets/economies.
I also am not sold on Alex Jones, however, he does have an inside connection that he gets his information through. An inside source that the WSJ (Wall Street Journal) is privy to for its articles.
It is an interesting read and the information can all be corroborated…though I “DO NOT” endorse all on this website, I have found the Bilderberg information to be reliable…
Paul Joseph Watson
Saturday, May 16, 2009Veteran investigative journalist Jim Tucker has uncovered Bilderberg’s 2009 agenda, which includes the plan for a global department of health, a global treasury and a shortened depression rather than a longer economic downturn.
Tucker said that former Swedish Prime Minister and regular Bilderberg attendee Carl Bildt, “Made a speech advocating turning the World Health Organization into a world department of health, advocating turning the IMF into a world department of treasury, both of course under the auspices of the United Nations.”
Tucker noted that such moves would constitute giant steps toward the world government that Bilderberg has set about to achieve but has been frustrated in finalizing over the past 10 years.
Tucker said that Bilderberg are keen on stressing the problems caused by the economic crisis, as well as the threat of a disease pandemic, as a means of justifying centralization of power.
According to Tucker, Bildt also discussed global warming in the context of a global tax on carbon emissions, which has long been a part of Bilderberg’s agenda.
The global tax which will be paid directly to the UN will be introduced gradually, first of all as a barely noticeable tax at the gas pump, before being hiked up once it is in place, said Tucker.
Regarding the crucial Lisbon Treaty, which was struck down after Irish voters said no to its passage last year, Tucker said that Bilderberg were planning to privately send representatives to Ireland to talk to political leaders in an effort to push the treaty through. The EU requires all member states to ratify the treaty before it can be passed and Irish voters will again be asked to vote in a referendum later this year despite having already rejected the treaty last year.
Tucker said that a key component of this year’s Bilderberg Group meeting was an effort to get President Obama to, “Slip through ratification of the International Criminal Court treaty,” by forwarding it to the Senate to be voted on.
“Their tactics are this,” said Tucker, “Obama is to sweet talk the many left-wing Democrats in Congress who really want the International Criminal Court treaty, they’re just scared because people were so strongly opposed to surrendering sovereignty that they were afraid to vote for it – political cowards – so Obama’s going to sweet talk them and say don’t worry, we’ll have more liberals in the Senate after the 2010 elections so in January of 2011 when the new Senate is seated you can ratify it late on a Saturday night when it’s too late for Sunday morning papers and to re-plan the Sunday talk shows….there will be no political reprisals.”
Tucker confirmed the information first released by Daniel Estulin, that Bilderberg were discussing whether to sink the economy quickly or drag on a long agonizing depression. “Treasury Secretary Geithner and Carl Bildt touted a shorter recession not a 10-year recession….partly because a 10 year recession would damage Bilderberg industrialists themselves, as much as they want to have a global department of labor and a global department of treasury, they still like making money and such a long recession would cost them big bucks industrially because nobody is buying their toys….the tilt is towards keeping it short,” said Tucker.
Tucker concluded by noting that Bilderberg members seemed grim faced at this year’s meeting and that geopolitically, “Things are going bad for them, Americans are responding, Europeans are responding, and their program is being blocked.”
Now, wasn’t it nice of our Treasury Secretary “Turbo Tax Timmy” to take time from his job, the one he doesn’t seem very good at, to fly to Greece to meet behind closed doors and help the elitists to decide where our money should go and how we should live our personal lives? I also wonder if we paid for it. Some phone calls will be going to DC 1st thing Monday as this is NOT official US business in the Constitutional sense.
It’s time for that AUDIT ( bill co-sponsored by Rep Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie [SD] – 5/6/2009 and 155 other Congressmen/women)!!
A Tale of Two Courageous County Sheriffs
By Ron Ewart
All around us, the power of the federal government is manifested by hundreds of presidential executive orders, thousands of un-read legislation emanating from the U. S. Congress and millions of bureaucratic rules, regulations, restrictions and ordinances, issuing forth from the government’s massive bureaucracy ….. laws, rules, regulations, restrictions and ordinances that in most cases, bear no resemblance to constitutional law, much less constitutional authority. These people don’t seem to care about constitutional law or constitutional authority, they just do it, because they can and it takes an alert citizenry to challenge them. How do you fight such a monster?
The U. S. Constitution is still in tack and upon occasion the U. S. Supreme Court will rule along the lines of the actual intent of the Framers of that Constitution. But it took two brave sheriffs of the great state of Arizona and the great state of Montana, both Western States who still believe strongly in states rights, to “esplain” it to the federal government, whom apparently does not think that they are governed by that famous document of liberty, or falsely believes that their “rule” supersedes it. It doesn’t…
It is not necessary to resort to civil war or revolution, to upset the “apple cart” of an arrogant, out-of-control federal government that has lost all allegiance to the Supreme Law of the Land. We only need use the most important tool of all, that the Founders gave us, our Constitution. With it, we can challenge the “bully” and win.
Finally, throughout our history, from even way before the ratification of our Constitution, the County Sheriff was the ultimate law for his jurisdiction. He is the only law enforcement officer in America elected by the people and answerable only to the people. He swears on solemn oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States and most sheriffs take that oath very seriously. The County Sheriff, operating under the authority of the 10th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution, could very well be the last line of defense of the God-given, unalienable, individual rights of the people and the protector of the Constitution, as well as American sovereignty.
In Mack/Printz v USA, the U S Supreme Court declared that the states or their political subdivisions, “are not subject to federal direction.”
Sheriff’s Mack and Printz paid a very heavy price for their courage but it was that courage and their sacrifice that scored a victory for all citizens of the United States, proving that we are still a Constitutional Republic under the rule of law and we have not morphed into an Absolute Democratic Monarchy, under the rule of the mob ….. yet!
read full article here
I’ve been following the “American Grand Jury” movement, even to the point of asking for an application, which I have never returned and in all reality, will never print it out, let alone fill it out and return it.
While I admire the Patriotism of those who are promoting and over seeing the grand juries, I have this nasty “GUT” feeling that there could be real trouble down the road “if and when” any of the presentments/indictments ever see the light of a court room.
Why?
It became all too clear while listening to a recent blog-talk radio episode, that there is a deep seeded biased effort to bring a “guilty as charged” mentality to the grand jury. When the guest promoted getting as many of these juries together to bring more indictments all across the country, while they openly promote and brag about the presentments/ indictments already handed down, my heart stopped a beat and my head was sent spinning in disappointment.
Of all things, juries are to be non-biased and is the reason many court proceedings are moved from their original jurisdictions.
Unless those overseeing these grand juries can show without a shadow of a doubt that ANY and ALL grand jury members haven’t been subjected to biased views/evidence against the defendant prior to the grand jury proceedings, NONE of these presentments/indictments will hold up to the scrutiny of any open court where lawyers are allowed to enter into the picture.
But, should this discourage those from continuing the grand juries? I think NOT. If nothing else, they bring awareness to the tyranny and treason being perpetrated upon the Constitution and the citizens of the United States.
So, to all my fellow patriots who are caught up and running with the grand jury movement, I wish you well, but I also wish you the sense to see a HUGE problem down the road that CAN and WILL come back to bite you if you continue to recruit grand jury members openly and publicly on the same website where conclusions of previous grand juries are being reported.
UPDATE: here is my proof:
35 Texas Citizens The indictment: Fraud and Treason
There was never a hint of indecision when this group of concerned citizens got together in Texas and decided to go to work. In their minds “the man who hates America” needed to be indicted and the sooner the better.The jury spent a week reviewing and contemplating the evidence but the vote was swift and decisive. All 35 members raised their hands and said, “we want this man tried in court and we are now looking to the Great State of Texas to bring that justice to our citizens.”
I hardly think our founding fathers would approve of this sort of activity being promoted under the guise of a constitutional grand jury. They have sunk to the level of the statist/progressive actions in which they claim to deplore: the abuse of the Constitution.
RED FLAG ALERT: IMMEDIATE ACTION IS NEEDED: CONTACT ALL YOUR REPS ON THE STATE AND NATIONAL LEVEL
111TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 4
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding
health care.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JANUARY 6, 2009
Ms. MCCOLLUM introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred
to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United
States regarding health care.
1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives
2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This joint resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Health
5 Protection Amendment of 2009’’.
6 SEC. 2. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
7 The following article is proposed as an amendment
8 to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be
9 valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitu10
tion when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of
VerDate Nov 24 2008 00:08 Jan 08, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:BILLSHJ4.IH HJ4 smartinez on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2
•HJ 4 IH
1 the several States within seven years after the date of its
2 submission for ratification:
3 ‘‘ARTICLE —
4 ‘‘SECTION 1. Health care, including care to prevent
5 and treat illness, is the right of all citizens of the United
6 States and necessary to ensure the strength of the Nation.
7 ‘‘SECTION 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation.’’.
Æ
THERE IS ALSO A LOT MORE GOING ON WITH HEALTH CARE LEGISLATION AND THERE ARE BILLS UP THE WAZOO THAT NEED TO BE PICKED THROUGH THAT ARE NOT BEING REPORTED INT HE MSM. I URGE EVERYONE TO TAKE THE TIME TO READ AND GET A 1ST HAND GRASP AS THE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS AS IT IS ONE OF THE “KEY” ITEMS THEY NEED TO GET IN PLACE FOR COMPLETE TAKEOVER AND ABOLISHMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION AS IT WAS ADOPTED BY THE FOUNDING FATHERS AND RATIFIED, AS WELL AS ADOPTED, BY ALL THE STATES.
Update #1: So now the “stars” are in the drivers seat for Constitutional legislation?
Quoting the T.I.C.(teleprompter in chief): “The stars are aligned for health care reform”.
So, even though he tried to pass silliness like this onto one of the most diplomatic, upstanding and classy 1st ladies, the TIC is now falling back onto former 1st lady, his SOS for advice on how to tackle big legislative issues:
For some reason, this just isn’t making me feel very confident, care to chime in?
Since the election in November, I have often asked myself: “How could so many Jews, especially ones I am or was close to at the time, vote for Obama?
Now, 6 months later, a writer at the American Thinker has answered my question. And the answer does not bring good news for our Constitutional Republic that the founding fathers fought so hard for. It leads us to a path that is ripe for striping “God” out of every aspect of American life to promote their destructive progressive agenda.
Unrequited Love: Evangelicals and Jews
By Stuart Schwartz
Who would have thought that the key to battling the rising tide of anti-Semitism in Obama’s United States lies in these words: “Jesus loves me! This I know, For the Bible tells me so.”The children of Evangelical Christians sing this hymn in bible schools across the country, reflecting belief in a life lived according to the will of God as revealed in the bible. No moral relativism here: on the one hand, God-honoring living, and the other, sin and defiance. Right and wrong — it is that simple. And it is this biblical view of the world that underlies the unwavering Evangelical Christian support of Israel and Judaism. As Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has noted, Israel and the Jews “have no greater friends and allies” than the 70-million strong Evangelical Christian community in the United States — better friends, in fact, than much of the American Jewish Community…This bible-based approach has produced strong Evangelical support. Christian tourism has kept the Israeli tourism industry afloat when Jews cut back. The Israeli Ministry of Tourism reports that 1.8 million of the 3 million visitors last year were Christians, capping a 40% increase in the past eight years in Christians from the United States.Evangelicals are dramatically more supportive of Israel than the nearly half of the six million American Jews who, according to The National Jewish Population Survey, identify themselves as reformed and/or secular Jews, many of whom are hostile toward both Israel and bible-based Judaism. They reject God in favor of “peoplehood.”As Dennis Prager, the columnist and radio talk host who describes himself as a bible-honoring Jew, notes, “their religion is rarely Judaism.” Instead, “it is every ‘ism’ of the Left. These include liberalism, socialism, feminism, Marxism, and environmentalism.” …He continues: After “Marxist claims about the proletariat proved false and capitalism was vindicated as the best way to achieve economic affluence,” the left replaced “the proletariat” with “the oppressed” as its “object of affection.” For the Jewish left “Israel has merely replaced John D. Rockefeller at the top of the (enemies) list.” These Jews are part of a feverish left for which it makes sense that Evangelical Christians would support Israel, for both ensure terrorism as they oppress the “powerless.” Case in point: Rabid Marxist and anti-Semitic Jew Dr. David Boyarin, a Talmud (traditional Jewish bible commentaries) professor at the University of California at Berkeley, who maintains that the highest form of Judaism is the destruction of Israel, and that the genetic composition of the Jewish race — if allowed to grow — will result in the oppression by Jews of other people.American Jews need to rethink alliances. Syndicated columnist and Fox News commentator Charles Krauthammer warns the Jewish community “it is a sign of the disorientation of a distressed and confused people that we should find it so difficult to distinguish our friends from our enemies.” He may well have had in mind the commentsof Rabbi Eric Yoffie, who heads the largest and largely secular (and least supportive of Israel) affiliate of American Judaism. Yoffie compared Evangelical leaders like the late Dr. Jerry Falwell to Hitler.read the entire article here, it’s value in understanding so much of what is happening today is priceless.
Obama goes on the record, off the cuff, about health care.
By Tevi Troy
Does anybody still read The New York Times Magazine? If not, everyone missed a recent interview with President Obama, in which he expounds, without a TelePrompTer, on his views on health care. In general, the interview reveals a good understanding of some of the challenges facing our system, such as high costs, especially during the end-of-life period. But it also hints at some unrealistic solutions, such as “comparative-effectiveness research” to drive down costs, an independent board to make health-care decisions, and some kind of non-democratic decision-making process that doesn’t go through what he calls the “normal channels.”
The president gets the interview off to a good start, encouraging consumer participation in the decision-making process. Consumer participation is part of what’s known as “value-driven health care,” an effort to use technology and transparency to let consumers make decisions based on both cost and quality of care. Obama even mentions an effort to correct “the asymmetry of information between patient and provider.” This would let covered consumers make smart decisions that contemplate cost.
The problem is that while the Bush administration had a clear and serious belief in all four elements of value-driven health care — information about cost, information about quality, technologies to make that information transparent, and incentives to encourage consumers to use said information — it’s not at all clear that Obama does. There’s some doubt whether Obama even means the same thing that Bush did when he mentions consumer involvement.
Obama also mentions Medicare and Medicaid and our “obligation to get those costs under control.” He is right about the problem of cost, but it was not clear what he could do to achieve this. While the White House is indeed looking for cost-cutting opportunities within Medicare, such ideas usually end up on Congress’s cutting-room floor.
One broader cost-cutting measure he mentions is comparative-effectiveness research, a $1.1 billion effort via the stimulus package to compare different therapies and try to get to official judgments about which ones work better. His vision for comparative effectiveness is one of objective studies through which you will learn that “the blue pill, which costs half as much as the red pill, is just as effective, and you might want to go ahead and get the blue one.” Once consumers have access to these studies, he believes, “if a provider is pushing the red one on you, then you should at least ask some important questions.”
The problem with his vision of comparative effectiveness is two-fold. First, per the stimulus legislation, it is supposed to be a measure of effectiveness, not a cost-comparison tool. Second, and more important, this binary view of effectiveness (one therapy is more effective than the other) is not compatible with the emerging notion of personalized medicine, which takes individuals’ genomic structures into account. Personalized medicine may teach us that while therapy A works better in the aggregate, therapy B might be better for some individuals based on their unique DNA. We have made great strides in bringing about personalized medicine in recent years, particularly through the unlocking of the human genome, but the technological challenges may pale before the policy obstacles that cost-cutters could place in personalized medicine’s path.
A cost-cutting measure that he does not mention in the interview, but that began getting media attention yesterday, is the new health-industry-developed plan to reduce spending growth. It is an open question how “voluntary” these reforms from terrified industry reps really are, and how enforceable they will be in the future.
Another subject the president discusses with the Times is the problem of end-of-life care. He tells the story of his grandmother, who got an expensive hip replacement, then died two weeks later. President Obama says he “would have paid for that hip replacement just because she’s my grandmother.” At the same time, however, he notes that “whether, sort of in the aggregate, society making those decisions to give my grandmother, or everybody else’s aging grandparents or parents, a hip replacement when they’re terminally ill is a sustainable model, is a very difficult question.” Furthermore, he recognizes that Americans don’t want to hear that we will not provide expensive late-stage care, a la England. As the president puts it, “If somebody told me that my grandmother couldn’t have a hip replacement, and she had to lie there in misery in the waning days of her life — that would be pretty upsetting.”
His answer to this question, however, is also somewhat upsetting — and not just because he calls denying care to the terminally ill “very difficult” and “upsetting,” but never “something we won’t do.” He says that “there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place.” And not only will this be difficult, he claims, but he has trouble imagining “the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance.” It is unclear what this group will look like, but the notion of some empyrean body, developed outside the normal political channels, making health-care decisions for the country, is a notion that makes me very, very nervous.
— Tevi Troy, deputy secretary of health and human services from 2007 to 2009, is a visiting senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.
Exclusive: William Federer cites historical incidents of nation calling on the Almighty
Posted: May 07, 2009
——————————————————————
Note: On this National Day of Prayer, William Federer offers a list of similar national commemorations in America’s history.
Early colonists declared Days of Prayer during droughts and Indian attacks.
One notable Day of Prayer was in 1746, when French Adm. d’Anville sailed for New England, commanding the most powerful fleet of the time – 70 ships with 13,000 troops – intending to recapture Louisburg, Nova Scotia, and destroy from Boston to New York, all the way to Georgia.
Massachusetts Gov. William Shirley declared a Day of Prayer and Fasting, Oct. 16, 1746, to pray for deliverance.
In Boston’s Old South Meeting House, the Rev. Thomas Prince prayed: “Send Thy tempest, Lord, upon the water … scatter the ships of our tormentors!”
Historian Catherine Drinker Bowen related that as he finished praying, the sky darkened, winds shrieked and church bells rang “a wild, uneven sound … though no man was in the steeple.”
A hurricane subsequently struck the French fleet.
With 4,000 sick and 2,000 dead, including Adm. d’Anville, French Vice Adm. d’Estournelle threw himself on his sword.
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow wrote in his “Ballad of the French Fleet”:
“Admiral d’Anville had sworn by cross and crown, to ravage with fire and steel our helpless Boston Town. … From mouth to mouth spread tidings of dismay, I stood in the Old South saying humbly: ‘Let us pray!’ … Like a potter’s vessel broke, the great ships of the line, were carried away as smoke or sank in the brine.”
All our founders’ inspiring, biblical quotes in one place – a must-have for your library: William Federer’s “America’s God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations”
In 1774, Thomas Jefferson proposed a Day of Prayer when the British blockaded Boston’s Harbor:
“This House … from the hostile invasion of the city of Boston … deem it highly necessary that the first day of June be … a Day of Fasting, Humiliation and Prayer, devoutly to implore the Divine interposition.”
George Washington wrote in his diary, June 1, 1774: “Went to church, fasted all day.”
A few years later, March 6, 1776, Gen. Washington ordered:
“A day of fasting, prayer and humiliation, ‘to implore the Lord and Giver of all victory to pardon our manifold sins and … bless the Continental Army with His divine favor and protection.'”
Ben Franklin stated during the 1787 Constitutional Convention:
“In the beginning of the Contest with Great Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer in this room for Divine protection.”
In 1794, after the Whiskey Rebellion, President George Washington declared a Day of Prayer.
In 1799, during a threatened war with France, President John Adams declared a Day of Prayer, urging Americans to:
“Call to mind our numerous offenses against the Most High God, confess them before Him with the sincerest penitence, implore His pardoning mercy, through the Great Mediator and Redeemer … and that through the grace of His Holy Spirit, we may … yield a more suitable obedience to His righteous requisitions.”
During the War of 1812, President James Madison, who interestingly enough had introduced the First Amendment in the first session of Congress, proclaimed a Day of Prayer:
“I … recommend … rendering the Sovereign of the Universe … public homage … acknowledging the transgressions which might justly provoke the manifestations of His divine displeasure … seeking His merciful forgiveness … with a reverence for the unerring precept of our holy religion, to do to others as they would require that others should do to them.”
On Aug. 25, 1814, the British invaded Washington and burned the White House and Capitol building. Suddenly dark clouds rolled in and a tornado blew off roofs and knocked down chimneys on British troops. Cannons were lifted off the ground and thrown yards away. British troops fled.
A British historian wrote:
“More British soldiers were killed by this stroke of nature than from all the firearms the American troops had mustered.”
Madison proclaimed another Day of Prayer, stating:
“In the present time of public calamity and war a day may be recommended … [for] public humiliation and fasting and of prayer to Almighty God … confessing their sins and transgressions … that He would be graciously pleased to pardon all their offenses.”
When President William Henry Harrison died in 1841, John Tyler, the first vice president to assume the presidency, issued a Day of Prayer:
“When a Christian people feel themselves to be overtaken by a great public calamity, it becomes them to humble themselves under the dispensation of Divine Providence.”
President Zachary Taylor declared a Day of Prayer during a cholera epidemic, July 3, 1849, stating:
“A fearful pestilence … is spreading itself throughout the land. … It is … recommended … a day of fasting, humiliation and prayer … to abstain … from secular occupations … to implore the Almighty in His own good time to stay the destroying hand.”
(Column continues below)
Prior to the Civil War, President James Buchanan proclaimed a Day of Prayer to avert civil strife, as did Lincoln, March 30, 1863, stating:
“The awful calamity of civil war … may be but a punishment inflicted upon us for our presumptuous sins. … We have forgotten God. … We have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become … too proud to pray to the God that made us!”
President Andrew Johnson proclaimed a Day of Prayer when Lincoln was shot.
During World War I, President Woodrow Wilson declared a Day of Prayer, stating:
“I … hereby proclaim … a day of public humiliation, prayer and fasting, and do exhort my fellow-citizens … to assemble on that day in their several places of worship … to pray Almighty God that He may forgive our sins … and purify our hearts.”
During World War II, Franklin D. Roosevelt prayed during the D-Day invasion of Normandy, June 6, 1944:
“Almighty God, our sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion and our civilization. … Help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice.”
When World War II ended, President Truman declared in a Day of Prayer, Aug. 16, 1945:
“The warlords of Japan … have surrendered unconditionally. … Our global victory … has come with the help of God. … Let us … dedicate ourselves to follow in His ways.”
In 1952, President Truman made the National Day of Prayer an annual observance, stating:
“In times of national crisis when we are striving to strengthen the foundations of peace … we stand in special need of Divine support.”
In April of 1970, President Richard Nixon had a Day of Prayer for Apollo 13 astronauts.
On Jan. 27, 1983, declaring a National Day of Prayer, President Ronald Reagan stated:
“In 1783, the Treaty of Paris officially ended the long, weary Revolutionary War during which a National Day of Prayer had been proclaimed every spring for eight years.”
President Reagan made the National Day of Prayer the first Thursday in May, saying:
“Americans in every generation have turned to their Maker in prayer. … We have acknowledged … our dependence on Almighty God.”
President George W. Bush declared Days of Prayer after the Islamic terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and after Hurricane Katrina.
Facing today’s economic crisis and fundamentalist Muslim threat, it may be time for Americans to once again observe a Day of Prayer.
Vodpod videos no longer available.
How pathetic.
A report released today proved that Speaker Pelosi was told that waterboarding was used on terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah way back in September 2002:
ABC News reported, via Free Republic:
ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” on terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah in September 2002, according to a report prepared by the Director of National Intelligence’s office and obtained by ABC News.
The report, submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee and other Capitol Hill officials Wednesday, appears to contradict Pelosi’s statement last month that she was never told about the use of waterboarding or other special interrogation tactics. Instead, she has said, she was told only that the Bush administration had legal opinions that would have supported the use of such techniques.
The report details a Sept. 4, 2002 meeting between intelligence officials and Pelosi, then-House intelligence committee chairman Porter Goss, and two aides. At the time, Pelosi was the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee.
The meeting is described as a “Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of particular EITs that had been employed.”
According to an earlier report, information gathered from Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) after waterboarding was used led to the discovery of a second wave attack planned for Los Angeles.
Constitutionally Speaking 