Your government working AGAINST you

Founders_Finger_GulagUnder Barack Hussein Obama.  With the overt and covert/tacit approval of Barack Hussein Obama.

First, from the UKDailyMail.com:

FBI tells teachers to inform on students who express ‘anti-government’ and ‘anarchist’ political beliefs as high schools are ‘ideal targets’ for extremist recruiters

by Wills Robinson

  • Document urges faculty members to assess behavior of students 

  • They suggest to watch for certain signs, such as tendency toward violence

  • Bureau hopes indications could prevent future terrorist attacks 

  • They believed it would help reduce the number of youngsters joining terrorist or anti-government groups

It would seem to me the real “extremist recruiters” could be some of the teachers already employed in public schools.

The FBI wants teachers to inform on ‘anti-government’ or ‘anarchist’ students.

In a document titled ‘Preventing Violence and Extremism in Schools’, the bureau urges faculty members to assess concerning behavior of schoolchildren as they may be ’embracing extremist ideologies’.

They also list a number of indications, such as violent tendencies, which may be a sign they are planning an attack or may want to join a terrorist group.

Officials then want staff to pass on information to authorities in a bid to prevent any actions which could put others in danger.

In other words, the United States government wants to make an enemy out of me once again — but oddly enough, only during Leftist administrations.  The federal government wants to make an enemy of its soldiers, of those who believe in religion (excepting that of Islam) and those who believe in the Second Amendment.

Obama American CRAZIESThose who cling to their God and guns.  Who believe in the US Constitution.  Who believe in the Bill of Rights.  Who believe in a religion other than Islam.

Second, the US Department of Justice was actually contemplating prosecution of those who deny climate change/global warming.

Seriously.  The actual Obama-sanctioned Belief Police.

From TheBlaze.com:

AG Lynch Testifies: Justice Dept. Has ‘Discussed’ Civil Legal Action Against Climate Change Deniers

by Jon Street

Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified Wednesday that the Justice Department has “discussed” taking civil legal action against the fossil fuel industry for “denying” the “threat of carbon emissions” when it comes to climate change.

A Democrat asked and was answered:

“My question to you is, other than civil forfeitures and matters attendant to a criminal case, are there other circumstances in which a civil matter under the authority of the Department of Justice has been referred to the FBI?” he asked.

“This matter has been discussed. We have received information about it and have referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action on,” Lynch answered. “I’m not aware of a civil referral at this time.”

Corporations first.  You and me next.

Finally: who else is an enemy of the federal government, according to official US government documents as per Michael Snyder?

1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”

2. Those that advocate for states’ rights

3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”

4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”

5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”

6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”

7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”

8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”

9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”

10. “Anti-Gay”

11. “Anti-Immigrant”

12. “Anti-Muslim”

13. “The Patriot Movement”

14. “Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians”

15. Members of the Family Research Council

16. Members of the American Family Association

17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union’”

18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol

19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform

20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition

21. Members of the Christian Action Network

22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”

23. Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”

24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21

25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps

26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”

27. The militia movement

28. The sovereign citizen movement

29. Those that “don’t think they should have to pay taxes”

30. Anyone that “complains about bias”

31. Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”

32. Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”

33. Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”

34. Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”

35. Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”

36. Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”

37. Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”

38. Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”

39. Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”

40. “Militia or unorganized militia”

41. “General right-wing extremist”

42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.

43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”

44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”

45. Those that are “anti-global”

46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”

47. Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”

48. Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”

49. Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”

50. Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”

51. Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”

52. Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”

53. Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”

54. Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”

55. Anyone that is “anti-abortion”

56. Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”

57. Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”

58. “Rightwing extremists”

59. “Returning veterans”

60. Those concerned about “illegal immigration”

61. Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”

62. Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”

63. Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”

64. “Anti-abortion activists”

65. Those that are against illegal immigration

66. Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner

67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations

68. Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”

69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr

70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”)

71. Those that believe in “end times” prophecies

72. Evangelical Christians

Am I — we — truly the danger to America?  Am I the one to be feared and tattled-upon?  Am I the one over which you should worry?

Obama True Danger To America

Or should you worry about a Hillary Clinton, a Bernie Sanders?

I think you have your answer.

BZ

 

This is with whom Obama negotiates

Khamenei Tweet About ObamaYes, the persons who continue to advocate “death to America” and, now, send Twitter messages about Obama committing suicide.

Is this not absolute insanity unbridled?  Why do we negotiate with the mentally unbalanced, those persons who have not and will not hold to treaties and agreements?

With this issue and that of Planned Parenthood, I become more convinced that I am inhabiting some sort of alternate reality from my worst nightmares.

Then I wake up and read the news for another day.

BZ

P.S.

Blogging intermittent due to issues with forest fires in my area; see my prior posts for Saturday and Sunday.

Obama: mixed up and muddled

And that quote is from his supporters regarding Iranian negotiations.

Imagine what his detractors are saying.  Like myself and others.

This president is having his house fall all about his shoulders, but few are noticing AMM-American-Media-Maggots-2because his water-carriers, the American Media Maggots, are shielding him continuously like the good lap doggies they promised to be at the outset.  GOWPs and the AMM, have shielded and protected Obama to the point where their credulity is now mostly lost.

Marie Harf Glittering JewelEven Marie Harf, the Department of State Flack, has to “explain” what Obaka really meant.  From CNSNews.com:

State Dep’t Clarifies Obama’s ‘Muddled’ Words on Iran Nuclear Breakout Time

by Patrick Goodenough

(CNSNews.com) – President Obama appeared to concede this week that under a final nuclear deal, Iran — after 13 or so years — would be able to build a nuclear bomb quickly if it chooses to do so. But State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf insisted later that the words had been misread.

Of course.  The words have been “misread.”

Harf told a daily briefing that Obama’s words “were a little mixed up” and “a little muddled,” saying they had referred to a hypothetical state of affairs in which an agreement had not been reached, rather than the situation as it will be in 13 years’ time under a negotiated agreement.

This is Marie Harf, the most ignorant glassesed bint on a current elevated government pedestal, quoting Barack Hussein Obama as “a little mixed up” and “a little muddled”?  And this is support?

Marie Harf did her level best to “walk back” Obama’s statements.  Please click the link.

Further, from Algemeiner.com:

“Open confusion” reigned today at the State Department after spokeswoman Marie Harf tried to withdraw a quote from President Barack Obama regarding Iran’s nuclear breakout time, advocacy group The Israel Project said.

In the interview with NPR’s Steve Inskeep, the President acknowledged that, after year 13, the current deal being worked out with Iran would not provide the international community with the promised 1-year warning should Iran decide to violate the deal and go for a nuclear weapon.

Details details details.  And on whom do these details fall?  Who wins, who loses?

Check out this article written by Henry Kissinger and George Shultz at WSJ.com.

NewsMax.com provides the article as an alternate, because the WSJ mandates a subscription and I won’t pay for internet sources.  I may provide dead links to you, but never at my own choosing.  And if I find dead links, I do my best to provide alternatives.  As I do now:

Kissinger, Shultz: Iran Deal Likely to Deepen US Involvement

The recently announced framework agreement on Iran’s nuclear program is more likely to increase American involvement in the Middle East rather than decrease it, former Republican Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George P. Shultz write in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

In the 2,000-word piece posted on the Journal’s website on Tuesday night, Kissinger and Shultz wrote that “Rather than enabling American disengagement from the Middle East, the nuclear framework is more likely to necessitate deepening involvement there — on complex new terms.”

Meaning: in over six years, there is still no one sitting at the Adult’s Table in the Obama Administration.

Since the number of Iran’s centrifuges have jumped from 100 at the start of talks 12 years ago to almost 20,000 today, “The threat of war now constrains the West more than Iran,” the former secretaries wrote. “While Iran treated the mere fact of its willingness to negotiate as a concession, the West has felt compelled to break every deadlock with a new proposal.”

Now, Iran’s program is within two to three months of building a nuclear weapon.

“In a large country with multiple facilities and ample experience in nuclear concealment, violations will be inherently difficult to detect,” they said. “Devising theoretical models of inspection is one thing. Enforcing compliance, week after week, despite competing international crises and domestic distractions, is another.”

Damn them for daring to speak and write the truth.  As Caucasoids, Kissinger and Schultz must be racists, not senior analysts.

Now, Iran’s program is within two to three months of building a nuclear weapon.

“In a large country with multiple facilities and ample experience in nuclear concealment, violations will be inherently difficult to detect,” they said. “Devising theoretical models of inspection is one thing. Enforcing compliance, week after week, despite competing international crises and domestic distractions, is another.”

And Iran has been completely forthcoming with current and past IAEA demands?  Allowed inspectors in?

Uh.  No.  Not even remotely.

Past behavior is the best predictor of future performance or the lack thereof.

A wonderful “out”:

Another wrench thrown into the gears is the means of enforcement, “which provides Iran permanent relief from sanctions in exchange for temporary restraints on Iranian conduct,” Kissinger and Shultz said.

Further:

Kissinger and Shultz also attack the idea of a nuclear umbrella provided to Iran’s Arab neighbors by the United States.

“Are the guarantees extended against the use of nuclear weapons — or against any military attack, conventional or nuclear? Is it the domination by Iran that we oppose or the method for achieving it?” they say. “What if nuclear weapons are employed as psychological blackmail?”

The central argument and paragraph:

“If the world is to be spared even worse turmoil, the U.S. must develop a strategic doctrine for the region,” they argue. “Stability requires an active American role. For Iran to be a valuable member of the international community, the prerequisite is that it accepts restraint on its ability to destabilize the Middle East and challenge the broader international order.”

Let’s be frank: Barack Hussein Obama couldn’t negotiate himself or his loved ones out of a paper bag.

What makes anyone think BHO could make any cogent negotiation?

BZ

 

Obama gives away the store to Iran

From Breitbart.com:

Iran Triumphant: Nuclear Deal Capitulates To Nearly All Iranian Demands

by John Hayward

A beaming Iranian foreign minister emerged from the meeting rooms in Switzerland to announce that all of the theocracy’s major demands had been met. According to the new provisions released on the nuclear deal, Iran will get to both keep active its centrifuges and receive sanctions relief.

That Obama, what a hard-nosed negotiator by way of John Kerry!  And I’m sure the foreign minister was beaming because Iran bent the US over completely, insisting we grab our ankles and cough.

The State Department has released a “fact sheet” highlighting the various points of the deal. Sanctions against will be lifted immediately, and probably forever. Iran gets to keep a huge number of its nuclear centrifuges spinning, including a thousand of them at the previously hidden and illegal fortified bunker of Fordo, which is supposed to become a “peaceful” nuclear, physics, technology, and research center. There are sunset provisions on everything Iran has tentatively agreed to, although in his Rose Garden press conference announcing the deal, Obama claimed they would somehow be “permanently” blocked from various forms of weapons development.

If you want to have a little bit of throw-up in your mouth, finish the rest of the article.

Capitulation, thy name is Barack “Neville” Obamerlain.

BZ

 

OBAMA CAPITULATES TO IRAN

Neville ChamberlainChamberlain ObamaFrom the WashingtonFreeBeacon.com:

U.S. Caves to Key Iranian Demands as Nuke Deal Comes Together

by Adam Kredo

Limited options for Congress as Obama seeks to bypass lawmakers

LAUSSANE, Switzerland—The Obama administration is giving in to Iranian demands about the scope of its nuclear program as negotiators work to finalize a framework agreement in the coming days, according to sources familiar with the administration’s position in the negotiations.

U.S. negotiators are said to have given up ground on demands that Iran be forced to disclose the full range of its nuclear activities at the outset of a nuclear deal, a concession experts say would gut the verification the Obama administration has vowed would stand as the crux of a deal with Iran.

Furthermore, Iran is laughing:

Iranian Negotiator Stresses Withdrawal of Powers from Past Stances in N. Talks

TEHRAN (FNA)- Director General for Political Affairs at the Iranian Foreign Ministry and nuclear negotiator Hamid Baeidinejad said on Wednesday that the western powers have withdrawn from their previous positions in nuclear talks with Tehran.

“The other side has withdrawn from its positions compared with the past, otherwise we wouldn’t have stood at this point and stage in the talks at all,” Baeidinejad told reporters in Tehran on Wednesday.

Yet, the Iranian negotiator stressed that certain issues have still remained unresolved between the two sides, including the removal of sanctions.

Read that again: Iran wants no sanctions at all.  Any bets on Obama keeping the sanctions in place?

And again, Obama bones Israel:

US Declassifies Document Revealing Israel’s Nuclear Program

By Ari Yashar, Matt Wanderman

Obama revenge for Netanyahu’s Congress talk? 1987 report on Israel’s top secret nuclear program released in unprecedented move.

In a development that has largely been missed by mainstream media, the Pentagon early last month quietly declassified a Department of Defense top-secret document detailing Israel’s nuclear program, a highly covert topic that Israel has never formally announced to avoid a regional nuclear arms race, and which the US until now has respected by remaining silent.

But by publishing the declassified document from 1987, the US reportedly breached the silent agreement to keep quiet on Israel’s nuclear powers for the first time ever, detailing the nuclear program in great depth.

The timing of the revelation is highly suspect, given that it came as tensions spiraled out of control between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama ahead of Netanyahu’s March 3 address in Congress, in which he warned against the dangers of Iran’s nuclear program and how the deal being formed on that program leaves the Islamic regime with nuclear breakout capabilities.

Another highly suspicious aspect of the document is that while the Pentagon saw fit to declassify sections on Israel’s sensitive nuclear program, it kept sections on Italy, France, West Germany and other NATO countries classified, with those sections blocked out in the document.

“Suspect”?  Are you kidding?

I’m truly thinking that our very own president is an anti-Semite.  Why?  Because actions speak oh-so-much louder than words.

Barack “Neville” Obamalain.

BZ

Obama Successful In Uniform