BLACK MARINE ASKS GOOD QUESTIONS

...meanwhile, back on the Bundy  ranch....

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/132699-black-marines-letter-refutes-left-wing-media-narrative-cliven-bundy-racist/

Black Marine’s Letter Refutes Left-Wing Media Narrative that Cliven Bundy is a ‘Racist’

While Rand Paul, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck have rightfully distanced themselves from Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s racially bigoted comments (see Kira Davis’ sassy video for the difference with “racism”), there are still some standing up for the principle on which they sided with Bundy over the government’s bullies to begin with.

This letter via the great Kevin Jackson comes from a black Marine going by the name of Charlie Delta:

The media distorts information to the point of social division. This is a photo of myself and the resilient, often charismatic, and maybe not so tactful Cliven Bundy. He’s a cowboy and a helluva family man, not an orator.

One thing he definitely isn’t – a racist. I found his comments to not only be NOT racist, but his own view of his experiences. Who the heck are we to determine another man’s perspective on the world around him?! Just because Picasso’s view of the world was abstract, does it negate the fact that his art was genuine?

Furthermore, if you take the time to do your own research, you’ll find that his statements about some black Americans actually hold weight. He posed a hypothetical question. He said, “I wonder IF” … Hell, I’m black and I often wonder about the same about the decline of the black family.

Bottom line is that we are all slaves in this waning republic, no matter our skin color. Mr. Bundy could have used any racial demographic as an example: Native Americans on reservations, whites in trailer parks, etc. He noticed the crippling effects of receiving government “assistance” and the long term result of accepting handouts.

It’s not progress at all. I challenge Sean Hannity, Rand Paul, and others to read my comment and reconsider their position in this matter. Individual liberties are at stake here, yours and mine. THAT is the issue.

Don’t let the liberal media and ignoramuses like Glenn Beck and that weasel Harry Reid make you lose sight of the real issue here: The federal government is a burgeoning behemoth and a bully on a once constitutional playground.I sincerely hope you real patriots out there who can see through the smoke.

Semper Fidelis

Whatever Bundy’s ignorant views on race issues, that doesn’t change the matter at hand – and that’s liberty.

Chicago Public Schools Now Phoning Home to Make Sure Kids Are Signed Up for Welfare

H/T The Black Sphere

DINEAH D'SOUZA'S "America:

http://www.dineshdsouza.com/archives/news/hollywood-reporter-bill-ayers-noam-chomsky-dsouzas-new-film/?awt_l=FT20o&awt_m=3WS0TXhiSPwlaFn

HOLLYWOOD REPORTER: BILL AYERS, NOAM CHOMSKY IN D’SOUZA’S NEW FILM

Originally posted at The Hollywood Reporter.

he follow-up to “2016: Obama’s America” will feature several prominent progressives, including Alan Dershowitz and Charles Truxillo, airing controversial opinions.

Dinesh D’Souza will let several prominent liberal thinkers have their say in his follow-up documentary to 2016: Obama’s America. The conservative filmmaker told The Hollywood Reporter that the documentary, America, will feature the commentary of Alan Dershowitz, Noam Chomsky, Bill Ayers, Michael Eric Dyson and Charles Truxillo.

“In 2016 we let President Obama’s voice be heard — literally,” D’Souza tells THR. “With America, we also wanted to hear directly the voices of America’s biggest critics. The conservative answer to offensive speech has always been not to silence it but to listen carefully, consider what’s been said and offer more speech. I was delighted that some of the smartest progressives in America agreed to sit down with me.”

D’Souza wouldn’t name the prominent liberals who declined his request to appear in the film, nor would he disclose what is said by those who do appear, beyond Charles Truxillo’s comments, seen in a video below.

The filmmaker is under indictment for violating campaign finance laws for allegedly using straw donors in order to give more money to a U.S. Senate campaign than legally allowed. His trial begins May 19, but he says his legal problems will not delay the release ofAmerica.

Several prominent people, including Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, have said that D’Souza is being targeted by political operatives who were upset with 2016, an unflattering look at Barack Obama that used lots of audio and video of the president. The movie also included an interview with George Obama, the president’s half brother in Kenya.

In video of America obtained by THR, Truxillo --  a professor of Chicano studies at the University of New Mexico and a leading voice on the far left on the topic of immigration — airs several provocative opinions.  In the film, he argues in favor of “North America confederating with Mexico in a country that will be predominantly Latino and Hispanic.”

Truxillo also tells D’Souza that Mexican immigrants have no desire to become like “the white brats in the mall” and adds: “I like the things the Americans have. Who doesn’t? But I don’t necessarily want to be part of their culture. I don’t want to end up in the world of Roseanne Barr.”

As for the other progressive thinkers, Dershowitz is one of the country’s most famous attorneys. Clients of the outspoken liberal have included Mike Tyson, Patty Hearst and O.J. Simpson. His representation of accused murderer Claus von Bulow was the subject of Reversal of Fortune, an Oscar-winning 1990 film in which deceased actor Ron Silver plays Dershowitz.

Noam Chomsky, a philosopher-scientist and professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is one of the most  regarded thinkers on the American left. Eric Dyson is a writer, radio host, television pundit and professor of sociology at Georgetown University.

Perhaps the most controversial of the group is Ayers, who co-founded the Weather Underground in 1969. The self-described “Communist revolutionary” group bombed New York City Police Department headquarters in 1970, the U.S. Capitol building in 1971 and the Pentagon in 1972.

Ayers, a retired professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, rose to renewed prominence in 2008 when various media revealed he had a friendly relationship with Obama, who was running for his first term as president. Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin famously said that Obama was “palling around with terrorists,” a reference to Ayers.

Read more at The Hollywood Reporter.

D’Souza’s new book on the role of America in the world is now available for pre-order, and the trailer for his upcoming film, America, was just released. Sign this petition to demand America in your city.

The United States and countries in Europe are upset because they can't have their way on abortion and homosexuality at UN

http://onenewsnow.com/culture/2014/04/23/left-steamed-its-agenda-items-continue-to-be-rejected-at-un#.U1j2H3i9LCQ

Left 'steamed' its agenda items continue to be rejected at U.N.

The United States and countries in Europe are upset because they can't have their way on abortion and homosexuality at the United Nations conferences.

The United Nations recently wrapped up two major meetings, with conservative nations and people of faith winning the day. Austin Ruse of C-FAM tells OneNewsNow the proponents of abortion, contraception, and homosexuality walked away empty-handed after repeated efforts.

"Delegations from all over the world have started rejecting the advance on language that is desired by the Left," he explains. "They wanted language on sexual rights, for instance; it was defeated. They wanted language on sexual orientation and gender identity – also defeated. They wanted language on reproductive rights – also defeated."

Ruse says European countries and the United States have a lot of clout and often gain victory because of it.

"But lately they haven't and they're steamed," he says. "They're angry. They express their anger at the conferences. This last conference ended at 5 a.m. and folks from the U.N. Population Fund and the U.S. delegation were visibly agitated that they lost."

But Ruse stresses that doesn't mean they will go away. He points out that portions of the Left's agenda have been before the United Nations for two decades or more – and they continue to return to try and weaken the opposition.

UKRAINE: WHAT IS REALLY AT STAKE?

Newt Gimgrich gives a sobering yet very academic and historical overview of what is and has taken place in the Ukraine in relationship to RUSSIA and the former Soviet Union. This audio history lesson is definitely worth your time. 

http://webtalkradio.net/internet-talk-radio/2014/04/21/breakout-putins-chess-game/?utm_source=Gingrich+Productions+List&utm_campaign=6bcc790418-ukraine042314&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bd29bdc370-6bcc790418-50935101

Breakout – Putin’s Chess Game

Download Episode

In this episode of the Breakout with Newt Gingrich podcast, Newt discusses the
evolving situation between Russia and Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin is
methodically attempting to restore the Russian Empire. He has already been
successful, as Crimea, which had been part of Ukraine since 1954, is once again a
part of Russia. However, Putin may not be finished and could be setting his sights on
Eastern Ukraine, which would have devastating results for the region if he decides to
act militarily.

For more on Breakout, tune in to this podcast each week, and read Newt’s new book,
Breakout.

Agenda 21: The BLM Land Grabbing Endgame

http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/agenda-21-blm-land-grabbing-endgame/

Why is the federal government so obsessed with grabbing more land? After all, the federal government already owns more than 40 percent of the land in 9 different U.S. states.  Why are federal bureaucrats so determined to grab even more? Well, the truth is that this all becomes much clearer once you understand that there is a very twisted philosophy behind what they are doing. It is commonly known as “Agenda 21″, although many names and labels are used for this particular philosophy. Basically, those that hold to this form of radical environmentalism believe that humanity is utterly destroying the planet, and therefore the goal should be to create a world where literally everything that we do is tightly monitored and controlled by control freak bureaucrats in the name of “sustainable development”. In their vision of the future, the human population will be greatly reduced and human activity will be limited to strictly regulated urban areas and travel corridors. The rest of the planet will be left to nature. To achieve this goal, a massive transfer of land from private landowners to the federal government will be necessary.

So the conflict between Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and the BLM is really just the tip of the iceberg. The reality is that the BLM has their eyes on much bigger prizes.

For example, Breitbart is reporting that the BLM is looking at grabbing 90,000 privately-held acres along the Texas/Oklahoma border…

After the recent Bundy Ranch episode by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Texans are becoming more concerned about the BLM’s focus on 90,000 acres along a 116 mile stretch of the Texas/Oklahoma boundary. The BLM is reviewing the possible federal takeover and ownership of privately-held lands which have been deeded property for generations of Texas landowners.

Sid Miller, former Texas State Representative and Republican candidate for Texas Agriculture Commissioner, has since made the matter a campaign issue to Breitbart Texas.

“In Texas,” Miller says, “the BLM is attempting a repeat of an action taken over 30 years ago along the Red River when Tommy Henderson lost a federal lawsuit. The Bureau of Land Management took 140 acres of his property and didn’t pay him one cent.”

Needless to say, officials down in Texas are not pleased about this. In fact, just check out what the attorney general of Texas is saying…

Gen. Abbott sent a strongly-worded letter to BLM Director Neil Kornze, asking for answers to a series of questions related to the potential land grab.

“I am deeply concerned about the notion that the Bureau of Land Management believes the federal government has the authority to swoop in and take land that has been owned and cultivated by Texas landowners for generations,” General Abbott wrote. “The BLM’s newly asserted claims to land along the Red River threaten to upset long-settled private property rights and undermine fundamental principles—including the rule of law—that form the foundation of our democracy. Yet, the BLM has failed to disclose either its full intentions or the legal justification for its proposed actions. Decisions of this magnitude must not be made inside a bureaucratic black box.”

In an exclusive interview with Breitbart Texas, General Abbott said, “This is the latest line of attack by the Obama Administration where it seems like they have a complete disregard for the rule of law in this country …And now they’ve crossed the line quite literally by coming into the State of Texas and trying to claim Texas land as federal land. And, as the Attorney General of Texas I am not going to allow this.”

Does the federal government actually need more land?

As I mentioned above, the feds already own more than 40 percent of the land in 9 different U.S. states…

Nevada: 84.5 percent
Alaska: 69.1 percent
Utah: 57.4 percent
Oregon: 53.1 percent
Idaho: 50.2 percent
Arizona: 48.1 percent
California: 45.3 percent
Wyoming: 42.4 percent
New Mexico: 41.8 percent

The federal government does not need more land. But there is an obsession to grab more so that the dictates of Agenda 21 can be implemented.

The map that I have posted below is a simulation of what the endgame of Agenda 21 might look like. If these radical environmentalists get their way, the only areas that will be allocated for normal human use will be the areas in green…

If you do not go along with the “sustainable development” agenda, you risk being labeled a “threat” to be dealt with.

For example, Senator Harry Reid has used the label “domestic terrorists” to describe those that showed up to support Cliven Bundy at his ranch.

Reid could have used lots of other labels. But he specifically chose to call them terrorists. And considering what the law allows the feds to do to “terrorists”, that is quite chilling.

And don’t think that if you just stay quiet that you won’t get labeled as a “terrorist”. In fact, there is a very good chance that you already fit several government criteria for being a terrorist. Just check out the list below. It comes from my previous article entitled “72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered ‘Potential Terrorists’ In Official Government Documents“…

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-Homosexual"

11. "Anti-Immigrant"

12. "Anti-Muslim"

13. "The Patriot Movement"

14. "Opposition to equal rights for homosexuals 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

Do any of those criteria apply to you?

If so, then you are a “potential terrorist” according to the U.S. government.

We live at a time when the federal government is becoming increasingly oppressive. Just consider the following excerpt from a recent article by John W. Whitehead…

It’s not just the Cliven Bundys of the world who are being dealt with in this manner. Don Miller, a 91-year-old antiques collector, recently had his Indiana home raided by the FBI, ostensibly because it might be in the nation’s best interest if the rare and valuable antiques and artifacts Miller had collected over the course of 80 years were cared for by the government. Such tactics carried out by anyone other than the government would be considered grand larceny, and yet the government gets a free pass.

In the same way, the government insists it can carry out all manner of surveillance on us—listen in on our phone calls, read our emails and text messages, track our movements, photograph our license plates, even enter our biometric information into DNA databases—but those who dare to return the favor, even a little, by filming potential police misconduct, get roughed up by the police, arrested, charged with violating various and sundry crimes.

This was not what our founders intended.

Our liberties and freedoms are being eroded a little bit more with each passing day, and most Americans don’t even seem to care.

In the end, we will pay a great price for our apathy.

Source

Take a look at the future of America: The Beginning of the End.

ILLINOIS GOVERNOR COMPARES Black Republicans TO Jewish Nazis

http://freebeacon.com/issues/quinn-campaign-wonders-black-republicans-like-jewish-nazis/

Quinn Campaign Wonders: Black Republicans Like Jewish Nazis?

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn (D.) / AP

BY: Adam Kredo
April 23, 2014 3:34 pm

Illinois Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn is in some hot water with the Jewish community after his campaign tweeted—and then quietly deleted—several messages urging backers to read an article comparing black Republican voters to Jews who collaborated with the Nazis.

Chicago Sun Times readers were stunned last week to find that writer Neil Steinberg has penned a column comparing black supporters of Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner to Jews who collaborated with the Nazis against their brethren.

“As a general rule, individuals will sell out the interests of their groups in return for personal benefit,” Steinberg wrote in his column, which claimed that Rauner is buying off the black community and its leaders. “It isn’t just a black thing. Jews collaborated with the Nazis during World War II, helping them to round up their own people in the hopes they’d be the last to go.”

Quinn’s camp praised the piece and tweeted it out to supporters several times. The tweets were deleted after local Jewish community officials quietly communicated their outrage to the governor.

“If Rauner is willing to throw his own money away like this, what’s he going to do when he gets his hands on ours?” read one now-deleted tweet from Quinn’s campaign account.

The campaign also retweeted—and then deleted—a missive from Steinberg promoting his piece.

Both tweets were captured by the website Politwoops, which archives political tweets for posterity.

Some in the Chicago Jewish community say that they were outraged by Quinn’s support of the Nazi rhetoric, which was disseminated over Passover, the holiday marking the ancient Jewish people’s release from slavery.

“Coming during Passover just a few days after the [anti-Semitic] shootings in Kansas, this kind of rhetoric was beyond outrageous,” said one local Jewish community insider. “Community leaders immediately contacted the governor’s office and urged retraction.”

Sources say that the heads of several major Jewish organizations personally registered their outrage with Quinn.

Even those in the Chicago political world say they were stunned by the Quinn campaign’s endorsement of the piece.

“I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Democratic official embrace racist rhetoric and Holocaust imagery like Pat Quinn did here,” said one Chicago political strategist. “It’s possible this was a campaign staff mistake—but the buck stops with the governor and he better start vetting every tweet personally going forward.”

Steinberg’s column focused mainly on what he claimed was Republican Rauner’s attempts to court African American community leader Hermene Hartman, who is a well-known publisher.

Steinberg went on to compare Hartman’s relationship with Rauner with those Jews who complied with the Nazis during World War II.

“There is the larger issue here, of Rauner buying not just Hartman but a community,” Steinberg wrote. “Lots of ministers with roofs to repair. I’d like to hear from any black Illinoisan—who’s not in Rauner’s direct employ — who thinks that arrogant rich guy is the man to run the state.”

The Quinn campaign has not officially publicly apologized for promoting the piece or acknowledged deleting its tweets.

The Quinn campaign could not immediately comment because everyone was “in a meeting,” according to a staffer answering phones at Quinn’s campaign office.

BEN CARSON: REJECT PURVEYORS OF DEPENDENCY

CARSON: Blacks must reject purveyors of dependency, victimhood

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/1/carson-outwitting-the-purveyors-of-dependency/?page=all#pagebreak

Divide and conquer is an age-old strategy, effectively used by many in positions of power to ensure that they retain their wealth and authority.

During the dark days of slavery in America, there were many geographic areas where the number of slaves significantly surpassed the number of whites and slave owners.

This occasioned appropriate anxiety for the owners, who cleverly sowed seeds of discord among the different groups of slaves in an attempt to effectively destroy unity. For example, field slaves were told that the house slaves thought of themselves as superior.

This worked in most cases, although there were notable instances of secret cooperation between the slaves to accomplish various goals. It required real wisdom and insight to avoid easy manipulation by the slave owners, who usually used slaves loyal to them to accomplish their nefarious objectives.

In today’s culture, there are political forces that see the descendants of slaves as useful objects for maintaining their positions of wealth and power. By promising to care for their every need, they create dependency.

Frightening those dependents into thinking that they will be abandoned if others are in control, they create loyalty that is undeserved but fierce — loyalty that translates into the real goal: votes. Anything or anyone that threatens this paradigm of victim and protector must be destroyed, lest the victims recognize the deceitfulness of their manipulators and revolt.

The most dangerous people to the modern manipulators are people who have freed themselves from the plantation mentality. They eschew the propaganda of victimhood and advocate for personal responsibility. They see the true compassion of a hand up rather than a handout.

The tragedy is that many “leaders” of the black community succumb to the mesmerizing poison of the controlling elites, who make them feel “cool” and important. I’m sure that some actually realize what is happening, but — like the kids you remember in high school — don’t want to risk being ostracized and expelled from the “in crowd,” and, therefore, remain silent.

It is so important for the black community to realize that there is tremendous strength in unity and that a disagreement on some issues does not have to create animosity. In fact, by engaging in open discussions rather than demonization, a great deal can be learned by all parties.

I am a registered independent, but I have many friends who are Democrats and many who are Republicans. One friend who identifies himself as a Democrat left Alabama at age 16 heading to Boston in search of employment. He accidentally ended up in Hartford, Conn., and worked in a lowly position as a construction aide for a hotel that was being built. This young black man from Birmingham had a strong work ethic and was gifted with common sense.

Today, he not only owns that hotel, but owns many other businesses and is a philanthropist. We do not disagree about most important things, but have some political disagreements, which have no negative impact on our friendship or our ability to work together on joint projects. If someone tried to exploit our differences, we would have a hearty laugh at their expense.

Those who spew venom at black conservatives would do well to read about the lives and philosophies of such luminaries as Booker T. Washington, George Washington Carver, Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman and many others, who refused to subscribe to the victim mentality.

They should make an attempt to understand what it takes to ascend from the lifestyle of Southern sharecroppers to the office of secretary of state of the United States of America.

Perhaps then, they would rally to the side of Condoleezza Rice, who achieved this and much more, including concert pianist. When the black community tolerates a group of liberal Rutgers professors who succeeded in disinviting her to their commencement because she is a black conservative, they embolden the controlling elites and dramatically minimize accomplishments that any ethnic group should be proud of.

We must fight for the precious hearts and souls of all of our young people. We have to give them the “can-do” attitude that characterized the rapid ascension of America. We must defang the dividers by ignoring them and thinking for ourselves.

I wish that those who are the haters and manipulators would take a moment to examine their hearts and motives. I hope they will think about using their intellectual talents for good.

They would be wise to ask themselves this question: How much good did being one of the cool guys in high school do in the long run? Let us all give honor to the concepts of hard work, integrity, kindness, compassion, personal responsibility, family values, and faith in and obedience to God.

Many people from all backgrounds gave up their freedom, their blood and even their lives to provide a life of liberty and dignity for those trapped by the chains of legal discrimination and hatred.

We must not allow their sacrifice to become meaningless by allowing “do-gooders” to replace the chains of overt racism with the new chains of dependency, low expectations, victimhood and misdirected anger.

Let’s use our God-given wisdom to outwit the purveyors of division and deceit. Let’s be loyal to the correct values and principles, regardless of the short-term personal cost. The long-term benefits will be well worth it.

Ben S. Carson is professor emeritus of neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins University and author of the forthcoming “One Nation” (Sentinel, May 20).