BOHICA!!!

For those who aren't "in the know" that title up there is an acronym for "Bend Over, Here It Comes Again".... In this case I am referring to the Unconstitutional "Assault Weapons" Ban.. Enacted 1994, sunsetted 2004, and ready in the on deck circle here in February 2009...

Link to ABC news' coverage of Attorney General Eric Holder's statements on the issue: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1. Humorously, comments keep disappearing as fast as they are typed in, at one point tonight 25 posts disappeared in seconds...

Looks like ABC is a member of the "Censor the Second Amendment" Movement. "CSAM" seeks to silence those Citizens who value the Second Amendment enough to speak out about it.... But then as ABC is a member of the "mainstream media" and we all know that the MSM are pretty much in the tank for not only BarryO's administration (and previously his election), but they are also pretty much in the tank for the New World Order, and it's subjugation of America...

What in the Hell is Going On???

Just received this in an email, and was immediately suspicious... I get a lot of emails that are not anything other than 'tinfoil hat' stuff....

But read this:

Presidential Determination No. 2009-15 of January 27,
2009


Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration Needs
Related To Gaza

Memorandum for the Secretary of State

By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and
the laws of the United States, including section
2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of
1962 (the ``Act''), as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601), I
hereby determine, pursuant to section 2(c)(1) of the
Act, that it is important to the national interest to
furnish assistance under the Act in an amount not to
exceed $20.3 million from the United States Emergency
Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund for the purpose
of meeting unexpected and urgent refugee and migration
needs, including by contributions to international,
governmental, and nongovernmental organizations and
payment of administrative expenses of Bureau of
Population, Refugees, and Migration of the Department
of State, related to humanitarian needs of Palestinian
refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.

Okay. You know who was President (of the US) on Jan 27th... And the Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund is a federal fund that allows for aliens to be transported into the US and set up with housing and the like - all at taxpayer expense.

It has been used before, but I am not sure that it has been used to let in "Palestinian Refugees" and "Conflict Victims" from Gaza who are largely supporters of HAMAS - a Terrorist organization!!!!

I guess we should be grateful that BarryO hasn't invited "AL QUEDA" "Refugees" and "Conflict Victims" of the US led intervention of the Taliban in Afghanistan.....

Oh, and as far as authenticity? Take a look - here is the link http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-2488.htm. Just in case you think that's a spoofed address, go to http://www.access.gpo.gov/. Then click on GPO access, then Click on Federal Register under the Executive Resources, then in the search box type "migration refugee" and click 'submit'.

The first search result is the one you want: "fr04fe09E Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration Needs"

That results in the text from above... So, not a 'tinfoil hat' email...

My, my the times that we live in...

Sumter!

First, as a ground rule, I will not term the "War of 1861" as "The American Civil War" in this piece. I will not use "War of Northern Aggression", though I find it more truthful... nor will I use "War Between the States", as personally I believe it was a war between the southern states and the northern federal government.

The anniversary of the shelling of Fort Sumter is coming in a couple months - the 12th of April at approximately 0320 (3:20 am to you who aren't on a 24 hour clock). Fort Sumter is widely recognized as the first battle of the War of 1861. Why is Sumter the topic of discussion? Mostly because I wanted to reiterate MBV's sentiment that we have no new Fort Sumter, and perhaps explain why he (and I) feel that way.

A brief history for those who don't spend all day reviewing it: Fort Sumter was a fort in Charleston, South Carolina harbor. It was almost completed in 1861 when Lincoln was elected President of the United States on his abolitionist platform, the election that virtually guaranteed secession. In February of 1861, first South Carolina and then six other states did secede. Most of the forts and other federal properties within the 7 states of the Confederacy were surrendered to the Confederacy. Although the older fort in Charleston harbor (Fort Moultrie) was surrendered, Fort Sumter was not. As a matter of fact, the garrison of Fort Moultrie fled to Fort Sumter as Sumter offered virtually no avenue of ground based assault.

Sumter was besieged, a supply ship turned away, and then finally, on orders from the Confederacy, the commander of the South Carolina Militia ordered the shelling of Fort Sumter, starting at 0320 on the 12th of April. A truce was given the next afternoon, and the fort was surrendered to the Confederacy on the afternoon following, the 14th of April.

What's so important about Sumter? It is not that it was the opening battle in a war of four years that would claim over half a million lives. The opening battle could have been anywhere. It is not that the first casualties of the war were caused by accident, not the actual battle. This fact is very little known - most people don't realize that Sumter was surrendered after the bombardment produced zero casualties on either side!!!

It is the fact that it turned many against the Confederacy. As the Confederacy's Secretary of State, Robert Toombs, warned, attacking Fort Sumter preemptively would "lose us every friend at the North. You will wantonly strike a hornet's nest. ... Legions now quiet will swarm out and sting us to death. It is unnecessary. It puts us in the wrong. It is fatal." Toombs could not have been more correct. Certainly, it was a catalyst for a few other states to join the Confederacy.. But it was a catalyst for many "fence-sitters" to side with the north, who looked like the victims of Confederate aggression...

This is the same thing that MBV is saying when he calls for no new Fort Sumters. The Threepers cannot be guilty of causing the first blood. We must be (and be seen as) righteous and above suspicion. They (the PTB) need to be clearly seen as aggressors. They need to be seen as the oppressors. They need to be seen as the ones in violation of the Constitution and in violation of Natural Law.

Which is, to say, that they (the PTB) need to be seen as they are...