Your Data, The Ministry of Public Security and a Militarized Police Force

Obama: We need to have a civilian security force that is just as powerful

The FUSION CENTERS

Militarized Police: The Standing Army the Founders Warned AboutWritten by  Joe Wolverton, II, J.D. for  The New American

 Militarized Police: The Standing Army the Founders Warned About
Cops storm a house wearing masks covering their faces, dressed in military special forces-style black uniforms and battle helmets. They bust down the door using a battering ram, then rush the occupants, seizing and breaking one camera and preventing another from recording the remarkable scene.

What was the heinous and violent crime of which the intended target of the raid was charged? Murder? Rape?

Credit card fraud.



This is the incredible, incomprehensible story told by Radley Balko in an op-ed published February 4 in the Washington Post.

Balko includes a video of the incident and the aftermath in his story. If you are concerned about the militarization of American law enforcement, watch this video and pass it around.

Regarding the police department’s response, Balko explains:

Finally, note that police department officials say they “do not have a written policy governing how search warrants are executed.” That’s inexcusable. Most police departments do. But whether or not they’re governed by a formal policy, the use of these kinds of tactics for nonviolent crimes like credit card fraud is hardly unusual, and it’s happening more often, not less. I’ve reported on jurisdictions where all felony search warrants are now served with a SWAT team. At least one federal appeals court has now ruled that under the Fourth Amendment, there’s nothing unreasonable about using a SWAT team to perform regulatory inspections. To be fair, two others have ruled that such tactics are not reasonable. But it’s concerning that this would even be up for debate. We have plenty of discussion and analysis about when searches are appropriate. We also need to start talking about how.

Steadily and speedily, the force of the militarized police is denying citizens the protections of fundamental civil liberties afforded us by the Bill of Rights. While there remain legions of law enforcement officers devoted to protecting and serving their fellow citizens, the federal government’s proffer of powerful, free or almost free, weapons, vehicles, gear, and tactical training is making the allure of becoming an unofficial branch of the armed forces irresistible.

To his credit, Balko turns to the experience of our Founding Fathers with armed and aggressive enforcers of “the law” to inform our own understanding of the rising threat of a militarized police. As Public Affairs Books, the publisher of Balko's Rise of the Warrior Cop book, explains:

The American approach to law enforcement was forged by the experience of revolution. Emerging as they did from the shadow of British rule, the country's founders would likely have viewed police, as they exist today, as a standing army, and therefore a threat to liberty. Even so, excessive force and disregard for the Bill of Rights have become epidemic in today's world. According to civil liberties reporter Radley Balko, these are all symptoms of a generation-long shift to increasingly aggressive, militaristic, and arguably unconstitutional policing—one that would have shocked the conscience of America's founders.

During the Virginia ratifying convention, James Madison described a standing army as the “greatest mischief that can happen.” His colleague and fellow delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787, George Mason put a finer point on it:

No man has a greater regard for the military gentlemen than I have. I admire their intrepidity, perseverance, and valor. But when once a standing army is established in any country, the people lose their liberty. When, against a regular and disciplined army, yeomanry are the only defence [sic], — yeomanry, unskilful and unarmed, — what chance is there for preserving freedom? Give me leave to recur to the page of history, to warn you of your present danger. Recollect the history of most nations of the world. What havoc, desolation, and destruction, have been perpetrated by standing armies!

In The Federalist, No. 29, Alexander Hamilton echoes not only Mason’s warning against a standing army, but his solution to the threat, as well.

If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.

In commenting on Blackstone’s Commentaries, founding era jurist St. George Tucker speaks as if he foresaw our day and the fatal combination of an increasingly militarized police force and the disarmament of civilians:

Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.

The connection between this professional, civilian standing army and the attack on the right of the people to keep and bear arms has been recognized by contemporary liberty-minded scholars, as well.

In his essay, “The Right to Keep and Bear Arms under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments: The Framers' Intent and Supreme Court Jurisprudence,” Stephen Halbrook writes:

Noah Webster, the influential federalist whose name still appears on dictionaries, stated: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed... ." Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States 56 (P. Ford ed. 1888).

In a similar treatise, Joyce Malcolm, a historian specializing in 17th century English constitutional history, makes the same point:

Where does this leave the American Second Amendment, with its reference to a well-regulated militia necessary to the security of a free state, and its insistence that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed? I would argue that the Second Amendment mirrors English belief in the individual's right to be armed, the importance of that right to the preservation of liberty, and the preference for a militia over a standing army.

In an essay published in the Wall Street Journal last August, Radley Balko presented chilling and convincing evidence of the blurring of the line between cop and soldier:

Driven by martial rhetoric and the availability of military-style equipment — from bayonets and M-16 rifles to armored personnel carriers — American police forces have often adopted a mind-set previously reserved for the battlefield. The war on drugs and, more recently, post-9/11 antiterrorism efforts have created a new figure on the U.S. scene: the warrior cop — armed to the teeth, ready to deal harshly with targeted wrongdoers, and a growing threat to familiar American liberties.

Balko rightly connects the menace of the martial police with the decline in liberty and a disintegration of legal boundaries between sheriffs and generals:

Americans have long been wary of using the military for domestic policing. Concerns about potential abuse date back to the creation of the Constitution, when the founders worried about standing armies and the intimidation of the people at large by an overzealous executive, who might choose to follow the unhappy precedents set by Europe's emperors and monarchs.

Given the critical role played by sheriffs in the protection of constitutionally guaranteed liberty, it is dismaying to read story after story describing the eager acceptance — and occasionally the full-time petitioning — of military materiel by county lawmen.

If the threat of the police becoming a standing army of the sort our forefathers believed to be “inconsistent with liberty” is to be diffused, Americans must not only exercise their right to demand that police recognize their responsibility to abide by the law rather than break it, but we must also fiercely resist every attempt to abridge our right to keep and bear arms while keeping ourselves ready to defend that right against all enemies.

The Sandbagging of America

Trevor Loudon New Zeal

Submitted by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton on June 15, 2013 – 6:54 pm EST4 Comments

NoisyRoom.net
Hat Tip: BB
By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

I was wrong. When I first heard that Edward Snowden was exposing the NSA on PRISM, I thought, good… let it all come out. After all the scandals and crap Obama has been getting away with, like most of America, I wanted something to come out. To get some exposure for the bad guys. I was played.

Then I sat down, listened to my gut and thought about it for a bit.

My first inkling that I had it wrong, was when John Bolton came out and called Snowden a traitor and said he was guilty of an act of war. Bolton is someone I admire a great deal. He contended that Snowden had given ‘aid and comfort to the enemy.’ And indeed, he has.

I then had a discussion with my friend Trevor Loudon of New Zeal. He and Cliff Kincaid have looked extensively at Snowden and his connections to the avowed Marxist, Glenn Greenwald. If you will remember, Snowden released his revelations to Greenwald, The Guardian and The Washington Post (both papers are liberal rags). You should know Greenwald, he addressed the International Socialist Organization‘s Socialism 2011 conference in Chicago:

Al-Qaeda hoped a single attack on U.S. soil, very minimal in scope compared to the level of deaths that the United States has been bringing to the world for decades–from Vietnam to illegal wars in Central America–would trigger bankruptcy-inducing policies. Ironically, the only thing that can truly strengthen America’s national security is a weakening of America.

There is a valid argument that Snowden’s betrayal is a case of Chinese espionage. The Russians are also offering asylum. He is backed and supported by Russia Today, Iranian Press TV and by Al Jazeera. Julian Assange of WikiLeaks fame is also supporting him. George Soros’ Free Press and CODEPINK are right there cheering Snowden on. It’s a who’s who of bad guys on Snowden’s team. But wait, it gets better. Snowden’s story is Swiss cheese for spooks.

Here are a few inconvenient facts on Snowden:

• The guy is a high school dropout. How did he get a classified position with the NSA?
• He started out at the NSA as a janitor.
• He learned Chinese while at the agency.
• He made a whopping 122k at the NSA (he falsely claimed it was 200k).
• He claimed he broke both legs while in special forces training. Not exactly… He was at Fort Benning when he broke them, while trying to get into the X-Ray program.
• Snowden was at the NSA for three months – count em’ and then tell me how he was promoted from janitor to technical analyst. Really? Don’t think so.
• He was a Ron Paul supporter, but voted twice for Obama.

So, tell me how an obviously progressive liberal decides suddenly to stand up for the Constitution and throw his life away? Sounds like a Marxist feint to me.

He is also a supremely crappy spy. From BlackFive:

WASHINGTON — The source had instructed his media contacts to come to Hong Kong, visit a particular out-of-the-way corner of a certain hotel, and ask — loudly — for directions to another part of the hotel. If all seemed well, the source would walk past holding a Rubik’s Cube.

I would not call that ‘spy tradecraft.’ I would call it stupid.

He is deeply worried about being spied on. He lines the door of his hotel room with pillows to prevent eavesdropping. He puts a large red hood over his head and laptop when entering his passwords to prevent any hidden cameras from detecting them.

Gee, next thing he’ll be making Star Trek YouTubes and line dancing. Oh no… wait… that’s the IRS. Sorry, it’s so hard to keep my alphabet agencies straight these days.

Snowden just out of the blue decided to do the “patriotic thing” and take a powder. Just ask Snowden’s pole dancing girlfriend whom he dumped in Hawaii when he made his revelations:

Snowden claimed he could wiretap anyone (including the President), which is a lie. He used a banned thumb drive to “collect data,” or so he would have us believe:

That claim is “absolutely outrageous,” former NSA and CIA director Michael Hayden tells The Daily Beast. Snowden “was not a collector,” and no low-ranking contractor like him would have the authority to access anyone’s phone calls or read anybody’s emails.

Robert Deitz, a former top lawyer at the NSA and CIA, agrees that Snowden’s boast is a “complete and utter” falsehood. “First of all it’s illegal,” he tells the Los Angeles Times. “There is enormous oversight. They have keystroke auditing. There are, from time to time, cases in which some analyst is [angry] at his ex-wife and looks at the wrong thing and he is caught and fired.”

Any software engineer can tell you that keystroke software is dirt common these days as employers try to keep tabs on their employees. You seriously think that Snowden pulled this off without help? He was given this information. Mark my words.

Wonder how much money they paid him to turn on his country? How much does treason pay these days? I believe Obama and company are behind all of this. Remember, Edward is closely connected to an avowed Marxist and within the public/private/secret organizational structures surrounding the hard left groups, it is entirely plausible that he’s simply acting as a red shirt — or is that a red herring? — to grab public sentiment, so it can be turned against the NSA, which would make him a Constitutional traitor, but a loyal foot soldier for the Administration.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t trust the NSA or any other government agency. But we are being suckered here. Obama, in true Alinsky style, has basically destroyed our military, discredited the Secret Service and defanged the CIA. Let me ask you this. If the NSA wouldn’t play ball with the Obama Administration on going after radical Islamists, wouldn’t it be plausible that they would use a tool like Snowden to try and bring them down? Notice how the IRS and FBI are being protected by Obama. Both are following the Dhimmi line of giving Islamists a pass, but ‘get’ those awful Christians and Tea Party folk! Obama is redoing the military and CIA with his chosen cadre to follow his wishes. Next up – the NSA. Sure the NSA needs policing, but they are one of our last defenses in the war against radical Islam and Obama will gut them over this. It is their job to sniff out terrorists here and abroad. Obama is removing another pesky obstacle to radical Islam and Sharia law. I am against violating our Constitutional rights, but tread carefully here. In the name of security, we are about to strip ourselves defenseless. In the name of Constitutional rights, we will chain ourselves to a dictator. Obama’s ultimate goal is to destroy our intelligence agencies and the military. He is close to doing so.

From Cliff Kincaid:

“The Signals Intelligence mission [of the NSA] collects, processes, and disseminates intelligence information from foreign signals for intelligence and counterintelligence purposes and to support military operations,” the NSA’s website says. “This Agency also enables Network Warfare operations to defeat terrorists and their organizations at home and abroad, consistent with U.S. laws and the protection of privacy and civil liberties.”

Notice how this has taken attention off the IRS scandal, the AP scandal and Benghazigate. It’s “oh-look-a-dandelion” folks and we are falling for it, dividing ourselves and fighting over whether this clown is a hero or a traitor. He’s an internal double agent serving the progressive agenda pure and simple.

German political subversion expert Torsten Mann says it best:

The highest art of psychological warfare is to disinform the public not by spreading lies but by spreading a very onesided and sophisticated selection of truths. Currently we are caused to believe that the US was a police state and nobody tells us that the real police states and the real threat to our freedom are Russia and China and their intelligence services. The Russian intelligence services are doing exactly the same surveillance and probably on a much bigger scale, but unfortunately there is no brave journalist disclosing KGB Leaks.

We are witnessing the sandbagging of America and all patriots need to check themselves on this. Snowden is not a hero, he is a traitor and a wannabe spy. He is part of a progressive agenda that is in league with the Chinese and the Russians, as well as radical Islam. The enemies within are remaking us in the image they desire with America on her knees and in chains.

I'm just a Bill

The Obama You Don't Know

• WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM

Introduction

The Obama you don't know

Above all, as America's first black chief executive, Obama symbolized the healing of long-festering wounds that were the terrible national legacy of slavery, the Reconstruction Era and Jim Crow. We would be, finally, one nation.

But after nearly four years in office, Obama has become a sharply polarizing figure.

Chapter I

A childhood of privilege, not hardship

First lady Michelle Obama told the Democratic National Convention that "Barack and I were both raised by families who didn't have much in the way of money or material possessions."

The facts aren't nearly so clear-cut.

While the Dunhams were not among the wealthiest families on the island, he nevertheless studied and socialized with the children of the social and financial elite. Obama has said he didn't fit in at the school. But that's not how other Hawaiians remember it.

Chapter II

The myth of the 'rock-star professor'

Time magazine gushed in 2008 about Barack Obama's 12-year tenure as a law lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, saying, "Within a few years, he had become a rock-star professor with hordes of devoted students."

Some former faculty colleagues today describe Obama as disengaged, doing only what was minimally required and almost never participating in faculty activities.

Chapter III

The 1997 speech that launched Obama

Few doubt that Barack Obama's stirring oration before the 2004 Democratic National Convention vaulted him into the national limelight.

Chapter IV

For the slumlord's defense, Barack Obama, Esq.

In this case, Obama defended a Chicago slumlord and powerful political ally who was charged with a long list of offenses against poor residents. The defendant was the Woodlawn Preservation & Investment Corp., controlled by Bishop Arthur Brazier, a South Side Chicago preacher and political operator.

Brazier was not merely an Obama legal client. A disciple of Chicago's famous radical activist Saul Alinsky, Brazier was also a close political ally of Daley's and one of the key movers and shakers among the city's progressive political elite who in the years ahead would advance Obama at every turn.

Chapter V

Obama's toughest critics on the Left

Barack Obama's carefully constructed image as a civil rights lawyer who wanted to heal the black community was greeted with skepticism by some Chicago activists.

"I never drank the Kool-Aid about Barack Obama," veteran Chicago black activist Eddie Read told The Washington Examiner. Read is president of the Black Independent Political Organization, one of Chicago's largest black community groups.

Chapter VI

The poor people Obama left behind

Four years after Barack Obama's historic election as president, little seems to have changed for the African-American communities on Chicago's South Side.

The lack of change -- or the sense that these neighborhoods are getting worse -- is eroding the president's standing among African-Americans in his hometown.

In 2011, Chicago suffered the third-highest black jobless rate among the nation's major metropolitan areas, at 19 percent, according to the liberal Economic Policy Institute.

Chapter VII

The myth of Obama as state Senate reformer

Former Illinois Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, a maverick Republican and reformer, told The Washington Examiner that Obama never fought corruption, even when it was being done by Republicans.

"I've never seen him fight corruption. He never wanted to upset the apple cart with the Chicago machine," Fitzgerald said.

Chapter VIII

Obama's state pension scheme

Much as the Rev. Jesse Jackson had been doing for years to Fortune 500 corporations, Obama and the Alliance of Business Leaders & Entrepreneurs, or ABLE, demanded that the officials set aside at least 15 percent of pension assets for management by minority-owned investment companies.

If their plan succeeded, the favored investment companies would add lucrative assets to their portfolios, which in turn would help push even more business their way.

Chapter IX

The Arab-American network behind Obama

President Obama's controversial relationships with radical figures like Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi have been well-publicized in recent years.

Prior to his academic career in the United States, Khalidi worked for Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization when it was classified by the State Department as a terrorist group.

Chapter X

Obama brings Chicago politics to Washington

Chicago has been called the home of "gangster government." How bad is it?

Four of the state's previous seven governors went to jail on public corruption charges, as did a third of Chicago aldermen who served during the period.

Obama was a little more direct during the 2010 congressional campaign, saying, according to the New York Times, "we're gonna punish our enemies and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us."

KUHNER: ARPAIO PROBE COULD DWARF WATERGATE

America may be facing a constitutional crisis. Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., has made a startling declaration: President Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent. If true — and I stress if — then this scandal dwarfs Watergate. In fact, it would be the greatest political scandal in U.S. history.

Recently, Sheriff Arpaio held a news conference. He said that his team of independent investigators — composed of former law enforcement officials and reporters — have for months meticulously examined the computer-generated birth certificate that Mr. Obama revealed to the public in April 2011. Their stunning conclusion: The document is a forgery. His chief investigator, Mike Zullo, says that the document is full of errors and omissions. In particular, Mr. Zullo claims that numeric sections are not filled out that otherwise would have been in birth certificates from Hawaii during that time. But other sections, such as those dealing with Mr. Obama’s race and his father’s work and field of study, are completed. Hence, Sheriff Arpaio’s investigative posse definitively believes the birth certificate is not authentic, but was manufactured to provide Mr. Obama with a veneer of constitutional legitimacy.

Sheriff Arpaio’s findings threaten to plunge America into an unprecedented crisis. For if — and again, I emphasize if — he is correct, then Mr. Obama has perpetrated the most elaborate hoax in U.S. history. A fraudulent birth certificate would mean that Mr. Obama is ineligible to serve as commander-in-chief. His presidency would therefore be legally and constitutionally illegitimate.

The consequences would shake the country to its very foundations. It would mean that he should be immediately removed from office — impeached. Moreover, every law and executive order passed under his administration — Obamacare, the economic stimulus, the Dodd-Frank financial reform, the government takeover of General Motors and Chrysler, the granting of amnesty to nearly one million illegal immigrants, the National Defense Reauthorization Act, the drone assassination list — would be null and void. The logic is inexorable: Should the president’s legal authority be deemed invalid, then everything resulting from it is also baseless. The Obama presidency would be overturned. Mr. Obama himself would be facing criminal charges — and possible jail time — for committing fraud.


Yet, the birth certificate issue would repeal more than the Obama administration. It would bring down the entire liberal regime. The ruling elites — the establishment media, the Hollywood left, the federal bureaucracy, the myriad regulatory agencies, the public sector unions, big banks and the financial sector — have refused to seriously examine Mr. Obama’s background. In fact, they have repeatedly propped him up. He defends the liberal corporatist status quo, constantly expanding government power. This is why they are determined to destroy anyone who seriously challenges Mr. Obama’s constitutional authority. To simply inquire into the status of his birth risks being called a “birther” — a kook and conspiracy theorist akin to Holocaust deniers. Having coddled and protected him, the ruling class could not survive if Mr. Obama was exposed as a slick con man. Their moral and intellectual legitimacy would be discredited as well.

The topic has become toxic. Even Fox News refuses to touch it. Many leading conservative radio talk-show hosts ignore it. The editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal mock so-called “birthers.” Meanwhile, the liberal media continues to vilify Sheriff Arpaio. He is being accused of racial profiling, committing civil rights abuses and having failed to effectively prosecute sex crimes. They allege he is waging a baseless, personal vendetta against Mr. Obama. Liberals are portraying him as a Southern stereotype: a racist, out-of-control sheriff determined to bring down a black president.

The very opposite, however, is the case. It was the citizens of Maricopa County who through a petition asked Sheriff Arpaio to investigate Mr. Obama’s birth certificate. The sheriff is not the only one with doubts. Many question the president’s status as a natural-born citizen. Mr. Obama’s grandmother says he was born in Kenya. This is echoed by Obama relatives. Members of the Kenyan parliament have repeatedly claimed Mr. Obama as their native son. The Kenyan media asserts he was born in Kenya. For nearly 15 years, Mr. Obama’s literary agent produced a pamphlet describing him as being “Kenyan born.” In his 2004 race for the U.S. Senate, wire stories — including by the Associated Press — frequently referred to Mr. Obama’s place of birth as Kenya. As late as 2009, the Kenyan government sought to build an official monument commemorating the site of Mr. Obama’s birth (until the State Department ordered the project be shuttered).

The president is a brazen opportunist; a political hustler who mastered his craft on the streets of Chicago. When it suited his interests to come across as a cosmopolitan, multicultural liberal, Mr. Obama pushed a Kenyan persona. When it was no longer politically expedient, he abandoned it. Yet, Mr. Obama cannot escape a fundamental dilemma: He either lied then or he is lying now. He was either born in Kenya (as he claimed during the 1990s and part of the 2000s) or he wasn’t (as he has insisted since 2007). Both cannot be true.

At best, Mr. Obama is a shameless liar. At worst, he is a foreign usurper.                  

Jeffrey T. Kuhneris a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.

Read more:http://times247.com/articles/82kuhner-arpaio-probe-could-be-bigger-than-watergate6?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook#ixzz21Gf5C8Fv




Complete First Amendment Mike Video Play List

Fast and Furious Facts

"Our federal government knowingly, willfully, purposefully gave the drug cartels nearly 2,000 weapons — mainly AK-47s — and allowed them to walk," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, recently told NBC News.

These arms were supposed to lead federal agents in Phoenix to the Mexican thugs who acquired them. Instead, Fast and Furious guns melted into Mexico. Approximately 300 Mexicans have been killed or wounded by Fast and Furious guns, estimates former Mexican attorney general Victor Humberto Benitez Trevino. Relevant details are scarce. However, at least one case generated enormous headlines — in Mexico. On Oct. 21, 2010, Sinaloa drug cartel members kidnapped Mario Gonzalez, brother of Chihuahua state's attorney general at the time, Patricia Gonzalez. That Nov. 5, his tortured body was discovered in a shallow grave. Mexican police soon nabbed eight of his suspected kidnappers in a shootout. They seized 16 weapons, including two Fast and Furious guns, serial numbers confirm. These guns were tied to two kidnappings. That case is detailed in a congressional report prepared for two top Republicans — Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Rep. Darrell Issa of California — and released last July 26. Fast and Furious guns have befouled at least 200 crime scenes, including murders and abductions. Among them: • Members of La Familia drug gang fired at a Mexican federal police helicopter on May 24, 2011, wounding three officers and forcing an emergency landing in Michoacan, western Mexico. Five days later, four more helicopters attacked La Familia. Gang members returned fire, striking all four choppers and injuring two more government agents. Police prevailed, killing 11 cartel members and arresting 36 — including those suspected of targeting the first chopper. Mexican authorities say La Familia possessed heavy-duty body armor and 70 rifles, including several Fast and Furious weapons. • Two weapons purchased by Fast and Furious targets were recovered in Sonora July 2010, and to what the Justice Department classifies as a "homicide/willful kill — gun." • Two Fast and Furious guns were linked to a February 2010 assassination conspiracy against Julian Leyzaola, then police chief in Baja California. • Four Fast and Furious guns found in January 2010 were connected to a "kidnap/ransom." • Eleven Fast and Furious firearms were discovered in Atoyac de Alvarez, a city on Mexico's Pacific Coast, after Mexican soldiers saved a kidnap victim in November 2009. Team Obama's defenders correctly argue that George W. Bush administration investigators distributed some 450 guns in Mexico through Operation Wide Receiver, the precursor to Fast and Furious. But there are several key differences between the two initiatives: No known deaths pertain to Operation Wide Receiver. Many of its weapons featured radio-tracking devices, unlike most Fast and Furious guns. Also, Mexico's government knew about and supported Wide Receiver.

In contrast, Issa and Grassley's report observed, "ATF and DOJ leadership kept their own personnel in Mexico and Mexican government officials totally in the dark about all aspects of Fast and Furious." "Fast and Furious has poisoned the wellspring of public opinion in Mexico as it relates to the cooperation and engagement with the United States," Mexico's ambassador to the United States, Arturo Sarukhan, said in a May 31 speech. The Grassley-Issa report concluded that 1,048 of these weapons "remain unaccounted for." Unlike carrier pigeons, these Fast and Furious guns will not fly safely home. Instead, for years to come, they will keep drawing blood in Mexico and points north.

Obama Social Security Number Fraud

Obama Social Security Number By Jack Tymann


An intensive investigation has revealed the identity of the man whose Social Security number (SSN) is being used by President Obama: Jean Paul Ludwig, who was born in France in 1890, emigrated to the United States in 1924, and was assigned SSN 042-68-4425 (Obama’s current SSN) in or about March 1977.

Ludwig lived most of his adult life in Connecticut. Because of that, his SSN begins with the digits 042, which are among only a select few reserved for Connecticut residents.

Obama never lived or worked in that state! Therefore, there is no reason on earth for his SSN to start with the digits 042. None whatsoever!

Now comes the best part! Ludwig spent the final months of his life in Hawaii, where he died.

Conveniently, Obama’s grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham, worked part-time in the Probate Office in the Honolulu Hawaii Courthouse, and therefore had access to the SSNs of deceased individuals.

The Social Security Administration was never informed of Ludwig’s death, and because he never received Social Security benefits there were no benefits to stop and therefore, no questions were ever raised.

The suspicion, of course, is that Dunham, knowing her grandson was not a U.S. citizen, either because he was born in Kenya or became acitizen of Indonesia upon his adoption by Lolo Soetoro simply scoured the probate records until she found someone who died who was not receiving Social Security benefits, and selected Mr. Ludwig’s Connecticut SSN for Obama.

Just wait until Trump gets past the birth certificate and onto the issue of Barry O’s use of a stolen SSN. You will see leftist heads exploding, because they will have no way of defending Obama.

Although many Americans do not understand the meaning of the term “natural born” there are few who do not understand that if you are using someone else’s SSN it is a clear indication of fraud.