• Feed RSS
There was an error in this gadget

Fwd: Test Your News IQ - Pew Research Center (I got 10 right)

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř Saturday, May 7, 2011
0

 
A SHORT (11 questions) CURRENT EVENTS TEST
 
This is a terrific test which reports results in a number of ways.  It indicates the majority of Americans don't know what's going on.  These results show 80% of the (voting) public doesn't have a clue which is scary.  There are no tricks here - just a simple test to see if you follow current events.
Test your knowledge with 11 questions, then be ready to shudder when you see how others did.
Then post your score in the subject line and forward it to a few people.
 

The SEIU and the Communist Party at the May Day Parade in Los Angeles

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř
0
http://pajamasmedia.com/zombie/2011/05/06/seiu-drops-mask-goes-full-commie/

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

London erupts with tributes, funerals for bin Laden

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř
0
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/05/06/londonistan-erupts-with-tributes-funerals-for-bin-laden/


What are the British going to do about this.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Who knew the details of this program and who signed off on it

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř
0
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/issa-calls-holder-to-account/?singlepage=true

How in the world does Holder keep his job!!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Fwd: Bin Laden's Last Will

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř
0


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Bin Laden's Last Will
Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 15:03:30 -0400
From: Michael Yon <myonmail@michaelyon-online.com>
Reply-To: Michael Yon <myonmail@michaelyon-online.com>
To: richard <rhomp2002@earthlink.net>


Bin Laden's Last Will

Greetings,


"Allah attests that the love for Jihad and death in the cause of Allah has taken over my life and the Sword Verses have penetrated every cell of my heart, "and kill all the polytheists [infidels] as they fight all of you". And how many times I wake from my sleep and find myself reciting this holy verse. If every Muslim would ask himself why did our Ummah reach to where she is [in a state of] humiliation and defeat, his instinctual response would be, because she has clung to the pleasures of life and tossed the book of Allah [Koran] behind its back and it is the only source that has the cure and success in the here and now and the hereafter. The Jews and Christians have tempted us with the pleasures of life and its cheap delights and they invaded us with their monitory values before invading us with their armies. And we were, like women, did not react, because the love for death in the cause of Allah has departed the hearts."

See more:  LINK

--
Very Respectfully,

Michael Yon



 

Please remember that this website accepts no advertisement and is dependent on your support.  

 

Please send any regular mail for Michael to:

Michael Yon
P.O. Box 5553
Winter Haven, Fl 33880

Michael Yon's Dispatches is an Opt-in only Newsletter.

Unsubscribe rhomp2002@earthlink.net from this list.

Our mailing address is:
Michael Yon, LLC
P.O. Box 5553
Winter Haven, Fl 33880

Add us to your address book

Copyright (C) 2011 Michael Yon, LLC All rights reserved.

Forward this email to a friend
Update your profile
Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp

Fwd: Fallait-il la CPI pour Ben Laden ?

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř
0
    Google Translation of the article:

Was it the ICC for Bin Laden?


It is an issue that can not be ruled out with a wave of your hand if you believe in the strength of an international law based on the fundamental values ​​of equality before the law and fight against this injustice that is the crime. Also can you answer yes to this point of view of principles. But, as regards the specific case study to examine whether or not in between the horizon of this necessity, he must also have in mind several other parameters: it is a war situation, the event on the field was intense

" Leon E. Panetta, The CIA director, Said The Seal commandos Went Into the Mission With only a 60 percent to 80 percent certainty That In The Bin Ladenwas compound. Mr. Panetta Said The commandos Made The split-second decision'''' to shoot him - The unarmed Qaeda founder Had a rifle Within Reach, a U.S. officials said Wednesday - When They found HIM In His third-floor bedroom.
There Was No Debate Among members forming Seal That whoever shot Bin Laden HAD HAD done The Right Thing.
''It's dark, There's Been a lot of bullets flying around, a lot of bodysuits dropping, your mission Is To capture or kill Bin Laden, Who knowswhat he's got tucked in history shirt?''Said Don Shipley, 49, to form Sealmemberwho Runs Extreme Seal Experience, a private training school inChesapeake, Virginia .

it would appear that bin Laden had had a gun in hand (" Had a rifle Within Reach ") and other sources say that a woman had interposed and was wounded in the leg. In this case the death of bin Laden can only be read in light of the principle. There are indeed interference situation that can not be excluded a backhander under penalty of using a conspiracy theory. One can certainly argue that the elite commando-elite of the elite-(whose training is described in the same article the Herald quoted above ) lost his cool although it is mentioned above that drew in all directions and that the shooter could also draw in the legs.Recognize the lack of composure for someone ultra-driven. Except we're not out of the woods.

For a moment imagine that bin Laden is back safe and sound.Already, it can not be locked in a jail of the ICC in The Hague since not only the Court has no jurisdiction over any crime prior to his creation (1 July 2002) , then the U.S. has not ratified them recognize any jurisdiction of this Court (except as a special tribunal for the former Yugoslavia: ICTY ), as well as the crimes took place first in the U.S., and as they are the USA who were in action, Bin Laden could also be tried there but with the possibility of beingacquitted for lack of evidence directly . Moreover, his living presence would have triggered a pressure such that the number of hostage takings and terrorist attacks would have had the only goal of the issue.

This argument is obviously not legally the same retort, but it is not appropriate nor legally in a state of war the soldier's situation must first see to neutralize the enemy without trying to kill him ; it should not be confused with criminal situation warning shot and the situation of war, except war crime that only apply to civilians, or Bin Laden was not a "civil". Obviously, it is possible to argue here, except that it can be legally charged with "terrorism" which falls under the jurisdiction of an enhanced making it more open military intervention type.

Ideally, therefore, bin Laden should have been taken alive and brought to the attention of the ICC, at least assuming a retroactive for crimes against humanity. Except that there is no international police force, so the country most concerned has ample opportunity to comply or not this ideal, this is really the problem. Because if there was an international police force, Al Quaeda could not speak today of "reprisals" (which is a shame for that matter) as it would have before her the world. However, it is not enough to argue that the U.S. and Israel do not want, since neither China nor Russia will recognize the Court. Actually it is quite the problem since there are also China and Russia that prevent condemn Syria , and are choosy about Libya. In any case, until there is not a major overhaul of the UN with strengthening democratic values ​​for entry criteria, the international police will not exist. Because it is what it is and not the existence of a hypothetical (and dangerous) world government.

Lucien SA Oulahbib


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Fallait-il la CPI pour Ben Laden ?
Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 10:17:16 +0200
From: Oulahbib <lucien.oulahbib@free.fr>
To: Lucien Oulahbib <lucien.oulahbib@free.fr>






07/05/2011 09:52:21
Un nouvel article sur le blog www.lucien-sa-oulahbib.info

Fallait-il la CPI pour Ben Laden ?

C'est une question qui ne peut pas être écartée d'un revers de main si l'on croit en la force d'un droit international basé sur les valeurs fondamentales d'égalité devant la loi et de lutte contre…

Pour lire la suite cliquez ici

© 2011 over-blog.com - Tous droits réservés
Pour ne plus recevoir d'information provenant de www.lucien-sa-oulahbib.info, cliquez ici ou copiez et collez l'adresse ci-dessous dans votre navigateur Internet : http://ann.over-blog.com/desinscription.php?email=resiliencetv%40free.fr&key=00f343f930402aee854dc4fa350b97ce











This is a great idea - pass it on

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř
0
   
WWII Trailer

 I want to see the whole film!   WW ll vets deserve to be honored!
 
Please take two minutes to watch this trailer.
 
    Very few of you who are under 55.. will understand just how lucky you are.. not to have been living under German or Japanese governments all your life.. but you should take a moment and really give thanks to these men.. who sacrificed the way they did.. to prevent that from happening.
 


After watching this trailer, please pass it on...
   

Thanks

What will be next - and when will the schools get to teach the core subjects if all these other subjects have to be covered

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř
0
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/05/07/3609012/history-lessons-on-gays-weighed.html

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

How To Get Your Grievances Before A Grand Jury

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř
0
If we don't start locally, we have no hope nationally.

How To Get Your Grievances Before A Grand Jury
http://www.lawlessamerica.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=360:charge-full-frontal-corruption-charge-at-the-fulton-county-district-attorney-and-grand-jury-update-it-worked&catid=124:articles&Itemid=219

"On Friday, May 6, 2011 at 9:00 am, a courier hand-delivered a letter to the Fulton County District Attorney, the receptionist guard dog at the front of the Fulton County District Attorney's Office, and each of the 23 members of the Fulton County Grand Jury that was then in session.

"The purpose of this was to bypass the people who block access to the Grand Jury.

"Read how it was done, and DO IT YOURSELF!  Feel free to modify these letters for your use...."
--

Freedom is always illegal!

When we ask for freedom, we have already failed. It is only when we declare freedom for ourselves and refuse to accept any less, that we have any possibility of being free.

Re: "Yes, Ron Paul Should Be Allowed to Debate"

ŠįlěƝţ ŁøvȜř
0
Both Paul and Johnson were in the debate Monday.

Am I missing something?

On May 7, 7:29 am, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's a good response in defense of Ron Paul and Gary Johnson (from a
> non-libertarian) against the misallied Christopher Malagisi.
>
> -- Rick Sincere
>
> _http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/2011/05/06/yes-ron-paul-allowed-...
> (http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/2011/05/06/yes-ron-paul-allowed-...)
>
> Yes, Ron Paul Should Be Allowed to Debate
> This post was written by Alex Knepper | 06 May 2011 | _Front Page Posts_
> (http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/category/posts/)
> Christopher Malagisi, writing for the Washington Examiner, pens the
> following in a terribly misguided _opinion piece_
> (http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/opinion-zone/2011/05/ron-paul-win...
> ixzz1LbPfRauO) arguing against including Ron Paul in the presidential
> debates:
> << The Republican Party as a whole…is based on five fundamental principles
> – individual freedom, limited government, free markets, a strong national
> defense, and preserving our traditional values and heritage. The modern
> Republican Party is based on the foundation of the conservative movement.
> …
> In order for any modern candidate to win the GOP nomination, they must
> embody these conservative principles, or at least appeal to these
> constituencies. With the exception of primary fiscal issues, Paul and
> Johnson
> consistently deviated and at various points were even hostile to the social
> and
> defense conservative branches.
> Throughout the debate, Ron Paul stated positions that were contrary to
> mainstream Republicans…
> [He and Gary Johnson] are not Republican or traditionally conservative…
> [and] has zero chance of winning… [emphasis Malagisi's] >>
> I certainly don't deny that Ron Paul (and Gary Johnson) hold to ideas that
> diverge sharply from mainstream Republican thought. I'm generally hawkish
> on foreign policy matters, and find most of their beliefs on such matters
> to be wrongheaded.
> The term 'Republican,' however, refers to party affiliation, not to
> political philosophy. Anyone whose priorities are right-of-center can find a
>
> home in the GOP. This is why Ronald Reagan, who famously stated that
> libertarianism represents "the heart and soul" of modern conservatism,
> remains the
> icon of a party in which Mike Huckabee, who _believes_
> (http://www.google.com/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=mike...
> eat&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1) that libertarianism is a greater
> threat to America than liberalism, finds himself leading many presidential
> polls.
> The logic of exclusion would appear to be that candidates who espouse
> heresy should not be considered legitimate Republican candidates and should
> hence be shut out from the debates.
> Really, now? What to do, then, about Rick Santorum, who has previously
> stated that he finds "the whole personal autonomy thing," which Malagisi
> holds as a hallmark of modern conservatism, to be _completely overrated?_
> (http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/rick-santorum-left-right-and-wrong/)
> Consider
> the following quote:
> << This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don't think most
> conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that
> people
> should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government
> should
> keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn't get
> involved in the bedroom, we shouldn't get involved in cultural issues. You
> know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional
>
> conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that
> individuals can't go it alone. That there is no such society that I am
> aware of, where we've had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a
> culture…>>
> Don't get my motives twisted in presenting Santorum's words, here: his is
> a perfectly legitimate argument. It is rooted heavily in Catholic
> teaching, and thinkers like Russell Kirk, who wrote, echoing Edmund Burke,
> that the
> state is a God-ordained institution, rather than a necessary evil, would
> have had a lot to add to it.
> However, no intellectually honest account of it can say that it does
> anything but relegate both individual freedom and limited government to a
> secondary role. In Santorum's philosophy, individualism is good only insofar
> as
> it furthers the primary goals of societal cohesion, strong families, and
> traditional Christian values. I disagree with his assessment, but it isn't a
>
> ridiculous argument. It is unarguably right-of-center and certainly deserves
>
> a place on the debate stage. But if we're going to exclude Ron Paul for
> holding positions that antagonize much of the base, we ought to exclude Rick
>
> Santorum, too (talk about a man who has "zero chance of winning"!).
> Setting aside Malagisi's false claim that Ron Paul is not socially
> conservative (he is pro-life, pro-DOMA, and does not believe in evolution),
> the
> Congressman's views on foreign policy really are rooted in conservative
> claims: he holds a skepticism toward power, an unwillingness to involve
> America
> in what he perceives as other people's problems, and is resistant toward
> the idea of nation-building, which he believes ignores the role of culture.
> I
> think that his premises about our current wars are fundamentally false.
> But his arguments are not illegitimate or somehow 'left-wing.' They deserve
> a hearing — and, more saliently, I think, they deserve to be rebutted. It
> benefits no one to live in an echo chamber, least of all people who hold to
> assertive foreign policy ideas. That's why I want John Bolton to run, too:
> a Bolton-Paul clash would be important and probably substantive. Certainly
> it would benefit us more to hear such an argument than to sit through
> another canned, PR-ready response from a hack like Tim Pawlenty.
> As Malagisi probably knows deep-down, there is no such thing as this
> creature known as the "true conservative." Conservatism proper is a
> disposition, not an ideology. It is an attitude toward life, not a checklist
> of
> particulars that can be legislated from on-high. It remains, as it always
> has
> been, an argument with itself. If Ron Paul is wrong about foreign policy —
> and
> I think that he is — then it's up to others on the stage to demonstrate
> that he is wrong. I hope that they can do that, rather than take the
> cowardly route of shutting him down.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  __._,_.___
>   Reply to sender<RL...@aol.com?subject=Re%3A%20%22Yes%2C%20Ron%20Paul%20Should%20Be%20Allowed%20t­o%20Debate%22>|
> Reply
> to group<GOP-Libe...@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20%22Yes%2C%20Ron%20Paul%20Should%20Be%20All­owed%20to%20Debate%22>|
> Reply
> via web post<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GOP-Liberty/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcWtrdHAxB...>|
> Start
> a New Topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GOP-Liberty/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlcXJscDNwB...>
> Messages in this
> topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GOP-Liberty/message/11717;_ylc=X3oDMTM2...>(
> 1)
>  Recent Activity:
>
>  Visit Your Group<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GOP-Liberty;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMjZhM2dtBF9TAz...>
>    This eGroup is sponsored by the Republican Liberty Caucus, which is not
> responsible for the content of posts nor the views of any participants.
> Discussion of issues, tactics and campaigns in pursuit of liberty within the
> Republican Party are welcome. Solicitations, insulting or abusive language
> and personal chats are not welcome.
> Send notice of violations to:
> Secret...@rlc.org
>  [image: Yahoo!
> Groups]<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkYTVzbTZrBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycEl...>
> Switch to: Text-Only<GOP-Liberty-traditio...@yahoogroups.com?subject=Change+Delivery+Format:+Traditional>,
> Daily Digest<GOP-Liberty-dig...@yahoogroups.com?subject=Email+Delivery:+Digest>•
> Unsubscribe <GOP-Liberty-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
> • Terms
> of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
>    .
>
> __,_._,___

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)