Google Custom Search

Saturday, February 03, 2007

Imbecilic Jacques Chirac At It Again

Raleigh, NC (TLS). Someone, somewhere in authority in France should really do something about Jacques Chirac. The man has totally lost it. I mean, he has gone berserk--totally lost his marbles. To keep the man from totally discrediting every single thing France does on the world stage, they really need to retire him before the end of his term. At the very least he should resign due to the inability to fulfill the functions of office.

Mr. Looney-Tunes is now saying that the U.S. owes Europe a 'carbon tax' unless we sign the outdated and unnecessary Kyoto Treaty on Global Warming--another one of those Socialistic documents that Europe and the United Nations would LOVE to force on the American people for no good reason.

Chirac is demanding that the U.S. pay a carbon tax on all exported goods to Europe unless we sign the Kyoto Treaty, which is tantamount to blackmail. Perhaps we could get the International Criminal Court of the European Union to charge him with this crime.

I say let's demand that France pay the United States war reparations for the thousands of American soldiers who died saving France's ass during WWII because they were too dumb, stupid, ignorant, and cowardly to do it themselves.

Tit for tat, huh, JACK?

Here are the idiot's remarks:
  • 'Carbon Tax'
  • U.N. Report on Global Warming a Tyrannical Sham

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). As expected, the release of the U.N.'s report on climate change today was a major boost to the environmentalist propaganda mill, which is determined to lay the blame for global warming entirely at the feet of mankind, whether the hard science proves it or not. The U.N.'s much-anticipated release of its Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change report delivers a scathing analysis of western civilization, particularly the capitalism, industrial expansion, and private entrepreneurship of the United States.

    None of this is surprising given the heavily politicized process of compiling the report and the overt leftist mindset of those within the 'environmentalist movement,' which is no scientific movement at all but a purely political one.

    Hard science, which relies on clearly observable facts, holds very little evidence in support of the environmentalist theory that the activity of mankind is the major cause of global warming. Yet the United Nations report is simply more of the same old propaganda one has come to expect from the corrupt organization that is known more for its anti-Americanism than for its objectivity and impartiality.

    In spite of all that supporters of the theory of man-induced global warming say, the scientific community is far from being in agreement on the subject, except for what the leftists have been able to browbeat out of scientists who may succumb to the power of the environmentalist propaganda machine. Dissenters are many, but those with the power mute their voices. Their view of 'science' is that you shame skeptics into submission so you can then claim you have a 'consensus.'

    As you will see in this special report below, there are yet many varied and highly respected scientists the world over who thoroughly disagree with the common party line that man caused global warming. However, these stalwart adherents of hard science are not the ones wielding most of the power. The ones in power have a political agenda, and it is to dismantle American capitalism, individual liberty, and free enterprise.

    Ralph Nader himself, one of the fathers of the modern environmentalist movement, was quoted this week admitting to the movement's objectives, stating that nothing less than the total dismantling of capitalism, modern industrialism, and free enterprise will allow the objectives of the environmentalist movement to be reached.

    At least Nader is being honest, which is something that cannot be said for scientists within the movement who propagate theoretical dogma rather than observable facts. Within this realm of the dogma-driven, hypothesis is passed off as fact, and conjecture must be strictly adhered to, not because of any factual evidence but because of the covert scheme to use their theory to bring about a change in American society that will portray their vision of the socialist 'brave new world.' Within this realm, the ultimate objective is to rid society of any vestige of capitalism and human freedom. The 'science' must be tweaked to fit that basic goal. If the hard science does not support the theory, then the science must be changed to be in line with the ultimate political objective. Thus, those scientists who resist this sham and who insist on sticking to the facts are castigated, vilified, and ostracized.

    It is no surprise that Democrats in Washington seized on the U.N. report like flies aiming for the biggest dung heap in the meadow. Henry Waxman in particular, propagandist extraordinaire, is doing cartwheels over the report and plans to make a strong case for Congress passing into law stringent measures that will severely limit personal freedom and the business of free enterprise.

    Most of us who value facts and not mere hypothesis and conjecture see this report for the horrid fiction that it is. It should be dismissed in its totality and tossed onto the ash-heap of human tyranny.

    Click here for the full story:
  • Climate Propaganda
  • Friday, February 02, 2007

    Congressman Drops Investigation of OKC Bombing Due to Lack of Cooperation from Feds

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). It has come to our attention that Congressman Dana Rohrabacher has dropped his investigation into ties between the Oklahoma City bombing and Islamic terrorism, due to lack of cooperation from the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI.

    This is a disgrace to the country. When Congress has no authority over the pseudo-government that forms the unelected federal bureaucracy, the Republic is in deep trouble. Congressman Rohrabacher has repeatedly sought information the Feds have on Islamic terrorists who worked with McVeigh and Nichols to bomb the federal office building in Oklahoma City over 10 years ago.

    However, with McVeigh out of the way, and Nichols disallowed from making public the information he has on Islamic terrorists who were part of the scheme, making any progress toward bringing the true masterminds of the bombing to justice has been a lesson in futility.

    Americans must not allow this to happen. The time is NOW to pressure the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security to show some accountability to the people the citizens elected to government in the Congress.

    It is time for the Department of Justice to release those records to Congressman Rohrabacher so that this investigation can proceed. Until that time it will be our assumption that the U.S. government is covering up vital information concerning the bombing and overseas terrorism--vital information that the public needs to know.

    An Electoral Nightmare for Gun Owners and Freedom Lovers

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). This evening I was sipping on some Earl Gray tea while munching on a few 'biscuits,' i.e., cookies. Having a cup of Earl Gray and biscuits is, of course, an old British tradition. Ok, so I admit I didn't have it at the prescribed time of 4 PM. But after all, I am in America. Here we are not quite so anal as to prescribe when these things should be done.

    As I was having my tea and biscuits, I stumbled across excerpts from a speech recently delivered by Dick Morris, Fox News consultant, political pundit, and former political operative for Bill Clinton. Morris is, without doubt, one smart cookie. If I were seeking elective political office, he is the first one I would contact to be on my team.

    However, Morris is sometimes very very wrong, such as when he predicted just prior to the November 2006 election cycle that there had been a late turnaround in voter support for the Republicans and that they would likely maintain control of at least one if not both Houses of Congress.

    Ok, so even political geniuses like Morris can make mistakes.

    However, there is one prediction Morris is making that I fear is no mistake. In the speech in question, Morris stated unequivocally that Hillary Clinton will be the next President of the United States.

    He has said this several times over the past year. The reason I take the prediction seriously is that Morris has put his neck on the line by repeating the assertion numerous times. He has written this in his syndicated newspaper columns. He has stated it on Fox News many times. Now he has made this prediction in an important speech before some highly influential individuals.

    In short, this is no minor prediction that can be easily forgotten. Morris is betting the farm on his assertion. His reputation is on the line.

    And this is what makes his prediction so frightening. Morris claims that the Iraq War has become so unpopular in America that no Republican has a chance of winning in 2008, no matter who they are, and this includes Giuliani, McCain, and Romney. Thus, voters will choose the one they see as the lesser of the evils, Hillary Clinton, despite her repeated warnings about Saddam Hussein before the War and her vote to authorize the invasion. In addition, this is in spite of the fact that her own husband repeatedly warned that Saddam needed to be stopped because of his weapons of mass destruction.

    But nevermind. Americans have become intellectually lazy. They will buy Hillary's bull.

    It only gets worse from there. Dick Morris postulates that Hillary's administration will be so disastrous that the ire of the electorate will be quickly ignited against her and the Democrats, and thus, they will oust them all in 2012, electing a Republican President and a Republican Congress.

    Great news, huh? Not exactly.

    The bad news is what Hillary will do during her four years as President, with Democrats controlling Congress. Look for a gun-grabbers' heyday. Goodbye Second Amendment. Hello to socialized medicine. Be prepared to sign away most of your earnings to the federal government to pay for the most sweeping expansion of government power in history. And get set for the United Nations to call the shots in America foreign policy.

    The fact that Hillary's trainwreck will result in a Republican sweep in 2012 is little consolation when one considers the horrid nightmare in the years leading up to 2012.

    Have you had enough yet? You had better brace yourselves. There's more. Morris further predicts that 2012 will be the last year a Republican will be elected President and probably the last time we will have a Republican majority in the House and Senate. Due to demographic shifts in population, Democrats are set for a long reign in the years after the 2012 election cycle. Their scheme of buying votes by give-away programs to Blacks, and the promotion of open borders that allow illegal aliens to flood the country, will finally pay off. These growing groups will be enough to put Democrats in the majority of all phases of government.

    Do you think this is possible? Of course, there is always the possibility that things could change unexpectedly. But Morris' argument is plausible enough to give one nightmares.

    Excuse me for a bit. I think I will put my cup of Earl Gray away and head for a double Black-Jack on the rocks.

    Gloria Chipman, V.O.T.I.V.E.S., and the OKC Bombing

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). Several weeks ago The Liberty Sphere issued a press release from Gloria Chipman, one of the Oklahoma City bombing widows, and her organization called V.O.T.I.V.E.S.--the Victims of Terrorism Information and Vital Exchange Services. As we reported at the time, the organization seeks the full release of information that points to a connection between the OKC bombing and Islamic terrorism. This information is confirmed by one of the perpetrators in the attack, Terry Nichols.

    Yet Nichols has been preventing from releasing this information to the public.

    The Liberty Sphere wants to know WHY.

    Read the complete information here:
  • Intel Files

  • Here is the original news release from Gloria Chipman. We cannot allow this vital information to simply fall through the cracks.

    Victims of Terrorism Information and Vital Exchange Services
    C/O Gloria Chipman
    OKC Bombing Widow and

    Press Release

    Victims of Terrorism Information and Vital Exchange Services

    Widows and widowers of the Oklahoma City Bombing formed V.O.T.I.V.E.S in August of 2001. This core group has been together since the bombing of April 19, 1995. We have grown to include bombing survivors, family members, and concerned citizens from across the nation.

    Congressman Dana Rohrabacher's report entitled The Oklahoma City Bombing: Was There A Foreign Connection? By the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee, clearly omitted additional information in Congressman Rohrabacher's possession. We hope that the omissions are due to his turning over the additional information to a Domestic Oversight Committee for further investigation.

    As presented in Rohrabacher's Report, we hope that the newly sworn in 110 Congress will take a serious stance against those in the FBI and the Department of Justice who impeded the original investigation, the capture of John Doe 2, and Others Unknown, into the Oklahoma City Bombing. We also hope, this newly elected Congress of the people, will investigate further and bring to justice, those that had prior knowledge of the bombing and did nothing to prevent it, as outlined in court released documents and FBI 302s obtained by Jesse Trentadue in his FOIA suite against the FBI. We contend that the senseless death and carnage of that day, which was forced on our loved ones, citizens and innocent children, could have been prevented.

    Evidence from the above-mentioned report shows the Oklahoma City Bombing case and the then worst terrorist attack on American soil is still an open murder investigation. With others unknown not yet apprehended, there is still a security threat to our country.

    We ask too, that a domestic subcommittee investigation take seriously the claims by Terry Nichols of knowing the others unknown as outlined in an affidavit dated Nov. 8, 2006, which can be found in its entirety on This 11-page affidavit outlines his knowledge of others unknown and how he has been prevented from getting this information out to the public.

    On January 4, 2007, the House of Representatives stood solemnly and prayed over this country and the offices they now hold in the 110 Congress. A portion of their prayer was that, 'the legislators of the 110 Congress may challenge, inspire and lead them to put aside self interests, to pursue the common good of all the people of this nation, and of especially of those who need them the most.'

    We, the victims of the Oklahoma City Bombing are among those that need you most! This country needs you to stand for Justice, where Justice has not been served.
  • Nuclear Axis Forms with Iran, North Korea, Venezuela

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). One of our favorite columnists, journalists, and experts on Middle East policy is Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post. Glick chronicles the movements of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as he goes about the work of creating a nuclear axis with other nations, thus hastening the day when Iran can not only produce but deploy nuclear bombs.

    Over the past few weeks some of the most dangerous information that can be found in the modern world has come to light concerning this axis. Ahmadinejad has formed an alliance with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-il, who himself has been up to no good in testing nuclear weapons, much to the chagrin of Japan, the United States, Australia, and even China. The Chinese even took Kim on a trip to the woodshed over his last failed nuclear test. Apparently, Kim has now found a willing accomplice in his demented plan to produce and deploy nuclear warheads--none other than Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

    In addition, as we reported on The Liberty Sphere earlier this week, Iran has provided Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez with the technology to develop small, manless aircraft capable of carrying destructive dirty bombs, and biological and chemical agents that could wipe our entire metropolitan cities.

    Thus, a worldwide network of evil is now in place, spanning across the globe, that potentially poses a grave danger to free societies. With Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela spouting hate-filled, venomous rhetoric against the United States and Israel, and with each of these nations seeking to build and deploy nuclear weapons, the world has entered a new and dangerous phase that threatens its very existence.

    Read this explosive expose by Caroline Glick:
  • Jerusalem Post
  • Thursday, February 01, 2007

    Wave of Attacks on Jews in Britain

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). This is getting to be ridiculous. Across Europe a wave of anti-Semitism has been brewing for quite some time in the aftermath of massive Muslim immigration. Jews have reported being afraid for their very lives in nations such as France, Belgium, Spain, and the Netherlands.

    Now the scourge has come to Great Britain with a vengeance. Apparently it is now politically correct to attack Jews both verbally and physically, the consequence of multiculturalism that embraces all views equally, particularly those that perpetrate hatred, violence, and anti-Semitism.

    Britain is now forced to taste the bitter fruits of its decades-old policy of multiculturalism and political correctness.

    According to The Daily Mail,

    'Attacks on Britain's Jews have risen to the highest level since records began.

    'A study published today shows the number of reported anti-Semitic incidents has almost tripled in 10 years, with more than half the attacks last year taking place in London.

    'The findings prompted the report's authors to warn of a "wave of hatred" against Jews.'

    Read the rest of the story here:
  • Daily Mail UK
  • Chirac Says Nuclear Iran No Problem

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). As most of you have probably heard by now, French President Jacques Chirac was quoted by several of the world's major newspapers as saying that a nuclear Iran would be no problem, that if Iran had one or two nuclear weapons it would be no big deal. His reasoning? If Iran attacks Israel it would mean the annihilation of Teheran.

    Well, at least his last statement was correct.

    But what an idiot. What a crazed, demented imbecile. The French people can be thankful that Chirac is on the way out. Under his watch not only did France provide Saddam Hussein with his first nuclear reactor in exchange for his oil, but the country came to be seen as one of the biggest allies in the West of one of the most cruel dictators in world history.

    In addition, Chirac is the one who opened the flood-gates to the steady onslaught of radical Muslim extremists into the country, who now have brought France into a state of civil war. Though Chirac won't admit or acknowledge it, officials within France's law enforcement agencies insist the country is in a civil war, perpetrated by Muslim youths, and Paris has done precious little to help law enforcement fight it. The result has been two straight years of violence, car bombings, fire bombings, riots in the streets, and urban mayhem at the hands of Muslim youths.

    And now the intellectually challenged Chirac claims that a nuclear Iran would be no problem.

    The remark set off such a firestorm around the world that Chirac summoned the reporters who first interviewed him back to his office to say that he was retracting the comments, that he was under the impression that what he said was 'off the record.'

    So, in other words, Chirac meant every word of it, off the record or not. He simply did not want his true thoughts on the matter published, or so he claims.

    But who knows for sure? The man has been one big canker sore that won't go away for the entirety of his tenure in France.

    Perhaps the French should demand that Chirac resign and get him out of the way now rather than wait for the completion of his term. Not only is he a major embarrassment to Europe, but I pity the French people who have had to endure his horrid policies for the entirety of his political career.

    Thursday's Top Stories on The Liberty Sphere

    Good morning!

    The Liberty Sphere is embedded in Raleigh, North Carolina, continuing with our follow-up to the exclusive report last week on terrorist cells operating out of Charlotte, North Carolina. Our trail has led us here, to Raleigh, where there is even more activity directly linked to international terrorism. We will provide you with that report pending further investigations.

    Meanwhile, make sure you check out The Liberty Sphere's top stories today:
    *More Evidence Surfaces in Border Patrol Hoax
    *Studies Prove Gun Control Ineffective Against Crime
    *Muslim Head-Choppers Foiled in U.K.
    *Democrats Plan to Give Away U.S. Sovereignty
    *The Inherent Necessity of Property Rights in a Free Society

    Scroll down for these articles.

    Check back with us for further updates...

    More Evidence Surfaces on The Border Patrol Hoax

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). With each passing day more evidence comes to light concerning the hoax perpetrated by U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton in trying, convicting, and incarcerating two innocent men who worked for the U.S. Border Patrol. This time, documents from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security directly contradict the account of Sutton concerning how drug smuggler and illegal alien Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila was identified.

    The documents show that Aldrete-Davila had been identified within one month of the incident by federal investigators. However, U.S. Attorney Sutton claims that Aldrete-Davila 'came forward through a Mexican lawyer who offered to identify his client in exchange for immunity.'

    The documents in question have been requested repeatedly by members of Congress who are demanding an inquiry into the Sutton debacle. For weeks the federal agency has used delaying tactics in providing Congress with the requested documents. When some of these documents were finally released, the information contained therein corroborates the allegations made by Andy Ramirez, chairman of 'Friends of the Border Patrol,' who charges that the two agents are the victims of a hoax perpetrated by the U.S. Attorney.

    The looming question that yet remains unanswered is, why did U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton fail to prosecute a drug-smuggling illegal alien and choose instead to prosecute two U.S. Border Patrol agents who were simply doing the job they were hired to do?

    These questions demand answers, and those answers may lie in some of the highest levels of the federal government.

    For more on this continually breaking story, click here:
  • WorldNetDaily
  • The Best Studies Prove Gun Control Ineffective Against Crime

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). Despite the vitriolic rhetoric of the gun control movement, particularly the 'Brady Bunch,' the best and most thorough studies of the issue show that gun control does not work. In survey after survey of nations with the most stringent gun control measures, including an examination of every single law on the books with regard to limiting the availability of guns, there is NO EVIDENCE of any correlation between more gun control and less crime.

    The CDC conducted one such study. The organization examined fifty-one of the most prominent gun control studies in the world and found that there is no evidence linking stringent firearms laws with less violence.

    The National Academy of Sciences conducted yet another study resulting in a 328-page report that was based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and a survey of 80 different gun control laws. Here again, this exhaustive study, which included some new research data provided by the Academy, shows no link between restrictions on gun ownership and lower rates of crime, fewer accidents with firearms, or a reduction in firearms violence.

    Thus, the conclusion of two of the most thorough and extensive research studies on the effectiveness of gun control find that there is absolutely NO evidence supporting the effectiveness of gun control laws. Yet the gun control lobby persists in perpetrating its deceptions designed to fool the public into believing that in order to reduce gun violence you must clamp down on law-abiding gun owners, the vast majority of whom do not use their weapons in violent attacks.

    The conclusion? The gun control lobby uses the crime argument as a ruse to cover their real agenda--the ultimate banning of private gun ownership among the citizens. Despite their vehement denials, this is most definitely the goal. To ignore the most thorough studies on the subject and to defy logic in such a blatant fashion leads to only one conclusion. The common arguments of the gun control lobby are smokescreens covering their hidden agenda.

    For a thorough analysis of this important issue, click here:
  • Ohioans for Concealed Carry
  • Muslim Head-Choppers Foiled in U.K.

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). The head-choppers are at it again, this time with a new twist. Apparently, radical Muslims are going after more moderate members of their religion that serve in the military of the U.K. The thwarted plot involved at least nine head-choppers who planned to kidnap and behead a Muslim serviceman, and then show the video of the gruesome act on the Internet.

    This represents a new and dangerous tactic of the Muslim Jihadists. Not only are British soldiers at risk, but so are Americans.

    Word out of the U.K. indicates that the fastest growing segment of Islam is the extremist Jihadist segment, which appeals to young males in particular. Law enforcement officials in both the U.K. and the U.S. fear that this could be a sign of a new wave of beheadings perpetrated by extremist Muslims.

    Read the complete story here, in the BBC:
  • BBC News
  • Democrats Plan to Give Away U.S. Sovereignty

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). Immediately upon assuming the leadership in Congress, the Democrats went to work frantically attempting to make U.S. Foreign Policy subservient to the most corrupt organization in the world, the United Nations. Clearly violating the terms of the U.S. Constitution, which clearly state that the notion of national sovereignty automatically renders null and void any attempt to subvert the nation's policies to an outside 'policing agency,' the Democrats obviously place more trust in the thugs of the U.N., such as Cuba, Syria, Iran, North Korea, and France, than they do the American people and their elected officials. For them to succeed in this scheme would be one more sad and dangerous chapter to add to the already bulging record the Democrats have amassed which fully portrays to the public Jefferson's notion of 'elective despotism.'

    Yes, they were elected. The people who elected them gave them power to enact legislation that is clearly antithetical to every Constitutional principle that has guided this nation for most of its history. Thus, according to Jefferson, they would be considered despots, tyrants whose actions are entirely illegitimate.

    Read the following article from Front Page Magazine to get the full details of how the Democrats plan to give away our sovereignty to the U.N., which has stolen and mishandled more money than any organization on earth.
  • Front Page
  • The Inherent Necessity of Property Rights in a Free Society

    Raleigh, NC (TLS). Across the country citizens have found themselves the victim of a subversion of a Constitutional provision known as 'eminent domain.' Once reserved only for non-profit enterprises that were deemed necessary for the public good, increasingly local town governments have viewed eminent domain as a means of increasing the tax base by condemning private property and selling it to big businesses, such as Walmart.

    The alarming proliferation of such obvious perversions of the Constitutional provision of eminent domain has citizens up in arms all across the country, including law suits that have been taken all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The High Court, admittedly, has a less-than-admirable record on the issue.

    The Founders of this Republic disagreed on the issue of eminent domain. Jefferson abhorred the notion. Madison was for it. Madison's view prevailed. However, today's proponents of the frenzied use of the provision would be hard-pressed to show that even Madison would approve of the horrid manner in which local governments have run rough-shod over the private property rights of citizens.

    One of our favorite columnists, the venerable Walter Williams, explains the ins and outs of the issue in the article you will find below in the Jewish World Review:
  • Property Rights
  • Wednesday, January 31, 2007

    The Sad Truth in the Ware Shoals Sex Scandal

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). As the small town of Ware Shoals, South Carolina begins to settle down in the aftermath of the initial shock of the sex scandal in its high school, several sad facts have become clear. In a broader sense, the nation is presently facing an epidemic of sorts involving female teachers and underage male students. For years whenever one heard of a sex scandal in a school, it was assumed that it involved a male teacher and a female student, or a male teacher and an underage male student.

    Our assumptions are quickly changing.

    Over the past few years we have been bombarded with story after story of hot young female teachers going after their young students, usually boys in their mid-teens whose hormones are raging. Several of these cases were displayed on Court TV, and in one instance the accused teacher persisted in her dalliances with the student in question even after her imprisonment and subsequent release.

    These kinds of stories cause one with any semblance of moral sensitivity to stop and ask, what is going on here? Why the sudden deluge of female teacher-male student liaisons?

    Sociologists and psychologists will be studying this phenomenon for sure. My initial hunch is that what we are seeing is an outgrowth of the feminist movement run amok. This is not to say that there are no aspects of feminism that were of value, such as equal pay for equal work and so forth. However, inherent in the feminist movement is the concept that if women are to claim their inherent worth and equality with men, then the ultimate expression of that is in the realm of sexuality, i.e., the notion that women should be free to pursue to the max the limits of their sexuality in any way they so choose, that they are in no way to be shackled by the loyalty oaths to men in marriage or even be held to fidelity with their boyfriends. Such ultimate freedom means sexual freedom, and women must be ultimately free to express their sexuality in any way they want, regardless of what vows they may have taken.

    Unfortunately, this concept fails to adequately articulate the boundaries of appropriate behavior. In the wake of such an oversight, a vacuum has been created that is totally devoid of any moral values. Thus, if being free means that you can express yourself sexuality any way you see fit, then why not have a fling with a 16 year old hot male stud? Nevermind that he sits in your English class each day depending on you for a grade.

    Jill Moore's plight in Ware Shoals may yet prove to be none of what I just described. She is due a full and impartial hearing in court. But the allegations made about her are symptomatic of a much deeper, broader problem in modern American society--a problem of our own making, and a problem for which each of us share in at least some collective guilt.

    Society is saturated with sex, and the models are getting younger and younger. Today, 13 year old girls are being shunned in some sectors unless they show up at school looking like hookers. Parents, by and large, have encouraged such behavior by not stopping it. In the abdication of parental responsibility in these matters, parents share part of the blame.

    In many ways, Jill Moore is as much a victim as the cheerleaders who joined her in her afternoon romps, if all of this turns out to be true. Moore has admitted to taking the cheerleaders off campus after football games where she gave them alcohol and cigarettes. This is entirely inappropriate, for sure. Yet how many high school students do the very same thing several times per week, without any adult present to see it? It isn't as if Jill Moore corrupted innocent kids. If you actually believe that teenage students aren't already engaging in this stuff, including the sex, then your head is about 20 feet in the sand.

    Mrs. Moore's father is a local church Pastor, a respected leader in the community, and formerly a member of the local school board. He resigned his post on the school board when it was revealed his daughter is the subject of a sex scandal investigation. He did not want there to be even the slightest appearance of impropriety, conflict of interest, or partiality on his part. The Reverend and his wife are sad victims in this sordid story. From every source The Liberty Sphere has contacted we hear nothing but praise for this man and his spouse. They certainly tried to the best of their ability to raise their children to be respectable, responsible adults. It is sad that two people with such stellar reputations are forced to endure the public spotlight for what their daughter allegedly did.

    Thus, the outcome of this case will be in the hands of the local prosecuting attorney and defense lawyers. Both Jill Moore and the principle of the high school, Jane Blackwell, have been released from jail on their own recognizance. It would be highly inappropriate to engage in gossip at this stage. Gossip takes on a life of its own, resulting in whispers that bear little resemblance to the truth.

    And the sad truth is that in order for truth to be found in this case, the town of Ware Shoals must endure a very public airing out of its dirty laundry. Even if the defendants are found innocent of the charges, this community will bear the scars from this entire episode for years to come.

    Shocking New Evidence in Border Patrol Hoax!

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). The case of the two U.S. Border Patrol agents who were tried and sent to jail to serve lengthy prison sentences is shaping up to be another example of a prosecutor gone bad, eerily reminiscent of the Mike Nifong-Duke lacrosse rape hoax. This time, however, the hoax takes us up several notches to the U.S. Prosecutor's level.

    U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton of El Paso has apparently lied to the court about how the government found the fleeing illegal alien drug smuggler--the man who testified against our Border Patrol agents, thus sending them to prison. WorldNetDaily News has uncovered evidence that suggests Sutton engaged in willful action to deceive the court in order to prosecute the two agents.

    As the facts in this case continue to be uncovered, it is beginning to become clear that the U.S. Attorney engaged in prosecutorial misconduct and misleading the court at the very least.

    This turn of events has led President George W. Bush to personally review the case in consideration of a Presidential pardon for the two agents. It seems to The Liberty Sphere that such a pardon is long overdue. The case against the agents was a joke, a fabrication, a hoax perpetrated by a rogue prosecutor at the federal level. This suggests corruption at the very highest levels of the U.S. Department of Justice.

    According to WorldNetDaily:

    'New evidence suggests prosecuting U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton of El Paso lied about how the government found the fleeing illegal alien Mexican drug smuggler, Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, according to a Border Patrol advocate closely following the case of former agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.

    'Contrary to claims, no Mexican attorney was involved as an intermediary offering to reveal the identity of the drug smuggler and bring him back to the U.S. in exchange for given immunity to testify against Border Patrol, contended Andy Ramirez, chairman of Friends of the Border Patrol.

    '"It's shocking how much lying Johnny Sutton has done about Aldrete-Davila," he told WND."'

    Read the entire update here:
  • Border Patrol Hoax
  • The Feingold Follies, The Move to Place America at Great Risk

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). Senator Russ Feingold, D-WI, is on record vowing to stop the practice of profiling in the pursuit of suspects in terrorism. Now that the Democrats control Congress, they are in a position to approve such nonsensical measures that will place this nation in great danger.

    Remember, it was not 80-year-old Caucasian grandmothers who brought down the Twin Towers. It was young Muslim men of Middle Eastern descent.

    From Political Mavens we find this item:

    'The first dictionary meaning of insanity is: Unsoundness of mind that renders a person unfit. The second: A degree of mental malfunctioning sufficient to relieve the accused of legal responsibility of a crime. The third: Extreme foolishness; folly.

    'To be charitable, Number Three seems most appropriate for the logic-challenged Senator Russ Feingold (D. Wisconsin).

    Read the whole scoop on Feingold's follies here:
  • Feingold's Follies
  • Quotes From Hillary Clinton, Part 2

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). As most of you who read The Liberty Sphere regularly know, we are periodically posting some famous--or infamous--quotes by Democrat Presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. So far, this has been a most curious exercise in fleshing out the mass of contradictions, lies, deceptions, and outright corruption exhibited by the candidate.

    This particular quote is perhaps the granddaddy of them all. In this statement by Hillary in 2002, not only does she state unequivocally that Saddam had WMDs and needed to be stopped, but she states one key fact that most of us know but which Democrats now claim to deny--Al Qaeda was in Iraq, given safe haven, training, and funding by Saddam Hussein.

    Wonder how she is going to weasel out of this one? (And by the way, Hillary, in a rare display of complete honesty, was telling the truth here...a truth from which she now runs faster than a fox from a hound-dog).

    "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
    Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

    Tuesday, January 30, 2007


    Charlotte, NC (TLS). As reported earlier on The Liberty Sphere in our exclusive report, the modern environmentalist movement is not really about global warming at all. It is a Leftist political movement intent on destroying American capitalism, free enterprise, and ultimately the liberty of individual citizens.

    Today we have received word that scientists who engage in what is known as 'hard science' as opposed to hypothesis, theory, opinion, and consensus, are taking the offensive in the face of the latest global onslaught by Leftist environmentalists.

    Late yesterday news outlets were inundated with reports from environmentalist movement groups that once again use hysteria to attempt to scare the public into accepting their prescription for global warming, i.e., a massive, forced change in human behavior. After all, according to environmentalist dogma, global warming has but one major source--human activity.

    Nevermind the hard science that shows otherwise.

    Even the most dense numbskull with the brain of a gerbil knows that the earth's history is one of cyclical changes in climate, independent of the activity of man.

    Now the true scientists who refuse to jump on a political bandwagon of hysteria and political manipulation are going on the offensive. Two major works are being published and released that directly contradict the hypothesis of the so-called 'scientists' who lay the blame for global warming at the feet of mankind.

    'Two powerful new books say today's global warming is due not to human activity but primarily to a long, moderate solar-linked cycle. Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years, by physicist Fred Singer and economist Dennis Avery was released just before Christmas. The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change, by Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark and former BBC science writer Nigel Calder (Icon Books), is due out in March.

    'Singer and Avery note that most of the earth's recent warming occurred before 1940, and thus before much human-emitted CO2. Moreover, physical evidence shows 600 moderate warmings in the earth's last million years. The evidence ranges from ancient Nile flood records, Chinese court documents and Roman wine grapes to modern spectral analysis of polar ice cores, deep seabed sediments, and layered cave stalagmites.'

    Read the scoop on these two major books here:

  • Drudge Report
  • Who Is THE Candidate Around Whom Conservatives Can Rally?

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). Early-on in the process leading up to the election cycle of 2008, conservatives and libertarians found themselves in quite a quandary. No candidate in either of the two major political parties had solid conservative or libertarian credentials.

    Suddenly that scenario has changed. With seemingly an endless string of announcements over the past couple of weeks, the political landscape finds itself with a variety of candidates who appeal to those with conservative/libertarian leanings.

    Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee has thrown his hat into the ring, as have U.S. House Representatives Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, and Ron Paul. Rounding out the conservative candidates are U.S. Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who is the only Democrat among the conservatives.

    Newt Gingrich says he will make an announcement concerning whether he will run soon, but most believe he, too, will throw his hat in the ring.

    Each of these candidates possess acceptable records to the voting base of conservatives, such as gun owners, evangelical Christians, pro-life groups, and those who support tough immigration reform to prevent the continued onslaught against the country by illegal aliens. Thus, any of these candidates could potentially garner enough support among the various conservative groups to form a competitive campaign on a national scale.

    However, I would like to do some analysis of these candidates, albeit briefly, in order to bring some pertinent facts into focus.

    Governor Richardson has served as a solidly conservative Governor in New Mexico. However, he comes with baggage. His years spent as a Clinton Administration official and confidante of Hillary and Bill Clinton automatically make him suspect. This dangerous liaison is enough for voters to think twice before throwing their support behind the candidate.

    Governor Huckabee carries a few negatives when it comes to the general population. As an ordained Baptist minister, many voters I am afraid will be leery of him, perhaps unfairly, but leery nonetheless. While Huckabee was a very popular governor in Arkansas, there is a big question mark over whether he can gain a broad-based following throughout the country. It is likely he is not electable.

    Newt Gingrich has an image problem that is similar to Hillary Clinton's. His negatives are as strong as his positives among the electorate, meaning that either people love him or they hate him. Whether the assessment is true or not, some view Newt as a polarizing figure much like Hillary. His recent statement to the effect that the electorate may have to give up some of its right to free speech in the name of fighting terror is highly problematic for those of us who value liberty above all.

    Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul also have an image problem, that is, with those who recognize them. Unfortunately Tancredo's major claim to fame is his heated exchange with Jeb Bush over Miami, Florida. He has great ideas, but I am not sure the public would go for him. The same can be said for Ron Paul, although I find myself in total agreement with him most of the time.

    This leaves Senator Brownback and Rep. Duncan Hunter. Both are attractive candidates. However, Brownback rates a grade of 'B' on gun rights issues, while Hunter rates a grade of 'A+', one of the very few in Congress who have such a stellar record on Second Amendment rights.

    At present, I put my money on Duncan Hunter as the choice around which most gun rights groups can rally, including those who are pro-life, pro-defense, and who support smaller government, lower taxes, strong immigration reform, and a decisive revamping of our trade policies so that fairness prevails.

    Not only does Hunter have the goods when it comes to the issues, but he is from an area of the country that conservatives sorely need to win. In the years since Ronald Reagan was Governor of California, that state has steadily become a liberal Democrat stronghold. In the middle of this wasteland of leftists, Duncan Hunter has achieved name recognition and the trust of the voters in the San Diego area. The Republican ticket will need someone from California who can deliver some votes. Personally, I do not see any of the other candidates having a chance in that area.

    Gingrich, Paul, Tancredo, Huckabee, and Brownback all hail from areas that are known for their consistent support for conservative candidates. We need a strong candidate who has the trust of the voters in a state that is NOT known for its conservatism, and California is the biggest prize of all.

    In addition, Duncan Hunter has the stage presence for a candidate on the national stage. He is poised, confident, relaxed, knowledgeable, courageous, and exudes the aura of a man who knows who he is and what he is about. The fact that he is a true Viet Nam War Hero, with a bronze star, is another highly attractive quality.

    Thus, at this stage of the process, I throw my support to Duncan Hunter as the man around whom conservatives can rally. Gun owners in particular will be impressed with his 'A+' grade from the GOA.

    Smoking Gun Identifies Iran as Perpetrator of Attacks

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). The Pentagon today confirmed that it has proof that Iran is perpetrating the terrorist insurgency inside Iraq. The news was revealed today after military officials traced serial numbers from a number of weapons and munitions found in the aftermath of several attacks against U.S. soldiers.

    These serial numbers have been traced directly to Iran, including the specific factories in which the materials were made.

    If ever there were any doubt that Iran is largely responsible for the terrorist insurgency inside Iraq, those doubts have been erased today. We now know for sure who is behind the menace, who is murdering our soldiers, and who is stirring up the pot to produce instability in the country.

    We also know that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

    In addition, word came today that Iran has offered Venezuelan Commie-strongman Hugo Chavez the technology to build unmanned aircraft, the purpose for which is unknown. It is widely speculated that the scheme would enable Chavez to conduct terrorist attacks without risking danger to his countrymen.

    These facts, all coming together in stark clarity today, are ample warning of the catastrophe to come, unless the United States takes action now.

    Unfortunately, it is time for the President to launch a massive attack on Iran. First, the nuclear plants must be taken out. Second, we must strike their weapons and munitions sites, rendering them useless. And then, the last blow MUST be a direct strike against Teheran in the central houses of government.

    Overkill, you say? Not when we now have proof positive that the man who has vowed to annihilate Israel, the United States, and Great Britain is supplying the hardware and in many instances the manpower for the murderous rampage against Americans and Iraqis inside Iraq. This scourge of humanity must be stopped permanently before a catastrophe of global proportions takes place.

    Israel Overcome with Fear

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). When the Israelis are afraid, it is time to get very afraid. According to the following report from the Jewish World Review, the Israelis are growing very wary of the growing Iranian menace.

    'The first reports from military intelligence about an Iranian nuclear program reached the desk of Yitzhak Rabin shortly after he became prime minister in May 1992. Rabin's conclusion was unequivocal: Only a nuclear Iran, he told aides, could pose an existential threat to which Israel would have no credible response. But, when he tried to warn the Clinton administration, he met with incredulity. The CIA's assessment — which wouldn't change until 1998 — was that Iran's nuclear program was civilian, not military. Israeli security officials felt that the CIA's judgment was influenced by internal U.S. politics and privately referred to the agency as the "cpia" — "P" for "politicized."

    'The indifference in Washington helped persuade Rabin that Israel needed to begin preparing for an eventual preemptive strike, so he ordered the purchase of long-range bombers capable of reaching Iran. And he made a fateful political decision: He reversed his ambivalence toward negotiating with the PLO and endorsed unofficial talks being conducted between Israeli left-wingers and PLO officials. Rabin's justification for this about-face was that Israel needed to neutralize what he defined as its "inner circle of threat" — the enemies along its borders — in order to focus on the coming confrontation with Iran, the far more dangerous "outer circle of threat." Rabin's strategy, then, was the exact opposite of the approach recently recommended by the Iraq Study Group: Where James Baker and Lee Hamilton want to engage Iran — even at the cost of downplaying its nuclear ambitions — in order to solve crises in the Arab world, Rabin wanted to make peace with the Arab world in order to prevent, at all costs, a nuclear Iran.

    'Now, more than a decade later, the worst-case scenario envisioned by Rabin is rapidly approaching. According to Israeli intelligence, Iran will be able to produce a nuclear bomb as soon as 2009. In Washington, fear is growing that either Israel or the Bush administration plans to order strikes against Iran. In Israel, however, there is fear of a different kind. Israelis worry not that the West will act rashly, but that it will fail to act at all. And, while strategists here differ over the relative efficacy of sanctions or a military strike, nearly everyone agrees on this point: Israel cannot live with a nuclear Iran.'

    Read the rest of this gripping story in Jewish World Review:
  • >Israeli Fear
  • The Consequences of a Nuclear Iran

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). The Jerusalem Post provides this chilling assessment of the consequences of a nuclear Iran. According to columnist Barry Rubin, the thought of such a scenario elicits a doomsday nightmare resulting in tens of thousands, if not millions, of deaths in Israel, Europe, and even the United States.

    Read Rubin's sobering assessment here:
  • Nuclear Iran
  • Monday, January 29, 2007


    Charlotte, NC (TLS). Word has come that Spain has fallen to the forces of Socialism that have succeeded in turning the country into the very first European Iran. The Spain as we once knew it is gone. Tourists are being urged to avoid the country.

    When the Spanish population turned against Prime Minister Aznar in the wake of fear from the Islamic terrorist attack in the country, Spaniards turned to Socialists who proceeded to cozy up to the terrorists and adopt their philosophy of government--totalitarianism. This has been coupled with an alarming anti-Semitism to which the Spanish government gives tacit approval.

    While Socialism may not be known as a totalitarian system of government, in practice this is precisely what it is. And thus, Spain becomes the first of the European nations that, under the influence of Islamic extremist nations like Iran, has fallen into the abyss.

    Read the full story here:

  • Spain, the European Iran

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). WorldNetDaily News has uncovered documents that show that ballistics reports from the trial of the two Border Patrol Agents prove their innocence. The information obtained by WorldNetDaily shows beyond doubt that the U.S. Prosecutor in the case fabricated evidence, lied to the court and to the jury, and perpetrated a hoax designed to send two innocent men to prison.

    First it was the Duke lacrosse rape hoax. Now it is the Border Patrol Agent hoax perpetrated by a rogue prosecutor out of control.

    The question is, can ANY American be assured of a fair trial in this country anymore? Apparently, our system of justice is nearly broken beyond repair.

    If there is a single ounce of integrity left in the United States government, the President will immediately pardon the two agents and a full investigation launched into the gross prosecutorial misconduct of this U.S. prosecutor who, like a bull in a china shop, railroaded two innocent men to prison.

    Perhaps it is the prosecutor who belongs in jail.

    Read the entire nauseating story here:
  • Border Patrol Hoax
  • Noted Middle East Scholar Warns Islam Poised to Take Over Europe

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). For quite some time now, this writer has been warning readers about the growing menace of Muslim Jihadists throughout Europe. The past two years has seen an alarming surge in violence in France in particular, prompting the country's top law enforcement official to exclaim in October, 'France is in the midst of a civil war with Muslim extremists, and the government is doing very little to help us fight it.'

    The violence has spilled into other European countries such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, and the U.K. In Great Britain, Muslims are pushing for pockets of Muslim-controlled areas to be ruled by Sharia law rather than the common law of Britain. In France, fully 30% of the population is now Muslim and growing. In the Netherlands the problem has reached such a critical stage that government officials are considering limits on immigration.

    Today, a noted Middle East scholar, Dr. Bernard Lewis, warns that Islam is poised to take over Europe and that a Muslim majority of the population of Europe is within reach within the next decade.

    Dr. Lewis made his remarks to the staff of the Jerusalem Post. Here is a sample of the article in The Jerusalem Post:

    'Islam could soon be the dominant force in a Europe which, in the name of political correctness, has abdicated the battle for cultural and religious control, Prof. Bernard Lewis, the world-renowned Middle Eastern and Islamic scholar, said on Sunday.

    'The Muslims "seem to be about to take over Europe," Lewis said at a special briefing with the editorial staff of The Jerusalem Post. Asked what this meant for the continent's Jews, he responded, "The outlook for the Jewish communities of Europe is dim." Soon, he warned, the only pertinent question regarding Europe's future would be, "Will it be an Islamized Europe or Europeanized Islam?" The growing sway of Islam in Europe was of particular concern given the rising support within the Islamic world for extremist and terrorist movements, said Lewis.'

    Read the full story here:
  • Jerusalem Post
  • The Liberty Sphere Top Stories, Monday, Jan. 29, 2007

    Good morning! I hope all of you have a great Monday.

    Here are The Liberty Sphere's top stories for today:

    *The Core Problem of the Gun Control Movement
    *Now the Fat Police Work For the Public Schools!
    *Hillary's Selective Amnesia or Barefaced Lies
    *Their Words Come Back to Haunt Them--A Collection of Democrat Quotes
    *Defeat H.R. 96, The Gun Show Loophole Closing Act

    We will keep you posted on the continually breaking story of the Ware Shoals High School sex scandal. Check with us for updates.

    The Core Problem of the Gun Control Movement

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). The modern debate between gun control proponents and Second Amendment rights groups has taken the dialogue in many different directions. Gun control proponents often site the use of handguns in crime as a central facet of their argument to limit gun rights. Second Amendment rights groups counter that key statistical information shows that tightening the availability of handguns does not correlate with a resulting decrease in handgun crime.

    In like manner, gun control proponents often use the tragic instances of deadly school violence as a pressing and urgent need to increase gun control. Their efforts to date, however, show no corresponding decrease in school violence in spite of the massive list of laws that already control the availability of guns. Second Amendment rights groups correctly point out, in rebuttal, that restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens never controls the actions of those who are intent on breaking the law. Thus, more laws do not matter. Criminals were never concerned with obeying the law to begin with. So, why punish law-abiding gun owners when the objective, or so they claim, is to beat down the criminal element that uses guns in their crimes?

    So far, each and every argument that has been postulated by gun control advocates has been successfully rebutted by Second Amendment advocacy groups. Yet this has in no way deterred the gun grabbers from their outlandish proposals to strip citizens of their Constitutional rights.

    This leads to only one conclusion--the common arguments used by gun control advocates do not address the real issue. The real issue is that gun grabbers have a philosophical aversion to the notion of guns, period, and they sincerely believe that society should be totally rid of these 'instruments of evil.'

    And here is precisely the core problem of the gun control movement. Their philosophical bias does not translate into personal behavior, i.e., the idea of gun control is embraced fully as a worthy endeavor, that is, until they themselves stand face-to-face with an immediate threat to their very lives and the lives of their family members.

    Senator Diane Feinstein, D-CA, is a perfect case in point. Feinstein is one of the fiercest opponents to gun rights in the country today. She rates a grade of 'F-' from Gun Owners of America for her consistent stance against Second Amendment rights. Yet it was Feinstein who, during the mid 1970s, bought and possessed a concealed handgun in response to a terrorist threat to her and her family.

    Feinstein herself admitted to her hypocrisy before a Senate panel in 1995, during which she stated the following: 'Because less than 20 years ago I was the target of a terrorist group. It was the New World Liberation Front. They blew up power stations and put a bomb at my home when my husband was dying of cancer. And the bomb didn't detonate. ... I was very lucky. But, I thought of what might have happened. Later the same group shot out all the windows of my home.

    'And, I know the sense of helplessness that people feel. I know the urge to arm yourself, because that's what I did. I was trained in firearms. I'd walk to the hospital when my husband was sick. I carried a concealed weapon. I made the determination that if somebody was going to try to take me out, I was going to take them with me.'

    So, there you have it, my friends, the core problem of the gun-grabbers. The rules they propose for the masses are not the same rules by which they themselves, the elites, intend to abide. It is perfectly acceptable for a powerful government official in San Francisco to arm herself with a concealed weapon when her family is threatened by a terrorist. Yet for an average individual citizen to do so automatically makes them a target for suspicion in crime and an urgent impetus for imposing more gun control on the masses.

    Over the last several years we have seen this very phenomenon time and again among America's leftist elites and Hollywood stars. Gun grabber Rosie O-Donnell stated in 2001 that 'gun owners should be jailed, period.' Yet it was discovered at the very same time she made the remark that she employed a bodyguard who carried a concealed weapon.

    This type of bare-faced hypocrisy is not surprising among the Hollywood elite. This is their very same practice when it comes to 'the environmentalist movement.' They will decry and condemn the burning of fossil fuels and Americans' love affair with SUVs, yet they themselves travel in some of the biggest gas-guzzlers in the country, and this is not to mention the thousands of air miles per year they rack up traveling here and yon.

    Here again, we peons among the insignificant masses of humanity should be forced to drive tin cans that get 150 miles per gallon. But the mighty stars of Hollywood get to burn millions of gallons of fossil fuels in their jets and in the Hummers, Vipers, and other gas-guzzling luxury vehicles they seem to so dearly love.

    This is one of the classic cases where the massive gap between philosophical theory and daily practicality is brought into the spotlight. To the Leftwing, the philosophical theory of a gun-less society is very attractive; and, it is even more attractive to attempt to impose that theory on the masses. Yet, when those very Leftwing activists are themselves confronted with imminent danger to their very lives and that of their families, the harsh realities of daily practically trump the philosophical theory. They carry a concealed weapon, or else hire a bodyguard to do so while they self-righteously denounce those 'evil guns.'

    This is one of the reasons why the pro-gun movement is so active and growing in America today. Not only are we repulsed by the blatant hypocrisy of the gun control movement, but we see a moral and ethical obligation to protect the ignorant from themselves. Yes, even Diane Feinstein needs to be protected from terrorists. So does Rosie O-Donnell. In their blind hypocrisy they fail to see the great danger in which they are placing themselves and the citizens with their relentless pursuit of gun control. Those of us who have eyes to see the danger are actually protecting the very lives of the likes of Feinstein and O'Donnell by our relentless fight to keep the practice of keeping and bearing arms free from government restriction.

    Now The Fat Police Work for the Public Schools

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). First it was smoking. Then it was sugar. Then, trans-fatty acids in food. Now Big Brother is sticking its big nose in another place it doesn't belong in a free society--telling parents that their children's BMI, or Body Mass Index, is too high.

    To enforce this latest attempt by big government to snoop into the private lives of American families, Big Brother has solicited it's public school system to serve as its foot-soldiers.

    The 'fat police' are now working for the public schools!

    We can be thankful that as of yet, the Federal Government has not enacted this crazed policy in all public schools nationwide. But don't count your blessings too soon. Remember the Democrats control Congress, and you can bet your last Krispy Kreme doughnut they will seek to implement these intrusive measures on the entire country.

    My ultimate nightmare concerning these intrusive, nosy big government snoops is not only will they rid society of smoking, sweets, and transfats, but the day is coming when the local doughnut shop will be outlawed in the name of 'looking out for our best interests.'

    Ground zero at present is the state of New Jersey's recent legislation requiring all public schools to continuously monitor the Body Mass Index of all students.

    This in itself is enough for most libertarians to cry foul. What on earth is the government doing meddling in medical matters that should be left between patients, families, and their physicians? A school nurse, a teacher, a principal, or a guidance counselor has no business sticking their nosy schnauzes into such private matters. The BMI of my child is none of their freakin' business.

    As expected, when the state of New Jersey first implemented the law, there were protests and many parents were leery. As time has passed, however, their resistance has worn thin, and even some who previously opposed the measure now claim they are glad the government-run school system is keeping tabs on their children's health.

    This is invariably the way it works. Collectivists in the socialist army of Big Brother impose on citizens their intrusive ideas that encroach on liberty and privacy. At first there are complaints. But complacency sets in, and less than stalwart citizens cave in to government propaganda, i.e., 'we are just concerned about your children's health.'

    My, what a nice thing that is, isn't it.

    Actually, they don't give a flying flip about the health of your child. What they really want is more control over our lives.

    Remember that when they come knocking on your door demanding to look into your cupboards and refridgerators to see what you are feeding junior when junior's Body Mass Index is out of whack. The food police of the public school system will demand to know what you are feeding junior that makes him so fat and out of shape.

    Presently, there are but a handful of states that have enacted such ridiculous legislation. If this is not an invasion of privacy, then I don't know what is. Someone, somewhere should take these states to court, all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary, to force public school snoops to show how their practice is not an invasion of privacy, particularly in light of the stringent measures Congress approved years ago concerning privacy of medical records.

    Either medical information is private or it isn't. The present federal law says it is private. This being the case, public schools are breaking federal law by monitoring students' BMI unless parents give express written approval for them to have that information. The way these state laws are written, the students and parents have no choice, placing the states in question squarely at odds with federal laws on privacy of medical information.

    So far in America, courts have maintained that minors do not have to notify parents when getting an abortion, due to the 'right of privacy.' Yet this so-called right to privacy does not apply to a student's medical records in the states that have enacted the Body Mass Index laws.

    Perhaps this information, in addition to information on gun owners and the like, are to be entered into a Hillary Clinton-style national database where those who do not maintain an acceptable Body Mass Index are denied college entrance.

    Once the genie is let out of the bottle, it is very difficult to get it back in. Jefferson's warning about these things was very sobering--liberty sometimes must be preserved only by the blood of tyrants and patriots.

    Hillary's Selective Amnesia or Barefaced Lies

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). At a campaign stop on Sunday, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-NY, claimed that had she known in 2002 what she knows now about Iraq, she never would have voted to authorize the invasion. Obviously in an attempt to placate the rabid anti-war extremists that run the Democrat Party these days, Hillary is either exhibiting a severe case of selective amnesia or she is telling a barefaced lie.

    Either way it is not good for the woman who would be President.

    Let's take a short trip back to the recent past, shall we? Perhaps Hillary could use a refresher course in the statements of her own husband when he was President, as well as the statements from people within her own party at the time concerning Iraq.

    The year was 1998. The day was February 17. The setting was the Pentagon. President Bill Clinton was speaking to a group of Pentagon officials concerning the problem with Saddam Hussein and Iraq. Here is a portion of what Mr. Clinton had to say, which was reported verbatim throughout news media outlets around the world:

    'The UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many more weapons.

    'Now, against that background, let us remember the past here. It is against that background that we have repeatedly and unambiguously made clear our preference for a diplomatic solution . . .

    'But to be a genuine solution, and not simply one that glosses over the remaining problem, a diplomatic solution must include or meet a clear, immutable, reasonable, simple standard.

    'Iraq must agree and soon, to free, full, unfettered access to these sites anywhere in the country. There can be no dilution or diminishment of the integrity of the inspection system that UNSCOM has put in place.

    'Now those terms are nothing more or less than the essence of what he agreed to at the end of the Gulf War. The Security Council, many times since, has reiterated this standard. If he accepts them, force will not be necessary. If he refuses or continues to evade his obligations through more tactics of delay and deception, he and he alone will be to blame for the consequences.

    'Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.

    'And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who's really worked on this for any length of time believes that, too. . . .

    'If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program. We want to seriously reduce his capacity to threaten his neighbors.

    'I am quite confident, from the briefing I have just received from our military leaders, that we can achieve the objective and secure our vital strategic interests.'

    What, exactly, does this mean? It means, simply, that then-President Bill Clinton possessed and believed the very same intelligence reports that led President Bush to invade Iraq. Clinton believed Saddam possessed and would use weapons of mass destruction as he had in the past.

    Democrats, one by one at the time, fully concurred with Clinton's assessment, though they pretend to have no knowledge of it today. This would include Mr. Clinton's wife Hillary, who is the front-runner for the Democrat nomination for President.

    Yet Hillary today claims that if she knew then what she knows now she would not have voted in favor of the War. Does this mean, then, that if she had known in 1998 what she knows now, she would have repudiated the remarks of her own husband, the President, and that of countless other Clinton Administration officials and Democrats in Congress who warned about Saddam Hussein?

    The duplicity of Democrats is utterly astounding and sickening. Attempting to play both sides of the game, now that the War has become unpopular they hope Americans forget what they said from the mid-1990s until President Bush was elected. Up until that time, it was DEMOCRATS who sounded the alarm about Iraq. So now, suddenly, they get an attack of selective amnesia, or else they just flat-out lie to the American people.

    I dare you to guess which one is the case.

    In addition, Mrs. Clinton went further to shoot herself in the foot by claiming that she voted in favor of invading Iraq, 'only if we had allies who were with us.' She then attempted to make the case that we had no allies in the effort.

    Here again, perhaps Mrs. Clinton should see a doctor about that memory problem. We had allies. The ones who were not with us were Germany and France. We had Britain, Spain (before they got scared by a terrorist attack), Italy, the Eastern European block, Australia, and South Korea.

    Thus, the statement that we had no allies in the effort is a barefaced lie.

    Perhaps someone should remind Mrs. Clinton that the historical record is there for all to see. She may try to run from her past statements, but she cannot hide. Neither can her husband or the other Democrats who, at the time, were some of the most vocal proponents of taking action against Saddam Hussein.

    Their Words Come Back to Haunt Them

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). The following is a collection of quotes from Democrats during the 1990s and early 2000s concerning Iraq, Saddam Hussein, and weapons of mass destruction. These are verified quotes, available in various news outlets around the country.

    This is a definite case of 'their words coming back to haunt them.'

    Hillary, are you reading?

    "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
    President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

    "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
    President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

    "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
    Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

    "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
    Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

    "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
    Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

    "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
    Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

    "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
    Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

    "There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
    Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

    "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
    Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

    "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
    Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

    "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
    Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

    "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
    Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

    "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
    Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

    "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
    Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

    "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
    Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

    "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
    Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

    "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
    Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

    "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
    Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.


    Charlotte, NC (TLS). From 'Ohioans for Concealed Carry' comes this dire warning concerning pending legislation in Congress that would severely hamper gun shows around the country. The House bill is H.R. 96, and it is entitled, 'The Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2007,' which is one of many bills the Democrats have introduced to rob citizens of their Constitutional rights.

    According to Ohioans For Concealed Carry,

    '"The Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2007," H.R. 96, will basically destroy any gun show or private sale of firearms as we know it. Alan Korwin, noted firearms author says of this bill,

    '"Under the original draft, currently legal gun shows are outlawed without prior federal permission. Gun show promoters must agree to warrantless searches in order to operate, and may be arrested if private citizens talk at the show about gun sales they wish to complete away from the show. The right to assemble peaceably at a gun show or even plan for one, carries stiff prison terms unless federal licenses are issued in advance. I am not making this up.

    '"Massive new bureaucracy is created because all shows and their exhibitors must be registered 30 days before the show, then again 72 hours before the show, and again five days after the show. That's in addition to registering anyone who walks in, plus "any other information" the Secretary of the Treasury decides, by regulation, is necessary on vendors, attendees, and the show itself."

    'We all knew that the newly elected anti-gun majority would not waste much time in proposing new laws that further infringe our Constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms. Now is the time to contact our representatives to make sure our voices are heard concerning these issues.'

    Sunday, January 28, 2007

    A Traitor and Her Comrades March on Washington

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). A traitor and her comrades marched on Washington Saturday, demanding an immediate withdrawal from Iraq and the impeachment of President Bush.

    The quintessential traitor, Jane Fonda, for the first time today threw her support behind the demands of withdrawal from Iraq. Hanoi Jane has thus far kept a low profile amid the demonstrations against the Iraq War that George Soros and his gang of thugs at have planned.

    Obviously, Hanoi Jane could keep quiet no longer. There she was, in the familiar role of denouncing the United States during wartime and demanding that our soldiers be sent home immediately. She was joined by the usual suspects in these events, Susan Sarrandon, Sean Penn, Rep. John Conyers, and ultra-liberal Democrat presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich.

    In actuality, Ms. Fonda is risking arrest by appearing at such blatantly anti-American rallies, and rightly so. In 1972, at the height of the Viet Nam War, it was Jane Fonda who not only protested the war but traveled to Hanoi, North Viet Nam to meet personally with Communist oppressors about her support for their cause.

    During that infamous trip, Fonda did the following, according to numerous press reports around the world: she praised the North Vietnamese, posed for a photo at a Communist anti-aircraft gun emplacement, made several radio broadcasts for the Communist North Vietnamese in which she called American military leaders 'war criminals,' then when some of the POWs returned home and described mistreatment by the North Vietnamese, she said Americans should '...not hail the POWs as heroes, because they are hypocrites and liars.'

    Thus, not only did Fonda commit treason of a high and aggravated nature, but she referred to our POWs returning home as hypocrites and liars. Tell that to Senator John McCain, who to this day still carries in his body the scars and marks of the inhumane, torturous treatment by the North Vietnamese Communists.

    The very fact that this anti-American traitor is still allowed to roam our streets spouting her denunciation of her own country makes my blood boil.

    The fact that she would go to Hanoi and meet with the enemy during wartime, communicating to said enemy her support for their cause and her denunciation of the United States government, constitutes the perfect textbook example of the term 'treason.' The U.S. Constitution defines treason very specifically. Fonda's actions during the Viet Nam War fit that definition perfectly. For her crime she was never arrested, never prosecuted, never tried in a court of law, and never punished for her crime according to the terms of the Ccnstitution.

    Treason is the one and only crime for which the Constitution provides a specific definition, and declaring that only Congress has the right to impose the proper penalty. Congress at one time exercised this right in calling for persons who committed treason to be put to death.

    There is no statute of limitations on a capital felony of this magnitude.

    If we were living in the America envisioned by the Founders, a Constitutional Republic governed by specific enforceable laws, such a blatant case of treason would not be allowed to slip through the cracks. However, since the America of today has obviously become a nation that is not governed by its Constitution, which for 200 years kept it free, it is no surprise that the likes of Hanoi Jane was not prosecuted for her heinous crimes, but is allowed to continue to roam the streets today still spouting her anti-American propaganda.

    She should be placed under arrest and given a chance in a court of law to defend her actions in Hanoi during the Viet Nam War.

    Democrats Block Fines for Hiring Illegal Aliens

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). Like clockwork, Senate Democrats remained steadfastly committed to their part in aiding and abetting illegal aliens in this country by blocking legislation proposed by Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions that would have placed heavy fines on businesses that hire illegal aliens.

    While some Republicans share in the blame for the country's current mess over illegal immigration, Democrats wrote the book on the entire subject. One cannot forget Bill Clinton's authorization to naturalize over one million aliens just prior to his 1996 re-election campaign. Democrats have always viewed illegal aliens as a ripe pool from which to draw votes, and their policies show it. This week was no exception.

    Senator Jeff Sessions proposed an amendment to the minimum wage bill that would have placed heavy fines on employers that engage in the practice of hiring illegal aliens. Democrats, however, would not even allow Sessions' amendment to reach the Senate floor for a vote. Amid huffing and puffing, wind-blowing and farting by Senator Blowhard (aka Ted Kennedy), the Democrats condemned the measure.

    Remember this, my friends, when the 2008 election cycle rolls around. Democrats stand firm against immigration reform, choosing instead to continue to cultivate their precious illegal aliens as potential votes in the future--votes that they can buy.

    Read the entire story here:
  • Washington Times
  • Outrage Intensifies Over Imprisonment of Border Patrol Agents

    Charlotte, NC (TLS). The controversy is heating up concerning the imprisonment of two U.S. Border Patrol Agents who shot at illegal aliens crossing the border illegally. A U.S. Congressman who has demanded that the President issue pardons for the two agents is now suggesting that Congress withhold funding for their incarceration, which will insure their release.

    Other than condemn the idiocy of the prosecutor for pursuing this case, including the outrageous act of granting immunity to the illegal alien in exchange for his testimony against the agents, there is very little Congress can do because of the separation of powers. Congress can, however, vote to withhold funding for the incarceration of the two agents.

    Congress can also call for the Department of Justice to launch an investigation into the actions of a prosecutor out of control. So far, the DOJ has refused to release documents to Congress concerning the prosecution of the two agents. This, too, is an outrage. Perhaps a thorough investigation of the Department of Justice should be launched by Congress.

    All of this, of course, would be a moot point if the President would do the right thing and go ahead and issue pardons to these two American patriots.

    Read the latest update on this story here:

  • CNS News