Is Owning Guns Racist?

Infowars.com
November 2, 2013

The push to brainwash the public on gun confiscation i.e. Eric Holder is rearing its ugly head once again. But fact is stronger than fiction. The spin on the NRA and bogus research studies can’t stop the liberty of the American people.

Editorial: Federal snooping program PRISM is troubling

The PRISM email-interception program is one more example of federal power unconstrained by law.

HELP WITH SURVIVAL HQ   PRISM  NSA CONTROL OVER PRIVACY

Reblogged from:   www.helpwithsurvivalhq.com

SOURCE

A FEDERAL document reveals a program called PRISM that scoops up email, chats, videos, photos, stored data, Internet phone calls, file transfers, video conferences and logins from nine different Internet providers.

The companies deny it. Not us, says Microsoft. Never heard of PRISM, says Apple.

Do we believe the companies?

Continue reading

‘I Don’t Trust the Government’: Ted Nugent Tells CNN

What He Thinks of Senate’s Gun Bill (and Recommends Eric Holder Be Arrested)

SOURCE

Sporting a graying beard and his signature camouflage hat, rocker and gun rights advocate Ted Nugent on Thursday dismissed the Senate’s gun control bill as a “feel-good measure” that won’t stop any shootings. Towards the end of his interview on CNN, Nugent recommended that Attorney General Eric Holder be arrested for gun trafficking.

“I don’t support the bill. I agree with the 90-plus percent of the law enforcement heroes out there, the real warriors of the street, that reject this as a feel-good measure ,” Nugent said bluntly. “I reject it out of hand as a feel-good measure that’s not going to accomplish anything. It won’t stop any shootings, that’s for sure.”

Nugent said he supports police enforcing the gun laws that are already on the books, rather than adding even more regulations. The Senate gun bill would expand background checks and likely include amendments from senators in both parties.

Ted Nugent Tells CNN What He Thinks of Senates Gun Bill (and Recommends Eric Holder Be Arrested)

CNN’s Erin Burnett then asked Nugent about New York’s new gun legislation that allows police to confiscate firearms from people who are determined to be mentally ill. TheBlaze has reported on the instance where a law-abiding gun owner’s guns were confiscated by mistake in New York.

Nugent said he simply doesn’t trust the “bureaucracy” to “accurately or responsibly or legally identify someone with mental issues.” However, the rocker did say he wants guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, but that it’s not the governments responsibility to determine who is mentally ill.

“I just don’t trust the government. I don’t trust the government that claims it’s going to reduce the budget while they increase the budget,” he added.

Throwing a curve ball, Nugent then asked Burnett if she wants to reduce gun trafficking. Naturally, Burnett answered yes. “Then you would support my recommendation that we arrest Eric Holder,” Nugent said.

“Well, no, I don’t support that,” Burnett replied.

“Well, if you want to stop gun trafficking why don’t we go after the guy trafficking guns? That would be Eric Holder,” Nugent shot back, clearly referring to Operation Fast and Furious where 2,000 guns were allowed to walk across the U.S.-Mexico border.

Before the interview ended, Nugent made sure to tell Burnett, “I love you madly.”

Watch the always entertaining Ted Nugent via CNN/Mediaite below:

.

top of page ^

Barack Obama ‘has authority to use drone strikes to kill Americans on US soil’

President Barack Obama has the authority to use an unmanned drone strike to kill US citizens on American soil, his attorney general has said.

Barack Obama 'has authority to use drone strikes to kill Americans on US soil'

Eric Holder, left, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee as Code Pink demonstrator Medea Benjamin protests against the use of drone strikes Photo: Getty Images
 

Eric Holder argued that using lethal military force against an American in his home country would be legal and justified in an “extraordinary circumstance” comparable to the September 11 terrorist attacks.

“The president could conceivably have no choice but to authorise the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland,” Mr Holder said.

His statement was described as “more than frightening” by Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, who had demanded to know the Obama administration’s position on the subject.

“It is an affront the constitutional due process rights of all Americans,” said Mr Paul, a 50-year-old favourite of the anti-government Tea Party movement, who is expected to run for president in 2016.

Mr Holder wrote to Mr Paul after the senator threatened to block the appointment of John Brennan as the director of the CIA unless he received answers to a series of questions on its activities.

Mr Obama has been sharply criticised for the secrecy surrounding his extension of America’s “targeted killing” campaign against al-Qaeda terrorist suspects using missile strikes by unmanned drones.

The secret campaign has killed an estimated 4,700 people in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. A quarter are estimated to have been civilians prompting anger among human rights campaigners.

According to research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, drone strikes killed between 474 and 881 civilians – including 176 children – in Pakistan between 2004 and last year.

Criticism within the US has focused on the implications for terror suspects who are also US citizens, after Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical cleric born and educated in the US, was killed in Yemen in 2011.

The administration claims it has the legal authority to assassinate Americans provided that they are a senior al-Qaeda operative posing an imminent threat and it would be “infeasible” to capture them.

This justification emerged only last month in a leaked memo from Mr Holder’s department of justice. Mr Obama this week agreed to give Congress his full set of classified legal memos on the targeting of Americans.

Civil liberties campaigners accuse the president and his aides of awarding themselves sweeping powers to deny Americans their constitutional rights without oversight from Congress or the judiciary.

Mr Holder stressed in his letter that the prospect of a president considering the assassination of an American citizen on US soil was “entirely hypothetical” and “unlikely to occur”.

Yet “it is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the president to authorise the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States,” he wrote.

Appearing in front the Senate judiciary committee on Wednesday, Mr Holder reiterated that “the government has no intention to carry out any drone strikes in the United States”.

Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, told him his reference to “extraordinary circumstances” such as September 11 or the 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbour were “extremely concerning”.

“It is imperative that we understand the operational boundaries for use of such force,” Mr Grassley said. “American citizens have a right to understand when their life can be taken by their government absent due process.”

Daphne Eviatar, a senior counsel at Human Rights First, said: “It’s hard to see how authorities could not be in a position to arrest someone yet be able to kill them.

“The administration should publish all its legal memos on targeted killing. Classified information can be redacted if necessary. There is no reason for legal opinions justifying ongoing US programmes to be kept secret.”

.

top of page ^