Leaders of Kansas City Muslim group petition Obama to limit free speech of American citizens

This is insanity!  Once our free speech and weapons are gone the United States of America as we now know it will be gone!  Please, please, please wake up folks!

“According to the ISGKC,  making a 14 minute movie trailer, and anything else that provoke Muslim rage, should be banned despite the First Amendment protections because it incites Muslim violence. But endorsing the death penalty for gays and lesbians, as well as anyone else guilty of capital crimes under Islamic law, is a view embraced by the same group.”

Reblogged from Counter Jihad Report

By Patrick Poole at PJMedia:

The leadership of the Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City have launched an online petition campaign for President Obama to back a bill to limit the free speech of American citizens they deem offensive.

The petition states:

The undersigned Board Of Directors and members of the Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City (ISGKC) urges you to sponsor a bill that outlaws any action that may insult one’s religion.  We utterly disagree with the violence that has taken place and the death of United States Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and other members of the United States embassy staff in Libya.  We support the apprehension and conviction of those responsible for such acts.

We understand the First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights and, as such, prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, etc., but when the allowance of “free” speech incites violence it should be banned.

The film behind the violence that is occurring in part of the Muslim world, “The Innocence of Muslims”, although it may be amateurish, its contents are very disturbing and insulting to the religion and has ignited an already volatile part of the world.  The film is repulsive to the sensibilities of Muslims and offends the religion of Islam in multiple ways; by denigrating the seriousness of Islam, our Prophet and the Muslims in general.  We believe that it would be in everyone’s interest to ban such actions from reoccurring.

Actions as such should not be tolerated as they are very offensive.  The violence that has taken place as a result of this film is very alarming.  As Muslims, violence of any sort is prohibited in our religion.  Those people who are carrying out these acts cannot possibly call themselves devout Muslims as they are acting out of pure rage and not out of religious duties.  We condemn the violence and feel that, in spite of the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, action may be necessary to pass such a bill or, at least, censure such actions in order to calm the current situation as well as prevent future re-occurrences.

American Muslims are hard-working, law abiding, and tax paying citizens.  Everyone respects freedom of speech and the First Amendment in general, however, when freedom of speech results in defaming and insulting others and provokes the killing of innocent people, it should be outlawed.  In light of the recent situation, the Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City hopes you may take up this cause and urge other representatives to do the same.  We appreciate your time and efforts.

ISGKC Board of Directors:

  • Board Member: Abdul Gafoor Akram
  • Board Member: Raqibul Huq
  • Board Member: Rushdy El-Ghussein
  • Board Member: Dr. Mohammed Kohia
  • Board Member: Russel Mohammad
  • Board Member: Ibrahim Morad

Lest anyone think that the ISGKC board has gone rogue, a link to the petition is featured prominently on the group’s website, stating:

ISGKC is sponsoring an online petition to establish a law against insulting one’s religion. Please click the link below and sign the petition. Thanks for your support.

The position of ISGKC is particularly curious, and outright hypocritical, since they have hosted internationally renowned hate sheikh Khalid Yasin. When Yasin started his 2010 Kansas City tour, he began at ISGKC:

Sh Khalid Yasin started the tour with a Khutbah at the Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City (ISGKC) Masjid on Friday followed by a lecture, “The Challenges facing the Muslim family and community in America” after Maghrib prayer at the Masjid. The attendance exceeded all expectations with about 350 people for the lecture. The Sheikh stressed on the importance of the Muslim community in the west and how to safeguard themselves against the social evils that the western world offers to Muslims especially our youth.

Among Yasin’s positions:

Read more at Counter Jihad Report

Obama is a domestic enemy of the U.S. Constitution

By Joseph Curl via The Washington Times

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

“Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmationI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.*

“* Unless, you know, 224 years from now, whoever happens to president simply decides he really doesn’t want to do that.”

— Article II, Section 1, Clause 8 of Barack Obama’s U.S. Constitution

The Founders set the course in a simple, concise, 35-word affirmation — the president’s top job is to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution. The chief executive does, of course, have other responsibilities, but his guardianship of the document they had just written was deemed by the Founders to be of such great import that they made him swear it — aloud, in front of witnesses.

In 1884, Congress, having no set oath of office, wrote its own: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same …”

Little did they know then that 128 years later, America would face just that: a domestic threat to the U.S. Constitution.

From the very beginning, the president and his administration made clear they had no intention of enforcing laws they didn’t like. Mr. Obama and his minions decided that they would simply stop enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act, no longer prosecute growers of “medical” marijuana, and let some states walk away from provisions in the No Child Left Behind law (which, by the way, was co-authored by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, and passed the Senate by a 91-8 vote).

Mr. Obama’s Justice Department has even more flagrantly flouted the laws of the land. Out of the blue, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., the nation’s chief law enforcement officer, reinterpreted America’s gambling laws (and dumped the decision on Christmas Eve so as to avoid scrutiny). More recently, Mr. Holder has decided to thwart congressional oversight by refusing to release documents on the disastrous “Fast and Furious” gun-running scheme, and he is actively fighting Florida for trying to expunge dead people from its voter rolls.

Now comes Mr. Obama’s decision to stop enforcing America’s immigration laws. The new policy states that illegal immigrants who were younger than 16 when they entered the country are eligible for a two-year exemption from deportation. Of course, the “deferred action process,” as Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano called it, will apply to illegals up to age 30. (Think when they legally get their driver’s licenses they will also be handed a voter registration card?)

The increasingly desperate Mr. Obama, once a constitutional professor, knows full well he is circumventing Congress. In March 2011 he told a group of young Hispanics: “America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the president, am obligated to enforce the law. I don’t have a choice about that. That’s part of my job.

Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws,” he said. “There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”

So why now? Politics. The Hispanic population in Florida, Virginia, Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado may well decide the November election, and with working-class whites, religious blacks, disenchanted young people and Jews fleeing in droves, Mr. Obama is looking to shore up his support, even if that means violating his oath to protect the Constitution.

Continuing his nonstop campaign of division — black against white, rich against poor, straight against gay, religious against secular, race against race — the president is seeking to build whatever loose coalition of support he can. Forget bipartisanship; a coalition of the middle, Mr. Obama’s sole path to victory, he thinks, is to stir up so much discontent within different strata that he can win re-election.

Of course, the liberals who whined about President George W. Bush’s signing statements haven’t made a peep about Mr. Obama’s Napoleonic power grab.

“What’s ironic,” columnist Charles Krauthammer noted, “is for eight years, the Democrats have been screaming about the imperial presidency with the Bush administration — the nonsense about the unitary executive. This is out-and-out lawlessness.”

But that doesn’t matter when you are King Barack. The Founders were determined to make sure no American leader ever had the power King George III enjoyed. Which is why they also wrote this in the Constitution: “The president, vice president and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

For more click here.

 

Related articles:

If We Took the Constitution Seriously, Obama Would Be Impeached

By Michael Filozof via The American Thinker

If  the citizens of this Republic still took the Constitution seriously, Obama would  be impeached for his decision to unilaterally grant amnesty to certain illegal  aliens.

Article  1, Sec. 8 of the Constitution, which enumerates the power of Congress, states  that “Congress shall have the Power To… establish an [sic] uniform Rule of  Naturalization.” Congress has passed numerous laws pertaining to immigration and  naturalization, including laws requiring the deportation of  illegals.

The  role of the President, according to Article II, Sec. 3, is to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Obama’s  refusal to execute Congress’s immigration  laws (or, for that matter, Congress’s Defense of Marriage Act) is an  impeachable offense. Article II, Sec. 4 states that the President “shall be  removed from Office on Impeachment for… Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes  and Misdemeanors.” The deliberate failure to enforce valid immigration law and  allow hordes of foreigners to live and work in the U.S. is, arguably, “treason,”  and doing so in an election year to appease Hispanic voters could certainly be  considered “bribery.”

In  theory, Obama could exercise his power in Article II, Sec 2. to “grant Reprieves  and Pardons for Offenses against the United States” and offer a blanket pardon  for all violators of immigration law. He’s not doing that, because he’d  certainly lose in November if he did. (However we should be concerned that if he  does lose in November, he’ll do it anyway on his last day in  office).

The  upshot of Obama’s policy not only to allow hundreds of thousands of illegals to  live and work in the U.S. during a time of 8 to 10% unemployment, but even  worse, since the vast number of illegals we’re talking about are Hispanics  eligible for affirmative-action preferences, to actually get preferential treatment over native-born  Americans.

Remember  Obama’s speech in Berlin in 2008? Well, now you know what “citizen of the world”  means: instituting an illegal and unconstitutional policy that favors Third  Worlders, and disadvantages people actually born as U.S.  citizens.

Of  course, he’ll get away with it… if you think the gutless Republicans in the  House actually represent the interests of their native born constituents  and will introduce articles of impeachment, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell  you….

For more click here.

H/T News You May Have Missed

Dictator Obama Issues New Threat to Supreme Court over ObamaCare

By Sher Zieve via Canada Free Press

In his latest display of his full USA federal government dictatorship over both the American people and the former co-branches of government, Dictator Obama is warning the Supreme Court to either rule in his favor or face severe consequences.

Fox News’ Martha McCallum advised Thursday that the Obama Administration has been quietly sending missives to the Supreme Court threatening that if it doesn’t rule in his favor on ObamaCare, Medicare will face disruption and “chaos.”  Therefore, if SCOTUS rules in favor of the US Constitution, Obama & Co will begin its campaign to either destroy Medicare or make those on it suffer greatly.   The Obama syndicate is said to be threatening to hold off Medicare payments to doctors and hospitals if SCOTUS does not comply with Obama’s demands and submit to him.

As an additional example of Obama’s illegal and (I believe) highly treasonous behaviors, on 1 May and 2 May Obama issued two additional unconstitutional and illegal Executive Orders.  The first E.O., issued 1 May 2012, makes the USA subject to “international regulations” as opposed to looking to and following the US Constitution.   Also, with this new E.O., the US FDA will now be able to be bypassed by International committees—thus, replacing the FDA with any international group which may be chosen.  In essence, Obama is quickly eliminating US Sovereignty and selling the USA to the international “community.”

The second E.O. issued in 2 days was signed by Obama on 2 May 2012.  This E.O. instructs the USA to bow to international regulations instead of the US Constitution and Businessweek reports:  “Obama’s order provides a framework to organize scattered efforts to promote international regulatory cooperation, the chamber’s top global regulatory official said today.

“Today’s executive order marks a paradigm shift for U.S. regulators by directing them to take the international implications of their work into account in a consistent and comprehensive way,” Sean Heather, vice president of the chamber’s Center for Global Regulatory Cooperation, said in an e-mailed statement.”  This also brings the USA closer to becoming a “North American Union” and—also—eliminating its sovereignty—in toto.

Suffice it to say, no one in Congress has issued even the proverbial “peep” over either of these illegal “orders.”  Do the American people really want to continue to live under this blatant tyranny?

The second question is “Will the Supreme Court of the United States of America bow to Obama and give up its co-equal status to the dictator as the US Congress has already done?”  If so,  perhaps its time for We-the-People to recruit the Honduran Supreme Court who, along with their military, ousted its then President Manuel Zelaya who had become a dictator.  Oppression under the Obama syndicate becomes worse each and every day, folks.  Will we ever choose to go back to the sunshine?

“And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?”—Revelation 13:4

For more information click here.

NDAA Nullification Becomes Law in Virginia!

By via Tenth Amendment Center

The Virginia legislature once again approved House Bill 1160 (HB1160), what many refer to as the NDAA Nullification Act.  The support was overwhelming, again.  In the House today the vote was 89-7 and the Senate concurred a few hours later, 36-1.

The bill “Prevents any agency, political subdivision, employee, or member of the military of Virginia from assisting an agency of the armed forces of the United States in the conduct of the investigation, prosecution, or detention of a United States citizen in violation of the United States Constitution, Constitution of Virginia, or any Virginia law or regulation.”

According to an inside report, bill sponsor Delegate Bob Marshall spoke twice in support of the bill on the House floor today.  Delegate Barbara Comstock (a long-time Patriot Act supporter) invoked Michael Chertoff and others as high government officials opposing HB 1160. Basically, she said state legislators have no business questioning the federal government.

Marshall responded with citations to a CRS report demonstrating the vagueness of the law, and its effort to circumvent the Treason Clause.  He also noted that state legislators are to be watchdogs against the Federal Government.

In the Senate today, Senator Dick Black (R-Loudoun) and Senator Chap Petersen (D-Fairfax) spoke in favor before the final vote.

THE FULL STORY

HB1160 originally passed the Virginia house in February by a vote of 96-4. It went to the Senate where opponents tried to hold it over until next year, effectively killing it.  The vote was a tie- and failed.  In two short days, thousands of grassroots activists contacted their Senators to support the bill and the next vote, taken quickly, was a different story – 39-1.

With minor amendments, the bill needed to go back to the House for approval.  A number of parliamentary maneuvers were used to stall and kill the bill.  Various votes to delay (“pass by”) actual approval were held.   Eventually, the House rejected the Senate amendments and the bill was sent back to the Senate for another consideration.

Again, the grassroots got on board – and activists from groups across the political spectrum called and emailed their Senators to move the bill forward.  The Senate, after a few days of jousting, “receded” from their original amendment by a vote of 37-1 in March, effectively passing the original House bill from the previous month.

HB1160 then went off to the Governor’s desk.  Inside sources had been telling us at the Tenth Amendment Center that Governor Bob McDonnell did not want to sign this bill.  Vetoing would certainly keep him in a good place with the establishment who supports NDAA detentions, but would also be a slap in the face of a huge portion of his own state’s population, considering the massive outpouring of support from the people there.

McDonnell had until mid April to sign or veto the bill.  On the very last day, after some strong behind-the-scenes work by supporters and sponsors, the Governor announced that he recommended some minor amendments – and he would support that version of HB1160.

The bill’s sponsor, Bob Marshall, released the following statement:

Over the past few weeks, Governor McDonnell has heard from a number of Virginians regarding House Bill 1160, sponsored by Delegate Bob Marshall. During the consideration of this legislation and since its passage, he has expressed both the shared concern that Virginia does not participate in the unconstitutional detention of U.S. citizens and the desire that this legislation does not impact legitimate law enforcement activities.

Preserving public safety is the foremost priority of any government. Every day, state and local law enforcement personnel work together and work with the federal government to keep Virginians safe by fighting crime, responding to emergencies, and combating terrorism. The governor believes we must encourage and promote these collaborative efforts while ensuring that core constitutional principles enjoyed by all U.S. citizens are respected. He believes these standards are expected by all Virginians and want to take appropriate steps to reaffirm that position. In the governor’s view, this legislation now accomplishes that goal.

Since the legislation’s passage, staff has worked with the patron to come up with amendments that will achieve the goal of not supporting unconstitutional detentions while preserving the ability of law enforcement and our state defense forces to carry out their responsibilities. The amendments Governor McDonnell sent down achieve those goals, and Delegate Marshall has expressed his support for them. The governor hopes the General Assembly will support them, as well.

The bill is now expected to be promptly signed by Governor McDonnell.

May the other states now follow the lead taken today by Virginia.

UPDATE – according to sponsor Bob Marshall, because the legislature passed the bill as recommended by the Governor, a signature is not required.  HB1160 becomes law on July 1st.

For more information click here.

Michigan government raids small pig farmers, forces farmer to shoot his own pigs! (Could our friends in Dearbornistan have anything to do with this?)

By Mike Adams via Natural News

NaturalNews can now confirm that the Michigan Department of Natural Resources has, in total violation of the Fourth Amendment, conducted two armed raids on pig farmers in that state, one in Kalkaska County at Fife Lake and another in Cheboygan County. Staging raids involving six vehicles and ten armed men, DNA conducted unconstitutional, illegal and arguably criminal armed raids on these two farms with the intent of shooting all the farmers’ pigs under a bizarre new “Invasive Species Order” (ISO) that has suddenly declared traditional livestock to be an invasive species.

See our previous report on this subject at: http://www.naturalnews.com/035372_Michigan_pigs_farm_freedom.html

And hear my interview with Mark Baker, who runs one of the farms to be targeted by the Michigan government, at: http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=67C793DC0503D209399C21450485DA07

The ISO also deems farmers who raise these pigs to be felons, and DNR officials were ready to make arrests on the scene and haul away these farmers to be prosecuted as hardened criminals.

Farmer forced to shoot his own baby piglets in cold blood

“I think this is an unconstitutional order, these actions of the DNR are way out of bounds,” attorney Joseph O’Leary told NaturalNews in an interview today. He is representing one of the farmers who was targeted in these raids. “To take what was six months ago an entirely legal activity, and suddenly people are felons over it. They’re not growing drugs, running guns or killing anybody, they’re raising animals pursuant to USDA regulations and state of Michigan regulations. They haven’t done anything wrong here, and the DNR is treating them like they are hardened criminals.”

In anticipation of the DNR arriving on the scene, one farmer engaged in what can only be described as a heart-wrenching task of shooting his own pigs, one by one, including baby piglets before the DNR arrived. This was to avoid being arrested as a felon. His livelihood is now completely destroyed, as the state of Michigan has put him out of business. Even after this farmer informed the DNR that he had destroyed his entire herd of pigs, the DNR continued to illegally acquire a search warrant by providing false information to a court Judge, then conducting an armed raid on his ranch to verify that the entire herd of pigs had indeed already been shot to death. That this took place satisfied the DNR, which is now showing itself to be engaged in the mob-style destruction of targeted farming businesses through its mass-murder agenda of Michigan’s small-scale farm pigs.

“It was very traumatic for him. These guys are farmers, and I know how much he cared for the animals there, and the DNR treats these like they’re some kind of a plant that needs to be exterminated rather than animals that people care about,” said O’Leary.

Here is what one of the raided farmers had to say about his experience of being forced to destroy his pigs:

“I was served a search warrant yesterday at 7: 45am. I have killed all my hogs. [DNR] gave me papers that say I do not have any hogs on my property. All they saw were dead hogs laying around from my mass slaughtering. It took 12 guys 4 times in there to kill all of them, sows with young, Pregnant sows, dozens of piglets, and old mature boars. It has been a sad few weeks. Does anyone know what it feels like to open fire on 20 baby piglets in one group which weigh between 5 lbs and 15 lbs. They are so adorable and cute. They commented to everyone that they never saw a fence built so tough and no way would a hog get out of this area.” (www.BakersGreenAcres.com)

One of the raids targeted Ron McKendrick of Renegade Ranch in Cheboygan County. His ranch was raided on Saturday morning, and DNR agents reportedly conducted an interrogation of his customers and his 75-year-old senior citizen employee. In order to gain access to his property, DNR bureaucrats acquired a temporary restraining order which was used to bully their way onto the property (a violation of the Fourth Amendment).

Another raid was conducted against the farm of Dave Tuxberry. He’s the man who was forced to shoot all his own pigs before DNR agents arrived, in order to avoid being arrested as a felon.

See the recent interview with Mark Baker on the Alex Jones Show

This embedded video gives you additional details relevant to this case:

http://www.naturalnews.tv/e.asp?v=C3FF2ED995627F3DF72B4BC9DD5F3B68&s=2

Call for arrest of Michigan’s DNR agents

Based on the actions of the DNR, it is my belief that the DNR is a rogue, criminal gang of government thugs who are murdering livestock, destroying the lives of farmers, violating the constitutional rights of Michigan citizens and engaging in outrageous acts of destruction of private property.

I believe it is the duty of law-abiding Michigan citizens to call for the immediate arrest of DNR officials who must be brought to justice for their crimes against Michigan farmers. Every agent of the DNR that participated in these raids must be brought to justice to answer for their crimes. If the use of force is necessary to make a lawful and legal arrest of these criminal Michigan government agents, then such use of force is fully authorized under the United States Constitution as well as the Constitution of the State of Michigan. It is under these laws, in fact, that police officers are given firearms to use in the protection of the People. In Texas, the state Constitution even says that farmers have the right to use lethal force to prevent someone from committing a felony crime against their property. This includes shooting horse thieves, for example, and being in the right to do so.

No government has any right to terrorize its citizens in the way that has been witnessed here with the DNR of Michigan. These people are utterly out of control, waging a private armed war against selective targets, using taxpayer money to destroy the lives of productive Michigan citizens. These DNS agents are dangerous and clearly psychologically imbalanced. They desperately need to be reminded of the tenants of lawful government and the rights of citizens. They need to be immediately arrested and given the privilege of a trial by jury to answer for their crimes against farmers.

While I do not espouse the use of violence to resolve issues with government, when innocent farmers are faced with being raided by criminal gangs of rogue government operatives who are forcing them to destroy their entire livestock herds, there is little choice but to halt the actions of these criminals through lawful arrest and bring them to justice in the court system where they must face charges of conspiracy, destruction of private property, the violation of the civil rights of private citizens, illegal trespassing and much more. This is the whole point of the Second Amendment, by the way: To give the People some balance of power so that they might protect themselves against the overzealous, tyrannical agendas of out-of-control governments which inevitably try to rule over the People as violent dictators.

A court hearing is scheduled this Friday at 9:00 am at the courthouse in Cheboygan County. I have been told that a very important legal strategy to halt this DNR madness will be unveiled in the courtroom that morning. Ron McKendrick, whose ranch was raided by DNR over the weekend, will be appearing in this hearing.

I am calling upon all patriots, farmers and food rights activists in Michigan to be there on Friday morning and join in this show of support for farming freedom and fundamental human rights. Do we not have the right to raise livestock without the state raiding our property and murdering our animals? And why is this not being covered in the national media?

Also: This battle continues to be waged by Mark Baker at www.BakersGreenAcres.com who desperately needs additional legal funds to continue his fight against the out-of-control government tyrants in Michigan who are trying to destroy farms. Please check his website for updates and make a small donation (even $5 or $10 helps) using the “Donate” button on his website.

NaturalNews will continue developing this story and we anticipate bringing you more details after the Friday hearing. In the mean time, I will continue to call for the immediate arrest of DNR officials who are now, by any standard, runaway criminal thugs who are operating under the false cover of government. If anyone has a list of the names of these people, please contact NaturalNews with that list so that we can publish them under a “WANTED FOR CRIMES AGAINST THE PEOPLE” heading as we continue to call for their arrest.

Watch NaturalNews for more breaking news on this front. In the mean time, as a message to Michigan farmers: Yes, they really ARE coming for you. You need to get together and deputize a 20-man posse to catch these thugs and arrest them at gunpoint, then haul them into the local Sheriff’s office to be booked and prosecuted.

Take Action Today, I am urging you to join hundreds of thousands of NaturalNews readers, DrudgeReport readers and InfoWars listeners across the country in taking action to loudly and aggressively denounce the Michigan state government’s actions in terrorizing farmers and forcing a slaughter of their traditional animal herds.

Here’s how you can help:

#1) CALL the office of Governor Rick Snyder PHONE: (517) 373-3400 PHONE: (517) 335-7858 (Michigan constituents) FAX:(517) 335-6863

When you call, DEMAND the investigation and arrest of the DNR workers who conspired to conduct these illegal and illegitimate armed raids on Michigan farmers.

#2) CALL the Michigan DNR offices and loudly complain about their total tyranny against Michigan farmers and ranchers:

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10366-121644–,00.html

Director, Rodney A. Stokes Phone: 517-373-2329 e-mail: DNR-Director@michigan.gov

Acting Natural Resources Deputy, Kelley Smith Phone: 517-373-2329

Chief Administrative Officer, Mark Hoffman Phone: 517-373-2329

Legislative Liaison, Gary Owen Phone: 517-373-0023

Public Information Officer, Ed Golder Phone: 517-335-3014

Upper Peninsula regional Coordinator, Stacy Welling Phone: 906-228-6561

Policy Coordinator, Donna Stine Phone: 517-241-3774

Senior Executive, Patricia Stewart Phone: 517-335-1833

#3) CALL the law enforcement division of the Michigan DNR to condemn them for using gun-toting officers to enforce the mass slaughter of privately-owned livestock:

Law Enforcement Division Gary Hagler, Chief Phone: 517-373-1230 Located: 530 W. Allegan St. Mason Building, Fourth Floor

#4) CALL the Michigan office of Attorney General and demand an investigation into the illegitimate and unlawful activities of the DNR operating in that state.

G. Mennen Williams Building, 7th Floor 525 W. Ottawa St. P.O. Box 30212 Lansing, MI 48909 Main Number (517) 373-1110 Facsimile (517) 373-3042

http://www.michigan.gov/ag/0,4534,7-164-21153-51368–,00.html

#5) SHARE this story on Facebook, Twitter and elsewhere. LINK to this page and spread the word.

Special thanks to Alex Jones and Matt Drudge for covering this breaking story. More details to come here on NaturalNews.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035585_Michigan_farms_raids.html#ixzz1sbfYFgGf

Obama’s Legal Humiliation

By via Western Journalism

Part 2 of: Barack Obama Foreign Student – American Media Threatened into Silence

Today, there is no American news outlet factually covering the illegal actions of the sitting President of the United States in context. Nor is there one consistently exposing the laws his administration has flagrantly broken, though this corruption now demonstrably permeates every level of the federal system.

Attorneys General Tom Horne, Arizona; Pam Bondi, Florida; Sam Olens, Georgia; Bill Schuette, Michigan; Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma; Marty Jackley, South Dakota; Alan Wilson, South Carolina; Greg Abbott, Texas; and Ken Cuccinelli of Virginia produced a joint memo on March 5th, 2012 detailing 21 blatant violations of law committed by the Obama administration.

By now it is unsurprising the media has by and large ignored this announcement, although AG Cuccinelli did appear in an extended segment with CSPAN (the relevant segment can be found here) on March 18th.

Fortunately, The Tea Party Tribune published the Attorney’s General memo, “A Report on Obama Administration Violations of Law” in full the same day it was released. It is nothing short of a flashing legal headline story, yet cannot be found at the Washington Post or the New York Times.

“Whether it is through the EPA, NLRB, Office of Surface Mining, FCC or other entities, the Obama Administration has aggressively used administrative agencies to implement policy objectives that cannot gain congressional approval and are outside of the law.” – A Report on Obama Administration Violations of Law

An abbreviated list of broken laws includes:

  • PPACA (Obamacare): Individual Mandate; To be heard by Supreme Court of the United States in March
  • FCC: Regulation of the Internet in the face of a court order from Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. stating that the FCC does not have the power to regulate the Internet
  • EPA 1: GHG (Green House Gas) lawsuit; EPA’s own Inspector General reported last September that EPA failed to comply with its own data standards; Heard in Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. in February
  • OSM: Attempting to impose regulatory requirements on the 19 states with authority for exclusive regulation of their coalmines for the first time in more than 30 years
  • DOJ: South Carolina & Voting Rights Act: Rejecting voter ID statutes that are similar to those already approved by the Supreme Court of the United States; DOJ ignored section 8 of the Voting Rights Act which calls for protections against voter fraud, and used section 5 to administratively block measures to protect the integrity of elections passed by state legislatures in preclearance states including South Carolina; South Carolina voter ID law merely requires a voter to show photo identification in order to vote or to complete an affidavit at the pain of perjury if the voter does not have a photo ID
  • DOJ: Arizona & Voting Rights Act: Rejecting voter ID statutes that are similar to those already approved by the Supreme Court of the United States
  • DOE: Yucca Mountain; In 2009, Administration arbitrarily broke federal law and derailed the most studied energy project in American history when DOE announced intent to withdraw 8,000 page Yucca Mountain licensing application with prejudice.

- A Report on Obama Administration Violations of Law

14 more violations of law are listed in the AGs’ memo. At one time or another, many of these violations have made the news, yet the full list is never presented to the public. When compiled, it is apparent even at a glance that the federal government as led by Barack Obama has no respect for the law. Clearly, the Obama government is acting as it deems fit. Much as a monarchy would. As if the States did not exist. As if the Constitution of the United States did not apply.

Indeed, when it comes to Obama and his government, the Constitution is a barrier to be removed. As Obama stated in a 2001 interview with NPR, “generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties.”  Undeniably, the Constitution limits government negatively; it states what the government cannot do. From the point of view of someone attempting to expand government powers beyond that which the Constitution limits it to, it is extraordinarily (and negatively) limiting. It was designed that way. It is the keystone, the cornerstone, the foundation of a free people; one freed and protected from government tyranny.

The M-1/A-2 tank in the room

If more evidence were needed to delineate the obvious disrespect coming from the Oval Office for the Law, on Monday, April 2nd 2012, President Barack Obama attempted to erase 200 years of legal history, stating in a press conference with world leaders that the law codified in the Supreme Court Case Marbury v. Madison (5 U.S. 137) 1803 is not valid:

“Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress.” – Barack Obama 4-5-2012

Hundreds of bills have passed out of Congress and been found unconstitutional, overturned by the Supreme Court, since Marbury V. Madison established in 1803 the Supreme Court’s right of judicial review.

The Supreme Court has been the final arbiter of law, determining the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress for over two hundred years. There is no article or section in the Constitution which specifically bestows this power within the Court. Instead, Marbury was the court’s interpretation of the Constitution; furthermore, the legal precedent it set in that decision still stands as good law today.

This is not the first time Mr. Obama has attempted to re-write history to his liking. The difference here lay in the fact that the media is in a feeding frenzy over this one.

The day following this massive falsehood, April 2nd, Eric Holder was ordered to address Obama’s statements by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, forcing the administration to publicly acknowledge the law established in Marbury.

Attorney General Eric Holder stated in the department’s court ordered response: “The Department has not in this litigation, nor in any other litigation of which I am aware, ever asked this or any other Court to reconsider or limit long-established precedent concerning judicial review of the constitutionality of federal legislation.” Even the Attorney General of the United States is hanging Obama out to dry on this issue.

Marbury V. Madison is not just an elephant in the room; it’s more like M-1/A-2 tank running flat out, but not for the reasons most immediately apparent. What is missing from this conversation, so ravenously devoured by the press, is this: Marbury was decided in 1803, it’s has been cited hundreds of times. It has never been overturned. The Attorney General of the United States affirms that it is good law. There is absolutely no question it is binding law, so commonplace it wasn’t even a discussion piece outside first year law school until the president tried to undo it in a press conference.

So far, so good, but what’s missing here?

If Marbury has never been overturned and is binding law with decades of citable history behind it, what makes it different from a case decided in 1875 which has also never been overturned and has been cited to for decades?

Nothing. They are both still law.

Minor V. Happersett in 1875 decided that Ms. Virginia Minor did not have the right to vote. While originally a Women’s Suffrage (voting) case, the Court in Minor interpreted the Constitution, determining that citizenship itself did not give right to vote, unequivocally stating in the final paragraph of the decision: “Being unanimously of the opinion that the Constitution of the United States does not confer the right of suffrage upon any one”Minor V. Happersett (88 U.S. 162).

Constitutional Amendments against discrimination preventing a person from voting based on race (15th), sex (19th) and age (26th)., are taken for granted as being a constitutional rights to vote; yet in reality, there is no constitutionally protected “right” to vote (there are amendments against discrimination.)

To re-state this immeasurably important distinction, there is nothing in the Constitution which gives Americans the right to vote; instead, the Constitution eliminates circumstances such as gender and race from preventing voting. This is a legal distinction perhaps only a lawyer can properly love, yet the fact remains that the difference between the two is as great as the difference between lead and gold.

This is why the Minor Case has never been overturned; its conclusion is a statement of fact. Because it has never been overturned, the basic definitions of citizenship made in Minor still apply today because they are the independent grounds upon which the court made its decision.

To use a metaphor, ‘The light bulb turned on because there is electricity. Electricity is the flow of electrons in a current which heats a wire making a light bulb glow.’ The definition of electricity is the independent ground upon which we can say the light bulb turned on.

This is not an issue of dictionary semantics or the meaning of words changing over time. The Minor court defined natural born citizenship as part of its independent ground for deciding the case, making it a part of the “holding” – for deciding the case as it did. “Citizenship does not give the right to vote. Citizens are…” These definitions were codified in law which, like those made in Marbury V. Madison, makes them inviolate.

The court in 1875 chose to define through its specific wording what natural born citizens were and still are today, just as in 1803 it decided the right of judicial review lay with the Supreme Court and nowhere else.

Illegal governments do illegal things

Why is the Minor case relevant in 2012 as it applies to the federal government breaking laws left and right?

The answer is not only insidiously dangerous, but terribly simple. The man at the head of that government is there illegally. How can this be? Because Minor V. Happersett is still law, it has not been overturned any more than Marbury V. Madison has.

“At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.” Minor V. Happersett (88 U.S. 162)

The Court did not need to decide if Virginia Minor was a citizen because she was obviously a natural born citizen, born in the United States to two parents who were its citizens. The Minor case instructs clearly and concisely that those not born to two citizen parents will have doubts cast on their citizenship status, which in some circumstances, such as qualification under Article 2 Section 1 of the United States Constitution, will demand answers.

Simple logic tells us that where there is doubt about something, proofs must be offered to confirm its status. The proof offered by Barack Obama of his Natural Born Citizenship and placed by him on the White House website has been found to be a “probable forgery” by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona, in a legitimate law enforcement action undertaken at the written insistence of the Citizens of Maricopa County and presented to them in person on March 31, 2012. The Sheriff is a five time, popularly elected law enforcement official who has served 20 years in that office.

This is the M-1/A-2 tank roaring through the room. If Marbury V. Madison is still law, so too is Minor V. Happersett.

If Barack Obama was completely wrong to state: “…the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress…”, then he is equally incorrect to claim Natural Born Citizenship because he was not “born in a country of parents who were its citizens.” He has offered no legitimate proof that he could be a citizen; his father was a British subject of Kenya and was never a citizen of the United States. What proof Obama has offered has been proven a forgery by law enforcement officials.

The simplest of conclusions is unavoidable: Illegal governments do illegal things. Expect nothing less.

Mrs. Cotter is a senior at American Military University, recipient of the Outstanding Student Essay of 2009, a member of Delta Epsilon Tau and Epsilon Pi Phi Academic Fraternities and on the Dean’s and President’s Lists for academic achievement. She has published at American Thinker, Examiner.com, Accuracy in Media, Family Security Matters, Post and Email, English Pravda, Tea Party Tribune, Patriot Action Network, and The Western Center for Journalism.

For more information click here.