You won’t be shocked to hear the two towns here (Concord and Carlisle) are ultra-liberal.
Via Business Insider:
A school in Boston reportedly had a Muslim poem recital over the intercom instead of the Pledge of Allegiance on the 12th anniversary of 9/11.
The principal of Concord Carlisle High School, Peter Badalament issued an apology and said that a ‘small number’ of people were outraged at the poem, which was meant to promote ‘cross-cultural understanding’.
According to the Washington Times, the Pledge of Allegiance was not read because of some confusion and the principal said that the school was unaware that their student pledge reader was unavailable that day.
The report said that Mohja Kahf’s ‘My Grandmother Washes Her Feet in the Sink of the Bathroom at Sears’ was recited in which a granddaughter’s account of watching her grandmother adhere to the religious Muslim custom of washing her feet five times a day, is described.
While everyone was watching news in Colorado during the final weeks of the recalls, Mississippi was instituting a new law to allow the open carry of firearms without a concealed carry permit.
House Bill 2 was passed in Mississippi’s last legislative session and signed into law by Governor Phil Bryant (R), but put on hold in July when Circuit Judge Winston Kidd issued an injunction to have the legislature “clarify it.”
On August 29 the Mississippi Supreme Court “unanimously upheld the… open carry law,” setting the stage for it to take effect.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com …
We’ve reported on how the Obama administration has been secretly arming Syrian jihadists since 2012. Now reports are coming out that the Central Intelligence Agency, headed by Muslim John Brenner, has been delivering light machine guns (something the Obama administration does not want in the hands of ordinary Americans) and other small arms to Syrian rebels for weeks. This is the same agency that wants to keep their operative’s mouths shut and threatening them and their families if they testify about the jihadist attack in Benghazi.
If an infidel wants to be called an infidel how is that offensive?
Via The Blaze:
An Army veteran is suing the state of Michigan for denying his request for a vanity license plate that says “infidel.”
Michael Matwyuk, 57, was an Army sergeant who served in Iraq in 2004 and 2005 with an engineer detachment, the Army Times reported. He said he and his fellow troops often were called “infidel” by insurgents as an insult.
“We embraced it, we joked about it, we laughed about it, we called each other ‘infidel,’” Matwyuk told the Army Times. “We’re infidels, we’re absolutely that and we were there who did not subscribe to the doctrine or belief system [the enemy] was trying to impose. We don’t subscribe to terrorism, Shariah law and oppression. We are champions of freedom, and if that makes us infidels good for me and good for the rest of us.”
But when Matwyuk tried to get a shortened form of “infidel” printed on a license plate in Michigan, the state turned him down because it was deemed offensive, Detroit’s WWJ-TV reported. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on his behalf, arguing a violation of Matwyuk’s First Amendment rights.
Border Sheriffs, frustrated with D.C. politicians, are once again speaking out. They say Congress is not listening and their ideas are not enough. Border Sheriffs, including Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels and Doña Ana County, N.M., Sheriff Todd Garrison, are fed up and want better security for their borders.
Dannels’ complaints about the lack of Border Patrol agents along the border suggests he supports a Senate plan to flood the Southwest border with 20,000 new agents. But he doesn’t. He doesn’t think border security proposals in the House will do much, either.
“The people in my county are very frustrated,” Dannels says, looking at the lush green of a valley that will soon shrivel to brown in the desert sun. “They feel border security hasn’t been taken seriously.”
Congress returned from recess this week facing a busy schedule, featuring debates over Syria, health care and the debt limit.
But Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said they also will find time to dive into immigration.
The Senate and House have spent months crafting their own versions of overhauls to the nation’s immigration laws. Yet Dannels is among more than a dozen sheriffs interviewed by USA TODAY who police the border from California to Texas and say the plans from Washington will do little to secure the border.
They say they have proposals that will work – more prosecutions of border crossers, closer screening of people going through border crossings, putting pressure on Mexico to do its part. But they feel they’ve been shoved aside by a Congress more interested in cutting a deal than finding solutions.
“They’ve had every organization up there except law enforcement. I just don’t understand that,” said Doña Ana County, N.M., Sheriff Todd Garrison. “If we just had a seat at the table and could express our concerns, it would at least shed some light on these issues.”
Arizona ranchers living along the Mexican border are fearful of the drug cartel and say the U.S. is “borderless”. The Arizona ranchers are speaking out to The Blaze and airing a special on the “For the Record” show this evening. The show promises to provide “never-before-seen surveillance videos taken from their ranches: proof that their ranches are being seized by drug traffickers and nefarious groups that use the cover of darkness to cross into the United States.”
The Blaze reported:
Mary, an Arizona rancher who spoke to TheBlaze on condition of anonymity out of fear of retribution from the drug cartels, warned, “it’s not our country anymore.”
“We may be bound to the laws of our country,” she said. “But we’re living by the law of the cartels.”
Like Mary, many of the ranchers chose to speak on condition that they not be named out of fear for their lives but their stories are all similar. They say the U.S. is “borderless.”
Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels, who works closely with the ranchers living along his county’s 83-mile border with Mexico, told TheBlaze the increased violence along his community’s southern border is an example that the federal government is failing when it comes to border security.
“Border security should be a primary issue even before we talk about immigration reform,” said Dannels, who has spent more than 25 years in law enforcement along the border. “The biggest change from 1984 until current is the violence on the border.”
– See more at: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/09/az-border-ranchersits-not-our-country-anymore-were-living-by-the-law-of-the-cartel-and-border-sheriffs-say-d-c-not-taking-border-seriously/#sthash.LRdMWF9Z.dpuf
Family Security Matters
Twelve years ago the bloodiest terrorist attack ever on U.S. soil occurred. But, last year, the American people received another mournful September 11th tragedy.
One year ago today, the victims of the Benghazi, Libya attacks-Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods-lost their lives at the Special Mission Compound and CIA Annex in Benghazi. Others were seriously injured. Since then, no one has been held accountable for the inadequate security at the Mission, which ignored the so-called Inman standards, or for the failure to fully anticipate the attacks given Libya’s deteriorating security environment. This in spite of numerous requests for increased security, which were ignored by top officials in Washington, D.C. Danger pay was increased for those in Benghazi, but the security was not upgraded. “The takeaway from that, for me and my staff, it was abundantly clear, we were not going to get resources until the aftermath of an incident,” said Eric Nordstrom, former Regional Security Officer in Tripoli, at a November 2012 hearing. “And the question that we would ask is, again, how thin does the ice have to get before someone falls through?”
Last month, the American people were treated to the news that Secretary of State John Kerry had cleared the State Department officials that former Secretary of State Clinton had placed on administrative leave for their failure to take appropriate action in the lead-up to the Benghazi attack. In December, 2012, The Accountability Review Board “found that certain senior State Department officials within two bureaus demonstrated a lack of proactive leadership and management ability in their responses to security concerns…given the deteriorating threat environment and the lack of reliable host government protection.” “However, the Board did not find reasonable cause to determine that any individual U.S. government employee breached his or her duty.” It was this lack of “breached” duty that compelled Secretary Kerry to end the administrative leave for these officials and return them to State, albeit into different positions.
Who, then, will be held accountable for the Administration’s failures in Benghazi?