The War On Words Continues – 50 Banned Words from NYC School’s Standardized Tests

The New York City Department of Education is waging a war on words of sorts, and is seeking to have words they deem upsetting removed from standardized tests.

The fear is that certain words and topics can make students feel unpleasant, officials are requesting 50 or so words be removed from city-issued tests.

The word “dinosaur” made the hit list because dinosaurs suggest evolution which creationists might not like. Halloween is targeted because it suggests paganism; a “birthday” might not be happy to all because it isn’t celebrated by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

“They’re going to meet people from all walks of life and they’re going to have to learn to adjust.” One NYC parent stated.

Words that suggest wealth are excluded because they could make kids jealous. “Poverty” is also on the forbidden list. That’s something Sy Fliegal with the Center for Educational Innovation calls ridiculous. “The Petersons take a vacation for five days in their Mercedes … so what? You think our kids are going to be offended because they don’t have a Mercedes? You think our kids are going to say ‘I’m offended; how could they ask me a question about a Mercedes? I don’t have a Mercedes!’” “It’s all of life! I don’t know how they figure out what not to put on the list. Every aspect of life is on the list.” Fliegal said.

In a throwback to “Footloose,” the word “dancing” is also taboo. However, there is good news for kids that like “ballet”: The city made an exception for this form of dance.
Also banned are references to “divorce” and “disease,” because kids taking the tests may have relatives or parents who split from spouses or are ill.

Even some students think banning these words from periodic assessment tests is ridiculous.
“If you don’t celebrate one thing you might have a friend that does it. So I don’t see why people would find it offensive,” Curtis High School Sophomore Jamella Lewis told Diamond. Jamella has more common sense in her Sophomore mind than the NYC Board of Education – combined.

Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott said the DOE is simply giving guidance to the test developers.
“So we’re not an outlier in being politically correct. This is just making sure that test makers are sensitive in the development of their tests,” Walcott said Monday He also says, “New York City’s list is longer because its student body is so diverse.”

Let me get this straight. On one hand, the school system states that the list is so long because the NYC student body is so diverse, yet they want to do away with the very things that make the entire city -no, the entire country so diverse. Of course, now that makes so much more sense.

Now they’re not talking about just young children. These word bans would be at every level of standardized testing, including middle and high school.
Do they truly believe these kids live in a closet?

Wait until these overly sensitive kids grow up and out into the real world.. won’t they be in for a surprise. How about preparing kids for the real world, a world that does include swimming pools, meth heads, unemployment and birthdays?

What they’re effectively doing is raising a generation of emotionally crippled adults that won’t know how to cope with the harshness of reality – i.e. the real world.

Here is the complete list of words that are up for execution (whoops, can I say that?):

Abuse –physical, sexual, emotional, or psychological (So much for questions on health)

Alcohol –beer and liquor, tobacco, or drugs (I wonder if the word hooch is acceptable?)

Birthday celebrations and birthdays  (Because no one was born on any particular day -ever. )

Bodily functions (Ahh.. the dreaded fart)

Cancer – and other diseases (Too scary. So much for health and science testing)

Catastrophes/disasters – tsunamis and hurricanes (It may give the kiddos that have never heard of them nightmares)

Celebrities (Ok, they got me there. I wouldn’t want to discuss most celebrities either. Now don’t get your feelings hurt, I did say MOST, not all.)

Children dealing with serious issues (Kids can only handle unicorns and rainbows)

Cigarettes – and other smoking paraphernalia (Because they may give you cancer and that’s another banned word)

Computers in the home – acceptable in a school or library setting (Little Suzie had to walk to the library to use the computer, because they don’t have one at home, just three Obama phones)

Crime (Never happens in NYC, so why even mention it?)

Death and disease (Might as well ban it. You can’t use cancer or crime)

Divorce (How dare the system make the kids with parents feel guilty about the kids with just a baby daddy?)

Evolution (We can’t let kids think there may be different points of view)

Expensive gifts, vacations, and prizes (There can’t be haves and have nots – just ask any liberal)

Gambling involving money (Hey, what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas -right?)

Halloween (Damn those Pagan rituals.. or maybe someone will get their feelings hurt when the Great Pumpkin doesn’t come to visit?)

Homelessness  (Those aren’t homeless people in NYC, they’re sidewalk warmers – is that more an acceptable term?)

Homes with swimming pools (See Above – the Have and the Have Nots)

Hunting ( I was sad when the hunter killed Bambi’s mom too, but I got over it)

Junk food ( I had 3 Oreos. Billy took 2.  How many fingers did Billy have left after I chased him down and caught him? )

In-depth discussions of sports that require prior knowledge (What..Seriously? No mention of Obama Golf? Oh the humanity!)

Loss of employment (Interesting how welfare isn’t on the banned list)

Nuclear weapons ( Question 2: Who said, “We seek the total elimination one day of :: banned word:: from the face of the Earth.”
1. Ronald Reagan 2. Ahmadinejad  3. Kim Jong Un)

Occult topics -i.e. fortune-telling ( I guess the non-Gypsy kids wouldn’t get it)

Parapsychology ( I guess any mention of Ivy League Duke University’s Parapsychology Department is out of the question – literally)

Politics (and that’s where low information voters come from)

Pornography (On a school test? Who does that anyway?)

Poverty (Why give kids the silly idea that with an education and a good work ethic, they may be able to get themselves out of a lifetime of it? That would be just silly.)

Rap Music (Anyone remember The Sugar Hill Gang? I said a hip hop the hippie the hippie to the hip hip hop, a you dont stop…)

Religion ( I don’t think I saw Atheism on the list. Imagine no religion… I wonder if you can.. )

Religious holidays and festivals -including but not limited to Christmas, Yom Kippur, and Ramadan (Is Festivus safe?)

Rock-and-Roll  (So you ban the word Rock and Roll, but not Justin Beiber?)

Running away (I wonder how that would go on a test – Johnny ran away from CPS 10 times. The police brought him back 2 times. How many times did Johnny escape?)

Sex (Storks bring babies and I’m not seeing abortion on the list of banned words)

Slavery (Riddle me this Batman – On a standardized test, how do you test knowledge of world history without mentioning slavery?)

Terrorism (They’re not terrorist, they’re freedom fighters!)

Television and video games (How about – Television and video games, turn them off and go outside)

Traumatic material – including material that may be particularly upsetting such as animal shelters
(I always found leftist particularly upsetting, yet they still exist)

Vermin – rats and roaches (Try living in NYC and not mention them. Good luck with that.)

Violence (Kumbya my Lord.. Kumbya…)

War and bloodshed (You’re kidding me – No questions about War for Oil?)

Weapons – guns, knives, etc. (Well so much for teaching the 2nd Amendment. I’m surprised the word Constitution isn’t banned -yet)

Witchcraft, sorcery, etc. (Sorry Harry Potter, no more Quidditch for you)

Oh please, they just want to promote an everyone is equal, utopian society where no one has more or less than anybody else, and if they do, it’s not fair. It’s good to share the wealth- you know spread it around. So let’s start indoctrinating the kids – get them while their young.

What do you think about the war on words? Let me know in the comments below 

URGENT ACTION ALERT — Urge North Carolina Gov. to Sign Anti-Sharia Bill HB 522

There have been more than 50 cases in 23 states in which judges have applied foreign law, depriving people of their constitutional rights.
No Sharia Law In America!

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory is facing a tough decision – whether to veto a bill that prohibiting judges from considering foreign law, including Islamic Sharia law. Although there shouldn’t be a need for this law, sadly there is. There have been more than 50 cases in 23 states in which judges have applied foreign law, depriving people of their constitutional rights. Often women and children wind up the victims when Sharia law is applied. This is without a doubt unconstitutional, but that hasn’t stopped liberal judges.
Read More On: Sharia Law In American State Courts [PDF File]

North Carolina Muslims hope they can persuade the Republican governor to veto the bill, according to The State.com
Muslims oppose the effort because they think it is motivated by intolerance and say it could infringe on other religious groups. .
But others say measures banning the use of “foreign laws” are targeting Sharia law, not other religions – Nonsense!

On U.S. soil, we must all embrace the laws of this country via the Constitution, and not demand enforcement of rules and regulations left in other cultures. Many Sharia law problems in the United States involve cases of women being beaten by their Muslim husbands and judges ruling that because the men were not accustomed to U.S. laws against spousal abuse, they cannot be convicted.

CAIR sent out a national “action alert” urging Muslims to call and email McCrory to ask him to veto the bill. Defending Sharia law from U.S. restrictions is one of CAIR’s top agenda items, according to its March 2012 statement announcing a “community toolkit to challenge ‘Anti-Sharia’ bills.”

---

WE MUST TAKE ACTION TODAY!

If McCrory signs the bill, North Carolina would become the seventh state to have an anti-Sharia law, according to TheState.com, joining Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, South Dakota, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. Alabama lawmakers approved a similar constitutional amendment, which will be on the ballot for voters to consider in 2014.

                                                                                                                                                     

As Americans, especially Americans living in North Carolina, we MUST take action now. House Bill 522, titled Foreign Laws/Protect Constitutional Rights,  has been ratified and sent to Governor McCrory for signature as of July 26, 2013.
Please take a moment to email Governor Pat McCrory through this email form on the Governor’s web page  asking him to sign HB 522  The Anti-Sharia Bill.
We MUST let him know that as Americans we say,“NO FOREIGN LAWS IN AMERICA!”
Please be respectful when contacting the Governor, but make sure he knows you support HB522.

You can also contact Governor Pat McCrory’s office by:
PHONE: (919) 814-2000
or FAX: (919) 733-2120
TWITTER: @PatMcCroryNC

Holder “Shooting was tragic and unecessary” – More Race baiting from the AG

Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday called the killing of Trayvon Martin a “tragic, unnecessary shooting,” and said the Justice Department will follow “the facts and the law” as it reviews evidence to see whether federal criminal charges are warranted.

In his first comments since the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the Martin case, the attorney general said the 17-year-old’s death provides an opportunity for the nation to speak honestly about complicated and emotionally charged issues.

He said the nation must not forgo an opportunity toward better understanding of one another.

On Sunday, the Justice Department said it is reviewing evidence in the case to determine whether criminal civil rights charges would be brought.

The department opened an investigation into Martin’s death last year but stepped aside to allow the state prosecution to proceed.

Holder said, “We are … mindful of the pain felt by our nation surrounding the tragic, unnecessary shooting death of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla., last year.” The attorney general’s characterization of the killing drew strong applause from the audience at the 51st national convention of the Delta Sigma Theta, the nation’s largest African-American sorority.

“Independent of the legal determination that will be made, I believe that this tragedy provides yet another opportunity for our nation to speak honestly about the complicated and emotionally charged issues that this case has raised,” Holder said.

“We must not — as we have too often in the past — let this opportunity pass,” he added.

“I hope that we will approach this necessarily difficult dialogue with the same dignity that those who have lost the most, Trayvon’s parents, have demonstrated throughout the last year — and especially over the past few days,” said Holder. “They suffered a pain that no parent should have to endure — and one that I, as a father, cannot begin to conceive.”

The Justice Department says the criminal section of the agency’s civil rights division, along with the FBI and federal prosecutors in Florida, are all continuing to evaluate the evidence generated during the federal investigation, plus evidence and testimony from the state trial.

Also on Monday, the White House said President Barack Obama won’t involve himself in the Justice Department decision on whether to pursue civil rights charges against Zimmerman. White House spokesman Jay Carney said it would be inappropriate for Obama to express an opinion on how the department deals with Zimmerman.

I’m galled, yet not surprised. The White House resident, Barry Soetero, thinks it would be inappropriate to express his opinion – now? He was quick with an opinion without having all the facts during his, “If I had a son he’d look like Trayvon” speech.

Now we have AG Holder continuing the race baiting. Unbelievable.  Maybe someone needs to remind him that a report submitted by the FBI after their investigation has already stated that George Zimmerman’s actions were not based on race:

“Zimmerman’s actions were not based on Martin’s skin color [BUT]rather based on his attire, the total circumstances of the encounter and the previous burglary suspects in the community,” an FBI agent wrote in a report dated March 5, 2012

Sanford Florida Police Department’s lead investigator concluded: “George Zimmerman wasn’t a racist, but instead a bit “overzealous” and emboldened by a little hero complex.”

You can’t re-investigate something and expect magic to appear and new evidence to show up…unless you’re Eric Holder or Al Sharpton. So why do it? It’s very helpful when you’re pandering to a certain segment of society.

Here’s something for you to chew on:

A 2007 special report released by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, reveals that approximately 8,000 — and, in certain years, as many as 9,000 blacks are murdered annually in the United States. This figure is accompanied by another equally sobering fact, that 93% of these murders are in fact perpetrated by other blacks. The analysis, supported by FBI records, finds that in 2005 alone, for example, blacks accounted for 49% of all homicide victims in the US — again, almost exclusively at the hands of other blacks.

No opinion on that, Barry? It’s not going to happen because race baiting and dividing a nation is much easier.
Wasn’t justice already served? I thought that’s what a jury trial is for, or does justice only count when you agree with the verdict?

h/t: AP

Banned Cleric’s Outspoken Deputy Visits White House

In case you haven’t heard, The Investigative Project on Terrorism just blew the whistle on the Obama administration’s latest interactions with Muslim jihadist.

Sheikh Abdullah bin Bayyah bragged on his Web site that he had met with Team Obama on June 13. IPT reported that bin Bayyah was invited by National Security Council official Gayle Smith “to learn from you and we need to be looking for new mechanisms to communicate with you and the Association of Muslim Scholars.”

Bin Bayyah’s June 13 account placed other senior officials in the meeting, including:Rashad Hussain, the U.S. special envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), National Security Adviser Tom Donilon and White House spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri. But the account was later changed to delete the reference to Donilon’s presence at the meeting.

Smith also thanked Bin Bayyah for “his efforts to bring more understanding among humanity”

So who is  Bin Bayyah and why should you care? 
Bin Bayyah is vice president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS), a group founded by and headed by Yusuf Qaradawi who is considered so radical, he’s banned from entering our country. Qaradawi, considered the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood movement, exhorts followers to kill every last Jew; sanctioned suicide bombings and the killing of our soldiers; expressed support for executing apostates and stoning gays; and declared that the “US is an enemy of Islam.” – Bayyah is his top lieutenant and supporter.

What does this administration hope to accomplish by consorting with radicals? It’s anyone’s guess, but it’s painfully obvious they’ve learned nothing from the recent past.

Just thought you’d like to know.

NSA Prism Program – Helpful or Hurtful?

Since the Prism program has become public, we’ve heard from both sides – both for and against. I’m not going to try to convince you either way, both sides have valid points.
I will say I may have been swayed to support the Intel community, but with this administration…now I’m not so sure. I will admit, there’s a fine line between privacy and counter-terrorism.

First let me explain what PRISM is and what it’s supposed to do.

NSA access is part of a previously undisclosed program called Prism, which allows officials to collect material including search history, the content of emails, file transfers and live chats, the document says. More specifically, it’s a data mining program.

The Guardian UK has verified the authenticity of the document, a 41-slide PowerPoint presentation – classified as top secret with no distribution to foreign allies – which was apparently used to train intelligence operatives on the capabilities of the program. The document claims “collection directly from the servers” of major US service providers such as Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet providers.

Unlike the collection of the Verizon call records, this surveillance can include the content of communications and not just the meta data,(meta data is technical information about communications traffic and network devices) although members of the Intelligence community state that only meta data is being collected. If this is true, it would be the first time President Obama was honest about anything – ever.

Although the presentation claims the program is run with the assistance of the companies, all those who responded to a Guardian UK request for comment on Thursday denied knowledge of any such program.

 The ACLU’s Mr. Jaffer had this to say about PRISM: “The stories published over the last two days make clear that the NSA now has direct access to every corner of Americans’ digital lives. Unchecked government surveillance presents a grave threat to democratic freedoms.” 

As far as oversight, a former member of the Intelligence Community has stated that PRISM is overseen by congress and FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act).

Now let’s take a look at the other side of the coin…

The crucial point is here, from the Director of National Intelligence:

Section 702 is a provision of FISA that is designed to facilitate the acquisition of foreign intelligence information concerning non-U.S. persons located outside the United States. It cannot be used to intentionally target any U.S. citizen, any other U.S. person, or anyone located within the United States.

The information, the data, may be in the US as a result of the global spread of the internet and the physical location of servers. But the information cannot be about either a US citizen or someone who is in the US. And, if we’re prepared to be honest about matters, we do actually want the government to be keeping an eye on foreigners in foreign lands. Which is what they’re doing.

Has the program actually thwarted a terrorist attack? 

Nobody knows. The US government has said that the monitoring schemes it runs are necessary to defend against terrorist threats. But it hasn’t cited any threats that were thwarted – unsurprising, given that the program has only just become public. One member of the intelligence community has stated that they have used collected information to stop a planned attack, but because of security reasons he could not elaborate.According to John Arquilla, writer for National Security at foreignpolicy.com:

“The tantalizing prospect of PRISM, and of the whole “finding effort,” is to deny the terrorists the virtual haven that they enjoy throughout the world’s telecommunications spaces — indeed, throughout the whole of the “infosphere,” which includes cyberspace. The piercing of this veil would mark a true turning point in the war on terror, for al Qaeda and other networks simply cannot function with any kind of cohesion, or at any sort of reasonable operational tempo if their communications become insecure. Cells and nodes would be ripped up, operatives killed or captured, and each loss would no doubt yield information that imperiled the network further. Even if al Qaeda resorted to the drastic measure of moving messages, training, and financial information by courier, operations would be so slowed as to cripple the organization. And even couriers can be flagged on “no fly” lists or caught boarding tramp steamers and such. So for all the furor caused by the PRISM revelations, my simple recommendation is to take a deep breath before crying out in protest. Think first about how the hider/finder dynamic in the war on terror has driven those responsible for our security to bring to bear the big guns of big data on the problem at hand. Think also about whether a willingness to allow some incursions into our privacy might lead to an improved ability to provide for our security, and where that equilibrium point between privacy and security might be. And last, think about the world as it might be without such a sustained effort to find the hidden — to detect, track, and disrupt the terrorists. That would be a world in which they stay on their feet and fighting, and in which they remain secure enough, for long enough, to acquire true weapons of mass destruction. Those of us in the national security business, who know that networks so armed will be far harder to deter than nations ever were, believe that big data approaches like PRISM and its forebears, have been and remain essential elements in the unrelenting and increasingly urgent effort to find the hidden.”

I’ll admit, I’m sitting on the fence on this one – for now- at least until I get more facts..

What do you think? Is our government over reaching again or is this program necessary to keep us safe from further planned terrorist attacks? I’d really like to hear your opinions.

Supreme Court Upholds Law Allowing DNA Samples Without Warrant

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled in Maryland v. King, by a vote of 5-4, that it is constitutional for police to take DNA swabs of felony arrestees–who have not yet been convicted of anything–without a warrant. It’s not whether the government can take DNA from people convicted of a crime. All states require DNA collection from individuals convicted of a felony. Instead, the issue is whether it’s constitutional to take DNA samples from people prior to their trial. The Supreme Court ruled yes.
So much for innocent until proven guilty and our 4th Amendment rights.

So what’s the difference between taking a DNA sample and fingerprints?  One is actually used for identification and one is not. It’s falsely claimed by the majority om the Supreme Court that DNA swabbing is necessary to identify the suspect. As Justice Scalia notes in his dissent, “These DNA searches have nothing to do with identification.” By law, DNA testing only starts after arraignment and bail decisions are already made. At that time, the suspect has long been identified. 

Scalia says that DNA analysis can take months, while the “average response time for an electronic criminal fingerprint submission is about 27 minutes.” Clearly, it is unreasonable to wait several months before a suspect is identified.

What if DNA evidence is needed to help solve the case? As Senator Ted Cruz who opposes the ruling writes, “If the government has good cause for needing the DNA sample—such as trying to match DNA at a crime scene to a particular person where there is other corroborating evidence—then the government can ask a judge for a search warrant. That’s what our Framers intended—judicial checks on extensive government power to invade our personal lives.”

What part of this does SCOTUS not understand? Oh wait…never mind.

Do you agree with the Supreme Court that it’s necessary for identification before a conviction or do you believe that the Fourth Amendment was just trampled on? Let me know what you think.

 

Must Read: Issa Posts Interviews With “Rogue” Cincy IRS Agents

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) revealed new testimony from IRS employees in Cincinnati involved with the IRS’s political targeting today on CNN’s State of the Union.

The Committee released excerpts from bipartisan transcribed interviews between Committee Investigators and Cincinnati IRS employees. In these interviews Cincinnati IRS employees reject the White House’s claim that the targeting was merely work of “rogue” agents and say targeting of conservative political groups came from Washington, D.C.

 

Q: In early 2010, was there a time when you became aware of applications that referenced Tea Party or other conservative groups?
A: In March of 2010, I was made aware.

******
Q: Okay. Now, was there a point around this time period when [your supervisor] asked you to do a search for similar applications?
A: Yes.
Q: To the best of your recollection, when was this request made?
A: Sometime in early March of 2010.

******
Q: Did [your supervisor] give you any indication of the need for the search, any more context?
A: He told me that Washington, D.C., wanted some cases.

******

Q: So as of April 2010, these 40 cases were held at that moment in your group; is that right?
A: Some were.
Q: How many were held there?
A: Less than 40. Some went to Washington, D.C.
Q: Okay. How many went to Washington, D.C.?
A: I sent seven.

******

Q: So you prepared seven hard copy versions of the applications to go to Washington, D.C.?
A: Correct.

******

Q: Did he give you any sort of indication as to why he requested you to do that?

[…]
A: He said Washington, D.C. wanted seven. Because at one point I believe I heard they were thinking 10, but it came down to seven. I said okay, seven.
Q: How did you decide which seven were sent?
A: Just the first seven.
Q: The first seven to come into the system?
A: Yes.

*****

Q: Did anyone else ever make a request that you send any cases to Washington?
A: [Different IRS employee] wanted to have two cases that she couldn’t ‑‑ Washington, D.C. wanted them, but she couldn’t find the paper. So she requested me, through an email, to find these cases for her and to send them to Washington, D.C.
Q: When was this, what time frame?
A: I don’t recall the time frame, maybe May of 2010.

******

Q: But just to be clear, she told you the specific names of these applicants.
A: Yes.
Q: And she told you that Washington, D.C. had requested these two specific applications be sent to D.C.
A: Yes, or parts of them.

******

Q: Okay. So she asked you to send particular parts of these applications.
A: Mm‑hmm.
Q: And that was unusual. Did you say that?
A: Yes.
Q: And she indicated that Washington had requested these specific parts of these specific applications; is that right?
A: Correct.

******

Q: So what do you think about this, that allegation has been made, I think as you have seen in lots of press reports, that there were two rogue agents in Cincinnati that are sort of responsible for all of the issues that we have been talking about today. What do you think about those allegations?
[…]
A: It’s impossible. As an agent we are controlled by many, many people. We have to submit many, many reports. So the chance of two agents being rogue and doing things like that could never happen.

******

Q: And you’ve heard, I’m sure, news reports about individuals here in Washington saying this is a problem that was originated in and contained in the Cincinnati office, and that it was the Cincinnati office that was at fault. What is your reaction to those types of stories?
[…]
A: Well, it’s hard to answer the question because in my mind I still hear people saying we were low‑level employees, so we were lower than dirt, according to people in D.C. So, take it for what it is. They were basically throwing us underneath the bus.

******

Q: So is it your perspective that ultimately the responsible parties for the decisions that were reported by the IG are not in the Cincinnati office?
A: I don’t know how to answer that question. I mean, from an agent standpoint, we didn’t do anything wrong. We followed directions based on other people telling us what to do.
Q: And you ultimately followed directions from Washington; is that correct?
A: If direction had come down from Washington, yes.
Q: But with respect to the particular scrutiny that was given to Tea Party applications, those directions emanated from Washington; is that right?
A: I believe so.

And another more senior IRS Cincinnati employee complained about micromanagement from D.C.:

Q: But you specifically recall that the BOLO terms included “Tea Party?”
A: Yes, I do.
Q: And it was your understanding ‑‑ was it your understanding that the purpose of the BOLO was to identify Tea Party groups?
A: That is correct.
Q: Was it your understanding that the purpose of the BOLO was to identify conservative groups?
A: Yes, it was.
Q: Was it your understanding that the purpose of the BOLO was to identify Republican groups?
A: Yes, it was.

******

Q: Earlier I believe you informed us that the primary reason for applying for another job in July [2010] was because of the micromanagement from [Washington, DC, IRS Attorney], is that correct?
A: Right. It was the whole Tea Party. It was the whole picture. I mean, it was the micromanagement. The fact that the subject area was extremely sensitive and it was something that I didn’t want to be associated with.
Q: Why didn’t you want to be associated with it?
A: For what happened now. I mean, rogue agent? Even though I was taking all my direction from EO Technical [Washington, D.C], I didn’t want my name in the paper for being this rogue agent for a project I had no control over.
Q: Did you think there was something inappropriate about what was happening in 2010?
A: Yes. The inappropriateness was not processing these applications fairly and timely.

******

Q: You have stated you had concerns with the fairness and the timeliness of the application process. Did you have concerns with just the fact that these cases were grouped together and you were the only one handling them?
A: I was the only one handling the Tea Party’s, that is correct.
Q: Did that specifically cause you concern?
A: Yes, it did. And I was the only person handling them.
Q: Were you concerned that you didn’t have the capacity to process all of the applications in a timely manner?
A: That is correct. And it is just ‑‑ I mean, like you brought up, the micromanagement, the fact that the topic was just weirdly handled was a huge concern to me.

******
Issa stated that more transcripts will be released.

…There’s no rogue in Cincinnati, there’s a rogue in the White House.

Eric Holder – The Moses of Our Time?

That was actually said by a left wing pundit and MSNBC contributor Michael Eric Dyson.
“He’s the chief law giver of the United States of America , so to speak. He’s the Moses of our time, and at least for this administration.”
Seriously? I couldn’t make this up if I tried….

Holder is the chief law giver? I thought Congress gave us laws, and the DOJ was supposed to make sure they are universally and judiciously enforced. He’s “the Moses of our time”? The only thing Eric Holder parted like the Red Sea was Congress. I wonder whether Holder consulted the Ten Commandments before potentially perjuring himself in his May 15 testimony when he claimed that he not been involved with any “potential prosecution of the press” for disclosing classified material?

Leave a comment and tell me what you think. I know I can’t be the only one that thinks someone has lost their mind.

Luton – Extremist Capital of Britain

Stacey Dooley, born and raised in Luton, investigates what is going on in her hometown and why it is known as the extremist capital of Britain. The group she confronts are protesting against the arrest of  a local woman and wife of the Stockholm suicide bomber. While following the protest, Stacey is confronted by a Muslim woman and experiences first-hand the views held by these groups.

Fatwa No : 126274
Muslims calling to Islam while living in a non-Muslim country-

It should be noted that it is not permissible for the Muslim to immigrate to the lands of disbelief except for a necessity or a dire need because immigration to the lands of disbelief cannot be free from violations of Sharee‘ah rules in general. For further information, see Fatwa 86405.

However, if there is a valid reason for the Muslim to immigrate and stay there, he must abide by the rules and laws which regulate people’s life and which do not contradict the rulings of Sharee‘ah.

Woolrich Jihadist- “We are forced by the Qur’an”

The unedited version.
Michael Adebolajomur murdered 25 year old British soldier Drummer Lee Rigby. He calmly tries to justify his actions by citing the koran.

Transcript:

The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers. And this British soldier is one.
It is an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
By Allah, we swear by the almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone.

So what if we want to live by the Shari’a in Muslim lands? Why does that mean you must follow us and chase us and call us extremists and kill us?
Rather you lot are extreme. You are the ones that when you drop a bomb you think it hits one person? Or rather your bomb wipes out a whole family? This is the reality.
By Allah if I saw your mother today with a buggy I would help her up the stairs. This is my nature.
But we are forced by the Qur’an, in Sura At-Tawba, through many ayah in the Qu’ran, we must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

I apologise that women had to witness this today but in our lands women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your governments, they don’t care about you. You think David Cameron is going to get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? You think politicians are going to die? No, it’s going to be the average guy, like you and your children. So get rid of them. Tell them to bring our troops back so can all live in peace. So leave our lands and we can all live in peace. That’s all I have to say. [in Arabic:] Allah’s peace and blessings be upon you.