“Rumblings of Dictatorship”

©2013 drkate

And there’s Benghazi, Breitbart, Aaron Swartz, and other knowers; Sandy Hook, Aurora, and Clackamas; election theft, martial law the so called fiscal cliff, and gun control…chemtrails, flouride, and the flu…

Declaration of Independence:

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

What are your plans for 2013?

…Open Thread…

196 Responses to ““Rumblings of Dictatorship””

  1. 1 drkate January 13, 2013 at 10:59 pm

    Working on another post which is taking a little more time than I thought…

    Carried over from last thread, h/t typistjan

    Someone is keeping a list. Think he has by-passed the clintons?


      • 3 typistjan January 13, 2013 at 11:55 pm

        CONGRESS CAN STOP OBAMA. Everytime he signs an Ex. Order, Congress has 30-days to void it.
        WILL THEY?

        • 4 nunua January 14, 2013 at 4:12 pm

          Why would they. Government is interested in taking total control of the three would be branches. It is a theocracy in the making. I just can’t tell which religion it is that is taking over.

          • 5 Bildo January 14, 2013 at 6:27 pm

            Sharia Law comes to mind.

            • 6 Quantum Leap January 14, 2013 at 9:06 pm

              exactly. Oklahoma is their trial run for sharia. sharia is bad and they want to control the world. bamboozler supports muslim brotherhood and sharia with billions in aid.

              • 7 heather January 14, 2013 at 10:03 pm

                QL–where did you hear that ok we their trial run? because that lib judge took away our vote in 2010 because some arab from colorado came and said its unconstitutional? yeah man, we are pissed about this and scott pruitt our AG is working on appealing it. not much news about it lately though. please explain the ok/sharia deal.

                • 8 Quantum Leap January 15, 2013 at 7:27 pm

                  I don’t remember where Heather, but it was in the last few days that I read it. Perhaps it was at Monica Crowley site. It has to do with Oblah blah’s close relationship to the arabs namely kashid…what’s his name…. and the infiltration of Islam currently in high positions in the WH. The global take over of Islam and all the money Oblah blah sends to Muslim brotherhood of Islam/sharia around the world.

                  There was a post I read yesterday upstream on this thread. The poster said something like “all this tuff is going on and no one is stopping it.”

                  Everyone is thinking that. You bet!

          • 9 Mary January 18, 2013 at 11:03 pm

            Islam: a major reason the Muslim-in-Chief was put into place by the NWO.

  2. 13 typistjan January 13, 2013 at 11:20 pm

    Hum, wonder if they can put the flu in the water supply?

  3. 14 no-nonsense-nancy January 14, 2013 at 12:44 am

    I hear they are having a hard time getting people to DC for the inauguration. They have even hired people to stand along the parade route.

    I say we need at least 10million people to go there, not to watch an inauguration, but to stop one !!! Since when can we count on congress for ANYTHING? Could we pull it off? Food for thought.


  4. 19 justafly January 14, 2013 at 7:59 am

    Obam is only a puppet. Someone has the J. Edgar Hoover-style 10 ton weights over his head and many of those in Congress and in the judiciary. They know the Libertarians/Republicans/Conservatives are mostly law-abiding, God-fearing and silent citizens. They on the other hand have 0% compunction against using lies, distortion, denial, subversion, civil unrest, violence and intimidation to advance their agenda. How naive are we to believe the USA is the only government with agents in foreign nations working to subvert the government in power of those nations, up to and including drone strikes and invasion. We will be faced with “Live Free or Die” in the coming decade.

  5. 21 Troy January 14, 2013 at 12:37 pm

    The evidence just keeps rolling in.
    fernleygirl says:
    January 14, 2013 at 1:35 pm (Edit)
    Read this (the strike-outs didn’t copy, so the text won’t read correctly until you go to the link):


    Lovre is the owner of an entity called Crisis Management Institute. The Institute provides a kind of social working platform to aid children enduring a wide range of disasters, including school shootings. Purportedly to assist the students of Sandy Hook she produced a PDF called “Talking with Children/Students About the Sandy Hook Shooting.” The only problem is it was apparently created on or before December 10th created before December 14, because it was posted before this time. As alerted by one poster the date of last modification of the PDF is December 14. However, was this really posted four days before the shooting? That can be seen in the screen shot above, which clearly records the 10th day of the month. The following screen shot was taken directly from the Word-Press code on her Website, cmionline.org, on January 9th and, of note, nothing has been altered or manipulated. If studied closely, the number “10″ in the date code is seen (that screen shot removed).


    • 22 Quantum Leap January 14, 2013 at 9:18 pm

      That’s a waste of money as usual. Parents are the ones to be assisting their kids in crisis and not the schools. Waste of money and too much pork. Too much control over others kids.

  6. 23 Dolores Moody January 14, 2013 at 12:44 pm

    This country is swirling down the drain and nobody is doing anything about it. Dr. Orly has protests coming up on Jan. 20 in front of the White House and Jan. 21 in front of the Supreme Court, but I have no idea how many will show up for either event. Then she has a hearing of some sort on Feb. 15, but it might be too late by then, I fear.

  7. 25 Tenacity January 14, 2013 at 1:52 pm

    I would just like to remind everyone that according to the constitution, the people in each State ARE the law enforcers. Article I, Section 8, clauses 15 & 16 state that “the Congress shall have the power… To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.”

    To my informed knowledge, Article I, Section 8 has never been repealed. Be apprised that the term Militia is neither a standing national army nor a top down organized national guard that answers to the Joint Chiefs of the national military. Militia, by definition and by practice, represents the citizenry of each State organized from the ground up.

    If Congress fails to do its job, then the Second Article of the Bill of Rights serves as the only means of enforcement for redress of grievances petitioned and unanswered. We are way past the time for our petitions to be answered. Even the courts have turned a deaf ear to the people. Our constitutional republic has been abandoned. Tyrannical forces control every institution of finance, government, justice, information & education. We can no longer afford to delay.

    • 26 Bildo January 14, 2013 at 6:56 pm

      The courts don’t have to listen to you because of your status. They listen to you if you know who you are. I went to court once and decided to play with them, again. The NAME was called, I stood up and said, “I’m here on that matter. I am the Authorized Representative of the entity you are identifying.
      The “judge” asked me my name. I gave him my first and middle name as that is my given-name. He said if that wasn’t me then I should sit down. I said thank you for the judicial determination that I, the man, am not the entity you are seeking in this matter.
      Then we all sat back while they prosecuted the LEGAL PERSON. They administered the estate without my consent. Now I’ve trashed that judge and they won’t put another one in from my county. They have to import a judge each time, from another county.

      Get with the program. Yelling at a corporation is great for amusement, but…….

  8. 31 typistjan January 14, 2013 at 3:02 pm

    ”How long shall they kill our prophets while we stand aside and look?”—Bob Marley


  9. 33 nunua January 14, 2013 at 4:44 pm

    It was about her Petition not a court case…

    Your petition has been removed from We the People

    We the People, WhiteHouse.gov

    8:35 AM (5 hours ago)

    to Orly

    Your petition“We petition Barack H. Obama (aka Soetoro aka Soebarkah) to resign due to his use of a stolen CT SSN, forged BC and SS”has been removed from the We the People platform on WhiteHouse.gov because it was in violation of theWe the People Terms of Participation.

    If you would like to request reconsideration of this decision, please reply to this email with an explanation why your petition is not in violation of the Terms of Participation.


    We the People Moderator



    Orly Taitz

    2:27 PM (0 minutes ago)

    to We, bcc: Yosi
    Dear sir/mdm,
    I received your e-mail, stating that my petition was removed due to violation of privacy and I state unequivocally that I did not violate any one’s privacy. I am a licensed attorney and do not see any violation of privacy. On Sunday evening and Sunday night I gathered nearly a 1,000 signatures from citizens of 49 states, which shows a great public interest and the matter to be an issue of public controversy.
    I demand my petition to be reinstated immediately. If you refuse to reinstate it, please, advice me, where exactly did I violate any one’s privacy.
    Dr. Taitz, ESQ

    I truly admire this little lady!!! Go ORLY!

    • 34 Quantum Leap January 17, 2013 at 3:32 pm

      I like Orly too. I don’t care what anyone says. No one is perfect and we are in no position to go it alone.

  10. 35 nunua January 14, 2013 at 4:49 pm

    “In Politics, nothing is accidental.
    If something happens, be assured
    it was planned this way.”
    –Franklin D. Roosevelt,
    32 Degree Mason
    UNITED STATES THE CORPORATION: I really liked this vid it goes much deeper than others on the act of 1871 and what DC really is.

    • 36 Bildo January 14, 2013 at 6:23 pm

      That’s why I can’t figure out why everyone is still trying to change a foreign-owned, bankrupt corporation. It has nothing to do with our country. When Corp US does anything to anyone, all the victim has to do is not consent.
      Get out of the corporation, and it’s jurisdiction, and your problem is solved.

      And on a side note, many are saying that to sign one of these white house petitions is a ticket to Camp FEMA.
      It’s also the same as petitioning Wal-Mart or any other corporation. They don’y have to listen to you.

      Again, if you are giving them your income tax money, for starters, then you are voluntarily supporting them. If we want Corp US gone we should stop supporting it. Period.

    • 37 Tenacity January 14, 2013 at 10:29 pm

      nunua, Thank you for sharing this video. It establishes a clear and concise chronology of what we’ve (Dr Kate, Red Beckman, I and others) have been saying for the last 3+ years. His work on the replacement 13th & fraudulently ratified 14th Amendments is perhaps the best I’ve seen and I have researched extensively. This video is a very important work as it contains the missing pieces of the Articles of Freedom that we in the Third Continental Congress intended to revisit and add. We had a good bit of this information in our hands in the fall of 2009 but ran out of time and needed to build such an understandable chronology. In addition to sharing this far and wide, I intend to follow up with this gentleman. So please accept my sincere gratitude for bringing this to DrKatesView.

    • 38 Bob's Box January 15, 2013 at 8:42 am

      FDR should know…HE DELIBERATELY GOT THIS NATION INTO WWII THROUGH PEARL HARBOR. Over 80% of this nation was against any war action in 1940. So it was up to FDR, cousin of progressive Teddy Roosevelt to devise a plan along with the Navy to bring Japan into Pearl Harbor.

      Startpage search “McCollum memo” and “Vacant Sea policy” to see where I am getting at. Read about this in Chapter 6 “The Lesser Races” of Judge Andrew Napolitano’s new book “Theodore and Woodrow: How two American presidents destroyed Constitutional freedom.”

  11. 39 Bildo January 14, 2013 at 6:36 pm

    Sooo, Orly is an attorney. A member of the BAR? A British agent? Controlled by the Lawyer’s Guild of Great Britain? How a-musing. I hate to be negative but don’t we all know about the lawyer/attorney thing?
    I’d like to see her “License to practice Law”. I asked our DA for his and he handed me his BAR card. I laughed at him. I love making those jerks squirm. Our DA has NO license to practice law!!! Does Orly?

  12. 51 heather January 15, 2013 at 11:03 am

    I found a very interesting article the other day while researching my family history. It was dated 1932 in Pine Plains, NY. The article was all about the new progressive movement in America and FDR–and one would truly believe that reading that article was the same as reading it today. The final sentence read, “History has a way of repeating itself.”

    I tried to copy and paste to share here but the file would not allow. So anyone interested in the progressive movement, just go to old news article throughout the US and read what they were trying to do way back then. Those days were the timmiration yrs that made this country great and those were the people who built America —

    • 52 heather January 15, 2013 at 11:05 am

      immigration movement years.

      Germany, Prussia, England, Ireland, Scotland, Greece and Italy were our biggest immigrants. And I say Prussia because thats how some listed their country of origin before they changed and divided.

    • 53 Bildo January 15, 2013 at 8:24 pm

      And with the bankruptcy of 1933 and the Reconconstruction Act the US citizens were served up as collateral for the debt. Good old FDR. The immigrants were a really good idea. They gave ’em all birth certs and were able to borrow more “money” by promising the immigrant’s future wages. This is why they want to give all our illegal immigrants amnesty. Give them all birth certs and SS#’s. Do you realize how much “money” they could borrow with all that new collateral?

      • 54 heather January 15, 2013 at 8:40 pm

        In the late 1800s and early 1900s immigrants came by the boat loads to live in America, the land of opportunity, the land of the free and the home of the brave. These immigrants gave their all to become Americans and live in the greatest country on earth. They came here, young and old, individually and family groups. They were brought to Ellis Island to be quarrentined prior to release and they all had to have a family member or sponsor before they could leave the island. This is the correct way to bring in immigrants…………..and not 1 single one got a penny from this govt…..unlike today when Clinton and Barry brought immigrants from Bosneia and other war torn countries, VV–they all got 20k or more to start their life here—on us!

        Those immigrants are our relatives that thought all of us what it means to be free, and live the american dream…those immigrants built this country unlike the have NOTs of today who stand with their hands out and reaching deeper and deeper into our pockets.

        Then came FDR with his progressive movement and whats when all hell broke lose and the immigrants who naturalized fought back these losers and thats where we are today–the same place, different error.

  13. 56 no-nonsense-nancy January 15, 2013 at 11:47 am

    Congress needs to get a backbone and do something about these evil-doers NOW!!!




  14. 59 foxyladi14 January 15, 2013 at 3:45 pm

    He has no shame. 👿

  15. 60 typistjan January 15, 2013 at 4:36 pm

    In case you missed the last one I posted, or didn’t bookmark it, much more info in this issue


  16. 61 Quantum Leap January 15, 2013 at 7:42 pm

    Obama’s official armored limo will bear license plates with the pro-D.C. statehood slogan “taxation without representation” starting this weekend, the dawn of his second term in the White House, a spokesman confirmed Tuesday.

    Puke Puke Puke!

    He’s in the faces of the Tea Party with his word salad. He going to claim he understands all the working stiffs who have to pay taxes!!!!!!!!!!

    It says “taxation without representation”……

    It should say ‘NO taxation without represention’

    he is soooooo f’n stupid. Valeries puppet gone wild.

    He must be laughing big time over this and how people fall for his lies and insane word salad.

    read it on ya-hoo

    Oh an Moocherelle has gotten a raise and a new WH position…..

    Fug these elitist and crooked magic negros.
    And no I’m not a racist.

    • 62 heather January 15, 2013 at 8:50 pm

      QL–none of us here are racists! We know that. So he’s going to rub his taxation of theft in our faces? Why not pour vinegar on us as well–what a pos he is and I hate the senate and the congress and the scotus and the military brass for allowing this to happen. They are all in violation of their oaths–their oaths mean nothing so when someone is sworn in with their hand on the Bible–we need to laugh at them and walk away–they are pos-all of em.

    • 63 sky January 17, 2013 at 9:25 am

      About taxes go to prowlingowl.com

    • 66 heather January 15, 2013 at 10:54 pm

      I cannot believe all this hoopla about background checks when one buys a frickn gun–do they not know that whenever you buy a gun–an FBI background check is done on the spot prior to the release of the gun you buy! OMG–are they stupid? Each state has different gun laws granted but they all require a background check. Oklahoma does a OSBI check. As far as registering your gun–if its not state law, oh well dont register it. Okies said today that if barry bans ammo—not to worry they are prepared to make their own ammo for their guns but they will not be without ammo.

      Most of the northeastern states have made it almost impossible to be a gun owner with strick rules and regs–thats unconstitutional as hell. It takes close to 9 months to get your license and registration in NJ. This is deliberate. It’s a piece of cake in OK and we are an open carry state just passed this past Nov.

      And that frickn Eric Holder – he was responsible for the terror he inflicted on Elia Gonzales of Cuba back on Clintons watch with Janet Reno the dyke. Talk about scaring the shit out of that little kid with the swat team busting that house apart and kidnapping him and sending him back to cuba! Remember that one?

      Holder is neck deep in fast and furious and barry too.

  17. 67 Quantum Leap January 15, 2013 at 8:10 pm

    Two days ago Georgia Judge Michael Malihi denied Barack Obama’s legal schemes to suppress his original birth certificates, social security numbers school and other records in Attorney Orly Taitz’s challenge of his eligibility to run for president in 2012. Obama’s attorney tried to one up the court by arguing, futilely, that Obama’s duties as acting President came first. At long last the issue of Obama’s possible fraudulent use of a Social Security number given to a resident of Connecticut who alleged was born in 1890 will be settled!

    According to a lengthy research project titled “List of Properties associated with Barack Obama and his Family,” done by a highly regarded former UK detective, Sergeant Neil Sankey along with Private Investigator Susan Daniels, Obama reportedly has 27 different social security numbers under 21 different personal and/or familial name variations in 22 states and the District of Columbia. Sankey’s research is featured in a web video entitled Dossier2MP4 produced by Jim Przybowski.

    continue article at The Western Center For Journalism:


  18. 70 Quantum Leap January 15, 2013 at 8:20 pm

    Obama has signed 923 executive orders in 40 months.Now Texas Republican Rep. Steve Stockman is threatening to impeach Obama if he tries to follow through with gun control executive orders.
    Watch him end up
    commiting suicide by hanging
    murdered suspiciously by none other than the crazy fek in the WH..

  19. 71 Quantum Leap January 15, 2013 at 8:23 pm

    From http://www.examiner.com

    Today, Jan. 14, 2013, Texas Republican Rep. Steve Stockman threatened President Obama that he would file articles of impeachment against him, should the president act on his statement recently where he said that he could enact gun control with the use of an executive order.

    The Daily Caller said that Stockman warned that,

    ““such executive orders would be “unconstitutional” and “infringe on our constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms.”

    Currently, the president has signed 145 executive orders. That’s more than any other president has signed in their first term.

    Stockman went on to say that he would actually take action to eliminate funding for any such executive order, but said that he would not be limited to that option. He said that he would even defund the White House.

    All of this is on the heels of Obama’s press conference today, where he mentioned the possibility of using executive action to reduce gun violence in America. On average, Obama has used executive orders more than any other president in history.

    Stockman, a first term Representative also said that an executive order is,

    ““not just an attack on the Constitution,” but also an “attack on Americans.” “If the president is allowed to suspend constitutional rights on his own personal whims, our free republic has effectively ceased to exist,” he said, according to The Daily Caller.

    If Obama holds true to his statements, it could cause much grief in Congress and all across the country over gun laws, and the weakening of the Constitution.

    by Jake Jones
    Fair use——


    • 75 Tenacity January 15, 2013 at 9:21 pm

      Does anything here remind you of the burial of OBL at sea?

      • 76 Tenacity January 15, 2013 at 9:23 pm

        Or Flight 93 in Shanksville, PA?

        • 77 heather January 15, 2013 at 11:12 pm

          Shanksville–that plane was seen at the airport in (I think)Columbus Oh with the passengers being removed and walked into a separate building never to be seen or heard from again……the witness protection program!

          A huge false flag-sandy hook, aurora, oregon mall–all of them. If no one had seen Lanza in the neighborhood for 3 yrs then the CIA probably had him in custody brainwashing and drugging him. Or he was sent away with the passengers of flight 93.

          What kind of a father would allow this to happen to his son!

  20. 78 Quantum Leap January 15, 2013 at 8:48 pm


    A US senator has accused the Obama administration and the Justice Department for not being “adequately forthcoming” with information on the targeting and potential killing of Americans suspected of terrorism.

    Ron Wyden, the Democratic senator from Oregon and a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, wrote an open letter to John Brennan, the frontrunner for the post of Director of the CIA, asking Brennan to provide Congress with the secret legal opinions defining the government’s capacity to pursue and kill US citizens suspected of involvement in terrorist activities.

    Members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence by law have access to classified legal opinions – but, Wyden writes, the Obama administration has denied him access to the opinions governing targeted assassinations of American citizens.

    Wyden stressed that it is vital that the legal opinions guiding such conduct be distributed so that Congress and the public can “have full knowledge of how the executive branch understands the limits and boundaries of this authority,” the letter reads.

    Wyden has tried for more than two years to gain access to the information, but has received either unsatisfactory responses or no response at all.

    Now, he wants the information before Brennan’s confirmation hearing before the Senate. He has also asked for written assurance that future legal opinions related to the surveillance and assassination of American citizens be provided to the country’s lawmakers.

    “For the executive branch to claim that intelligence agencies have the authority to knowingly kill American citizens but refuse to provide Congress with any and all legal opinions that explain the executive branch’s understanding of this authority represents an alarming and indefensible assertion of executive prerogative,” Wyden’s letter reads.

    The senator has also requested a list of countries in which the intelligence community has used its “lethal counterterrorism authorities,” saying that the committee has the right to know “countries where United States intelligence agencies have killed or attempted to kill people. The fact that this request was denied reflects poorly on the Obama Administration’s commitment to cooperation with congressional oversight,” the letter continues.

    He also asks Brennan to prepare to discuss a massive recent Senate Intelligence Report on the CIA’s torture techniques and interrogation methods. Wyden seems to be particularly interested in hearing about why the CIA “repeatedly provided inaccurate information about its interrogation program to the White House, the Justice Department, and Congress.”

    Brennan is chief counterterrorism advisor to President Obama, who nominated Brennan as his next director of the Central Intelligence Agency on January 7, 2013. Brennan now faces a Senate confirmation.

    • 80 heather January 15, 2013 at 10:57 pm

      Will the gop really drag him out? Do they have the guts to do what the constitution says? Are they finally awake in DC to the evil and destruction he has done to us? Who has the guts to stand up to that pos and tell him to stfd and stfu and you are under arrest for treason.

  21. 81 heather January 15, 2013 at 10:58 pm

    Is it coming to a head in DC?

  22. 82 typistjan January 15, 2013 at 11:09 pm


    Today I was watching Fox News and they were horrified that a professor in Florida was sure Sandy Hook was a set up by the Govt…they were saying he should be fired…within a few minutes, they were getting Tweets like mad saying most of America thought it was and Megan Kelly was so shocked….don’t these people READ THE NEWS?….YIKES.
    So then she was doing a poll and wanted people to write in to her Tweet! Honestly,

  23. 90 typistjan January 16, 2013 at 12:12 am

    Okay, this starts off on Romney then gets in pretty heavy with other stuff and other people, drugs, money, etc. then on to Giffords, Benghazi, etc.

  24. 91 Kathy January 16, 2013 at 3:39 am

    Anybody know if this AZ Tea Party meeting took place yesterday? Did Mike Zullo announce anything new?


  25. 93 jane January 16, 2013 at 8:55 am

    I know we will all be judged, but my wish is this;

    That GOD tells oblahblah, that HE has an executive order for his sorry arse…….
    ” Hey O, get thee into HELL”……now! Don’t need MY signature either…..

  26. 95 Bob's Box January 16, 2013 at 10:23 am

    House Reads Out Constitution, Only 74 Members Show Up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


  27. 97 no-nonsense-nancy January 16, 2013 at 11:13 am

    Anyone who denies tht he is a dictator now is blind, deaf, dumb and retarded!


    • 98 foxyladi14 January 16, 2013 at 2:23 pm

      The king has no clothes Yet people keep commenting on how dapper he looks.

    • 99 Quantum Leap January 16, 2013 at 7:03 pm

      Yeah NNN. And I cannot even read the news yet it’s so appalling what this Islamo/collectivist is doing. He has infiltrated the WH although It appears legit and well meaning, IT IS NOT! TELL YOU THIS, no one will follow his EO’s. He’s illigit.

  28. 100 heather January 16, 2013 at 12:53 pm

    Rush was just going over barrys fake gun law where he demands a universal background check–and Rush said, “No one did a background check on obama, not even the media, so the uninformed voters have no idea who he is!”

    My newly elected congressman said, he will never vote for obamas gun ban–it clearly defies the 2nd amendment and barry has already gone way outside his bounds.

    • 101 Warren January 16, 2013 at 2:42 pm

      Actually, that brings up an interesting idea.

      Perhaps a prominent firearms retailer or the NRA should run a standard purchaser background check on “someone” and publish the findings.

      Perhaps the findings would be “of interest”.

      • 102 heather January 16, 2013 at 4:54 pm

        Hmmm–would that someone be the KING BARRY?! I think that is an awesome idea and quite frankly in our nation’s best interest for our security!

  29. 105 jane January 16, 2013 at 4:11 pm

    I think we should all speak loudly; UNTIL his hineyess gives US his true background check, then he can do ours.

  30. 106 heather January 16, 2013 at 5:24 pm


    such bs–kids need to use their imaginations and pointing their fingers for guns is normal! NORMAL I say. This govt has taken their imaginations away from them with everything from playing TAG on the playground to a ton of other things.

    How about all these black rappers who rap with their hands and fingers and rap about killing and mrder and how about hollywood allowing this–1st amendment rights you say—well kids have them too and this is bullshit. Oh I would say that this whole gun thing is going to open every can of worms everywhere on everything. Start making the black rappers stop with their hate!

  31. 107 hammer and nail January 16, 2013 at 5:55 pm

    Here is Obama hugging and laughing with Emily Parker (age 6, red dress) on her family’s facebook page.
    The picture start with laughing, hugging…there’s state troopers standing around.
    Then the last pictures are all somber, with Obama “consoling” a parent.
    OOOOOOPSEEE they effed up!
    Emily Parker was “killed” at Sandy Hook!


    OOOOPSEEE they effed up!
    Emily Parker was “killed” at Sandy Hook

  32. 112 Quantum Leap January 16, 2013 at 6:52 pm

    The latest Rand Paul Letter:

    Dear Fellow Conservative,

    Barack Obama’s BILLION-DOLLAR, left-wing benefactors are busy mobilizing support to RAM through Harry Reid’s illegal, rule-breaking filibuster scheme as soon as the Senate goes back into session.

    They know that should Harry Reid succeed in finally gutting the Senate filibuster, they’ll be able to RAM their entire Big Government agenda into law.

    And if you think these last four years have been a disaster, I can assure you, if Harry Reid guts the filibuster – it’s only going to get worse.

    Massive tax hikes. Out-of-control spending. Gun grabs. Big Labor power grabs. More attacks on our God-given liberties.

    There’s no telling how far they’ll go.

    That’s why it’s critical you sign your “Stop the Power Grab” Fax Bomb IMMEDIATELY.

    You see, our fight to defeat Harry Reid’s attempt to destroy the Senate filibuster is really heating up.

    By now, I had hoped Senator Reid would have backed down from his scheme to break Senate rules to gut the filibuster.

    But instead, the reverse is true.

    And Harry Reid and his Big Government pals seem all too willing to flush 214 years of Senate history down the drain in their mad rush for more power.

    You and I must stop them.

    That’s why it’s vital you sign your “Stop the Power Grab” Fax Bomb right away.

    And along with your signed Fax Bomb, I hope you’ll consider making a generous contribution to help RandPAC mobilize millions of Americans to this fight.

    I’ve had my staff prepare a three-pronged plan of attack to defeat Harry Reid’s illegal, rule-breaking scheme.

    The first prong includes contacting millions of Americans through emails to alert them to the importance of this fight by asking them to sign a Stop the Power Grab Fax Bomb.

    My goal is to FLOOD Capitol Hill with tens of thousands of petitions from constitutional conservatives DEMANDING their Senators vote against any attempt to weaken or gut the filibuster.

    The second prong – beginning this weekend – will be to fill up the inbox of every U.S. Senator with emails urging them to oppose Harry Reid’s illegal, rule-breaking scheme.

    And in the final hours before the vote, RandPAC will Phone Bomb Capitol Hill with thousands of phone calls from concerned Americans like you.

    Of course, such a massive program isn’t cheap.

    But this may be the most important Senate fight of my entire career.

    If you and I lose this battle, it will be virtually impossible to stop Harry Reid from ramming through anything his liberal pals can dream up.

    And that’s one thought that sends shivers down my spine.

    • 118 no-nonsense-nancy January 16, 2013 at 10:57 pm

      I saw these before but I can’t remember what site it was from. It is further prof that that event never happened or it was staged.

    • 121 Quantum Leap January 17, 2013 at 4:20 pm

      Those photos are strange. How much money did the family get paid to participate in this Sandy Hook fraud? So that means the funerals were not of Sandy Hook either? They just posted pics. No proof anyone was dead.

      A young man killing kids is super strange and non believable and they are now saying Adam Lanza was already dead when this so called event occured.

  33. 122 typistjan January 16, 2013 at 10:23 pm

    From what pit on the outskirts of HELL did this slime ball come?

    Obama Administration Seeks Approval to Test Anthrax Vaccine on Children?

    The Obama Administration is seeking approval to conduct morally impermissible, wholly non-therapeutic medical experiments that would expose healthy children to risks of serious harm.
    Specifically, the Department of Health and Human Services is seeking to test the highly controversial, dangerous Anthrax vaccine, on children. [Editor’s Note: the author from Health Impact News cites the Federal Register for this information, but there is no explicit reference to the anthrax vaccine in the cited material].
    Full article: http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/902/9/

  34. 127 Drew January 17, 2013 at 2:51 pm

    YouTube: – The Sandy Hook Shooting – Fully Exposed –

    Over 10-million views — for good reason — but now it’s acquired a “potentially offensive or inappropriate” warning.

    Here’s the link (to copy & paste), if the video doesn’t appear below:


    • 128 Quantum Leap January 17, 2013 at 4:37 pm

      You know what freals me out about this……..look closely and you will see all the recent “shooters” all look the same. Take away their hair and you will see it. It looks photoshopped like they have a pic of some dude and then keep changing the hairdo. The shooter at clakamas town center looked like adam lanza who looked liked Judge Roll’s killer and on and on.

  35. 129 Quantum Leap January 17, 2013 at 3:42 pm

    Okay so people don’t like Orly or Beck or Tea party. So what elese do we have? NOTHING! I say revive the tea party and get the pissed off dems who had taxes raised to join the TPP.
    TP is thinking of moving in a different direction and stop with the neo con BS. TP is not a caucasian REPIBLICON group although the news likes to think so.

    We have got to do something. This can’t go on like this. We have got to fight back like in 2009.

  36. 131 usapatriots-shoutl January 17, 2013 at 4:45 pm

    Even though I haven’t posted anything for awhile, I’ve been following you. Dr. Kate’s site is the place I go when I am feeling lost and isolated in the world among all the obots who seem to be overwhelming me at times. This is the only site that validates the fact I am not stark raving mad.

    I have been working on building a new web site that is to be a show case of my jewelry, art, and eventually some e-published books. Me being me, I have little patients dealing with the technical side of things and have trouble getting things to work. According to the host, my site is published on the inter net and visitors can go to it. I haven’t been able to bring it up in spite of all the directions they gave me–which they claim it is up and running. Could you check this out for me and let me know? If you have any suggestions, about improving the site, that would help, too. Nothing on there is carved in granite and it will probably look a lot different a few months from now.


    • 132 drkate January 17, 2013 at 6:13 pm

      Wow, USA, what a nice site! When I am ‘rolling in the dough’ again, I will buy…in the meantime, it looks like a nice place to go to ‘rest’ from all this political drama and hoo-ha. Thank you always for being a regular reader here! 🙂

      • 133 no-nonsense-nancy January 17, 2013 at 9:33 pm

        Yes, USA, you have a wonderful site. And you have my very favorite thing in all the world. A carosel horse! I have always wanted one from a real Merry-go-round.

        Do you make charms for Pandora bracelets? My family has gotten into those lately. I got one for Christmas.

  37. 135 Quantum Leap January 17, 2013 at 4:55 pm


    At issue is whether professional “crisis actors” are going beyond mere simulation of mass casualty events (what the Denver-based group VisionBox Crisis Actors say they do) to actually impersonate real-life people caught in the news of recent massacres, notably the Sandy Hook Elementary School killings that SUPPOSEDLY took the lives of 20 children and 6 adults in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, 2012.

    There’s a woman named Jennifer Greenberg Sexton who lives in Florida. She has a remarkable family because so many members of the Sexton-Greenberg clan are dopplegangers of people associated with the Sandy Hook massacre.

    Here’s Jennifer Greenberg on Stars Color, a website with pictures of people in the movie industry — actors, actresses, directors — which suggests Greenberg is an actress, albeit not a famous or even known one:

    Go see the pics of the ‘crisis actors here.
    and here are the important pics here…….mind blowing!

    For more information visit http://www.Visionbox.org and http://www.CrisisActors.org.

    Visionbox is a project of the Colorado Nonprofit Development Center. Crisis Actors is a project of the Colorado Safety Task Force established by Colorado State Senator Steve King.

    Nathan Bock
    Amanda Brown
    (720) 810-1641

    • 137 heather January 17, 2013 at 10:21 pm

      so where are these parents and the kids that were so called killed? who took them away? do the real people of sandy hook know anyone of them? hmmm i wonder.

  38. 138 Quantum Leap January 17, 2013 at 5:10 pm


    Before Sandy Hook -You Are Cordially Invited to Participate in a School Shooting, Parental Consent Required
    This was originally posted on March 3, 2011. With all the focus on Sandy Hook, it cannot be overlooked.
    I got an email about Homeland Security and and FEMA shenanigans in Pottawattamie County, Iowa.

    It sounded goofy— a mock school shooting to be staged on March 26th, 2011. The email stated that, ”The premise of the mock shooting has been changed to suggest that a student, whose parents oppose illegal immigration comes to school with a gun and shoots a Latino Student” The link provided in the email did not work. I did my own search and found two links that are official. They do not go into detail about the scenario or script they will be following.

    The powers-that-be have been soliciting school children and adults to participate as actors in a “mock” school shooting scenario; apparently playing assigned parts as victims and bystanders. I didn’t notice anything about who will play the starring role of “the shooter”.

    Here are the links I found:

    Participant Handout: http://www.pottcounty.com/departments-services/emergency-management/pdf/Participant-Handout.pdf

    Actor Info Waiver Form: http://www.pottcounty.com/departments-services/emergency-management/pdf/Actor-Info-Waiver-Form.pdf

    School Announcement Handout: http://www.treynor.k12.ia.us/PottCoEMAannouncement.pdf

    Chicago Tribune Article Mentions the Illegal Immigration Scenario:

    “…exercise director Doug Reed said the scenario incorporated the Immigration issue to get Homeland Security funds to cover the training exercise. To qualify, Reed said, the exercise needed to be about terrorism, which the federal government defines as the use of violence to intimidate or coerce a government or population as a means to further a political or social objective. “

    What do you think?


  39. 140 no-nonsense-nancy January 17, 2013 at 9:38 pm

    Do you need a gun but your local store is fresh out of them and the ammo, too? Not to worry. Just print one out with a 3D printer! It’s as easy as pie!


    • 143 no-nonsense-nancy January 18, 2013 at 8:02 am

      That is a good article, Jan. From a comment. This is something some of us never really thought of:

      Regarding the revolving door and another example of no difference in party leadership in this country, we’ve had either a Bush or Clinton as president, vice president or sec of state for 32 consecutive years! Think about that for just a moment. Hows that for one-party rule! And to think the Mrs. is considering a run in 16 and the offspring is actually contemplating a run for some public office.

  40. 144 truthwitness January 17, 2013 at 10:07 pm

    1)hi I want to let anyone who is listening to know that an awesome person will be on the coast to coast this evening. His name is Russ Dizdar. He has much knowledge and experience in satanic ritual abuse. MUCH!!!!! The pre-existant new world order and SRI. So check this!!! so applicable to the current crises.
    Also listen to him on http://preemptionbroadcast.podomatic.com/entry/2013-01-16T18_28_13-08_00. Fellow believers, this is where to look: the spiritual rhelm! It either is or it isn’t and we do not get enough information in our churches! Coast to Coast can not be played on the c 2 c web site cuz u have to belong to their deal so find an am site that has talk radio by googleing or try shout cast or maybe someone has an idea for listening and it is on now I think out west.
    2)Please check out Doug Hamp. He is http://www.douglashamp.com/
    Douglas Hamp graduated from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem with an M.A. in the Hebrew Bible and Its World where he specialized in ancient languages including Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek. He is the author of of Discovering the Language of Jesus, The First Six Days and Corrupting the Image numerous articles and has lectured on biblical languages, creationism and prophecy in the United States and internationally for over eight years in English and Spanish. Douglas is a committed follower of Yeshua (Jesus).
    3) LA Marzulli: http://lamarzulli.wordpress.com/

    I feel we are in the end times and all the spirit world is where we will find answers which is clearly described in the word of God.
    Please give me any feed back you have! I am personally entering full commitment to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and believe that the kingdom of God is at hand. It has become my life. I am in the process of my transformation and have to share this truth. We need to know our roots began at the creation and what has been going on as far as the angel of light – who was created by God to be one of his beautiful beings and as you know he wanted to be as God or more than God. Listen to Doug Hamp talk of the creation. Listen to LA Marzilli explain his gifted insights into the Nephillum whom I has not been aware of. Did not hear in church. Listen to Russ describe the worshipers of the angel of light lucifer and all those who worship lucifer. The craziness that is unleashed on this earth as the end of the age draws near. The beautiful plan God worked out for us is alive and real. The more chaos and dark things are in my awareness the more and deeper I am aware of Gods beautiful plan and love for us!!

    Sorry Dr Kate, but I did ask your permission…thank you for letting me share.

    • 145 Paula January 18, 2013 at 8:17 am


      You may like to examine this book in regards to the nephilim, as well:


      In regards to being in the end times, I believe we are most likely at the end of the dispensation of the grace of God in which we find ourselves living, today; however, I KNOW we are not in the end times referred to in Matt – John, Hebrews – Rev, and the OT prophets, which involves the Tribulation for all unbelievers. How do I know this one may ask? Because I know how to study my Bible rightly divided, which is between Prophecy & the Mystery, Israel & the Body of Christ, and between the earth(for Israel) and the heavenly places (for the BoC).

      You don’t need scholars that know Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek telling you this or that in regards to the Bible. You just need to believe your Bible as it is written, rightly dividing the word of truth.

      “The more chaos and dark things are in my awareness the more and deeper I am aware of Gods beautiful plan and love for us!” Actually, truthwitness, all we need is to believe God’s word, righly divided, to understand God’s beautiful plan for those of us that are saved.
      The Lord tells members of the Body of Christ how they are stablished in Rom 16:25:

      Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to MY gospel, and the PREACHING of Jesus Christ, ACCORDING TO THE REVELATION OF THE MYSTERY, which was kept secret since the world began…

      Notice Paul doesn’t say according to the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of PROPHECY. Two different gospels, one to Israel according to prophecy (which had been written down from the beginning), and one to Gentiles (which after Israel fell, see Rom. 9 – 11 included unbelieving Jews) according to the revelation of the MYSTERY, which had been hid in God from before the foundation of the earth (God had kept it secret, not written down until he gave it to the Apostle Paul, and he also tells us why in 1 Cor. 2:7-8–But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would NOT have crucified the Lord of glory).

      If you’ve trusted Jesus Christ’s shed blood for the forgiveness of your sin plus nothing else (His work alone) and believe that he was raised again for your justification, then you are able to study his Word to you, for you, and about you, so that you may know God’s wonderful plan for the Body of Christ in the heavenly places, and his wonderful plan for believing Israel to inherit the earth at the end of the tribulation.

      Here’s one verse where the Lord tells us how to know his plans:

      Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth–2Tim 2:15

      It becomes a matter of if we choose to believe God and take him at his word (the simplilcity of the gospel that is in Christ Jesus), instead of the foolishness of the wisdom of this world, which includes religion and satan hiding the gospel in religious garbage from them that are lost, and surprisingly enough, hiding sound doctrine from them that are saved.

      And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will–2Tim 2:24-26.

      I believe these verses are referring to ALL men, weather they be lost, or weather they be saved, for when you boil it down, those are the only two types of men in this world.

      I would encourage you to study it out for yourself, as the Lord tells you to do. It is plain to see in the word of God, it is just a matter of belief (faith and trust in what he says, not what some self proclaimed scholars say).

      • 146 Tenacity January 18, 2013 at 10:42 am

        I suggest that you all read Scripture for yourself and stay clear of dispensational brain-soiling. Some people can’t see the forest for the trees and fail to see the whole picture of Scripture. Christ certainly did not view Scripture, especially the Old Testament, as described by the dispensationalists. Read it for yourself and you will see the fallacy. I will be happy to address any specific question in this regard, but will not engage in a senseless debate with any dispensationalist. Understand that I am in no way condemning any dispensationalist as the Blood of Christ can cover all of our errors as long as we are in relationship with Him and follow His teaching. Allow me to add that the New Testament is not a new book of law. The concepts presented by dispensationalism adds nothing beneficial to the gospel of Christ, but it does distort the exegesis of Scripture. Caveat emptor!

        • 147 truthwitness January 18, 2013 at 5:55 pm

          Hi Tenacity. I am once again in a state of humbleness and have no idea of dispensationalists. Although I suppose I could do a search I would much rather hear from you what it is. Is it something to do with interpretation of scripture? Is it to do with living under the law as opposed to the New life through Jesus Christ?
          You know, I have some regrets may have presented the comments I shared about some folks and their web sites in a way that appeared like:
          Here-look at I have found great truth about God and so read this and that– I was simply sharing some info that perked my interest especially in light of the satanic ritual-like events that are going on.
          I am sorry if I have offended anyone’s beliefs as I felt ok about this blog is open to the sharing of information – can you explain dispensational brain-soiling? It is a term that is new to me. In fact I can not understand if you are implicating something about my post or not. Because from the sound of it (brain-soiling) I just know its not something I am into!!
          kind of makes me feel like giggling a little…Just sayin’, But seriously, I have been a believer in Christ for many years but in my post above I was feeling open to sharing my deepening commitment kind of like when a couple becomes aware years of commitment and repeats the wedding vows. …yawn…I think I am tired! TW

          • 148 drkate January 18, 2013 at 5:58 pm

            TW–Tenacity was responding to Paula’s ‘dispensationalism’ which is a doctrine that some follow. May I give Tenacity your email so you and he can correspond directly?

        • 150 Durus January 19, 2013 at 7:34 am

          Let’s be clear here… in your opinion, dispensationalism is Caveat emptor!

          While in God’s opinion, as revealed in the Pauline Epistles, man created covenant theology or replacement theology is Caveat emptor!

          Paul thoroughly refuted covenant theology or replacement theology in Romans 11.

          However, those Pauline Epistles just aren’t convenient for covenant theologians or replacement theologians, so they choose to be ignorant of the Pauline Epistles.

          In Paul’s view, covenant theologists or replacement theologists would be Gentiles under grace, who have chosen to be ignorant and are wise in their own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.

          Covenant theologists or replacement theologists through their chosen ignorance, have succumbed to the same jealousy as demonstrated by the elder son, in Jesus Christ’s parable of the Prodigal Son:

          Lu 15:25 Now his elder son was in the field: and as he came and drew nigh to the house, he heard musick and dancing.
          Lu 15:26 And he called one of the servants, and asked what these things meant.
          Lu 15:27 And he said unto him, Thy brother is come; and thy father hath killed the fatted calf, because he hath received him safe and sound.
          Lu 15:28 And he was angry, and would not go in: therefore came his father out, and intreated him.
          Lu 15:29 And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends:
          Lu 15:30 But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf.
          Lu 15:31 And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.
          Lu 15:32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

          Paul affirms in Romans 11, that Israel, a representation of the Prodigal Son, who was lost and dead, will repent and return to their Father’s house.

          Ro 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
          Ro 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
          Ro 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

          In Paul’s view, Gentiles under grace, can choose to be either :

          1) The Son, who is ignorant and wise in own conceits, in which case, he will allow thoughts of jealousy to rob him of the joy he could experience as he joins with his Father in rejoicing about the Son, who was lost and dead, returning to the Father’s house. Covenant theologists or replacement theologists choose to be this Son.

          2) The Son, who is humble and wise loving brother, in which case, he will not allow thoughts of jealousy to rob him of the joy he could experience as joins with his Father in rejoicing about the Son, who was lost and dead, returning to the Father’s house. Dispensationalists choose to be this Son.

          • 151 Tenacity January 19, 2013 at 11:33 am

            It is unfortunate and divisive when professing Christians put words & thoughts into other Christians mouths & heads. I doubt that most Christians would even be able to quickly answer through which lens they view Scripture, whether by covenant (including replacement) or dispensation. I find your conclusion regarding choices to lack merit, to be judgmental and certainly not applicable to most Christians I know, but is typical of many, but not all, dispensationalists I have encountered. False assumptions seem to run rampant in cultish circles regardless of the lens one has chosen as their Holy Grail. I prefer to allow the Scriptures to speak for themselves rather than have a man force his choice of lens (filter) down my throat.

            A past friend of mine and author (Carl Ketcherside) was once asked if he would fellowship with a brother in error. His response was, “Of course, what other kind do I have?”

            Below is a pretty good article to give those interested a better understanding of what Covenant Theology is. I share the thinking of the disclaimer at the top of the article. The closing comment in the article is worth repeating here:

            Many more things could be said regarding Covenant Theology, but the important thing to keep in mind is that Covenant Theology is an interpretive grid for understanding the Scriptures. As we have seen, it is not the only way to interpret Scripture. Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism have many differences, and sometimes lead to opposite conclusions regarding certain secondary doctrines, but both adhere to the essentials of the Christian faith: salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone, and to God alone be the glory!


            • 152 Tenacity January 19, 2013 at 12:35 pm

              The concept of Scriptural Israel is a serious point of contention. Just as many terms have been changed to deceive and confuse, the term ‘Jew’ has been created in recent history and propagandized to be synonymous with the Scriptural terms Yehuwdiy [Jehudi] or Ioudaios. These terms initially referred to those of the Kingdom of Judah and, after the carrying away of the ten tribes, eventually referred to any Israelite in the Biblical era.

              Allow me to interject 2 Scriptures here:

              Matthew 23:15 Woe be unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye compass sea and land to make one of your profession (KJV says ‘proselyte’ or a convert); and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell, than you yourselves.

              Revelations 3:9 I know thy works and tribulation, and poverty (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them, which say they are Jews (Ioudaios), and are not, but are the Synagogue of Satan.

              Today, as many as 90% of those claiming to be Jews are not of Judaios, including those that reestablished and now govern the current nation of Israel. These Ashkenazim (as opposed to Sephardi) were converted to a Talmudic Kabbalist Judaism which does not follow the Torah as it is from Babylon. Do your research! I highly recommend you read “Synagogue of Satan” by Andrew Hitchcock which you will find at Kindle. Zionism as known today is a fraud (counterfeit) and has nothing to do with Scriptural Israel.

              Let’s look at Paul’s writing: Ephesians 2

              11 Wherefore remember that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, and called uncircumcision of them, which are called circumcision in the flesh, made with hands, 12 That ye were, I say, at that time without Christ, and were aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and were strangers from the covenants of promise, and had no hope, and were without God in the world.
              13 But now in Christ Jesus, ye which once were far off, are made near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, which hath made of both one, and hath broken the stop of the partition wall,
              15 In abrogating through his flesh the hatred, that is, the Law of commandments which standeth in ordinances, for to make of twain one new man in himself, so making peace, 16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by his cross, and slay hatred thereby, 17 And came, and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were near.
              18 For through him we both have an entrance unto the Father by one Spirit. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but citizens with the Saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone,
              21 In whom all the building coupled together, groweth unto a holy Temple in the Lord.

              Any question about what Scriptural Israel is today? It has not been replaced by the church, it is the church, Christ’s Church. You may also look at Galatians 6:15-16 and 3:24-29.

      • 154 truthwitness January 18, 2013 at 3:49 pm

        Well thank you Paula-you seem like a person who is a seeker of truth as i am. I appreciate your mission, teaching and witnessing to get the message out as He commanded us to do.
        I believe it is ok to share our discoveries with one another as we learn and grow in Christ. Also, I especially appreciate your feedback as that is what I desire. Although I do not consider myself expert at the interpretation of Gods Word, I believe the Word to be dynamic and living as well as approachable on many levels. That being said there is a beautiful simplicity in stating my personal relationship with Him is the most precious of all that is. I am in awe of his love which never changes. I do learn from others whether they are scholars or simply seekers His truth like you and I.
        Being a curious person, I discovered the individuals I mentioned in the posts above, As a person who loves sharing and relating with others, I shared my experience with Dr Kate’s forum fully aware not all would find value in my comments. Thank you for sharing your response and bringing your views to my attention. I am a self-proclaimed student and seeker of God and His truth. My spirit is humble evolving…
        I did pick up somewhat of a critical and lecturing aspect in your message. I am considering there is little value in responding to to the nature of that other than I share that we all fall short of the Glory which is God’s. As to your negative commentary of scholarly, I do not think one should discriminate upon what is or is not scholarly. In fact, whether scholarly is self-proclaimed or not is not important to me. I believe God uses all types of his children to spread his goodness and message. My son who is mentally handicapped having a rare genetic syndrome has taught me so very much because through his precious spirit God speaks to me and others. And through my son’s struggles that are also my struggles I thank God.
        It is a privilege to speak with you as a result of this special person who provides this forum, Dr Kate!

  41. 155 truthwitness January 18, 2013 at 12:10 am

    don’t know if anyone is thinking about checking out Russ Dizdar tonight on Coast to Coast AM but since i am a night owl I found an AM station that you can get on the Internet. It is KAST out of Oregon.
    http://www.shatterthedarkness.net/# is another one of his web sites.

  42. 156 Bildo January 18, 2013 at 8:59 am

    On a side note: If you don’t reside in a Federal Zone, this is for you—–
    USA is a member of UPU and has a duty to deliver letters coming from UPU members. And in USA there are TWO places that letters can come from: a state of the Union, or the federal zone. And the federal zone is known as DOMESTIC mail and requires 45-cent postage. But if you’re in a state of the Union, the postage is only 2 cents, as enacted by Congress BEFORE 1933, when the Congress was still acting under the laws of the Republic, i.e. under Public Law.

    In 1933 US went bankrupt and public law was replaced by PUBLIC POLICY, in effect creating the current corporate Democracy which is FEDERAL. I.e., it includes all FEDERAL areas such as ZIP code areas. So whatever Congress passed after 1933, is PUBLIC POLICY of the corporate Democracy, and NOT Public Law of the Republic. So the last Postage Stamp Act that Congress passed before 1933, is STILL VALID in the republic, i.e. in the 50 states of the Union.

    And that Act declared postage for First class mail to be 2 cents. Now, the USPS doesn’t have to honor that, since under their federal Public Policy the postage rate was increased to the current 45 cents, and the Congress’ pre-1933 Stamp Act is FOREIGN law for them.

    So the USPS can refuse to accept letters with 2-cent stamps into their system. BUT if that stamp/letter was ALREADY CANCELLED, they have a duty under the UPU treaty to deliver it. And you’ve cancelled that stamp BY YOUR SIGNATURE, in effect making you the postmaster in regard to that letter.

    So, if a letter has a return address with a ZIP code or two-letter State abreviation, it is DOMESTIC and so requires the regular 45-cent stamps. BUT, if the return address has NO ZIP and the state is fully spelled out, and it’s marked NON-domestic, then it comes from a state of the Union, which is OUTSIDE of federal domestic area. And if the stamp is cancelled by your signature, the USPS has no choice but to deliver it, lest they’d be violating the UPU treaty.

    • 157 no-nonsense-nancy January 18, 2013 at 9:24 am

      I think that if I mailed a letter that way it would come back to me along with a knock on my door by my mailman. He already knocked on my door once to see if I was OK when I was flying my flag upside down to make a statement about the crisis our country is in.

  43. 159 Bildo January 18, 2013 at 9:55 am

    When you mail the letter you drop it in one of those big blue boxes. If it comes back to you, just drop it in a blue box again. It’ll go through. But this is only for those of us that do not reside in a Federal Zone. I’m on the land of the Republic. No zip code. No 2-letter state abbreviation.

  44. 160 Bildo January 18, 2013 at 10:07 am

    And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will–2Tim 2:24-26.

    Sounds like volunteering to be a subject/citizen of the corporation United States and it’s god. Along with being a member of a 501c3 incorporated “church” which has given up Christ as it’s head and replaced Him with the State.
    They will not perform a marriage unless you agree to bring in the State as a third party to the marriage. Throw away God and worship the State.

    Time to recover your selfs.

  45. 161 jane January 18, 2013 at 1:56 pm

    Here’s a great item to read, SHARE with others!!! found it on another site!
    It is long, but sums it all up pretty much!!

    You know you live in a country run by idiots…

    When smoking Pot is legal and widely accepted But smoking
    Tobacco is treated like a criminal


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if….
    You can get arrested for expired tags on your car but not for
    Being in the country illegally.


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…
    Your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions
    Of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more of
    our money.


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…
    A seven year old boy can be thrown out of school for calling his
    Teacher “cute” but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class
    In grade school is perfectly acceptable.


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…
    The Supreme Court of the United
    States can rule that lower courts
    Cannot display the 10 Commandments in their courtroom, while
    Sitting in front of a display of the 10 Commandments.


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…
    Children are forcibly removed from parents who appropriately
    Discipline them while children of “underprivileged” drug addicts
    Are left to rot in filth infested cesspools.


    You know you live in Country run by idiots if…
    Working class Americans pay for their own health care (and the
    Health care of everyone else) while unmarried women are free to
    Have child after child on the “State’s” dime while never being held
    Responsible for their own choices.

    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…
    work and success are rewarded with higher taxes and
    Government intrusion, while slothful, lazy behavior is rewarded
    With EBT cards, WIC checks, Medicaid and subsidized housing,
    And free cell phones.


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

    The government’s plan for getting people back to work is to
    Provide 99 weeks of unemployment checks (to not work).


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

    Being self-sufficient is considered a threat to the government.


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

    Politicians think that stripping away the amendments to the
    Constitution is really protecting the rights of the people.


    You know you
    live in a Country run by idiots if…

    The rights of the Government come before the rights of the


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

    Parents believe the State is responsible for providing for their


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

    Being stripped of the ability to defend yourself makes you “safe”.


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if….

    You have to have your parents signature to go on a school field
    Trip but not to get an abortion.


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

    An 80 year old woman can be stripped searched by the TSA but a
    Muslim woman in a burka is only
    subject to having her neck and
    Head searched.


    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

    Using the “N” word is considered “hate speech” but writing and
    Singing songs about raping women and killing cops is considered

    You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

    You can write a post like this just by reading the news headlines.



  46. 163 Troy January 18, 2013 at 2:05 pm

    Molan Labe ………on the Presidential limo! Yeah!

    LMAO!!!….That is actually what Ann Barnhardt’s auto liscense plate reads.
    MOLNLBE = come and take them

    No one and I mean NO ONE gets anywhere near that car except for the Secret Service…….It’s either an intentional false flag or there is a SS Agent that actually has some patriotic balls…..I’m leaning towards a false flag followed shortly by a faked hit attempt on Barry…..Icing on the cake for a gun grab.

    • 164 Tenacity January 18, 2013 at 4:31 pm

      I hope the usurper saw it before it was removed. That’s ‘molon labe’ btw, pronounced moh-lone’ lah-vay’. This was King Leonidas’s response to Xerxes when the Persians ordered the Spartans to lay down their weapons.

    • 165 heather January 18, 2013 at 11:31 pm

      Oh sure thing!–now who could get that close to that car? Only the SS or the CIA–so one of them did it!

  47. 166 foxyladi14 January 18, 2013 at 2:42 pm

    Oh.yes that would do it . 🙂

  48. 167 Quantum Leap January 18, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    Despite his “King Complex,” Ohomely One doesn’t have the Constitutional authority to write legislation.

    The worst of Ohomely One schemes center around;

    *** The Feinstein Gun Ban – to criminalize firearms that look “scary;”

    *** A thinly-veiled national gun registration scheme hidden under the guise of “background checks” to ensure federal government overlords gain every bureaucratic tool they need for full-scale gun confiscation;

    *** An outright BAN on magazines holding more than 10 rounds.
    From invading Libya without the approval of Congress to the so-called “Dream Act,” Ohomely One has a history of abusing his Executive powers to do whatever he chooses.

    Our Founders fought a revolution to STOP this kind of madness.

    Unfortunately, this arrogance is nothing new when it comes to Ohomely One.

    The Ohomely One better back off. Congress is losing it’s patience and gave him lots of rope to hang himself with.

    • 168 heather January 18, 2013 at 11:19 pm

      The KING has the cops in NYC carrying 7 bullents only–Hannity had a whole show with retired cops, detectives, retired FBI agents, lawyers, and Wayne LaPierre and a female sharp shooter who explained the ar-15 and other semi-autos…great show info and the cops are ticked off good and a lot of them in NY refuse to defy the 2nd amendment against the people unless they are criminals!

      This might be the straw that breaks the camels back now!

    • 169 heather January 18, 2013 at 11:24 pm

      FBI background checks are done when you buy a gun…what don’t they get about that–are they stupid!

      Illegal guns will never have a background check–that’s why they are called illegal. Either these DC thugs are stupid or they think we are—but I got news for them–it’s them are stupid.

      • 170 drkate January 18, 2013 at 11:30 pm

        I say do a background check on Holder (fast and furious) and Obama (faked ID) and see what comes up…

        • 171 heather January 18, 2013 at 11:36 pm

          Holder definitely for F&F and barry too–they are behind the entire thing and we know it. Holder and Janet Reno/Bill Clinton were behind the Elia Gonzales kidnapping with the swat teams breaking into the families house to snatch him up in the middle of the night all armed to the max–remember that one! Holder is as evil as barry. There was no reason to send that kid back to Cuba–his mother died trying to get that boy to america where he could live free.

      • 172 foxyladi14 January 19, 2013 at 12:40 pm

        Yes Heather they are stupid! 😯

  49. 173 truthwitness January 18, 2013 at 4:17 pm

    You are so right about the “arrogance” of this man!! But seriously, do you think that congress is losing patience? It seems the congress, including the judicial system is under a numbing mind control while the executive is on an expansive, well-calculated, and unfortunately unimpeded power grab! I am dumbfounded that there are no loud congressional voices to oppose the tyranny which is blatantly taking place.

  50. 174 Quantum Leap January 18, 2013 at 5:40 pm

    2013 Jan 16
    Dear Mr. Vice President:
    As the elected Sheriff of Stanislaus County (California), I recognize the primary responsibility of law enforcement is to protect the citizens and preserve individual rights and freedoms. Individual rights and freedoms as provided for by the Constitution of the United States should never be threatened or compromised.

    In accordance with the Constitution of the United States and the statutes of the State of California, I believe that every law abiding adult citizen has the right to acquire, own, possess, use, keep and bear firearms. I refuse to take firearms from law abiding citizens and will not turn law abiding citizens into criminals by enforcing useless gun control legislation.

    Accountability for senseless acts of violence committed by the few who use firearms to commit violent crimes like killing defenseless children, should not extend to the majority of law abiding citizens in America who don’t victimize others. Even more despicable are those elected leaders who use these senseless acts of violence to promote their personal agenda by politicizing tragedy and exploiting the victims.

    Instead of enacting more useless and unnecessary legislation restricting the rights and freedoms of law abiding citizens, our elected leaders should focus their efforts on the underlying problem. Addiction, mental illness and a complete erosion of traditional family values in our society are all contributing factors.

    California has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation yet we continue to take guns from criminals every day. The laws we enforce now have no effect on reducing gun violence or preventing criminals from obtaining and using firearms to commit crimes.

    We will continue to relentlessly pursue criminals, seek justice for victims, protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation, protect the freedoms of responsible law abiding citizens and respect the Constitutional right of all people to liberty, equality and justice.
    Sheriff – Coroner
    Stanislaus County

  51. 176 Quantum Leap January 18, 2013 at 6:17 pm

    Does anyone feel comfortable putting their John Hancock on a petition?

    “we petition the obama administration to:
    President Obama keep his promise and oath of office.
    At a televised campaign event in Lebanon, Virginia in 2008, Obama stated;

    “When you all go home and you’re talking to your buddies and you say, ah ‘He wants to take my gun away.’ You’ve heard it here; I’m on television so everybody knows it. I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in people’s lawful right to bear arms. I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won’t take your handgun away.”

    The President also took an oath of office;

    “to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

    He publicly announced an attack on the 2nd Amendment, choosing to violate his oath. I suggest as an honorable man, if unable to keep his promise or more importantly his oath of office, to please step down.”

    Created: Jan 06, 2013

    • 177 drkate January 18, 2013 at 7:32 pm

      not on a whitehouse petition. Fodder for FEMA

    • 181 heather January 18, 2013 at 11:13 pm

      nope–I’m with Dr Kate with this one. I refuse–and today barrys robo dialer called my house with a recording that this is a call from the potus in dc asking for your approval of my EO for gun control……of course it was a recording and i said a few choice words and hung up–which i am sure they recorded–but i really don’t care. so be prepared for these calls to start with everyone.

  52. 183 Quantum Leap January 19, 2013 at 12:45 am

    dk, this thread should be called ‘rumblings of Impeachment’

    I bet more than 51% of the people support this to end the nightmare.

    This is a keeper:

    Articles of Impeachment Against Barack Hussein Obama – Filed by Citizen Alexander Emric Jones, January 15, 2013.

    – He has clearly communicated his intent to eviscerate the second amendment rights of American citizens by pursuing executive orders to curtail the right to keep and bear arms without congressional authorization and in violation of the second amendment.

    Below, Congressman Stockman has pledged to move for impeachment against Obama. I am standing up against Obama right beside him, will you?

    “The President’s actions are an existential threat to this nation,” reads a statement by Rep. Steve Stockman. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms is what has kept this nation free and secure for over 200 years. The very purpose of the Second Amendment is to stop the government from disallowing people the means to defend themselves against tyranny. Any proposal to abuse executive power and infringe upon gun rights must be repelled with the stiffest legislative force possible.”

    – He has aided America’s enemies, violating his oath, by sending funds to insurgents in Syria who are being commanded by Al-Qaeda terrorists.

    – He has violated federal law by overseeing a cover-up surrounding Operation Fast and Furious, the transfer of guns to Mexican drug cartels direct from the federal government.

    – He has lied to the American people by overseeing a cover-up of the Benghazi attack which directly led to the deaths of four American citizens. The cover-up has been called “Obama’s Watergate,” yet four months after the incident, no one in the administration has been held accountable.

    – He has brazenly undermined the power of Congress by insisting his authority came from the United Nations Security Council prior to the attack on Libya and that Congressional approval was not necessary. “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question,” said Obama. This is an act that “constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution,” according to Congressman Walter Jones.

    – He has flagrantly violated article 1, section 9, clause 8 of the Constitution by accepting rotating status as chairman of the United Nations Security Council. The clause states, “No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States; and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall without consent of Congress accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

    – He has ignored Congressional rejection of the cybersecurity bill and instead indicated he will pursue an unconstitutional executive order.

    – He has signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act which includes provisions that permit the abduction and military detention without trial of U.S. citizens, violating Habeas Corpus. Despite Obama claiming he would not use the provisions to incarcerate U.S. citizens, it was his administration that specifically demanded these powers be included in the final NDAA bill.

    – He has enacted universal health care mandates that force Americans to buy health insurance, a clear violation of the Constitution in exceeding congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. Obama has also handed out preferential waivers to corporations friendly to his administration.

    – He has declared war on America’s coal industry by promising to bankrupt any company that attempts to build a new coal plant while using unconstitutional EPA regulations to strangle competition, ensuring Americans see their energy costs rise year after year.

    – He has violated the Constitution’s Takings and Due Process Clauses when he bullied the secured creditors of automaker Chrysler into accepting 30 cents on the dollar while politically connected labor unions and preferential others received better deals.

    – He has violated Article II of the Constitution by using signing statements as part of his executive usurpation of power.

    “I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment.”

    Rep. Steve Stockman, Texas.

    For these, and other offenses which constitute high crimes and misdemeanors, including perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming and refusal to obey a lawful order, we call for the immediate impeachment of Barack H. Obama.

    Impeachment Clauses in the Constitution

  53. 184 Quantum Leap January 19, 2013 at 12:54 am

    Let it roll!

    Congress Delivered Articles of Impeachment for tyrant Obama

    Bruce Fein
    April 8, 2011


    1. Article II, Section IV of the United States Constitution provides: “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.”

    2. According to James Madison’s Records of the Convention, 2:550; Madison, 8 Sept., Mr. George Mason objected to an initial proposal to confine impeachable offenses to treason or bribery:

    Why is the provision restrained to Treason & bribery only? Treason as defined in the Constitution will not reach many great and dangerous offences. Hastings is not guilty of Treason. Attempts to subvert the Constitution may not be Treason as above defined–As bills of attainder which have saved the British Constitution are forbidden, it is the more necessary to extend: the power of impeachments.

    3. Delegates to the Federal Convention voted overwhelmingly to include “high crimes and misdemeanors” in Article II, Section IV of the United States Constitution specifically to ensure that “attempts to subvert the Constitution” would fall within the universe of impeachable offences. Id.

    4. Alexander Hamilton, a delegate to the Federal Convention, characterized impeachable offenses in Federalist 65 as, “offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the violation or abuse of some public trust. They are of a nature which with peculiar propriety may be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done to society itself.”

    5. In 1974, the House Judiciary Committee voted three articles of impeachment against then President Richard M. Nixon for actions “subversive of constitutional government.”
    A d v e r t i s e m e n t
    6. Father of the Constitution, James Madison, observed that, “Of all the enemies of public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other…. War is the true nurse of executive aggrandizement.”

    7. James Madison also instructed that “no nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

    8. The exclusive congressional power to commence war under Article I, section VIII, clause XI of the Constitution is the pillar of the Republic and the greatest constitutional guarantor of individual liberty, transparency, and government frugality.


    9. Article I, Section VIII, Clause XI of the United States Constitution provides: “The Congress shall have the power … To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;”

    10. Article II, Section II, Clause I of the United States Constitution provides: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.”

    11. The authors of the United States Constitution manifestly intended Article I, Section VIII, Clause XI to fasten exclusive responsibility and authority on the Congress to decide whether to undertake offensive military action.

    12. The authors of the United States Constitution believed that individual liberty and the Republic would be endangered by fighting too many wars, not too few.

    13. The authors of the United States Constitution understood that to aggrandize power and to leave a historical legacy, the executive in all countries chronically inflates danger manifold to justify warfare.

    14. John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the United States, in Federalist 4 noted:

    [A]bsolute monarchs will often make war when their nations are to get nothing by it, but for the purposes and objects merely personal, such as thirst for military glory, revenge for personal affronts, ambition, or private compacts to aggrandize or support their particular families or partisans. These and a variety of other motives, which affect only the mind of the sovereign, often lead him to engage in wars not sanctified by justice or the voice and interests of his people.

    15. Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist 69 that the president’s Commander-in-Chief authority

    …would be nominally the same with that of the King of Great Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first general and admiral of the confederacy; while that of the British king extends to the declaring of war, and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies; all which by the constitution under consideration would appertain to the Legislature.

    16. In a written exchange with Alexander Hamilton under the pseudonym Helvidius, James Madison wrote:

    In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department. Beside the objection to such a mixture to heterogeneous powers, the trust and the temptation would be too great for any one man; not such as nature may offer as the prodigy of many centuries, but such as may be expected in the ordinary successions of magistracy. War is in fact the true nurse of executive aggrandizement. In war, a physical force is to be created; and it is the executive will, which is to direct it. In war, the public treasures are to be unlocked; and it is the executive hand which is to dispense them. In war, the honours and emoluments of office are to be multiplied; and it is the executive patronage under which they are to be enjoyed. It is in war, finally, that laurels are to be gathered, and it is the executive brow they are to encircle. The strongest passions and most dangerous weaknesses of the human breast; ambition, avarice, vanity, the honourable or venial love of fame, are all in conspiracy against the desire and duty of peace.

    17. James Madison also wrote as Helvidius to Alexander Hamilton:

    Those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things, be proper or safe judges, whether a war ought to be commenced, continued, or concluded. They are barred from the latter functions by a great principle in free government, analogous to that which separates the sword from the purse, or the power of executing from the power of enacting laws.

    18. On June 29, 1787, at the Federal Convention, James Madison explained that an executive crowned with war powers invites tyranny and the reduction of citizens to vassalage:

    In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence agst. foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.

    19. In a letter dated April 4, 1798, James Madison wrote to Thomas Jefferson:

    The constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, & most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care, vested the question of war in the Legislature. But the Doctrines lately advanced strike at the root of all these provisions, and will deposit the peace of the Country in that Department which the Constitution distrusts as most ready without cause to renounce it. For if the opinion of the President not the facts & proofs themselves are to sway the judgment of Congress, in declaring war, and if the President in the recess of Congress create a foreign mission, appoint the minister, & negociate a War Treaty, without the possibility of a check even from the Senate, untill the measures present alternatives overruling the freedom of its judgment; if again a Treaty when made obliges the Legislature to declare war contrary to its judgment, and in pursuance of the same doctrine, a law declaring war, imposes a like moral obligation, to grant the requisite supplies until it be formally repealed with the consent of the President & Senate, it is evident that the people are cheated out of the best ingredients in their Government, the safeguards of peace which is the greatest of their blessings.

    20. During the Pennsylvania Convention to ratify the Constitution, James Wilson, a future Justice of the United States Supreme Court, observed:

    This system will not hurry us into war; it is calculated to guard against it. It will not be in the power of a single man, or a single body of men, to involve us in such distress; for the important power of declaring war is vested in the legislature at large: this declaration must he made with the concurrence of the House of Representatives: from this circumstance we may draw a certain conclusion that nothing but our national interest can draw us into a war.

    21. In 1793, President George Washington, who presided over the Federal Convention, wrote to South Carolina Governor William Moultrie in regards to a prospective counter-offensive against the American Indian Creek Nation: “The Constitution vests the power of declaring war with Congress, therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject, and authorized such a measure.”

    22. President Thomas Jefferson, who served as Secretary of State under President Washington, in a statement before Congress regarding Tripoli and the Barbary Pirates, deemed himself “unauthorized by the Constitution, without the sanction of Congress, to go beyond the line of defense.” He amplified: “I communicate [to the Congress] all material information on this subject, that in the exercise of this important function confided by the Constitution to the Legislature exclusively their judgment may form itself on a knowledge and consideration of every circumstance of weight.”

    23. In a message to Congress in December, 1805 regarding potential military action to resolve a border dispute with Spain, President Thomas Jefferson acknowledged that “Congress alone is constitutionally invested with the power of changing our condition from peace to war, I have thought it my duty to await their authority for using force.” He requested Congressional authorization for offensive military action, even short of war, elaborating:

    Formal war is not necessary—it is not probable it will follow; but the protection of our citizens, the spirit and honor of our country, require that force should be interposed to a certain degree. It will probably contribute to advance the object of peace.

    But the course to be pursued will require the command of means which it belongs to Congress exclusively to yield or deny. To them I communicate every fact material for their information, and the documents necessary to enable them to judge for themselves. To their wisdom, then, I look for the course I am to pursue; and will pursue, with sincere zeal, that which they shall approve.

    24. In his War Message to Congress on June 1, 1812, President James Madison reaffirmed that the shift in language from make to declare in Article I, Section VIII, Clause XI of the United States Constitution authorized at the Constitutional convention did not empower the Executive to involve the United States military in any action aside from defense against an overt attack. Although President Madison was convinced that Great Britain had undertaken acts of war against the United States, he nevertheless maintained that he could not respond with military force without congressional authorization. He proclaimed:

    We behold, in fine, on the side of Great Britain, a state of war against the United States, and on the side of the United States a state of peace toward Great Britain.

    Whether the United States shall continue passive under these progressive usurpations and these accumulating wrongs, or, opposing force to force in defense of their national rights, shall commit a just cause into the hands of the Almighty Disposer of Events, avoiding all connections which might entangle it in the contest or views of other powers, and preserving a constant readiness to concur in an honorable re-establishment of peace and friendship, is a solemn question which the Constitution wisely confides to the legislative department of the Government. In recommending it to their early deliberations I am happy in the assurance that the decision will be worthy the enlightened and patriotic councils of a virtuous, a free, and a powerful nation.

    25. In his Records of the Convention, 2:318; Madison, 17 Aug., James Madison wrote that the power “To declare war” had been vested in the Congress in lieu of the power “To make war” to leave to the Executive “the power to repel sudden attacks.”

    26. Mr. Elbridge Gerry “never expected to hear in a republic a motion to empower the Executive alone to declare war,” but still moved with Mr. Madison “to insert declare—in place of make” in Article I, Section VIII, Clause XI. Id.

    27. Mr. George Mason was against “giving the power of war to the Executive, because not safely to be trusted with it; or to the Senate, because not so constructed as to be entitled to it. He was for clogging rather than facilitating war; but for facilitating peace.” Yet Mr. Mason “preferred declare to make.” Id.

    28. Mr. Roger Sherman “thought [the proposal] stood very well. The Executive shd. be able to repel and not to commence war.” Id.

    29. Delegates to the Federal Convention overwhelmingly approved the motion to insert “declare—in place of make,” to deny the Executive power to initiate military action, but to permit the Executive to repel sudden attacks unilaterally. Id.

    30. Then Congressman Abraham Lincoln sermonized:

    Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose — and you allow him to make war at pleasure…. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after you have given him so much as you propose. If, to-day, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, “I see no probability of the British invading us” but he will say to you “be silent; I see it, if you don’t.”

    The provision of the Constitution giving the war-making power to Congress, was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons. Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object. This, our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us. But your view destroys the whole matter, and places our President where kings have always stood.

    31. Crowning the President with unilateral authority to commence war under the banner of anticipatory self-defense, prevention of civilian slaughters, gender discrimination, subjugation of ethnic or religious minorities, or otherwise would empower the President to initiate war without limit, threatening the very existence of the Republic. Although a benevolent Chief Executive might resist abuse of an unlimited war power, the principle, if ever accepted by Congress, would lie around like a loaded weapon ready for use by any successor craving absolute power.

    32. Thomas Paine justly and rightly declared in Common Sense that “in America, the law is king. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other.”

    33. Article 43 Paragraph 3 of the Charter of the United Nations provides that all resolutions or agreements of the United Nations Security Counsel “shall be subject to ratification by the signatory states in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.”

    34. Article 43 Paragraph 3 of Charter of the United Nations was included specifically to allay concerns that prevented the United States of America from ratifying the League of Nations Treaty in 1919.

    35. That treaty risked crowning the President with the counter-constitutional authority to initiate warfare. On November 19, 1919, in Section II of his Reservations with Regard to Ratification of the Versailles Treaty, to preserve the balance of power established by the United States Constitution from executive usurpation, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge resolved as follows:

    The United States assumes no obligation to preserve the territorial integrity or political independence of any other country or to interfere in controversies between nations — whether members of the League or not — under the provisions of Article 10, or to employ the military or naval forces of the United States under any article of the treaty for any purpose, unless in any particular case the Congress, which, under the Constitution, has the sole power to declare war or authorize the employment of the military or naval forces of the United States, shall by act or joint resolution so provide.

    The rejection of Lodge’s reservations by President Woodrow Wilson and his Senate allies insured defeat of the treaty.

    36. Section 2(c) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973 clarifies Presidential authority to undertake military action as follows:

    The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

    37. In United States v. Smith, 27 F. Cas. 1192 (1806), Supreme Court Justice William Paterson, a delegate to the Federal Convention from New Jersey, wrote on behalf of a federal circuit court:

    There is a manifest distinction between our going to war with a nation at peace, and a war being made against us by an actual invasion, or a formal declaration. In the former case it is the exclusive province of Congress to change a state of peace into a state of war.

    38. In Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258, 267 (1890), the Supreme Court of the United States held:

    The treaty power, as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments, and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or in that of one of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter, without its consent.

    39. In his concurrence in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 642-643 (1952), which rebuked President Harry Truman’s claim of unilateral war powers in the Korean War, Justice Robert Jackson elaborated:

    Nothing in our Constitution is plainer than that declaration of a war is entrusted only to Congress. Of course, a state of war may in fact exist without a formal declaration. But no doctrine that the Court could promulgate would seem to me more sinister and alarming than that a President whose conduct of foreign affairs is so largely uncontrolled, and often even is unknown, can vastly enlarge his mastery over the internal affairs of the country by his own commitment of the Nation’s armed forces to some foreign venture.

    40. All treaties are subservient to the exclusive congressional power to commence war. In Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 18 (1957), the United States Supreme Court held:

    There is nothing in [the Constitution’s text] which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution. Nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification of the Constitution which even suggests such a result.

    41. Unconstitutional usurpations by one branch of government of powers entrusted to a coequal branch are not rendered constitutional by repetition. The United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional hundreds of laws enacted by Congress over the course of five decades that included a legislative veto of executive actions in INS v. Chada, 462 U.S. 919 (1982).

    42. In their dissent in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004), Justices John Paul Stevens and Antonin Scalia recognized the “Founders’ general distrust of military power lodged with the President, including the authority to commence war:

    No fewer than 10 issues of the Federalist were devoted in whole or part to allaying fears of oppression from the proposed Constitution’s authorization of standing armies in peacetime. Many safeguards in the Constitution reflect these concerns. Congress’s authority “[t]o raise and support Armies” was hedged with the proviso that “no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years.” U.S. Const., Art. 1, §8, cl. 12. Except for the actual command of military forces, all authorization for their maintenance and all explicit authorization for their use is placed in the control of Congress under Article I, rather than the President under Article II. As Hamilton explained, the President’s military authority would be “much inferior” to that of the British King… (Citing Federalist 69, Supra.)

    43. On December 20, 2007, then Senator Hillary Clinton proclaimed: “The President has the solemn duty to defend our Nation. If the country is under truly imminent threat of attack, of course the President must take appropriate action to defend us. At the same time, the Constitution requires Congress to authorize war. I do not believe that the President can take military action — including any kind of strategic bombing — against Iran without congressional authorization.”

    44. Then Senator Joseph Biden stated in a speech at the Iowa City Public Library in 2007 regarding potential military action in Iran that unilateral action by the President would be an impeachable offense under the Constitution:

    It is precisely because the consequences of war – intended or otherwise – can be so profound and complicated that our Founding Fathers vested in Congress, not the President, the power to initiate war, except to repel an imminent attack on the United States or its citizens.

    They reasoned that requiring the President to come to Congress first would slow things down… allow for more careful decision making before sending Americans to fight and die… and ensure broader public support.

    The Founding Fathers were, as in most things, profoundly right.

    That’s why I want to be very clear: if the President takes us to war with Iran without Congressional approval, I will call for his impeachment.

    I do not say this lightly or to be provocative. I am dead serious. I have chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee. I still teach constitutional law. I’ve consulted with some of our leading constitutional scholars. The Constitution is clear. And so am I.

    I’m saying this now to put the administration on notice and hopefully to deter the President from taking unilateral action in the last year of his administration.

    If war is warranted with a nation of 70 million people, it warrants coming to Congress and the American people first.

    45. In a speech on the Senate Floor in 1998, then Senator Joseph Biden maintained: “…the only logical conclusion is that the framers [of the United States Constitution] intended to grant to Congress the power to initiate all hostilities, even limited wars.”

    46. On December 20, 2007, then Senator Barack Obama informed the Boston Globe, based upon his extensive knowledge of the United States Constitution: “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”


    47. President Barack Obama’s military attacks against Libya constitute acts of war.

    48. Congressman J. Randy Forbes (VA-4) had the following exchange with Secretary of Defense Robert Gates during a March 31, 2011 House Armed Services Committee Hearing on the legality of the present military operation in Libya:

    Congressman Forbes: Mr. Secretary, if tomorrow a foreign nation intentionally, for whatever reason, launched a Tomahawk missile into New York City, would that be considered an act of war against the United States?

    Secretary Gates: Probably so.

    Congressman Forbes: Then I would assume the same laws would apply if we launched a Tomahawk missile at another nation—is that also true?

    Secretary Gates: You’re getting into constitutional law here and I am no expert on it.

    Congressman Forbes: Mr. Secretary, you’re the Secretary of Defense. You ought to be an expert on what’s an act of war or not. If it’s an act of war to launch a Tomahawk missile on New York City would it not also be an act of war to launch a Tomahawk missile by us at another nation?

    Secretary Gates: Presumably.

    49. Since the passage of United Nations Security Council resolution 1973 on March 19, 2011, the United States has detonated over 200 tomahawk land attack cruise missiles and 455 precision-guided bombs on Libyan soil.

    50. Libya posed no actual or imminent threat to the United States when President Obama unleashed Operation Odyssey Dawn.

    51. On March 27, 2011, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated that Libya never posed an “actual or imminent threat to the United States.” He further stated that Libya has never constituted a “vital interest” to the United States.

    52. United Nations Security Council resolution 1973 directs an indefinite United States military quagmire in Libya, authorizing “all necessary measures” to protect Libyan civilians, which clearly contemplates removal by force of the murderous regime of Col. Muammar Qadhafi.

    53. In a Letter From the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate sent March 21, 2011, President Barack Obama informed Members of Congress that “U.S. forces have targeted the Qadhafi regime’s air defense systems, command and control structures, and other capabilities of Qadhafi’s armed forces used to attack civilians and civilian populated areas. We will seek a rapid, but responsible, transition of operations to coalition, regional, or international organizations that are postured to continue activities as may be necessary to realize the objectives of U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1970 and 1973.”

    54. In his March 21, 2011 letter, President Barack Obama further informed Members of Congress that he opted to take unilateral military action “…in support of international efforts to protect civilians and prevent a humanitarian disaster.”

    55. President Barack Obama has usurped congressional authority to decide on war or peace with Libya, and has declared he will persist in additional usurpations of the congressional power to commence war whenever he decrees it would advance his idea of the national interest. On March 28, 2011, he declared to Congress and the American people: “I have made it clear that I will never hesitate to use our military swiftly, decisively, and unilaterally when necessary to defend our people, our homeland, our allies, and our core interests” (emphasis added).

    56. President Obama’s humanitarian justification for war in Libya establishes a threshold that would justify his initiation of warfare in scores of nations around the globe, including Iran, North Korea, Syria, Sudan, Myanmar, China, Belarus, Zimbabwe, Cuba, and Russia.

    57. In Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928), Justice Louis D. Brandeis wrote on behalf of a majority of the United States Supreme Court:

    Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding.

    58. President Barack Obama has signed an order, euphemistically named a “Presidential Finding,” authorizing covert U.S. government support for rebel forces seeking to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, further entangling the United States in the Libyan conflict, despite earlier promises of restraint. Truth is invariably the first casualty of war.

    59. In response to questions by Members of Congress during a classified briefing on March 30, 2011, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indicated that the President needs no Congressional authorization for his attack on the Libyan nation, and will ignore any Congressional attempt by resolution or otherwise to constrain or halt United States participation in the Libyan war.

    60. On March 30, 2011, by persistent silence or otherwise, Secretary Clinton rebuffed congressional inquiries into President Obama’s view of the constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution of 1973. She failed to cite a single judicial decision in support of President Obama’s recent actions, relying instead on the undisclosed legal opinions of White House attorneys.

    61. President Barack Obama, in flagrant violation of his constitutional oath to execute his office as President of the United States and preserve and protect the United States Constitution, has usurped the exclusive authority of Congress to authorize the initiation of war, in that on March 19, 2011 President Obama initiated an offensive military attack against the Republic of Libya without congressional authorization. In so doing, President Obama has arrested the rule of law, and saluted a vandalizing of the Constitution that will occasion ruination of the Republic, the crippling of individual liberty, and a Leviathan government unless the President is impeached by the House of Representatives and removed from office by the Senate.

    In all of this, President Barack Obama has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States

  54. 188 foxyladi14 January 19, 2013 at 12:46 pm

    It is strange that so many are getting the flu this year. 😦

  55. 191 no-nonsense-nancy January 19, 2013 at 6:00 pm

    I attended a pro gun rally at my state capitol today. It was really great with a lot of really good speakers, including the PA president of the NRA. How did yours go, Ten. Were you able to say everything you wanted to in your speech? I hope it was recorded. I recorded all of our rally with a new gadget I got last year and finally figured out how to use.

  56. 193 typistjan January 19, 2013 at 6:22 pm

    If you get a chance, listen to Huckabee tonight. He is on right now but they will have a re-run later. Interviewing Rep. Salmon-AZ and Rep. Stockman-TX. These are the two that are standing up and stating they will stop obama or charge him if necessary.

  57. 194 no-nonsense-nancy January 19, 2013 at 6:27 pm

    Eleven college students’ lives saved by one armed student!


  58. 196 Bob's Box January 20, 2013 at 6:30 am

    Orly Taitz may have blown it bigtime.


    “UPDATE: I discovered the reference to Harry Bounel in the 1940 census back in Oct 2012 and have been working with Albert Hendershot quietly for three months now to get CONCRETE proof that this is the original holder of O’s social security number. Orly’s information is misleading. First the Bounel in the Bronx census is a white man born in 1890 Russia, and he became a naturalized citizen. The Bonnel that she believes was living with Michelle’s family in CT is not the same man. The one in CT is listed as born 1860, with a different name spelling, and is mulatto. She is confusing information.

    Secondly, there is no known connection to the Newtown CT area nor to any of the hospitals there. A death certificate for Harry Bounel born in Russia has not yet been found. She is running on assumptions. She is assuming that the Bonnel showing in the 1910 census and the one in the 1940 census in NY are the same person. They are not.

    Third, and finally, none of her information can be proved until a death certificate for Harry Bounel is found. I have personally submitted FOIAs to the SS admin and have gone back and forth with them for three months now trying to get information. They are asking for proof of death. What I have done with them DOES show a positive inference that O is using Bounel’s SS#, however it is not proof and won’t stand up in a court of law. My research will now be hampered by Orly prematurely publishing the connection and including misinformation. Any headway I’ve gained will now be shut down because all avenues to gain documentation will be closed. This is the reason Al and I were keeping this to ourselves so we could find actual proof, not supposition. I had the SS admin in check and was going in for the checkmate, but now that she’s published this all doors to documentary proof will be closed.

    Al, and I, will publish an article about what I’ve done shortly, now that we’ve been forced into being public about it by Orly once again grasping at straws and prematurely tipping our hand. – By Leslie”

Comments are currently closed.

January 2013
« Dec   Feb »

Get Your Copy at drkatesview@gmail.com

All Pets Haven

Blog Archives

Just follow copyright law and nobody gets hurt!

The contents of this blog are protected under U.S. Copyright Law, United States Code, Title 17. Requests for use of active and archived articles in this blog must be presented in writing in the comment section, and proper attribution is expected. Thank you in advance.

drkatesview thanks you!

Since 8/15/09


Listen to drkate’s Revolution Radio

RSS Logistics Monster

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS American Thinker

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Atlas Shrugs

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS American Spectator

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Button 1 120 by 90

%d bloggers like this: