Video: The reason why Ron Paul needs to be removed from office

Quotable Quote:

There’s been a coup, have you heard? It’s the CIA coup. The CIA runs everything, they run the military. They’re the ones who are over there lobbing missiles and bombs on countries. … And of course the CIA is every bit as secretive as the Federal Reserve. … And yet think of the harm they have done since they were established after World War II. They are a government unto themselves. They’re in businesses, in drug businesses, they take out dictators … We need to take out the CIA.

Ed Morrissey weighs in here:

“Take out”? Isn’t Paul a member of Congress? Has he introduced any legislation to stop CIA funding, or demanded any hearings? After all, those are actions that Congress can take short of annihilation. I think the military would laugh at the notion that they take orders from the CIA. They take orders from the President and are accountable to Congress. We know this, because we’re rational adults and not conspiracy theorists.
The only coup that has been conducted is the one that took out Paul’s sense of rationality and judgment years ago. Maybe a primary challenge would be a good idea in Paul’s district.

Good news there is someone running against Ron Paul craziness, his name is Tim Graney:

We need expanded nuclear energy use, additional drilling and continued research into non-petroleum based transportation fuels. We need to reduce the burden of regulation and over-taxation on businesses in the U.S. so we can compete with other nations in this global economy and keep more jobs here in America. American values are something special, but over the years as we continue to tolerate more and different value systems, we almost have become intolerant of where we came from. Toleration is a two-way street and it is time for assimilation to be traveling back on the other side of that road. Assimilation does not mean losing our diverse cultural identities, but it does mean immigrants should absorb some of the very values and traditions that attract immigrants from around the world to the American dream.
There are other major issues that need to be addressed, most notably health care and education. We did not end up with excess government overnight, it has taken decades to get where we are and it will take years to unwind the amount of government in our lives. By working together on the issues that are important to all Americans, we can begin this process of restoring the Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness our Founding Fathers envisioned for all of us.

and….:

Katy, TX – January 12, 2009 – Tim Graney of Katy had his staff contact Ron Paul to arrange a series of candidate debates. Graney has been traveling the district, meeting voters, fundraising, and gaining momentum since announcing his candidacy nearly two months ago.
As a former small business owner and Conservative Republican, Graney points out “…the people of District 14 are excited for new and true representation! As we’ve travelled the District, the number of people who have expressed their interest in seeing a debate between me and Paul is astonishing. Both my supporters and his want to see this debate.”

“…the people of the district have grown tired of his antics and self promotion. This District is made up of good, hard-working folks who want to see results. Grandstanding is not going to put Americans back to work. They don’t want career politicians who advance their personal political careers at the expense of their communities,” Graney said.
While the Paul camp still cannot confirm their participation in the Graney-Paul debates, one can’t help but wonder how Paul can find time to challenge Ben Stein to a debate, but not have time for a debate that impacts the people of his district? When asked about this issue, Tim Graney responded, “…it’s what the people of District 14 have come to expect. We’ve seen this song and dance before when Paul had no time to hold a Health Care town hall in Katy, or anywhere in the district. However, the good doctor did find plenty of time to throw a campaign fundraiser and birthday bash for himself in Galveston during the summer recess, which was attended by many from outside the district and as well as outside of Texas.”

Incidentally, Mr. Graney took his time during that summer recess to attend several Health Care town halls held by other Representatives around the Houston area. This time around, it seems that Paul is more interested in a debate with Ben Stein to garner national attention for his own agenda, than he is in a debate that the people of the 14th District want to see and ultimately have a say in. A debate on the issues that affect them most…creating jobs and putting Americans back to work”

In other words, Taxes is tired of the crazy. It is time for real leadership. Support Tim Graney today.

Trijicon stops the Bible verses on the rifle scopes

(H/T Say Uncle)

I wrote about this here and here… and now the company has put a halt to it.

A company under fire for etching biblical references on rifle scopes used by the U.S. military said Thursday it will stop the practice, and offered to provide modification kits to the Pentagon to enable their removal on existing optics.
Michigan-based Trijicon Inc. made the announcement in a statement released by Levick Strategic Communications, a Washington, D.C.-based firm that specializes in crisis management.
“Trijicon has proudly served the U.S. military for more than two decades, and our decision to offer to voluntarily remove these references is both prudent and appropriate,” Trijicon president Stephen Bindon said in a statement. “We want to thank the Department of Defense for the opportunity to work with them and will move as quickly as possible to provide the modification kits for deployment overseas.”
Trijicon also said it will remove the inscriptions from all products it has made for the military, but not yet shipped, and that it will provide foreign military services that purchased Trijicon products the same options.
via Trijicon: No more Bible references on rifle scopes – Navy Times.

A wise-choice for that company indeed. All around, I believe that this decision will be good for all involved. Because the last thing we need, is the enemy using our own weapons for propaganda purposes.

On the SCOTUS decision, it is a mixed bag

This good in some ways, and bad in others:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court threw out a 63-year-old law designed to restrain the influence of big business and unions on elections Thursday, ruling that corporations may spend as freely as they like to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress. The decision could drastically alter who gives and gets hundreds of millions of dollars in this year’s crucial midterm elections.
By a 5-4 vote, the court overturned two of its own decisions as well as the decades-old law that said companies and labor unions can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to produce and run their own campaign ads. The decision threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.
It leaves in place a prohibition on direct contributions to candidates from corporations and unions.
via Justices Block Key Part of Campaign Law – NYTimes.com.

The good part about this is, is that it frees up private companies to make ads supporting their candidate of their choice. Which does mark a victory for Freedom of Speech. The bad part is, that Unions will now be able to use their own monies to produce smear ads against Republicans. So, it is a double-edged sword. It might be a victory, but at what cost?

Update: Something that I forgot to add, I am still trying to wake up; anyhow, I believe more than anything at all, this new ruling will cause the candidates to have to work harder to get their offices. There will be no more just gliding into the Presidency, like a particular person did in 2008. This means that anyone can produce an ad and run against someone who might have some questionable background, like someone we all know, who won in 2008. Overall, I believe the whole idea, of actually having to work for the office and the leveling of the playing field is a good thing. Because we all saw how Obama basically overran John McCain in this election. The changing of this law will prevent that from every happening again —- and believe me, that is a good thing.

A bit more on the Gun Scopes and Bible Verses

Yes, I do know what I wrote here. I assumed everyone would know this, but in case not; I was referring to the Arabs who attacked us on 9/11 and those who are down with the whole idea of Jihad, not all of them.

However, I happened to read something over at a blog, of who’s author has criticized me in the past. Which, by the way, is his right to do. Anyhow, I happened to read this here and I felt the need to quote it here.

Ed Brayton writes about a message sent to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation:

To: Mikey Wenstein and MRFF:

I am a U.S. Army infantry soldier with the rank of (rank withheld). I am married with children. I am stationed at Fort (installation name withheld). I have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan multiple times. I have been awarded medals for direct combat engagement as well as for injuries and wounds received in hand-to-hand combat. I am a Muslim American. My family converted when I was very young. I am caucasian and have a last name that does not sound ethnic. Therefore, few of my fellow soldiers know that I am a Muslim. My wife comes from a Christian tradition but rarely practices or attends church. I have witnessed terrible religious persecution in the my (number withheld) years in the Army. Most of it comes from “angry” conservative Christians in my unit chains of command and occasionally from my fellow infantry soldiers. I am very familiar with the Trijicon ACOG gunsights and have often had them as part of my personal weapons; both my M-4 and my M-16. In my first 2 deployments I saw and experienced no incidents regarding the New Testament bible quotes that are written on the metal casing of the gun sights. Many soldiers know of them and are very confused as to why they are there and what it is supposed to mean. Everyone is worried that if they were captured in combat that the enemy would use the bible quotes against them in captivity or some other form of propaganda. As an American soldier I am ashamed that those bible quotes are on our primary weapons. As a Muslim American I am horrified. As one who swore his oath to the Constitution, I am driven to fight this Christian insanity but I know if I try to do so in a visible way that I will suffer at the hands of my military superiors. I am of low enlisted rank and can be crushed easily. I am prepared to suffer, but I am not prepared for my wife and children to suffer. So I have reached out to MRFF because there is nowhere else safe to go to try to fight this thing of disgrace. There are many other soldiers who feel as I do. Many are Protestant and Catholic and they fear reprisal just as much as I do for trying to stand up to the Christian bullies in uniform who outrank us. But if you try to fight back, you are not “asking” for trouble, YOU ARE IN TROUBLE from the start. And if you are a Muslim American, the hatred is always just below the surface and ready to explode at a moment’s notice. After the Fort Hood shootings, it was so bad, even for a low profile Muslim like me, that I had to ask MRFF for help.
Nothing in my first 2 deployments prepared me for what happened with the Trijicon ACOG gun sights during my 3rd deployment to Afghanistan. I will never forget the day it occurred. It was morning and there was a mandatory formation of several companies. A very senior NCO was yelling at us which is not that unusual. He asked a private what it was that he (the private) was holding in his hand and the private said it was his “weapon” several times to which the senior NCO replied “and what ELSE is it”? FInally, the senior NCO said that the private’s rifle was also something else; that because of the biblical quote on the ACOG gunsight it had been “spiritually transformed into the Fire Arm of Jesus Christ” and that we would be expected to kill every “haji” we could find with it. He said that if we were to run out of ammo, then the rifle would become the “spiritually transformed club of Jesus Christ” and that we should “bust open the head of every haji we find with it.” He said that Uncle Sam had seen fit not to give us a “pussy ‘Jewzzi’ (combination of the word ‘Jew’ and Israeli made weapon ‘Uzi’) but the “fire arm of Jesus Christ” and made specific mention of the biblical quotes on our gun sights. He said that the enemy no doubt had quotes from the Koran on their guns but that “our Lord is bigger than theirs because theirs is a fraud and an idol”. As a Muslim and an American soldier I was fit to be tied but I kept it in. There were many Afghans, both civilian and military, on base within earshot of what was being yelled at us and I can only wonder in shock what they must have thought. This senior NCO was apparently also the head person of a conservative, crazy Christian group called the “Christian Military Fellowship” and made a big deal about the importance of joining to everyone. He told us all that we MUST read a book called “Under Orders” in order to make it through this combat deployment and said he had many copies for everyone. Some of my friends went and got their copies. I refused. Finally, this senior NCO ended his yelling by warning us that if we did not “get right with Jesus” then our rifles would not provide spiritual strength despite the bible quotes on our ACOG gunsights and that we would be considered “spiritual cripples” to our fellow units and soldiers. He didn’t say it in so many words, but the message was clear; if anything bad happened in a combat situation, it would be the fault of anyone who had not accepted Jesus Chris in the “right way”. I have never felt so ashamed and scared in my life. I have never hated myself so much for not speaking out. So I thought of my wife and children and endured. Every time I looked at my rifle with that Trijicon ACOG gunsight/scope with the biblical quote from the book of John (8:12), it would make me sick. If I had tried to protest, it would have made me dead. And if I’m dead I’m of no use to my wife and children.

To which Ed adds:

I’m at a loss for words. “Appalling” seems inadequate.

Now, I realize that what I wrote at the other posting was a bit rough, okay? For the most part, I was being quite snarky. Further more, I was referring to the Arabs who are in the arena of Jihad against America. Yes, I do believe that this a war of ideals and yes, it does happen to involve “Christian Americans” (Not in the sense of CHURCH per se, but rather of culture and ideals.) However, as someone that does believe quite highly in the SEPARATION of Church and State —– Yes, I do realize that the actual wording is not found in the Constitution, however, our founding fathers did believe in it and the concept is there. In fact, Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists the following:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

Thomas Jefferson believed that, and so do I. Therefore, I believe, on constitutional grounds that these sights with the scriptures on them should be removed. We must remember that there are AMERICANS fighting this war on terror, not just Christian Americans; but Muslim Americans, Jewish Americans, and Americans of ALL Faiths are fighting against a backward ideology that seeks to destroy our Country.

I realize that some Christians and some Conservatives will not agree with me and might even accuse me of being a phony for writing this. But, Hey, it is the price one must pay to stand for something that is absolutely right.

So, to Ed Brayton, I say this, you might not like me one bit and that is your right. But this time, you are absolutely correct.

The Scott Brown victory, what it all means

I have been trying to piece together something to write about this victory for the Republican Party and more importantly for the people of Massachusetts. This victory means a great deal of things; some that can be articulated well, and some — you would just have to feel. However, being that I am writer, I will try to do my best to bring those thoughts out in writing.

This victory means that the far left progressives in the Democratic Party have suffered a major setback; and yes, that does include the President.
This victory means that the Democratic Party is about to get, or already has gotten a major message; not only from the people of Massachusetts, but from the American people as well, that Government is not supposed to be from the top down, but rather from the bottom up. They also will figure out, that if you try to impose something on the American people, that is not wanted, you pay for it at the ballot box.
This victory should be an open message to the Democratic Party; Never, ever, under any circumstances run political campaigns with any sort of entitlement attitude. No one, regardless of what party you represent, is entitled to any sort of political office. If you do attempt to run a political campaign with that sort of idiotic attitude, you will pay for it at the polls and you will lose horribly in that election.

Now to the Republicans, I have some thoughts for you as well:

This is not the time for the Republican Party to get arrogant. You all have to remember, you all just got your tails kicked in 2008. Under no circumstances should you repeat the same stupid mistakes of the Bush era — This will lead to your humiliating defeat in the 2010 elections and in the 2012 elections. The Bush-Karl Rove “Center-Right Coalition” had one fetal flaw, it was blind arrogance; which ultimately lead to its demise.
Scott Brown did not run a Republican Senate campaign; Scott Brown ran a campaign for the people of Massachusetts. The Republican Party would be wise NOT to try to capitalize on his victory, because right now, the Republican Party, in the eyes of the American people, especially among independent voters, is damaged goods now. They will be able to recover from that, it will take time and you cannot rush that at all. If you attempt to rush that along, you will utterly fail at a comeback.

This victory, while small, is a sweet one. I just hope and pray that for once in their lives that the Republican Party establishment uses this victory to their advantage and does not louse it up — Because at this point, we the American people, have just too much lose, if Republicans screw this comeback up. On the other hand, America has much to gain, if the Party does things right.

So, please, Republicans, for once… Do the Republican Party’s return to its rightful place in American politics the proper way, please?

IT HAS HAPPENED! – SCOTT BROWN WINS!!!!

It has happened:

Via the AP:

BOSTON (AP) — In an epic upset in liberal Massachusetts, Republican Scott Brown rode a wave of voter anger to win the U.S. Senate seat held by the late Edward M. Kennedy for nearly half a century, leaving President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul in doubt and marring the end of his first year in office.
The loss by the once-favored Democrat Martha Coakley in the Democratic stronghold was a stunning embarrassment for the White House after Obama rushed to Boston on Sunday to try to save the foundering candidate. Her defeat signaled big political problems for the president’s party this fall when House, Senate and gubernatorial candidates are on the ballot nationwide.
“I have no interest in sugarcoating what happened in Massachusetts,” said Sen. Robert Menendez, the head of the Senate Democrats’ campaign committee. “There is a lot of anxiety in the country right now. Americans are understandably impatient.”
Brown will become the 41st Republican in the 100-member Senate, which could allow the GOP to block the president’s health care legislation and the rest of his agenda. Democrats needed Coakley to win for a 60th vote to thwart Republican filibusters.
One day shy of the first anniversary of Obama’s swearing-in, the election played out amid a backdrop of animosity and resentment from voters over persistently high unemployment, Wall Street bailouts, exploding federal budget deficits and partisan wrangling over health care.
For weeks considered a long shot, Brown seized on voter discontent to draw even with Coakley in the campaign’s final stretch. His candidacy energized Republicans, including backers of the grass-roots “tea party” movement, while attracting disappointed Democrats and independents uneasy with where they felt the nation was heading.

AllahPundit and the readers at Hot Air are over the moon. Allah says that this changes everything; I sort of agree. I believe that there is much work to do. I would not get cocky, if I was everyone. I think we should measure our happiness, because the Democrats, especially these Democrats, know no bounds at all. So, while this is a wonderful moment, it really does not change much, just like Glenn Beck said, The Democrats still have a majority and could still push Healthcare through. So, I will not gloat, just yet. Now come the normal 2010 elections and more importantly 2012, that will be the huge decider. Update: Ed Morrissey Basically says the same thing as me, but in much longer form.

Anyhow, Congratulations to Scott Brown, The Brown Campaign and more importantly the American people in Massachusetts, you have done well. Let this be just the beginning! 😀

Jon Stewart NUKES the Democrats, Obama and Coakley

This comes from my friend Ed Morrissey over at HotAir.com:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c

Mass Backwards

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Health Care Crisis

The 9:15 mark has a hilarious crack that made me laugh so darned hard, that I just about blacked out and of which I am still recovering. 😀

On a more serious note, Ed Morrissey adds the following:

So why do Democrats need 60 votes? Democrats will claim it’s because the Republicans are more obstructionist than Democrats were under Bush, but that’s not the case. Democrats were happy to be obstructionist on their core issues, especially on judicial appointments. They didn’t need to be obstructionist on most other issues, because Bush was a lot more centrist than they liked to paint him. Bush went out of his way to court Democrats like Ted Kennedy on education and others on spending and government expansion, because Democrats like those policies.
Democrats had the same option, which was to work with Republicans and craft more centrist approaches to issues like health-care reform and carbon emissions. Instead, they chose a radical agenda, which has not only pushed Republicans into obstructionism but has alienated voters to such an extent that Massachusetts looks ready to elect its first Republican Senator in almost 40 years. That’s not the fault of Republicans — it’s the fault of overreaching Democrats.

Amen. I could not have put it any better, if I tried. The Democrats have been overreaching since this election started. Hell, the overreach started during the primary! I remember when Barack Obama shot forward during the primary and I remember thinking, if the Democrats fall for this guys rhetoric, they are going to pay for it dearly later on. Turns out I was massively correct. We are at this point, the American people are extremely angry and the Democratic Party is just about ready for civil war.

Needless to say, It is going to be a very interesting 2010.

America tries to help Haiti, gets accused of occupation

No, I am not kidding.

I have two stories, first this story via the U.K. Telegraph:

Video:

The Story:

The French minister in charge of humanitarian relief called on the UN to “clarify” the American role amid claims the military build up was hampering aid efforts.
Alain Joyandet admitted he had been involved in a scuffle with a US commander in the airport’s control tower over the flight plan for a French evacuation flight.
“This is about helping Haiti, not about occupying Haiti,” Mr Joyandet said.
Geneva-based charity Medecins Sans Frontieres backed his calls saying hundreds of lives were being put at risk as planes carrying vital medical supplies were being turned away by American air traffic controllers.
But US commanders insisted their forces’ focus was on humanitarian work and last night agreed to prioritise aid arrivals to the airport over military flights, after the intervention of the UN.
The diplomatic row came amid heightened frustrations that hundreds of tons of aid was still not getting through. Charities reported violence was also worsening as desperate Haitians took matters into their own hands.

Let me get this straight —- The United States of America’s last two Presidents get together, put political differences aside and begin to raise all sorts of funds for people of Haiti and now we are the bad guys? Unreal. 🙄

And then, there’s this by Paul Goodman:

The humanitarian catastrophe in Haiti is turning out to be a classic illustration of anti-Americanism in seven easy steps.
Calamitous events take place in a chaotic place (think Bosnia, think Somalia, think Iraq in 1991).
The U.N and the U.S intervene.
The civil government proves to be useless or malign, or both. The U.N isn’t up to the job. The only effective force in sight is the U.S. According to today’s Guardian, John O’Shea, the head of Goal, a medical charity, has called on the U.S to take charge of the whole operation. So has a major U.S aid agency (“which declined to be named for political reasons”).
There are only two possible outcomes.
The U.S takes over. If this happens, it will be accused of “creating a military occupation under the guise of humanitarian aid” and “occupying” the country outright. (Apologies, my memory’s failing me. These criticisms have been aired already. The first quote’s from President Chavez of Venezuela. The second’s from Alain Joyandet, France’s “Co-operation Minister”.)
The U.S doesn’t take over. If this happens, it will be criticised for “not doing enough” – and isolationism.
So either way, the U.S loses.
I’m not a fully signed-up member of the Stars-and-Stripes fan club. But there are times when I think: who’d be an American?

Sorry, I am just going to say this, and I know that some identity politics type of jackass or some minority serial complainer will bitch about it; fine, screw ’em, I just don’t give a damn anymore. What needs to happen right about now, is this — The United States of America needs to get all those supplies off of those ships and planes and get back on their ships and planes and get the hell out of Haiti now. I mean, we have ponied up for these people and other such people long enough, let them idiots deal with their problems themselves, why the hell should WE have to be the ones to go in and play captain? Not like they are going to appreciate what we do any damn way. If the U.N. does not like our forces being there, LET THE U.N. TAKE OVER THE MISSION AND LEAVE!

Yeah, I know, some liberal asshat is going to call me a racist bigot for saying it. I got two words for you: Screw You. The United States of America has wasted more money on Countries that do not like us, for whatever reason and we are doing it again; and again we are being fingered as the bad guys. Enough is Enough! It is time for the United States to say home and take care of its own problems and stop trying to help everyone who has a Earthquake or other kind of natural disaster.

It just so happens that the United States of America is going through its own sort of disaster, A man-made one, its called our Economy — and instead of us watching what we spend and keeping what we have, which is not much, when you figure that China is buying our debt, we are sending it off to a bunch of idiots, who really do not like us anyhow! No, this is not sarcasm, I am quite serious. What do we get for all this sort of charity? The above nonsense that I just quoted.

Bottom Line: I believe it is high time that the United States of America reevaluated its role abroad and got out of the rescue and charity business for Countries that really do not like us anyhow.

Others: Mudville Gazette, Fausta’s Blog, Neptunus Lex, and The Jawa Report

Senator Jesse Helms on the MLK Holiday

Congressional Record, October 3, 1983, Vol. 129, No. 130, pages S 13452 through S 13461.

Mr. President, in light of the comments by the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy), it is important that there be such an examination of the political activities and associations of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., principally from the beginning of his work in the civil rights movement in the mid 1950s until his death in 1968. Throughout this period, but especially toward the beginning and end of his career, King associated with identified members of the Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA), with persons who were former members of or close to the CPUSA, and with CPUSA front organizations. In some important respects King’s civil rights activities and later his opposition to the Vietnam war were strongly influenced by and dependent on these associations.

There is no evidence that King himself was a member of the CPUSA or that he was a rigorous adherent of Marxist ideology or of the Communist Party line. Nevertheless, King was repeatedly warned about his associations with known Communists by friendly elements in the Kennedy Administration and the Department of Justice (DO J) (including strong and explicit warning from President Kennedy himself). King took perfunctory and deceptive measures to separate himself from the Communists against whom he was warned. He continued to have close and secret contacts with at least some of them after being informed and warned of their background, and he violated a commitment to sever his relationships with identified Communists.

Throughout his career King, unlike many other civil rights leaders of his time, associated with the most extreme political elements in the United States. He addressed their organizations, signed their petitions, and invited them into his own organizational activities. Extremist elements played a significant role in promoting and influencing King’s opposition to the Vietnam war-an opposition that was not predicated on what King believed to be the best interests of the United States but on his sympathy for the North Vietnamese Communist regime and on an essentially Marxist and anti-American ideological view of U.S. foreign policy.

King’s patterns of associations and activities described in this report show that, at the least, he had no strong objection to Communism, that he appears to have welcomed collaboration with Communists, and that he and his principal vehicle, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), were subject to influence and manipulation by Communists. The conclusion must be that Martin Luther King, Jr. was either an irresponsible individual, careless of his own reputation and that of the civil rights movement for integrity and loyalty, or that he knowingly cooperated and sympathized with subversive and totalitarian elements under the control of a hostile foreign power.

Biographical Data

Martin Luther King, Jr. was born on January 15, 1929, in Atlanta, Georgia. He was the son of Alberta Williams and Martin Luther King, Sr., a Baptist minister. He was graduated from Morehouse College, Atlanta, in 1948, receiving the degree of B.A. He attended the Crozer Theological Seminary in Chester, Pennsylvania, receiving the degree of B.D. in 1951, and he received the degree of Ph.D. from Boston University in 1955. In 1953 he married Coretta Scott of Alabama, by whom he was the father of four children. On April 4, 1968 King was murdered by a rifle assault in Memphis, Tennessee. On March 10, 1969, James Earl Ray, an escaped convict, pied guilty to the murder of King and was sentenced to 99 years in prison, a term he is now serving.

Operation “Solo” and Stanley D. Levison

In the early 1950s the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) undertook a long-term and highly classified counter-intelligence operation against the CPUSA. The FBI persuaded a former member of the National Committee of the CPUSA and former editor of the Daily Worker, the Party newspaper, to become active again within the Party leadership and to report on Party activities to the FBI. This man’s name was Morris Childs, and his brother, Jack Childs, also a Communist, agreed to act as an informant as well. The FBI operation was known as SOLO, and for nearly 30 years it provided reliable and highly sensitive information about the CPUSA, its activities within the United States, and its relations with the Soviet Union to the highest authorities in the U.S. government. At least three U.S. Presidents were aware of SOLO, and Morris Childs may have briefed President Nixon prior to his trip to Moscow in 1972. In 1980 SOLO was brought to an end. Jack Childs died on August 12, 1980, and the operation was publicly disclosed and thus terminated by historian David J Garrow in a book published the following year.

Among the most important facts learned from SOLO was that the CPUSA was dependent on a direct financial subsidy paid by the Soviet Union. About one million dollars a year in Soviet funds was paid to a member of the CPUSA, usually Jack Childs himself, in New York City. Although this subsidy was illegal, the FBI allowed it to continue for a number of reasons-prosecution would have exposed SOLO and necessarily brought it to an end, and the operation was of continuing value; and the dependence of the Party on Soviet funds meant that it did not seek to increase its membership and importance within the United States.

In 1953 Jack Childs reported to the FBI that an individual named Stanley David Levison (1912-1979), a New York lawyer and businessman, was deeply involved in acquiring and disposing of the funds of the Soviet subsidy to the CPUSA. Levison may have been involved as a financial benefactor to the Party as early as 1945 and may have established legitimate business enterprises in the United States and Latin America in order to launder Soviet funds to the Party. In this connection Levison was said to have worked with Isidore G. Needleman, the representative of the Soviet trading corporation AMTORG.

Childs also reported to the FBI that Levison assisted CPUSA leaders to acquire and manage the Party’s secret funds and that he directed about $50,000 a year into the Party’s treasury. After the death of Party treasurer William Weiner in 1954, Levison’s financial role became increasingly important, and Levison, according to Childs, became “the interim chief administrator of the party’s most secret funds.”2

The FBI maintained close surveillance of Levison, but in mid to late 1955, Levison’s financial role began to decline. The FBI decreased its surveillance, although Levison was believed to have occasional contacts with CPUSA leaders. The Bureau eventually terminated surveillance of Levison, probably sometime in 1957. Some indications that CPUSA leaders were disgruntled with Levison led the FBI to interview him on February 9 and March 4, 1960. It is not clear what Levison told the FBI at these interviews, but he definitely rejected the request of the FBI that he become an informant within the Communist Party.

In the summer of 1956 Bayard Rustin, himself a former member of the Young Communist League, the youth arm of the CPUSA, introduced Levison to Martin Luther King, Jr. in New York City. Levison and King soon became close friends, and Levison provided important financial, organizational, and public relations services for King and the SCLC. The FBI was not aware of their relationship until very late 1961 or early 1962, and it was the discovery of their relationship that led to the protracted and intensive FBI-DOJ surveillance of King for the remainder of his life. The FBI believed that Levison was still a Communist and that King’s relationship with him represented an opportunity for the Communist Party to infiltrate and manipulate King and the civil rights movement.

Of King’s dependence on Levison there can be no doubt. A DOJ Task Force investigating the FBI surveillance of King discussed this dependence in its report of 1977:

The advisor’s [Levison’s] relationship to King and the SCLC is amply evidenced in the files and the task force concludes that he was a most trusted advisor. The files are replete with instances of his counseling King and his organization on matters pertaining to organization, finances, political strategy and speech writing. Some examples follow:

The advisor organized, in King’s name, a fund raising society …. This organization and the SCLC were in large measure financed by concerts arranged by this person …. He also lent counsel to King and the SCLC on the tax consequences of charitable gifts.

On political strategy, he suggested King make a public statement calling for the appointment of a black to the Supreme Court …. This person advised against accepting a movie offer from a movie director and against approaching Attorney General Kennedy on behalf of a labor leader ….In each instance his advice was accepted.

King’s speech before the AFL-CIO National Convention was written by this advisor …. He also prepared King’s May 1962 speech before the United Packing House Workers Convention …. In 1965 he prepared responses to press questions directed to Dr. King from a Los Angeles radio station regarding the Los Angeles racial riots and from the “New York Times” regarding the Vietnam War)

After King’s death, Coretta Scott King described Levison’s role: “Always working in the background, his contribution has been indispensable,” and she wrote of an obituary of King written by Levison and Harry Belafonte, “two of his most devoted and trusted friends,” as “the one which best describes the meaning of my husband’s life and death.TM It may be noted that this obituary began with a description of America as “a nation tenaciously racist …. sick with violence …. [and] corrosive with alienation.” According to Garrow, Levison also assisted King in the writing and publication of Stride Toward Freedom, the administration of contributions to SCLC, and the recruitment of employees of SCLC. King offered to pay Levison for all this help, but Levison consistently refused, writing that “the liberation struggle [i.e., the civil rights movement] is the most positive and rewarding area of work anyone could experience.”

Military Scopes being sold by Michigan supplier have Holy Scriptures references on them, liberals horrified

The idiot story of the day:

Coded references to New Testament Bible passages about Jesus Christ are inscribed on high-powered rifle sights provided to the United States military by a Michigan company, an ABC News investigation has found.
At the end of the serial number on Trijicon’s ACOG gun sight, you can read “JN8:12”, a reference to the New Testament book of John, Chapter 8, Verse 12, which reads: “Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.” The ACOG is widely used by the U.S. military.

The sights are used by U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the training of Iraqi and Afghan soldiers. The maker of the sights, Trijicon, has a $660 million multi-year contract to provide up to 800,000 sights to the Marine Corps, and additional contracts to provide sights to the U.S. Army.
U.S. military rules specifically prohibit the proselytizing of any religion in Iraq or Afghanistan and were drawn up in order to prevent criticism that the U.S. was embarked on a religious “Crusade” in its war against al Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents.
One of the citations on the gun sights, 2COR4:6, is an apparent reference to Second Corinthians 4:6 of the New Testament, which reads: “For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”
Other references include citations from the books of Revelation, Matthew and John dealing with Jesus as “the light of the world.” John 8:12, referred to on the gun sights as JN8:12, reads, “Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.
via U.S. Military Weapons Inscribed With Secret ‘Jesus’ Bible Codes – ABC News.

UPDATE: I had some stuff written here, that I wish I had never written. Snark is fun, but only if everyone else is laughing. I blew it and I apologize. Please, go read this….NOW.

Others: Winds of Change.NET, Townhall.com, The Jawa Report