Add a rally, forum, town hall, or other event to collect RSVPs, give attendees directions and more.
Add events from your existing Ning or MeetUp groups to share with other FreedomConnector activists.
Let other FreedomConnector activists join your cause to mobilize for freedom!
VOTE NOW: What should Republicans' Top Legislative Priority Be?
Repeal the ObamaCare individual mandate
Stop the NSA's warrantless spying on Americans
Refuse to reauthorize the Import-Export Bank
Stop the ObamaCare bailouts of insurance companies
View poll and comments »
I don't think anyone would disagree, once you give an entity separate from yourself the power to make some decisions in your stead (a bit of your own sovereignty), you have created a 'monster' that absolutely must be kept under very tight control. Because sovereignty is such a valuable commodity, sharing it should give everyone great concern.
In fact, sovereignty (or decision making, concerning your very life) in the hands of someone you can absolutely trust would be bad enough, but what about someone you can't? You would think that 1) you wouldn't give it away lightly; you'd give them absolutely no more than necessary, 2) you'd be very careful about who you trust it with, 3) even then, you'd probably keep one eye on it, and 4) if anything, you'd have strings attached so as to get it back, or fail-safe measures to stop the trustee should anything go wrong. You'd never allow this monster to be 'on it's own'. Your main job, thereafter, would be to monitor it constantly.
Because members of our society have taken to feeding it, that is, giving it more and more decisions about our lives, it has grown to where we're fearful of it breaking it's chains altogether, even taking over.
Honestly, we didn't just do something so stupid on our own. We realize that, 'Hey, I didn't give up my sovereignty, so how did I lose it anyway?' Good question. Short answer is, the monster figured out that it could ask someone else for theirs, and just kept doing that until, voila, it's got enough to take mine.
Long story, short, We have to make our Reps aware that that is our sovereignty they are f---ing with and then that they must start immediately getting it back!!!!!
Just a small example: If you asked me if I wanted to pay for buying a billion dollars worth of aircraft to kill Syrians, I'd say 'Hell no!'. But government (the monster) evidently asked the right people and now they can take it from me. See, they don't ask us individually, where they would get rejected, they ask the select few that favor whatever it is they want to do. In doing so they've circumvented the restraint process. See how that works?
Al Sharpton wants to make sure you know that the real victim of Saturday's execution-style killing of NYPD officers Wenjian Liu and Raphael Ramos was not the cops involved. Oh sure, he's paying some transparent lip service to their deaths, but Sharpton thinks there are bigger issues at stake. He seems to think the real victims here are Al Sharpton and his money-grubbing movement.
According to Sharpton, he's receiving threats, and as CBS News reported the officers' murders are making it tough for him to cash in on the Eric Garner and Michael Brown cases:
Civil rights leaders Sunday condemned the ambush killings of two New York police officers and expressed fear that the backlash over the bloodshed could derail the protest movement that has grown out of the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner…
Similarly, the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has called for peaceful protests, condemned “eye-for-an-eye” violence and called it absurd to blame protesters or politicians for the officers’ deaths.
Sharpton made the comments during a press conference on Sunday, where he appeared with Garner's widow and mother. He went on to claim that his movement is:
“...a pursuit of justice to make the city work fairly for everyone. This is not about trying to take things in our own hands. That does not solve the problem of police misconduct. If we go into a area where’s it’s an eye for an eye, then it is only a matter of who can out-plunk eyes, rather than who can make the system fair.”
That movement, he fears, is under assault. People who think he's just petty little race-baiting agitator are angry, and Sharpton claims he is being attacked by "those who are misguided – from those who are trying to blame everyone from civil rights leaders to the mayor rather than deal with an ugly spirit that all of us need to fight."
He also played what he claims is just one of the many threatening voice mails he's received. “The language," he said, "is ‘hey N-word, stop killing innocent people, I’m going to get you,’ and I have several like this. So we are now under intense threat.”
“I have instructed our attorneys last night, I have began receiving threatening phone calls and hate. I’ll play one because I’m turning this over to the FBI."
First of all, if Al Sharpton is receiving threats, he should probably call the cops. We're sure they're eager to help him out. They're undoubtedly big fans - especially since, just one week ago, his ultra-peaceful "Million Marchers" were wandering down the street chanting "What do we want? Dead Cops. When do we want them? Now."
Maybe when they said they wanted "dead cops now" they were just "speaking colloquially."
Secondly, why would anyone, anywhere, believe Sharpton's nasty little voice mails are genuine? This man has made a career out of phony accusations - beginning with Tawana Brawley's fake rape claims. Those, of course, were leveled against... Oh right. Cops. There's no reason to assume that the current threats weren't phoned in by one of his accomplices.
...And even if they weren't, so what?
All of this - the alleged threats included - is exactly what Sharpton and his cohorts wanted. He's been fomenting hate, riots, violence, and death since his track suit days, most notably in the case of the Crown Heights riots back in the early 90's. He couldn't possibly care less about the death of two police officers, nor is he interested in the pain their families are now forced to endure.
He sees an exploitable situation, riles up a bunch of easily manipulated sheep, and turns them lose on a neighborhood. After the chaos dies down, he gets in front of the cameras, outlines his new fundraising strategy, and then spends a few minutes trying claim that he had nothing to do with the creation of the situation in the first place.
If he receives a few threats in the process, that's just sauce for the goose. He can - on top of proclaiming his innocence, paint himself as a victim.
So far, that blueprint has gained him an MSNBC show and repeated audiences with some of America's most prominent politicians.
This is - to a T - his modus operandi.
When Muslims claim victory in a military conquest, they raise up a minaret
Whatever side of the conspiracy you find yourself on, there are certain facts that are not up for dispute. On 09,11.01 the twin towers of the world trade were brought down by Muslims flying jetliners into the sides of the buildings, and bringing them down in massive explosions. This one, single act brought Muslim Islamic terrorism front and center on the world stage and it has not left us for a moment since then.
The New World Order has used that event to bring us along on the the forward march into an American police state. Within one year of the bombings, Verichip Corp released the implantable RFID microchip. Then came the Patriot Act, followed at the same time with the invasion of Iraq and Afganistan in the Middle East. Nazi-style checkpoints were created at all airports and transportation areas. Anyone wanting to fly anywhere in America must submit themselves to the molestation of the TSA gestapos. Obama’s NSA taps all cell phone communications, Internet, text messaging and social media to store them in the digital concentration camps of places like the Utah Data Center. Nearly every major intersection now has 24 hour “red light cameras” to record who comes and goes.
America is on permanent lockdown, and no one seems to care.
Claiming victory for Islam
When Muslims claim victory in a military conquest, they do two things. They build a mosque on or near the site of the battle, and then they raise up a minaret as high as it will go to show the world that that land has been claimed as an Islamic victory. On September 22, 2011, they opened Park 51, otherwise known as the Ground Zero Mosque. Step one was completed.
Step two happened on May 10, 2013, with the raising of an Islamic minaret to sit triumphantly atop the One World Trade Center. Look at the above graphic and tell me what you see. With the exception that one can send broadcast signals and the other cannot, what would be the difference? An intellectually honest person would be forced to agree.
In New York City, both mayoral candidates said that they fully supported adding Muslim holidays to the school calendar. We have a president who was raised as a Muslim in Indonesia who simply will not prosecute Islamic crimes against American citizens. When the American Consulate in Libya was attacked, and four Americans brutally killed, Obama did nothing then and is doing nothing about it now.
Even the name of this new tower, the ONE WORLD Trade Center, tells you everything you need to know about the One World Government thats coming. I believe that when the roundup begins for the FEMA Concentration Camps, this tower will be one of the main points of entry, and you will go in under the shadow of the highest Islamic minaret in the world. Irony doesn’t get much more pointed than that.
The war on terror has ended, freedom has lost.
North Korea is claiming there is clear evidence that US Government was behind Sony’s movie ‘The Interview’. North Korea is threatening to blow up multiple citadels in the US including the White House and the Pentagon. A Rant by Korean authorities was published in a state run news agency call KCNA.
In classic Obama fashion, you know someone who sympathizes with Cuba, he is downplaying Sony canceling the film as just a silly cyber spat, while North Korea is considering the film an ‘act of war.
Your support keeps freedom alive!