Palin on Blowback From 'Blood Libel' Comment: They Can't Make Us Shut Up

Sarah Palin said Monday night that she used the term "blood libel" to describe false claims made against outspoken conservatives like herself who were accused of having blood on their hands in the aftermath of the deadly shootings in Arizona.

Palin was criticized by some Jewish groups for employing the highly charged words that historically have referred to a false rationalization for anti-Semitism -- that Jews used Christian blood in some rituals.

"I think the critics again were using anything that they could gather out of that statement," Palin said on the Fox News Channel's "Hannity" show. "You can spin up anything out of anybody's statements that are released and use them against the person who is making the statement." Palin made the "blood libel" remark in a video that she put out to defend herself and other conservatives against claims that their inflammatory rhetoric -- and in her case, a map showing targeted Democratic congressional districts in cross-hairs -- contributed to the shooting rampage that left six dead in Tucson last week.

"They can't make us sit down and shut up," she said.

Assassin's politics lean 'left wing, quite liberal' 'Communist Manifesto,' 'Mein Kampf,' listed as alleged gunman's favorite

By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WorldNetDaily

"The Communist Manifesto" and Hitler's "Mein Kampf" were among the favorite reading materials of Jared Lee Loughner, the suspected gunmen in today's fatal shooting that reportedly left six dead and gravely injured a U.S. congresswoman.

Lougher, 22, listed those tomes among his favorites on his YouTube channel, in which he wrote that "conscience dreams" were a "great study" at his college, Pima Community College.

Understand what's happening to America's culture and what you can do to fight it with "How Evil Works," autographed, from the WND Superstore.

One user on Twitter, Caitie Parker, wrote she went to high school, college and was in a band with the gunman. She said she hadn't seen him since 2007.

Parker wrote of Lougher, "As I knew him he was left wing, quite liberal and oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy."

She also described him as "more left."

Lougher also left a trail of bold political statements.

On his now deleted MySpace page, Lougher wrote a series of disjointed rants, including:

* "If there's no flag in the Constitution, then the flag in the film is unknown. There's no flag in the Constitution. Therefore, the flag in the film is unknown. Burn every new and old flag that you see. Burn your flag!"

* "I bet you can imagine this in your mind with a faster speed. Watch this protest in reverse! Ask the local police, 'What's your illegal activity on duty?'"

* "If you protest the government, then there's a new government from protesting. There's not a new government from protesting. Thus, you aren't protesting the government."

Three months ago, Lougher made a YouTube video in which he proclaimed, "I know you're illiterate! This is the greatest protest for exposure into a wrongful act. The school is breaking the Constitution. If you watch the video then you'll understand. The teachers are taking advantage of you in the First and Fifth Amendment. The United States Constitution, which is the law, can be broken at this school."

Religion of peace' launching 'ferocious' attacks Worshippers targeted in Egypt, Iraq, Nigeria, Russia Read more: 'Religion of peace' launching 'feroc

2011 WorldNetDaily

It was only six days after the 9/11 attacks that President Bush described Islam as a religion of peace, specifically saying, "Islam is peace," but the Religion of Peace website reports that for 2010, there were 1987 jihad attacks in 46 nations resulting in 9,175 deaths and 17,436 injured, according to a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

So analysts are expressing alarm that individual attacks on Christian churches are being replicated rapidly and appear to be reflecting a new wave of Islamists' war against any stability in the Middle East.

Recent al-Qaida attacks on Christians stretching from North Africa to the Middle East and Central Asia reveal a new terrorist initiative that not only attempts to eliminate remnants of existing non-Islamist religions but hits hard at "soft target" opportunities, such as praying Christians in Egypt, leaving security experts off-guard.

Analysts say the orchestrated attacks against Christians – from Egypt, Iraq and Nigeria to Russia's mostly Muslim North Caucasus of the Ingushetia region bordering Chechnya – initially were thought to be random.

However, the killing spree now is being viewed as a coordinated pattern of attacks representing a new and higher level of violence.

The Vatican had been expressing alarm for some time, with Pope Benedict XVI describing as "ferocious" the terrorist acts that were launched in October when some 58 Iraqis were killed and 78 wounded in an attack on the Syrian Catholic Cathedral of Baghdad.

The October attacks were an act of "unheard-of ferocity against defenseless people joined in prayer," said senior Vatican official Archbishop Carlo Marina Vigano at a recent general assembly meeting of Interpol in Doha, Qatar. Interpol, or the International Criminal Police Organization, helps facilitate police cooperation internationally.

The attack on the cathedral was followed by further attacks by al-Qaida-affiliated groups that struck in a coordinated effort on three Christian homes in the Iraqi capital, followed by mortar attacks on another two largely Christian communities.

The latest violence against Christians occurred last week in Alexandria, Egypt, on the Coptic Christian church where a suicide bomber killed 21 people and wounded another 80. Some 1,000 Christians were attending New Year's Mass.

According to observers, blood splattered the front of the church, as well as a mosque directly across the street. Many of the bodies were left in the church overnight to be collected by ambulances for burial the next day. Some Christians brought white sheets with the sign of the cross emblazoned on them in what appeared to be victims' blood.

"There were only three soldiers and an officer in front of the church," said Archbishop Raweis, the top Coptic cleric in Alexandria. "Why did they have so little security at such a sensitive time when there's so many threats coming from al-Qaida?"

Outraged Christians immediately blamed the predominantly Muslim government of Egypt which has seen growing tensions for some time between its Muslim majority and Christian minority.

Keep in touch with the most important breaking news stories about critical developments around the globe with Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin, the premium, online intelligence news source edited and published by the founder of WND.

ISRAEL21c - Our system makes an initial assessment within three minutes

Built to replace human selectors or random check ups of visitors, the SDS-VR-1000 is based on the assumption that sophisticated terrorists might not be included in suspect lists. Not many terrorists walk into an airport waving a banner announcing who they are. They don't carry handguns or try to conceal explosives as they debark from an international flight into the United States. And just as rarely do they have police records.

So how can US officials go about identifying potential terrorists? A new solution is Israel's Suspect Detection Systems (SDS) - a company that has developed an advance automated filtering tool for identifying potential suspects with hostile intentions among masses of tens of thousands visitors.

Consider it a personal polygraph machine, that will make air travelers infinitely safer, says SDS CEO Shabtai Shoval, a former division manager at Comverse Technology who founded SDS along with former head of the Israel Police's polygraph division Yeshayahu Horowitz and former deputy Mossad chief Amiram Levin.

"Our system makes an initial assessment within three minutes. If the system identifies a suspect, he can be sent to a personal agent to complete the investigation," Shoval said.
Shoval explained that the inspiration his journey from Comverse to airport security was spurred by the September 11 attacks, as well as a viewing of a Tom Cruise movie.

"I happened to see the movie Minority Report - with Tom Cruise. I thought to myself, how great it would be to be able to prophesize a crime before it happens," he told
"Among my staff in the telemarketing division of Converse were two people formerly from the Shabak (Israel's General Security Services). After 9-11, we said to ourselves, maybe we should change direction toward the field of homeland security. 'What's the major problem that 9-11 has presented to the world,' we asked?

"Our conclusion was the fundamental issue that international terrorism has gotten sophisticated enough to enable terrorists to get into the target country without any weapons and with their own identity. Therefore, they can then create a strategic terror attack from within, without carrying in any means with them," he said.

Built to replace human selectors or random check ups of visitors, the SDS-VR-1000 is a device based on the assumption that sophisticated terrorists might not be included in suspect lists and will not carry weapon or explosives when they approach a checkpoint.

"We came to this conclusion two years ago - and since then, that idea has only been reinforced with the Spanish train explosion and the Chechnyan school takeover. It plays out again and again. International terrorists are getting inside a country without weapons, under their own identity and are succeeding in changing history," said Shoval.

According to Shoval, there are two basic ways to combat this threat - either through good intelligence, or through being able to detect them when they try to enter a country.

"Intelligence is a problem - since most potential terrorists haven't been on a suspect list. So you need to look for intention. This has to be done with the handicap of not being able to look for weapons, since carrying a weapon into the US, for example, would be stupid since it's so easy to obtain weaponry once they're inside," he said.

"If only you could have each person trying to enter the US go through a polygraph test with a specialist, you could prevent terrorists from entering - but of course that's not realistic. But, can we create a machine - that uses the basics of polygraph technology - that works automatically without the specialist, and takes only three minutes?"

The SDS system does just about that. It is based on the belief that the terrorist's fear will be reflected in measurable psycho-physiological parameters.

"As they say in the movies, we have the technology to do this - to use artificial intelligence in software to imitate polygraph capabilities It took a long time -two years - and lots of trial and error through tests conducted in Israel. But we've achieved a success rate of 95%," said Shoval.

The way it works is that the passenger approaches the machine - they put their passport on a scanner and their other hand on a sensor. He is then presented with an array of written questions in the language indicated by the passport (or in an audio mode with earphones if requested). A special detector then measures physiological responses.

"What is does is collect objective data out of the passenger's ID - and it analyzes the data compared to the subjective data it collects while the passenger is asked different questions," said Shoval. "The process takes approximately three minutes, and the passenger either receives a transfer printout authorizing him to advance to the next stage of entry to the country, or an announcement that he is required for further questioning. A monitoring official will then escort the passenger to another area for further questioning."

The system has been approved by the Israeli security apparatus, and an experimental version is going to be tested this year in an American airport.

"We've passed all the lab tests in Israel - with the involvement of various security involvement - and now this year, it will be field tested in Israel and in the US. Once it's on the market, each system will cost approximately $200,000 and will service about 40,000 per year. We're talking to Boeing and Accnture about partnerships as well as looking for a VC strategic investor in the US," said Shoval.

According to Shoval, the SDS system is a truly unique product, one that could only have been developed in the cultural and political climate of his country - and he lists three reasons why.

"First, it's based on the methods developed by the Shabak and El Al, Israel's national carrier.
Second, the field tests in Israel were unique -only here can you find a population (in Gaza) where 95% of the population has been in an ongoing conflict with their authorities. It's a fine tuning issue to find which people among those 95% are actual terrorists. If you cross that barrier, there's no place in the world where it can't work. Even in Iraq, only about 30% of the population have been involved with confrontations with the US Army and ruling Iraqi forces.

"And third - it took Israeli boldness to go ahead with a plan involving full contact polygraph with civilians, a concept that the US would not have been able to initiate. Americans chose not utilize human selectors - partly due to budget, and partly because it's difficult to educate the selector how to define between the different kinds of profiling. Here, our system is doing it for you - there's no human element involved.

"It's like a robot selection process - we don't make the decision to take someone out of line and put him in jail - we only take someone for further investigation. There's no profile selecting and no human rights violations," he said.

We've created a single-track minded machine - it can do just one task - ID a terrorist."

Obama Jokes on Air Force one - We will be landing the plane in South America to see Hugo Chavez! Really

Obama watch - This guy may be coming apart right in front of our eyes.. Please pray for our President....

______________________________________________

© 2010 WorldNetDaily


WASHINGTON – On the flight home from the European Summit today, Barack Obama stopped in the press cabin of Air Force 1 and joked that he was stopping the plane in South America to see Hugo Chavez.

That according to CNN's Ed Henry, who Tweeted the message to anyone who might be paying attention, editorializing that the president appeared to be "a little punchy."

Chavez is known as a leading anti-American socialist leader in Venezuela.

Within minutes the blogosphere was aflame with concerns not only about the propriety of the remark but about Obama's state of mind.

The flippant remark wasn't the only trigger for such concerns:

* Shortly after his meeting with European Union leaders, Obama offhandedly remarked: "This summit was not as exciting as other summits."

* Some observe he seems distant from the nation's economic challenges, the rising tide of anger sweeping the country over enhanced airport security checks and the secrecy over what top military officials characterize as an unexplained missile launch over Southern California Nov. 8.

* Pundits and talk-show hosts, including Rush Limbaugh and top-rated Sean Hannity, have cited White House sources as saying the president is "unhinged," "detached," "bored," "losing it" and obsessed with critics.

"There are some Democrats that cue me into things," said Hannity on his show Thursday. "The feeling among some people in the White House is that this president is unhinged, that he's detached, that he's losing it, he's obsessed with critics, very specifically obsessed with Fox News, he can't stand [Vice President Joe] Biden, he hates the Clintons, the Clintons hate him. Infighting, apparently, and finger pointing is at an all-time high; if the president is brought bad news on the economy, he has a meltdown every time he hears it. And this is what people – and I'm telling you, my sources are reliable – are telling me."

Millions of Americans sense there is something very wrong with the president of the United States, but they don't know exactly what. "The Manchurian President" answers that question. Now available autographed at WND's Superstore!




Before Air Force 1 landed, American bloggers were weighing in through cyberspace with their opinions of the latest remark from Obama:

* "Is he finally losing it? I think that people who joke and laugh about inappropriate things, or at inappropriate times are having trouble dealing with something."

* "The guy is certifiable."

* "He must be bored again."

* "If CNN is noticing Obama is mentally ill, that's a big deal. CNN has to be careful or get their press card pulled. They are being as open as they can be."

* "He's cracking. By spring he'll be a complete mess."

* "'Punchy' is an interesting choice of words. It usually means drunk to the point of being stupid. That seems to fit the context."

For whom the bell tolls - An end to free press in America

Who says Congress never gets anything done?

On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously approved a bill that would give the Attorney General the right to shut down websites with a court order if copyright infringement is deemed “central to the activity” of the site — regardless if the website has actually committed a crime. The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) is among the most draconian laws ever considered to combat digital piracy, and contains what some have called the “nuclear option,” which would essentially allow the Attorney General to turn suspected websites “off.”

COICA is the latest effort by Hollywood, the recording industry and the big media companies to stem the tidal wave of internet file sharing that has upended those industries and, they claim, cost them tens of billions of dollars over the last decade.

The content companies have tried suing college students. They’ve tried suing internet startups. Now they want the federal government to act as their private security agents, policing the internet for suspected pirates before making them walk the digital plank.

Many people opposed to the bill agree in principle with its aims: Illegal music piracy is, well, illegal, and should be stopped. Musicians, artists and content creators should be compensated for their work. But the law’s critics do not believe that giving the federal government the right to shut down websites at will based upon a vague and arbitrary standard of evidence, even if no law-breaking has been proved, is a particularly good idea. COICA must still be approved by the full House and Senate before becoming law. A vote is unlikely before the new year.

Among the sites that could go dark if the law passes: Dropbox, RapidShare, SoundCloud, Hype Machine and any other site for which the Attorney General deems copyright infringement to be “central to the activity” of the site, according to Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group that opposes the bill. There need not even be illegal content on a site — links alone will qualify a site for digital death. Websites at risk could also theoretically include p2pnet and pirate-party.us or any other website that advocates for peer-to-peer file sharing or rejects copyright law, according to the group.

In short, COICA would allow the federal government to censor the internet without due process.

The mechanism by which the government would do this, according to the bill, is the internet’s Domain Name System (DNS), which translates web addresses into IP addresses. The bill would give the Attorney General the power to simply obtain a court order requiring internet service providers to pull the plug on suspected websites.

Scholars, lawyers, technologists, human rights groups and public interest groups have denounced the bill. Forty-nine prominent law professors called it “dangerous.” (pdf.) The American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch warned the bill could have “grave repercussions for global human rights.” (pdf.) Several dozen of the most prominent internet engineers in the country — many of whom were instrumental in the creation of the internet — said the bill will “create an environment of tremendous fear and uncertainty for technological innovation.” (pdf.) Several prominent conservative bloggers, including representatives from RedState.com, HotAir.com, The Next Right and Publius Forum, issued a call to help stop this “serious threat to the Internet.”

And Tim Berners-Lee, who invented the world wide web, said, “Neither governments nor corporations should be allowed to use disconnection from the internet as a way of arbitrarily furthering their own aims.” He added: “In the spirit going back to Magna Carta, we require a principle that no person or organization shall be deprived of their ability to connect to others at will without due process of law, with the presumption of innocence until found guilty.”

Critics of the bill object to it on a number of grounds, starting with this one: “The Act is an unconstitutional abridgment of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment,” the 49 law professors wrote. “The Act permits the issuance of speech suppressing injunctions without any meaningful opportunity for any party to contest the Attorney General’s allegations of unlawful content.” (original emphasis.)

Because it is so ill-conceived and poorly written, the law professors wrote, “the Act, if enacted into law, will not survive judicial scrutiny, and will, therefore, never be used to address the problem (online copyright and trademark infringement) that it is designed to address. Its significance, therefore, is entirely symbolic — and the symbolism it presents is ugly and insidious. For the first time, the United States would be requiring Internet Service Providers to block speech because of its content.”

The law professors noted that the bill would actually undermine United States policy, enunciated forcefully by Secretary of State Clinton, which calls for global internet freedom and opposes web censorship. “Censorship should not be in any way accepted by any company anywhere,” Clinton said in her landmark speech on global internet freedom earlier this year. She was referring to China. Apparently some of Mrs. Clinton’s former colleagues in the U.S. Senate approve of internet censorship in the United States.

To be fair, COICA does have some supporters in addition to sponsor Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vermont) and his 17 co-sponsors including Schumer, Specter, Grassley, Gillibrand, Hatch, Klobuchar, Coburn, Durbin, Feinstein, Menendez and Whitehouse. Mark Corallo, who served as chief spokesperson for former Attorney General John Ashcroft and as spokesman for Karl Rove during the Valerie Plame affair, wrote Thursday on The Daily Caller: “The Internet is not at risk of being censored. But without robust protections that match technological advances making online theft easy, the creators of American products will continue to suffer.”

“Counterfeiting and online theft of intellectual property is having devastating effects on industries where millions of Americans make a living,” wrote Corallo, who now runs a Virginia-based public relations firm and freely admits that he has “represented copyright and patent-based businesses for years.” “Their futures are at risk due to Internet-based theft.”

The Recording Industry Association of America, which represents the major record labels, praised Leahy for his work, “to insure [sic] that the Internet is a civilized medium instead of a lawless one where foreign sites that put Americans at risk are allowed to flourish.”

Over the course of his career, Leahy has received $885,216 from the TV, movie and music industries, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

God Bless The Idiots Of WV- What a bunch of Sheep

What has Jay Rockefeller ever don for America?? (The Answer nothing!) No wonder Mommies boy and KKK Byrd both come from the smartest state in the union!

SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-WV): “There’s a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to FOX and to MSNBC: ‘Out. Off. End. Goodbye.’ It would be a big favor to political discourse; our ability to do our work here in Congress, and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and more importantly, in their future.”