Judge Says No to Parts of Az Illegal Immigration Law

This is why elections matter.

Judge Susan Bolton was appointed by Bill Clinton.

What s surprise.

FBI Raids in Three States

Via Foxnews.com:

ADRIAN, Michigan -- The FBI said Sunday that agents conducted weekend raids in three states and arrested at least three people, and a militia leader in Michigan said the target of at least one raid was a Christian militia group.

The raids took place in Michigan, Indiana and Ohio, the FBI said. Federal warrants were sealed, but a federal law enforcement official speaking on condition of anonymity said some of those arrested face gun charges and officials are pursuing other suspects. Some of the suspects were expected in court Monday.

FBI spokeswoman Sandra Berchtold confirmed the FBI had been working in two southeast Michigan counties near the Ohio state line. FBI spokesman Scott Wilson in Ohio said agents arrested two people Saturday after raids in two Ohio towns.

A third arrest made in northeast Illinois on Sunday stemmed from a raid Saturday just over the border in northwest Indiana, both part of an ongoing investigation led by the FBI in Michigan, according to a statement from agents in Illinois.

It wasn't clear what prompted the raids, but Michael Lackomar, a spokesman for the Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia, said one of his team leaders got a frantic phone call Saturday evening from members of Hutaree, a Christian militia group. They said their property in southwest Michigan was being raided by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, according to Lackomar.

You will find the rest of the story at this link.

Detnews.com has more on this here.

My friend Eowyn at Fellowship of the Minds has still more here.

I don't know what to make of this as yet, as there isn't much information available. More will probably be coming out tomorrow after those who were arrested make their court appearances.

This could be a legitimate law enforcement operation by the feds, or something else.

One thing is certain: I am going to be very interested in seeing exactly what laws these people will be alleged to have violated.

I am quite sure I will not be alone in that.

(h/t: Everybody who emailed this story to me)

A Notepad Mea Culpa Regarding the A.C.L.U.

I have to admit that I am not a real big fan of the A.C.L.U. I understand what they claim to be, but they have always seemed to me somewhat biased and selective when it comes to speaking out in defense of certain individuals or groups. My sense has always been, with a few notable exceptions, they tend to lean a little too far to the left for my comfort, but that is not to say they don't get it right on occasion.

Back on February 10th, I posted this article about the feds and police spying on pro-lifers in Wisconsin, and in which I wrote the following:

I doubt we will hear so much as a peep out of the A.C.L.U., either. Of course, we all know if George W. Bush were still in the White House and the feds were investigating, say, C.A.I.R., the people at the ACLU, among other lefty-oriented organizations, would be spinning on their eyebrows and spitting nails over it.

Apparently I was a little hasty in condemning the ACLU for its "lack of action" in this matter, as this comment was posted by Chris Ahmuty of the ACLU of Wisconsin:

Anonymous said...

Dear Dave,
The ACLU objected to this instance of domestic spying the day Wisc. Pro Life issued their media release. Below is our tweet with a link to the AP story in which we condemn the govt. And we have not stopped here. There is a lot going on which might surprise you.

"ACLU WI asks are the feds spying on you? http://bit.ly/9xBHvf "

Chris Ahmuty, ED
ACLU of Wisconsin

The link provided by Mr. Ahmuty lead to this Wisconsin State Journal story:

It concluded the report was unlikely to "have any impact on civil liberties or civil rights" given its limited dissemination. But anti-abortion groups and the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin on Monday both criticized the federal government's collection of information on law-abiding protesters.

You will find the whole story here.

I hope the attention this matter has generated will cause the DHS, and other law enforcement agencies, to consider their actions carefully the next time around. After all, our federal government has, in a sense, acquired the power of life and death over us, and power of that nature needs to be watched closely. Very closely.

-And it matters not whether the people running said government have a "D" or and "R" behind their names.

I also hope the scrutiny will result in those responsible for this hideous incident to be called on the carpet, but that is probably asking a bit much given the current environment in D.C.

Ed. note: The Notepad thanks Mr. Ahmuty for pointing its error out, and for teaching this blogger a lesson.

UAH Killer Professor Is Lefty Kook

Via BostonHerald.com:

“She was an oddball - just not very sociable,” said Sylvia Fluckiger, a former lab technician who worked with Bishop in 1993.

Bishop acknowledged at the time being questioned in the bombing attempt of a Harvard medical doctor evaluating her on doctorate work, a professor with whom Bishop was known to quarrel, Fluckiger said.

Reyes confirmed he is working with the FBI to learn more about why Bishop was a suspect in the attempted bombing of Dr. Paul Rosenberg, who received a double-pipe bomb in the mail on Dec. 19, 1993. He ran from his Newton home with his wife, escaping without injury. The bomb never exploded.

You can read the entire article here, and also about what some of the witnesses are saying here.

Ted Kaczynski, Bill Ayers, Amy Bishop...

You know, I think Janet "Reno II" Napolitano might want to consider shifting her focus away from armed conservatives and start keeping tabs on communist college professors, as they seem to be a far larger threat to innocent people.

Just a thought.

The Obamanistas Want To Track Your Cell Phone

Via CNET.com (emphasis mine):

Two years ago, when the FBI was stymied by a band of armed robbers known as the "Scarecrow Bandits" that had robbed more than 20 Texas banks, it came up with a novel method of locating the thieves.

FBI agents obtained logs from mobile phone companies corresponding to what their cellular towers had recorded at the time of a dozen different bank robberies in the Dallas area. The voluminous records showed that two phones had made calls around the time of all 12 heists, and that those phones belonged to men named Tony Hewitt and Corey Duffey. A jury eventually convicted the duo of multiple bank robbery and weapons charges.

Even though police are tapping into the locations of mobile phones thousands of times a year, the legal ground rules remain unclear, and federal privacy laws written a generation ago are ambiguous at best. On Friday, the first federal appeals court to consider the topic will hear oral arguments (PDF) in a case that could establish new standards for locating wireless devices.

In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records" that show where a mobile device placed and received calls.

You will find the entire article at this link.

It appears our Constitution is about to be shat upon yet again by the federal government, and the 4th Amendment thereof may be about to take in right in the neck.

Just like CARNIVORE and ECHELON, I doubt we will be hearing much from the left over this outrage. After all, one of their own is currently in the White House, so that makes this sort of nonsense acceptable in their twisted way of thinking.

Of course, if George W. Bush was still POTUS, these very same hypocrites would be spinning on their eyebrows and spitting nails, while accusing GWB of being everything but a child of God.

Understand, I have no problem with law enforcement using available technology to track real criminals, particularly those who pose a danger to innocents, but they at least should have to obtain a warrant to do so. I would even support a streamlined process to speed up the process, but only if it is very tightly controlled.

Obviously our system of privacy laws has a very long way to go before it catches up with rapidly advancing technologies. This is not a little dangerous to those of us who believe in our right to privacy and the 4th Amendment, as government could get away with a lot of shenanigans in the interim.

It's even more of a concern when you take into consideration the decidedly totalitarian leanings of those currently in power, and who seem to often operate is if the Constitution does not apply to them.

Stay tuned, because this hideous story is far from over.

DHS & Police Illegally Investigate Pro-Lifers in Wisconsin

Via LifeNews.com:

Obama Administration Admits It Wrongly Tracked Abortion Groups in Wisconsin

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
February 8, 2010

Email RSS Print

Madison, WI (LifeNews.com) -- The Department of Homeland Security admitted today that it improperly conducted a threat assessment on pro-life and pro-abortion groups in Wisconsin. The assessment came before an expected rally last year in response to the University of Wisconsin Hospital board decided to allow abortions.

In February 2009, pro-life advocates planned to protest the hospital's decision to open up a new Madison Surgery Center doing abortions.

The Associated Press reported today that the department said in a memo that it "destroyed all of the copies of the assessment after an internal review found it violated intelligence gathering guidelines about 'protest groups which posed no threat to homeland security.'"

AP indicated the assessment was reportedly only shared with the director of Wisconsin's intelligence-sharing center and local police in Middleton, Wisconsin, the site of the rally.

Today, a pro-life organization in Wisconsin informed LifeNews.com of its concerns.

In response to an open records request by the Alliance Defense Fund and Pro-Life Wisconsin, the Middleton Police Department and the Wisconsin Department of Justice, along with the Department of Homeland Security all refused on February 4 to release copies of the threat assessment.

Pro-Life Wisconsin officials told LifeNews.com that the assessment was "inappropriately shared" and should never have targeted pro-life groups.

“The majority of Americans identify themselves as pro-life, and the Middleton Police Department has shown they are out of touch with this peaceful majority,” said Peggy Hamill, state director of the pro-life group. “Pro-lifers are not a minority of the population, nor are they second-class citizens. We refuse to let our First Amendment rights be silenced.”

A few months later in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office for Civil Rights concluded the investigation was an improper use of department resources.

The conclusion said the department inappropriately directed against activities protected by the First Amendment, in which law enforcement inappropriately engaged in “the collection, retention and dissemination of U.S. person information regarding protest groups which posed no threat to homeland security and… violated [DHS] Guidelines.”

Hamill said DHS destroyed its copies of the report, but the Middleton Police Department retained its copy.

In January 2010 the Alliance Defense Fund, on behalf of Wisconsin pro-life advocates, asked the Middleton Police Department for a copy of the report pursuant to Wisconsin’s open records laws.

The Middleton Police Department refused to disclose the report and further said that the DOJ similarly refused to authorize disclosure of the report, despite the fact that DHS had already determined that the report was an improper investigation of freedom of speech activities.

“This move by DHS illustrates the Obama administration’s goal of silencing pro-lifers. It is disturbing that a local police department has apparently tapped into the security apparatus of the federal government to potentially obstruct free speech,” Hamill concluded.

“Last year, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano unjustly included pro-lifers in a report on domestic terrorism, and here we see her words in action," she said.

-End

You can find Steve Ertelt's original article here.

Welcome to Comrade Chairman Obama's Amerika.

If we were living in a sane world, my hope would be that heads were going to ultimately roll over this travesty, particularly that of Janet "Reno II" Napolitano, but I shan't hold my breath waiting for it to happen, as the Holder "Justice" Department has shown itself to be somewhat, a'hem, lax in enforcing the law when it involves those they support.

I doubt we will hear so much as a peep out of the A.C.L.U., either. Of course, we all know if George W. Bush were still in the White House and the feds were investigating, say, C.A.I.R., the people at the ACLU, among other lefty-oriented organizations, would be spinning on their eyebrows and spitting nails over it.

As for the State Controlled Media, they are about as close to useless as it is possible to be.

I would love to see some serious federal lawsuits brought forth over this matter, as that is probably the only way those responsible for this blatantly illegal idiocy will ever be forced to explain themselves.

Clearly we are dealing with a rogue administration that considers itself immune from constitutional scrutiny of any kind, and is not above using federal and local law enforcement agencies to try and intimidate those who actively, or even passively, oppose the hideous policies of the Obamanistas.

It does not get any more hideous than wantonly murdering unborn children, or supporting those that do.

Given Obama's actions during the campaign in attempting to use the courts to silence his detractors, this should surprise no one. It most definitely does not surprise me.

Not even a little bit.

N.C. Town to Residents: To Hell with the Constitution

In case you have been snowed in without power and haven't heard, on Friday, the residents of King, North Carolina, came under a "state of emergency" declared by the town's City Council due to the approaching bad weather.

This state of emergency automatically activated a state law that, according to the town's Chief of Police, automatically installs a curfew, restricts the sale of alcohol, and prohibits the transport of firearms in vehicles if a "driving ban" is called for as part of the "emergency."

A driving ban was included between midnight and 5am in this case, meaning that town residents were only allowed to bear arms on their own premises, and were thus prohibited from transporting them in their vehicles.

You can see the WXII12.com story here.

Here is an interesting video I found on YouTube:



Of course, many residents of the town were incensed at having their constitutional rights shat upon in such a tyrannical fashion, and expressed their displeasure in no uncertain terms.

Hopefully the residents of King, as well as citizens all across North Carolina, will now realize that elections do have consequences, and respond by removing the idiot politicians who are responsible for this unconstitutional action from office at their next opportunity. Perhaps sooner.

I see what happened in King this weekend to be a stark precursor to what life in Obama's Amerika could very well be like in the near future, as given the tyrannical leanings of those currently in power in D.C., I could easily envision something like this happening on a national scale.

The lesson here is that those of us to whom freedom and liberty still matter must remain ever vigilant, lest something similar happen to us.

You can read more about it here.

Will Hasan's Rampage Mean Yet Another Assault on the 2nd Amendment?

It seems every time there is a senseless shooting (and even times when they are not so senseless) there is no shortage of gun-grabbers waiting in the wings, gearing up to use the latest tragedy to try and push through a new wrinkle intended to further interfere in our constitutional right to "keep and bear arms."

Never mind that no gun law ever written has kept a gun out of the hands of a criminal who sought one, but that doesn't matter to the anti-freedom crowd, and make no mistake, that is exactly what they are.

You see, it has never been so much that we 2nd Amendment supporters love guns so much as it is that we love freedom, and if you have even been paying any attention at all to the history of the last 300 years or so, those who surrender their firearms soon after forfeit their freedom, and some their very lives.

What happened at Ft. Hood was indeed a tragedy, and could have been stopped much sooner than it was, but not because of the availability of firearms, but due to the lack of them.

Via Reason.org (emphasis mine):

When Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan started shooting up the Soldier Readiness Processing Center at Fort Hood, Pfc. Marquest Smith dove under a desk. A.P. reports that “he lay low for several minutes, waiting for the shooter to run out of ammunition and wishing he, too, had a gun.”

Neither Smith nor the other victims of Hasan’s assault had guns because soldiers on military bases within the United States generally are not allowed to carry them. Last week’s shootings, which killed 13 people and wounded more than 30, demonstrated once again the folly of “gun-free zones,” which attract and assist people bent on mass murder instead of deterring them.

Judging from the comments of those who support this policy of victim disarmament, Smith’s desire for a gun was irrational. According to Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, “This latest tragedy, at a heavily fortified army base, ought to convince more Americans to reject the argument that the solution to gun violence is to arm more people with more guns in more places.”

Note how the reference to “a heavily fortified army base” obscures the crucial point that the people attacked by Hasan were unarmed as a matter of policy. Also note the breathtaking inanity of Helmke’s assurance that “more guns” are not “the solution to gun violence.” In this case, they assuredly were.

You will find the entire article here.

To me, the one glaring irony in this tragic occurrence is that, on one of America's largest military installations, and eight years into a war, it took a civilian police officer to drop the rampaging goon, but not until he had caused the deaths of fourteen human beings, and the wounding of nearly forty others.

If someone chooses not to own a firearm, that is just fine with me, but I don't want anyone else, especially the government, making that decision for me.

I have a sneaking suspicion that along the way, several of the gun-grabbers out there are going to find themselves cowering under their bed one night, frantically dialing 911 and praying the government is going to arrive in time to save their ass, along with those of their loved ones.

I bet more than a few of them will be wishing, just as Pfc. Smith did, that they had a gun.

ACORN AIDS "PIMPS" FOR CHILD PROSTITUTES! (See updates at bottom)

All I can say is, Barack Hussein Obama's favorite organization sure does seem to attract the lowest of the scum residing on this Earth.

I doubt this will get much play, if any, in the State Controlled Media (SCM) as it would reflect somewhat negatively on Obama, and as we all know, that just cannot be allowed, can it?  /sarc

Heck, at least it's a good start.


UPDATE: ACORN Cans the two employees.

UPDATE II: ACORN busted again, and for the exact same thing, this time in Washington D.C.

UPDATE III: Now ACORN cans the D.C. employees!

UPDATE IV: ACORN given the heave-ho by the Census Bureau?  -Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

UPDATE V: Maryland may prosecute the video shooters who were doing the job the MSM abandoned long ago (unless the targets have a "R" behind their name.) I'm calling BS on this right now.

Assuming for a moment Barack Hussein Obama is serious about deficit reduction (he isn't) and given the fact that we are now facing a record deficit of $1.38 Trillion, and given the fact that ACORN is screwing God knows how much out of us proletarian peon taxpayers, I think it is time this particular POTUS, who just blew $12-13 Trillion out the door that we do not have, throw his former employer off the government gravy train.

Yeah, I won't hold my breath, either.

Montana to Feds: Back the Hell Off

The State of Montana is calling BS on federal gun laws in a really big way, and it appears they are willing to invoke their 10th Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States, if necessary:

The law provides guns and ammo made, sold and used in Montana would not require any federal forms; silencers made and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered; and there would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required.


The idea is spreading quickly. Tennessee already has a similar law, and similar plans have been introduced in Alaska, Texas, Florida, South Carolina, Minnesota and Michigan. Lawmakers in nearly 20 other states have such plans in the works.

You can read the entire WorldNetDaily article here.

All I can say is God bless 'em and more power to 'em.

I just wish my home state of Georgia was on that list.

FBI Training Bloggers To Incite Others?

Via breitbart.com (bolds are mine)

Hal Turner worked for the FBI from 2002 to 2007 as an "agent provocateur" and was taught by the agency "what he could say that wouldn't be crossing the line," defense attorney Michael Orozco said.

"His job was basically to publish information which would cause other parties to act in a manner which would lead to their arrest," Orozco said.

Prosecutors have acknowledged that Turner was an informant who spied on radical right-wing organizations, but the defense has said Turner was not working for the FBI when he allegedly made threats against Connecticut legislators and wrote that three federal judges in Illinois deserved to die.

"But if you compare anything that he did say when he was operating, there was no difference. No difference whatsoever," Orozco said.

Special Agent Ross Rice, a spokesman for the FBI in Chicago, said he would not comment on or even confirm Turner's relationship with the FBI.

You can read the entire article here.

Okay, I realize the above assertion is being made by a defense attorney in the course of defending his client in a criminal case, but if true, this raises some very troubling questions about the activities of the FBI.

The idea that federal authorities are using people to go onto public forums and inciting people to break the law in order that they may then be arrested by these same authorities is extremely disturbing to me.

Entrapment of this nature used to be illegal in this country.

(h/t: Drudge)

Life in Obama's Amerika

This is beyond unbelievable:



What the hell is happening to our country?

(h/t: The Anchoress)

DHS Withdraws Controversial Report

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) boss Janet Napolitano has ordered the now infamous report that implied, among other things, that our returning veteran soldiers were potential terrorists, be withdrawn:

"The wheels came off the wagon because the vetting process was not followed," Ms. Napolitano told the House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday.

"The report is no longer out there," she said. "An employee sent it out without authorization."

Sorry, but I am not buying a word of that, particularly given that the report was "leaked" just ahead of the April 15th Tea Party protests that went on all over America.

And even though this report has been "withdrawn" and is slated to be re-written, the proverbial cat is now well out of the bag.

I find it not a little disturbing that those of us who stand in support of this nation's founding document are now officially considered to be extremists, subversives, and even potential terrorists, by our very own government.

I care not how this report is going to be massaged, tweaked and re-worded, as I fully expect the end result will be just as insulting as before.

Perhaps even more so.

You can read the entire Washington Times story here.

Napolitano should be fired and packed off to Arizona. Tomorrow would be good. Yesterday would have been better.

Wisconsin Court Upholds Warrant-less GPS Surveillance

Are law enforcement agencies in your state secretly tracking your vehicular movements? If you reside in the state of Wisconsin, they just might be doing exactly that.

The Chicago Tribune has reported that the Wisconsin District 4 Court of Appeals, which is made up of three judges, has ruled unanimously that law enforcement agencies in that state may place GPS tracking devices on citizen's vehicles to track their movements without first having to obtain a warrant:

As the law currently stands, the court said police can mount GPS on cars to track people without violating their constitutional rights -- even if the drivers aren't suspects.

Officers do not need to get warrants beforehand because GPS tracking does not involve a search or a seizure, Judge Paul Lundsten wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel based in Madison.

You will find the whole story here.

As a libertarian, I find this court's ruling to be contrary to everything I believe in as a freedom-loving American citizen. No government agency should be allowed to place a tracking device on your vehicle without first going before a judge and making a case for it.

I realize we are moving more toward a surveillance society, particularly in the more urbanized areas of the country, with traffic cameras, red light cameras, cameras on public sidewalks, even cameras in the local car wash, and I realize you can be tracked via your cell phone as well, but secretly placing tracking devices on citizen's vehicles without probable cause is going way beyond the pale.

This is once ruling I hope to see go all the way to the United States Supreme Court and be tossed, before this lunacy starts to catch on in other places.

Assuming that it hasn't already.

Do Gun Grabbers Ever Sleep?

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has introduced legislation ostensibly designed to make it tougher for firearms to fall into the hands of anyone that is considered to be a "known or suspected dangerous terrorist."

To those not "plugged in" to the way government thinks, at first glance, H.R. 2159, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009 seems perfectly reasonable, as who would possibly object to putting up road blocks to keep firearms out of the hands of those who harbor ill intentions?

The problem is, government gets to define who among us actually falls into the category of a "known or suspected dangerous terrorist."

This proposed legislation:

... permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any "known or suspected dangerous terrorist." The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is "appropriately suspected" of preparing for a terrorist act and that the attorney general "has a reasonable belief" that the gun might be used in connection with terrorism.

Gun rights advocates, however, object to the bill's language, arguing that it enables the federal government to suspend a person's Second Amendment rights without any trial or legal proof and only upon suspicion of being "dangerous."

"[Rep. King] would deny citizens their civil liberties based on no due process," objected Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America. "A 'known terrorist?' Look, if the guy has committed an act of terrorism, we shouldn't have to worry about him being able to buy a gun; he should be in jail!"

Pratt further warned WND of the potential overlap of H.R. 2159 and a recent DHS memo that warned against potential violence from "right-wing extremists," such as those concerned about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty.

"By those standards, I'm one of [DHS Secretary] Janet Napolitano's terrorists," Pratt said. "This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they're all potential terrorists. Actually, we could rename this bill the Janet Napolitano Frenzied Fantasy Implementation Act of 2009."

You can find Drew Zahn's entire WorldNetDaily article here.

The way this clearly unconstitutional bill is worded, it might just mean that we conservatives could very well be denied our God-given, constitutionally-protected 2nd Amendment rights, based on the opinion of a liberal government bureaucrat.

Stay tuned.

"Extremist" Detained, Warned for "Subversive Survivalist" Bumper Sticker

If you have a Don't Tread On Me bumper sticker affixed to your vehicle, you might want to think twice before driving through the state of Louisiana.

According to relatives, an unidentified man who was driving in the area of Ball, La., was pulled over and detained for half an hour by a law enforcement officer for having said sticker affixed to his vehicle. He reportedly underwent a background check during his ordeal to determine if he was a member of an "extremist" group.

According to the relative, it happened this way: Her brother-in-law was driving home from work through the town, which has a local reputation for enhancing its budget by ticketing speeders. He was pulled over by police officers who told him "he had a subversive survivalist bumper sticker on his car."

"They proceeded to keep him there on the side of the road while they ran whatever they do to see if you have a record, keeping him standing by the side of the road for 30 minutes," she told WND.

Finding no record and no reason to keep him, they warned him and eventually let him go, she said.

You can read Bob Unruh's entire WorldNetDaily article here.

I don't know what the man who was detained plans to do, but if I were to be pulled over and detained for half an hour because of a bumper sticker, the grandchildren of every elected official in whatever jurisdiction it took place in would grow up knowing me as Mr. Plaintiff.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have some bumper stickers to order.

Boston Cops Using Database to Spy On Celebs and "High-Profile Citizens"

The Boston Globe is reporting that a recent state audit in Massachusetts has turned up some serious malfeasance on the part of some state law enforcement officers:

Law enforcement personnel looked up personal information on Patriots star Tom Brady 968 times - seeking anything from his driver's license photo and home address, to whether he had purchased a gun - and auditors discovered "repeated searches and queries" on dozens of other celebrities such as Matt Damon, James Taylor, Celtics star Paul Pierce, and Red Sox owner John Henry, said two state officials familiar with the audit.

You can read the whole story here.

If they can do it to celebrities, they can damn sure do it to the rest of us, and not just in the state of Massachusetts.

Time To Scrap the Patriot Act

I really don't mind the federal government doing things like this to non-U.S. citizens who sport funny beards, wear towels on their heads, smell of camel dung, and have been actually caught planning or carrying out a terrorist attack against this country, as I do not believe the provisions of the U.S. Constitution should apply to such people, but for the government to do this to a 16yo U.S. citizen is unconscionable:

Around 10 p.m. on March 5, Lundeby said, armed FBI agents along with three local law enforcement officers stormed her home looking for her son. They handcuffed him and presented her with a search warrant.

"I was terrified," Lundeby's mother said. "There were guns, and I don't allow guns around my children. I don't believe in guns."

Never in my worst nightmare did I ever think that it would be my own government that I would have to protect my children from," Lundeby said. "This is the United States, and I feel like I live in a third world country now.

Third world country, indeed.

You can read the whole WRLA story here.

I have no idea as to the guilt or innocence of young Mr. Lundeby, but that is irrelevant at this point.

Unless or until the federal government produces evidence that this young American is in some way connected to the Islamist barbarians that we are currently at war with, then he deserves to be treated the same as any other citizen suspect, and should be afforded all the rights and protections provided for in the Constitution.

(h/t: Drudge)

Scamnesty Rears its Ugly Head Yet Again

I hope you all have kept the KY handy, because it appears our illustrious federal government, under the direction of the 44th "president," is about to try and cram yet another "comprehensive" immigration reform bill down our throats.

Administration officials said that Mr. Obama’s plan would not add new workers to the American work force, but that it would recognize millions of illegal immigrants who have already been working here.

And this line of steaming BS is supposed to make us actually feel better?

We all know what this really means-amnesty for those who have broken our laws and invaded this country illegally.

As before, I suspect the government will lie and tell us that it isn't actually amnesty, but the fact is we all know better. Let's face it, members of both parties are most anxious to gain the votes of these criminal invaders somewhere down the line. The sooner the better.

One would think that after the severe drubbing our elected "representatives" took via snail mail, fax, telephone and internet the last time this lunacy was attempted, that just maybe they would cease and desist from any further action in this most sensitive area, especially given the fact that so many of our fellow real Americans are out of work due to the current economic situation.

I still have trouble understanding exactly just what part of "illegal alien" the brain-dead idiots in our government aren't quite getting.

Is Missouri Safe for Libertarians Again?

Unless you have been hiding out deep in a cave for the last couple of weeks, you have no doubt heard about the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report that was circulated among the members of the Missouri law enforcement community. This existence of this report came to light when a copy was forwarded to Alex Jones by an anonymous Missouri law enforcement officer. From there it quickly exploded all over the conservative blogosphere, it made all the major talk radio shows, and was also covered on cable news shows by Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity.

Not surprisingly, the liberal Main Stream Media (MSM) were much too busy covering (up) for the Organizer and fawning over Michelle's vegetable garden, and thus remained virtually mum on this disturbing story. Of course, who among us with any real intelligence and who is truly "plugged in" pays them any attention anymore, anyway?

Even without the MSM, the outcry became such that the The Missouri Highway Patrol has now retracted the now highly controversial report, and even the governor of Missouri, who once expressed his support for it, has apparently had a change of heart and is now running for the tall grass.

One of those named in the report, along with Bob Barr and Ron Paul, is Chuck Baldwin, who was the Constitution Party's presidential candidate last year, and who has written three blog posts on this subject that you can read here, here and here.

The exact origins of this report remain a little hazy, but many, including Chuck Baldwin, have attributed it to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) a radical lefty "special interest" organization that is not exactly known for fondness toward those of us who reflect more light than they do.

I imagine that had a report been circulated in Missouri that identified the members of organizations such as the Nation of Islam as potential domestic terrorists, the people at the SPLC would have begun spinning on their eyebrows, and busloads of civil rights barristers from all over the country would have been en route to Jefferson City in a heartbeat.

If I were a Missouri resident, I would be demanding to know just how it is that a far-left private organization, who answers to no one, has managed to get its tentacles so far up the law enforcement totem pole in that state that a report such as this would be circulated among its state's law enforcement officers in the first place.

We as freedom-loving Americans need to be asking the same question, because when it has gotten to the point that real Americans, who just happen to support our nation's founding document, who think it wrong to murder the unborn, who might not be too fond of the U.N., and who might think it wrong that the federal government can confiscate huge parts of our incomes, can be targeted for possible harassment by their own government, possibly due to the influence of an outside organization, then its time to rise up and clean house at the next voting opportunity, as something has gone hideously awry.

You have to wonder how many other states with "fusion centers" may be up to similar shenanigans that we don't even know about, and may never find out about. After all, the MIAC report was never intended for public release.

Personally, I view this as another attempt on the part of the left to stifle dissent, and to try to intimidate those of us who do not share in their "utopian" world-view into silence. This was one attempt that went much further than it ever should have. It appears that the left only believes dissent is the "highest form of patriotism" when there is a non-liberal residing in the White House.

Stay tuned, because I have a feeling the fallout from all this is only just beginning.