Sam on Bob Harden Stress and CBT

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Terror threat -- U.S. churches in danger

Terror threat -- U.S. churches in danger
Caution signWith the recent airing of an al-Qaeda video that encourages Muslims to attack religious institutions, Christian churches are being warned.


In a video released by al-Qaeda spokesman Adam Gadahn, the American-born Muslim asks jihadists to quickly obtain guns and carry out terrorist attacks against the West. He states that Muslims are placed in the region to "do major damage to the enemies of Islam, waging war on their religion, sacred places, and things and brethren."

"That's very troubling," admits Steve Amundson of the Florida Security Council. "Adam Gadhan lived here in Southern California for a number of years. He studied under Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi at the Islamic Center of Orange County, which is in Garden Grove."

church steepleGadahn's statements to U.S. Muslims follow the death of Osama bin Laden. In response, the Christian Emergency Network has issued a warning for churches in the United States, and Amundson advises Christians to stay alert.

"Churches, just like everybody, I tell them to be vigilant; be aware of your surroundings," he urges. "Don't walk around like everything's okay, because we're in different times now, and it's time for Americans to be vigilant, be aware, [and] be alert because something could happen."

Churches are also advised to have an emergency team ready and to regularly conduct emergency drills.

Obama’s ineligibility: Proof that Congress is lying

conngress and federal agencies also refuse to investigate Obama’s alleged felonies: forged birth documents and Selective Service registration and a stolen Social Security Number

Obama’s ineligibility: Proof that Congress is lying

 - Lawrence Sellin  Wednesday, June 29, 2011
For patriotic Americans, this is our Cuban Missile Crisis. Make Congress blink.
Congress has always known that Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen and has never been eligible to be President, yet they continue to lie to the American people.

They are covering up their disregard for the Constitution and their dereliction of duty.
Congress and federal agencies also refuse to investigate Obama’s alleged felonies: forged birth documents and Selective Service registration and a stolen Social Security Number.
The United States is now at a turning point in history.
Will the country be governed by laws or by corrupt politicians and bureaucrats and their beneficiaries, the wealthy special interests?
If our country no longer has any honest leaders, it will be the responsibility of ordinary citizens to restore the Constitution and the rule of law.
In doing so, patriotic Americans will be viciously opposed, denounced and denigrated by those corrupt politicians, powerful financiers and the main stream media.
Nevertheless, we must now stand our ground in order to save our country.
Abraham Lincoln said that the American people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.
Dean Haskins has produced an excellent video explaining how the Obama Administration and the Congress are lying to the American people.

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

VIDEO - Obama, You're Fired!!

BREAKING: Bachmann Storms To Huge Lead Among Iowa Conservatives In New Poll

BREAKING: Bachmann Storms To Huge Lead Among Iowa Conservatives In New Poll

On June 30, 2011, in 2012 Polls, GOP Candidates, by Eric Odom
Rep. Michele Bachmann has significantly expanded her lead among Iowa conservatives, according to a new poll conducted by the 2012 Iowa Report. The poll finds Bachmann with 40% support among Iowa conservatives, more than triple four other possible contenders registering in double digits (Ron Paul, 12%; Sarah Palin, 12%, Herman Cain, 11%, Mitt Romney, 10%).

Bachmann’s polling numbers among Iowa conservatives have been rapidly increasing over the past several weeks and could serve as a leading indicator of her position among Republicans in the state. Bachmann moved from 33% support one week ago to 40% support this week among conservatives at the same time she has been climbing other statewide polls. Perhaps just as significantly, nearly a third of Iowa conservatives now think Bachmann will “ultimately win” the Iowa caucuses.

Mainstream media covers up horrifying Obama mistake

Mainstream media covers up horrifying Obama mistake

No one in mainstream media seems inclined to mention Barack Obama’s horrifying mistake last Thursday when, speaking at Fort Drum,  he said that SFC Jared Monti was “the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously.” Alas, he was mistaken. He awarded the Medal of Honor to Jared Monti posthumously in 2009 and awarded the Medal of Honor in person to SSG Sal Giunta in person in 2011. Obama later apologized for this mistake, but it’s really dismaying that a president who spoke movingly and even eloquently in awarding the Medal of Honor made a mistake of this magnitude.

“It shouldn’t take a teleprompter for the C-in-C to get it right,” writes military blogger Black Five. It’s interesting that mainstream media journalists who are so eager to zing Michele Bachmann for getting John Wayne’s birthplace wrong, have not been interested in asking whether this was a mistake Obama made in ad libbing or whether the White House speechwriters and fact-checkers fell down on the job. You might think that their chief motive is to make Obama look good and to suppress facts that make him look bad.


Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/06/mainstream-media-covers-horrifying-obama-mistake#ixzz1QhfCytog

Houston Cemetery Bans the Word 'God' from Military Funerals

Houston Cemetery Bans the Word 'God' from Military Funerals

Christine Biediger
This morning, just five days before the celebration of our nation's independence, I was shocked into wakefulness by a news item on Fox and Friends.  It seems that the Houston National Cemetery has now begun banning "God" from military funerals.
The director of the Houston VA National Cemetery, Arleen Ocasio, has ordered the burial teams to instruct that religious references, as well as prayer, are no longer to be included as part of the burial services.  Requests for messages or prayers can be formally submitted for her approval, but the mention of "God" is not allowed.
Ocasio has also ordered the closing of the cemetery chapel, which used to be available for grieving family and friends to gather and pray.  The space is now used to conduct personnel meetings, and for storage.
Perhaps Ocasio is not aware that this country was founded by people who willingly uprooted their families and risked their lives crossing a violent and deadly sea to reach these free shores.  These God-fearing people carved a righteous civilization out of a wilderness and raised their children with the moral principles handed down from God.  Great consideration was taken by our founders, when creating a constitution that would protect the individual liberties of all.  They defined citizen rights in a divinely inspired and distinctly indestructible manner, because our rights come to us from God -- not from man.  Countless heroes have died defending the freedoms -- religious and other -- that were established as the foundation of the American way of life.  How sacred is our religious freedom.  How sacred is freedom, period.
As a resident of Houston, I am profoundly ashamed that my wonderful city has become the epicenter of an issue so vile, so evil.  It is one thing for a Christian valedictorian to have to fight for the right to mention God, or to pray, as part of her valedictory address -- a right protected by the 1st Amendment, I might add.  But this takes the fight to a whole new level.
It is beyond my ability to comprehend what a family must feel when they bury a loved one who served voluntarily, honorably, and with great sacrifice, for the freedoms we take for granted every day of our lives.  These people are keenly aware of the America-haters who live among us, who rely upon the very freedoms, earned with military bloodshed, to rain their hatred down upon our heads.  Yet these military families stoically bear in their hearts the understanding that their loved ones' sacrifice was for the rights and freedoms of all Americans, even those who don't deserve them.
If anyone in this country deserves the right to have prayers and religious speech, take place over their graves, it is those who have sacrificed the most.  The ban on "God" at these funerals is an insult -- not only to Christians, but, more importantly, to our military Christians.  How very shameful it is that this attack comes from within the Veterans Administration itself.
The words spoken at a funeral service are intended to bring comfort to those left behind.  For a Christian, the most soothing and reassuring words come from our Creator.  The prayers offer a salve on the open wounds of our souls.  Our military families deserve this type of a farewell, if that is what they choose. 
This is a lesson to us, as we sit in the comfort of our freedoms.  The left-wing war against the liberties that our military heroes have fought for is being waged here, at home.  We must take up the fight to preserve what has been won for us, with a rain of e-mails, phone calls, complaints, and political action to root out those in our administration who would treat our warriors in such a vile way.  Whether you believe in God or not, please do what you can to safeguard religious rights -- you never know when a freedom you hold dear will be in jeopardy.
Here is the contact information for the cemetery:
Houston National Cemetery
10410 Veterans Memorial Drive
Houston, TX 77038
Phone:  (281) 4...
FAX: (281) 447-0580

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/06/houston_cemetery_bans_the_word_god_from_military_funerals_1.html

Educate Sen. Chamblis - Fax this Document to him and others

Report a Crime or you are Guilty of a Crime - If the official you report the crime to does not take action they have also committed a crime.

One of the purposes of this document is to make every government official who receives this liable for criminal prosecution if they do not take action.  We can make every government official subject to criminal indictment if they do not take action on Obama's ineligibility.
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I – CRIMES, CHAPTER 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 3. Accessory after the fact
      Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact. Except as otherwise expressly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years.

Sec. 4. Misprision of felony
      Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
# # # # # # #

To avoid being found guilty of the above crimes it is my obligation to report my suspicions to authorities.

If Obama has committed fraud by claiming to be a natural born citizen, which is almost certainly true, he has committed numerous crimes.

If Obama has released a phony birth certificate, which is almost certainly true, he has committed a felony.

# # # # # # #

I am hereby discharging my legal obligation to report a crime by notifying my Congressman, my Senators and others.

# # # # # # # #

If the authorities I have notified do not take action they will be subject to the penalties described in Title 18 of the United States Code.

Obama will be exposed –Don’t get caught on the wrong side of this issue.

Lennon was a closet Reagan Fan - John, not Vladimir!

Lennon was a closet Republican: Assistant


WENN.com
First posted:
John Lennon
John Lennon was a Ronald Reagan fan who enjoyed arguing with left-wing radicals, according to his former assistant. (Supplied Photo/WENN.COM)


John Lennon was a closet Republican, who felt a little embarrassed by his former radicalism, at the time of his death - according to the tragic Beatles star's last personal assistant.
Fred Seaman worked alongside the music legend from 1979 to Lennon's death at the end of 1980 and he reveals the star was a Ronald Reagan fan who enjoyed arguing with left-wing radicals who reminded him of his former self.
In new documentary Beatles Stories, Seaman tells filmmaker Seth Swirsky Lennon wasn't the peace-loving militant fans thought he was while he was his assistant.
He says, "John, basically, made it very clear that if he were an American he would vote for Reagan because he was really sour on (Democrat) Jimmy Carter.
"He'd met Reagan back, I think, in the 70s at some sporting event... Reagan was the guy who had ordered the National Guard, I believe, to go after the young (peace) demonstrators in Berkeley, so I think that John maybe forgot about that... He did express support for Reagan, which shocked me.
"I also saw John embark in some really brutal arguments with my uncle, who's an old-time communist... He enjoyed really provoking my uncle... Maybe he was being provocative... but it was pretty obvious to me he had moved away from his earlier radicalism.
"He was a very different person back in 1979 and 80 than he'd been when he wrote Imagine. By 1979 he looked back on that guy and was embarrassed by that guy's naivete."

Report : Here's how the Obama birth certificate was born


Mara Zebest grew up in Baltimore MD, where her parents cultivated her
life-long love of art and graphic design. She spent 26 years as a Navy wife,
traveling around the country with their two children; until settling down in
the Sacramento area in 1990.

Mara has served as co-author on the Inside Photoshop series of books as well
as Photoshop Elements 2.

Mara has served as Technical Editor on numerous books on Photoshop,
Illustrator, Xara, and Microsoft Office series.

Mara also teaches private classes on Adobe InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop
and Microsoft Office to Goverment Employees and Fortune 500 corporations.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Obama Ineligibility - Scientific Poll.- Half of Americans Want Congressional Investigation

Half of Americans would like to see Congress investigate Barack Obama's eligibility for the presidency and nearly that many believe the definition of the constitutional term "natural born citizen" means both parents must be U.S. citizens, according to a new scientific poll.

"There's no marginalizing those who want this matter investigated by Congress," said Fritz Wenzel of Wenzel Strategies, who conducted the WND/Wenzel Poll telephone survey June 16-19. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.85 points.

"Even among Democrats, more than one in four – 28 percent – said they now want an inquiry, as do 43 percent of independents and 77 percent of Republicans. Interestingly, men are much more skeptical than are women about the question of eligibility – only 42 percent of men said they think Obama proved his eligibility by releasing the electronic birth certificate, compared to 59 percent of women."


Read more: Stunning numbers want Congress to probe Obama's eligibility http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=314585#ixzz1QQiPdZJu

'Cars 2': Hollywood screws up again

'Cars 2': Hollywood screws up again

Jason McNew
This evening, along with my wife and our four children, I saw the much anticipated sequel to the wildly successful computer animated movie Cars.  The original  film, released by Pixar in 2006, was an inspiring story of self redemption -- the main character a young rookie race car named "Lightning McQueen" (played by Owen Wilson) who, while talented, is narcissistic, careless, and highly self centered.  Upon being stranded in fly-over country with ordinary people (well, cars), Lightning changes his ways and learns to do unto others.  The original Cars  was interesting, funny, family friendly, and had a decidedly Christian message. 

Leave it to Hollywood to screw a formula like this up --
Cars 2  fell short on all counts.  The sequel was rife with violence (cars being murdered), toilet humor (Mater soils the floor with motor oil and gets stuck in a Japanese toilet stall with an automated bidet), environmentalism, and anti-Americanism.  The antagonists in the film consist of big oil (who are engaged in a deliberate conspiracy to kill people and discredit alternative energy) and Mator (a loyal but unsophisticated rusty old tow truck played by Larry The Cable Guy) is described as "oh yes... he's definitely American."  Cars 2 was thematically very dark.

The reasons why the first
Cars  film was so successful are lost on Hollywood, and my prediction is that Cars 2  will fail to meet revenue expectations -- perhaps badly.  It should be reviewed before watching it with your children.


Jason McNew is a 37 year old IT professional.  He is working on a forthcoming book titled
Jude's Acre.  He can be reached at jasond@mcnew.org.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/06/cars_2_hollywood_screws_up_again.html

The Democrat Party’s Socialist Plan

The Democrat Party’s Socialist Plan

Redistribution of Wealth

- Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh 
The Communist Party confiscated my grandparents’ and my parents’ land, homes, guns, jewelry, gold coins, paintings, wedding pictures, clocks, watches, bonds, stocks, tools, savings, and anything of value. They left my grandparents homeless. Grandpa and grandma had to build a barn-like structure made of mud and straw bricks, which they called home. My grandparents refused to relocate from the rural area into grey concrete apartment cubicles in the city. My parents chose the one bedroom apartment with its low rent, subsidized by the government.
I am staring at my 50-year-old house, empty, sad, and abandoned. We spent 18 wonderful years within its walls. The formerly lush surroundings are now overgrown with weeds and kudzu. We trimmed the azalea bushes; they are making a comeback with beautiful pink, purple, and fuchsia blooms. The rose bushes are sprouting a few anemic, tiny flowers. 
I know where Tiger’s tomb is by the overgrown cluster of daffodils. The only hardy survivor is the fig tree, planted when the house was built. It has grown taller since I last saw it. It is covered with blooms – birds and squirrels will be happy when the sweet fruits ripen later in the summer. The Japanese magnolia, or what is left of it after Katrina, is a symphony of pink beauty. In a few days, it will snow petals in a thick carpet all over the yard.
The house has been empty for over two years now, a victim of the mortgage market crash, crash brought on by the Democrats forcing banks to lend money to citizens who could not possibly afford a home or pay it back.  The area is so economically depressed. Renting or selling is equally impossible. There are two other empty homes on a small street of ten houses.  It is an ideal place, quiet, lovely, and close to everything.
The Democrats enlisted the help of nefarious organizations such as SEIU, ACORN, community agitators, and other street organizers to picket the homes of bankers to force them to lend money to non-credit worthy customers under the false charge of racism. Once the loans were approved, with very little checking of documentation, the bankers had no choice but to package bad mortgage loans with good ones and resell them to others in order to minimize loss. Bankers are in business to make money for their stockholders, not redistribute wealth among citizens.
Realtors received their cut of the bad mortgage deals. They helped people they knew could not afford such lavish and expensive homes on their incomes. Paperwork was misfiled, salaries stretched, proof of income and bad credit scores overlooked.
Banks sold and resold bad mortgages so quickly and so many times that current owners had no idea which bank held their mortgage contracts. Trying to purchase such a home was impossible, nobody knew who owned it.
Some citizens took advantage of the housing boom by flipping homes quickly in order to make huge profits. They are guilty parties to the housing disaster. Financially irresponsible people who bought homes on interest-only schemes knew they were taking a huge risk.
Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton pushed the Community Reinvestment Act. Spreading the wealth seemed like a great socialist idea – take from producers and give to people who made no effort to better themselves, study and work , happy to take from the government, having no idea or caring who was actually paying for their welfare. 
Feelings of pride for a job well done and putting in a good day’s work were lost during forty years of welfare and entitlements designed to create perennial Democrat voters enslaved to the federal government. Cradle to grave entitlements mentality created people who lost their purpose, pride, and responsibility to themselves and their families. There was no surprise when welfare dependent people waited on local and federal governments to save them from the on-coming hurricane Katrina.
Bush the son made a weak attempt to stop the mortgage abuse but it was not enough. A Democrat-controlled Congress overrode several attempts made at accountability. Corrupt lawmakers like Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, and Chris Dodd, all Democrats, maintained that giving 100% mortgages to people who had shady credit and insufficient income worked well and protected the poor.  They maintained that home ownership was a right and denying it was discriminatory and racist.
These happy beneficiaries of the Ponzi scheme mortgage loans called Community Reinvestment Act, which was bound to crash at some point, participated willingly in the destruction of other people’s lives and wealth. Why would they care if other Americans saved their money, were responsible citizens, bought homes they could afford, made payments on time, paid all their bills, and maintained a good credit rating? Although on welfare, it was their right to own a home, said ACORN through bullhorns, while picketing bankers’ homes.
I studied years and years in college when people my age were having fun, partying every weekend, enjoying their youth, reproducing irresponsibly, dropping out of school, drinking, doing drugs, smoking, abusing their bodies in general, and expecting society to pay for their wasted years because it is “social justice.”  Am I supposed to spread my wealth now to the leeches of society who chose the path of laziness and convenience?
I pay enough in taxes to support other people’s children, irresponsible lifestyles, illegal aliens’ free education, housing, and healthcare. I am also generously donating to causes that help people during natural disasters or stricken by unfortunate circumstances.
I would like to see rich liberals, Hollywood, and politicians in Washington put their money where their lecturing mouths are and spread their wealth first, give away personal fortunes before they take our hard-earned property and savings.
I worked 18 years to pay off my house. I went to work when I felt bad, when I felt tired, ill, or overworked, very seldom calling in sick. I held two jobs most of the time in order to take care of my family. I did not take vacations, bought expensive gadgets we did not need, and did not update the house with the latest appliances, furniture, or interior decor. It was clean, warm, cozy and homey. I kept it well repaired, but it was dated. It was our home, solidly built, with a tornado shelter and six-foot walls. Homes this sturdy are no longer being built. We had well insulated walls, double windows and doors before the environmental nut jobs were even born. Now, it is sitting empty and decaying, a sign of the economic and financial troubles that are destroying our country, all caused by greed, irresponsibility, politicians in general, and the Democrat Party in particular. Eighteen years of diligent and responsible work are dripping slowly down the economic drain, all in the socialist name of “spreading the wealth.”


Saturday, June 25, 2011

Obama's Ineligibility Issue Returns to Supreme Court

Read more:Eligibility returns to Supremes' conference agendahttp://www.wnd.com/?pageId=315069#ixzz1QItfO5AE

The U.S. Supreme Court, which has refused even to consider the issue of Barack Obama's eligibility – and at one point was reported by one justice to be avoiding the issue – has put the question on its schedule for a conference this fall.
That means the issue of Obama's eligibility, which dogged the candidate during the 2008 race and has plagued his administration with questions ever since, could be looking at the nation's highest court reviewing the controversy even as the 2012 election race heats up.
The courthas announced that the case Alan Keyes, et al., v. Debra Bowen, Cal...will be heard in conference Sept. 26.
A conference is a meeting at which the justices consider which cases to accept. The court has had numerous other similar cases before the justices in conference and routinely has rejected requests to hear them without any explanation.
The closest that anything has come to an explanation was aseries of remarks by Justice Clarence Thomas, who appeared before a...


Read more:Eligibility returns to Supremes' conference agendahttp://www.wnd.com/?pageId=315069#ixzz1QItpY1I7

Does the Tea Party Favorite, ALLEN WEST, keep his word?

You can’t get a Job unless you support my politics!

http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blogs/the-right-to-workshould-be-one
 You can’t get a Job unless you support my politics!

The Right To Work Should Be One Of Life's Most Basic Freedoms

Each year in the United States, union bosses extract over 8 billion dollars from the wages of America’s union workers. The payment of these union fees is not voluntary but is a requirement to simply keep a union job.

This huge amount of money is then spent at the whim of big union bosses to support candidates and issues that a large number of their members do not agree with. It is also used to promote the extravagant lifestyle of union bosses, with its penthouses, limousines and raw political power. Many union heads, such as Donald Trumpka, of the AFL-CIO, are frequent overnight visitors to the White House and sit on various boards and committees that formulate laws and regulations which benefit unions. The political clout of organized unions is immense. No Democrat has ever been elected to the office of President without a huge turnout of union workers all with marching orders on the preferred candidate of the union movement.
A major blow to the political power of the unions was the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. This sweeping act limited the rights of individual members to contribute to politicians or groups. Another section outlawed closed shops that would only hire union members while another required unions to give a 60 day “cooling-down period” or notice of intent to strike. Also, if a strike were of intense national interest, workers could be compelled to go back to work and agree to binding arbitration.

Democrat President Harry S. Truman vetoed the Taft-Hartley Act but congress overrode his veto and the bill became law. Truman ran on the promise of vetoing the act in his second term but this never came to be.

A new political initiative called the National Right-To-Work Act is being tossed about Washington. This bill would make it unlawful for payment of union dues to be a pre-requisite to getting and keeping a job. At the present time, there are 22 states mostly in the south and west that enforce Right-To-Work. It is the goal of the new act to extend Right-To-Work to all 50 states. This would make the payment of union dues voluntary. Workers would most likely elect not to pay these dues and unions would have less money to use to attempt to sway the electoral process.

A recent case of the Boeing Company coming under pressure from the National Labor Relations Board is a good example of the importance of the Right-To-Work Act. Boeing chose to build a new factory to assemble its jumbo jets in South Carolina. South Carolina is a Right-To-Work state where employees can choose whether or not to join a union. The NLRB is attempting to force Boeing to build the factory in Washington state instead. In Washington State, all workers must pay union dues in order to work at a union facility. The question is over the constitutionality of such an act by the NLRB. I believe that the question is absurd on its face. This would hold true if it were a lower level of governmental that was making this judgment. But for a United States federal level agency to force a private company to build in a forced union state is akin to despotism.


If you agree that American workers should have the right to work without pressure from unions to join, please contact your US Representative and both Senators and express your strong support of a National Right-To-Work Act.

Express to them that you think the right of a worker to choose should be guaranteed by law. Democrat legislators are usually for the right of a woman to choose, I think that a working person should deserve their same level of support.

'Rathergate' expert on birth certificate: 'Highly suspicious'

'Rathergate' expert on birth certificate: 'Highly suspicious'

Typography pro played key role in ending career of CBS News anchor


Posted: June 24, 2011
12:20 am Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2011 WND


Dan Rather
NEW YORK – The typography expert who played a key role in ending the career of CBS News anchor Dan Rather has told WND he has strong suspicions the Obama birth certificate released by the White House is fraudulent.
 
Joseph M. Newcomer, who exposed the "Killian documents" as fraudulent in 2004, has told WND the Obama birth certificate released by the White House April 27 is a "highly suspicious" document that deserves professional forensic examination.
 
"There is something deeply wrong here," Newcomer told WND. "There are artifacts in the birth certificate document that are strongly suggestive of a forgery. The document screams out that something is wrong."
 
Newcomer's 7,000-word analysis of the Killian documents in the Rather case demonstrated that the purported memos regarding George W. Bush's experience in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War were produced on a modern computer word processor, not a 1970s-era manual typewriter.
 
Newcomer stressed that he was relying on published charges that the Obama birth certificate was fraudulent, including the analysis by scanner expert Doug Vogt and by typography expert Paul Irey.
 
He was particularly concerned about the date stamps on the Obama birth certificate that displayed a clear difference between highly pixelated gray scale letters and numbers and a final number that displayed sharp black and white characteristics.
As WND previously reported, Vogt made the same observation.
 
As shown below, the date stamps in boxes 20 and 22 of the Obama document recording the date the local registrar and registrar general accepted the birth certificate have two different shades, on the line of text in the printed form and in the date stamp itself.

Obama birth certificate "date accepted by registrar general"
"If I saw these differences in a document I was examining, it would scream out at me that the document was a 'cut-and-paste' fraud," Newcomer said.
 
He said that the Hawaii Department of Health should release the original Obama birth certificate to the public for independent forensic examination.
 
"Often a forensic expert can determine a forged document with certainty by examining a copy of the document," he pointed out. "But the only way to prove the document is authentic is to have the original in your hands."
 
In a review of the Dan Rather case, the Weekly Standard commented that even today, Newcomer's evaluation "remains definitive."
 
Newcomer told WND that health issues would not permit him to undertake the type of rigorous analysis of the Obama birth certificate that he attempted in 2004 with the Killian documents.


Read more: 'Rathergate' expert on birth certificate: 'Highly suspicious'  

Friday, June 24, 2011

Report a Crime or you are Guilty of a Crime


As of 6 PM Sunday June 26th I have faxed the entire Florida Congressional delegation and all 100 U.S. Senators.

If the official you report the crime to does not take action they have also committed a crime.

One of the purposes of this document is to make every government official who receives this liable for criminal prosecution if they do not take action.  We can make every government official subject to criminal indictment if they do not take action on Obama's ineligibility.
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I – CRIMES, CHAPTER 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 3. Accessory after the fact
      Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact. Except as otherwise expressly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years.

Sec. 4. Misprision of felony
      Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
# # # # # # #

To avoid being found guilty of the above crimes it is my obligation to report my suspicions to authorities.

If Obama has committed fraud by claiming to be a natural born citizen, which is almost certainly true, he has committed numerous crimes.

If Obama has released a phony birth certificate, which is almost certainly true, he has committed a felony.

# # # # # # #

I am hereby discharging my legal obligation to report a crime by notifying my Congressman, my Senators and others.

# # # # # # # #

If the authorities I have notified do not take action they will be subject to the penalties described in Title 18 of the United States Code.

Samuel Sewell– Naples, FL– sams@bestselfusa.com – 239-591-4565

# # # # # # # #
Obama will be exposed!  Don’t be caught on the wrong side of this issue!

Obama Ineligibility - Scientific Poll.- Half of Americans Want Congressional Investigation

Half of Americans would like to see Congress investigate Barack Obama's eligibility for the presidency and nearly that many believe the definition of the constitutional term "natural born citizen" means both parents must be U.S. citizens, according to a new scientific poll.

# # # # # # #

Obama’s ineligibility: Our Lexington and Concord moment is coming

Like the militia at Lexington and Concord, it is now the responsibility of ordinary Americans to restore the Constitution and save the republic.

Obama’s ineligibility: Our Lexington and Concord moment is coming

By Lawrence Sellin  Friday, June 24, 2011
In a February 13, 1818 letter to H. Niles, John Adams wrote:
“But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was affected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations…This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution.“

The first “shots” of the Second American Revolution have not been fired, but the battle lines have been drawn.

There is now a radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the American people.

Petitioning the current Congress for the redress of grievances is futile. Members of Congress have turned a deaf ear to the voices of their constituents.

The present occupiers of the US Government openly violate the Constitution, are hopelessly corrupt and politically correct, have brought us to the brink of bankruptcy, have opened our borders to illegal immigration and have permitted a fifth column promoting Sharia law to infiltrate our society.

They can no longer be trusted as guardians of our posterity.

Not a week goes by without yet another document analyst claiming that his Certificate of Live Birth presented by Obama at his press conference on April 27, 2011, is a forgery.
Clear evidence has been presented that Obama has a stolen Social Security Number and that his Selective Service registration is also a forgery.

As John Adams also said:
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

There indeed are evil people in America, who passionately want to destroy our republic There are deluded and partisan liberals, who confirm in their own minds that they are noble and righteous by blindly supporting Obama.

The Democrats are tethered to Obama’s disastrous, radical agenda.

The Republican “opposition”, which has succumbed to Obama’s psychological warfare, is paralyzed by the fear of being branded a “racist” if they challenge him in any way.
Both the Democrats and Republicans in Congress are consumed by self interest and have forgotten their duty to their constituents and country.

Has our government degenerated to such an extent that Obama can stand before the country, boldly lie, present an obviously forged document as proof that he is eligible to be President and nothing is done?

In my opinion, the answer is “yes”. We now have a rogue government, which knowingly violates the Constitution and refuses to enforce the law when it affects their own personal interests.
It no longer matters to me why they are doing it, but that they are clearly ignoring their oaths of office.

To me, those who are perpetrating this “Misprision of felony” are traitors and must be removed from their positions of authority. They no longer have either credibility or the trust of the people.
Obama is laughing in our faces, knowing that he has cowered his opposition simply by name-calling. If it was not so pathetic, that, too, would be laughable.

Like the militia at Lexington and Concord, it is now the responsibility of ordinary Americans to restore the Constitution and save the republic.

To our cowardly politicians and government officials, I can only offer the words spoken by Samuel Adams in 1776:
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”

Lawrence Sellin  Bio
Lawrence Sellin Most recent columns
© Canada Free Press 2011
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. receives hate mail at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com

Psychiatrists as psychopharmacologists - There is a better way to create mental health - Non-drug therapy.

Best Self USA is well known for finding nutritional and cognitive solutions to emotional problemshttp://bestselfusa.com/
# # # # # #

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/jul/14/illusions-of-psychiatry/
The Illusions of Psychiatry

Marcia Angell

The Emperor’s New Drugs: Exploding the Antidepressant Myth
by Irving Kirsch
Basic Books, 226 pp., $15.99 (paper)                                                  
Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America
by Robert Whitaker
Crown, 404 pp., $26.00                                                  
Unhinged: The Trouble with Psychiatry—A Doctor’s Revelations About a Profession in Crisis
by Daniel Carlat
Free Press, 256 pp., $25.00                                                  
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR)
by American Psychiatric Association
American Psychiatric Publishing, 992 pp., $135.00; $115.00 (paper)                                                  
In my article in the last issue, I focused mainly on the recent books by psychologist Irving Kirsch and journalist Robert Whitaker, and what they tell us about the epidemic of mental illness and the drugs used to treat it.1 Here I discuss the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)—often referred to as the bible of psychiatry, and now heading for its fifth edition—and its extraordinary influence within American society. I also examine Unhinged, the recent book by Daniel Carlat, a psychiatrist, who provides a disillusioned insider’s view of the psychiatric profession. And I discuss the widespread use of psychoactive drugs in children, and the baleful influence of the pharmaceutical industry on the practice of psychiatry.
One of the leaders of modern psychiatry, Leon Eisenberg, a professor at Johns Hopkins and then Harvard Medical School, who was among the first to study the effects of stimulants on attention deficit disorder in children, wrote that American psychiatry in the late twentieth century moved from a state of “brainlessness” to one of “mindlessness.”2 By that he meant that before psychoactive drugs (drugs that affect the mental state) were introduced, the profession had little interest in neurotransmitters or any other aspect of the physical brain. Instead, it subscribed to the Freudian view that mental illness had its roots in unconscious conflicts, usually originating in childhood, that affected the mind as though it were separate from the brain.
But with the introduction of psychoactive drugs in the 1950s, and sharply accelerating in the 1980s, the focus shifted to the brain. Psychiatrists began to refer to themselves as psychopharmacologists, and they had less and less interest in exploring the life stories of their patients. Their main concern was to eliminate or reduce symptoms by treating sufferers with drugs that would alter brain function. An early advocate of this biological model of mental illness, Eisenberg in his later years became an outspoken critic of what he saw as the indiscriminate use of psychoactive drugs, driven largely by the machinations of the pharmaceutical industry.
When psychoactive drugs were first introduced, there was a brief period of optimism in the psychiatric profession, but by the 1970s, optimism gave way to a sense of threat. Serious side effects of the drugs were becoming apparent, and an antipsychiatry movement had taken root, as exemplified by the writings of Thomas Szasz and the movie One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. There was also growing competition for patients from psychologists and social workers. In addition, psychiatrists were plagued by internal divisions: some embraced the new biological model, some still clung to the Freudian model, and a few saw mental illness as an essentially sane response to an insane world. Moreover, within the larger medical profession, psychiatrists were regarded as something like poor relations; even with their new drugs, they were seen as less scientific than other specialists, and their income was generally lower.
In the late 1970s, the psychiatric profession struck back—hard. As Robert Whitaker tells it in Anatomy of an Epidemic, the medical director of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), Melvin Sabshin, declared in 1977 that “a vigorous effort to remedicalize psychiatry should be strongly supported,” and he launched an all-out media and public relations campaign to do exactly that. Psychiatry had a powerful weapon that its competitors lacked. Since psychiatrists must qualify as MDs, they have the legal authority to write prescriptions. By fully embracing the biological model of mental illness and the use of psychoactive drugs to treat it, psychiatry was able to relegate other mental health care providers to ancillary positions and also to identify itself as a scientific discipline along with the rest of the medical profession. Most important, by emphasizing drug treatment, psychiatry became the darling of the pharmaceutical industry, which soon made its gratitude tangible.
These efforts to enhance the status of psychiatry were undertaken deliberately. The APA was then working on the third edition of the DSM, which provides diagnostic criteria for all mental disorders. The president of the APA had appointed Robert Spitzer, a much-admired professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, to head the task force overseeing the project. The first two editions, published in 1952 and 1968, reflected the Freudian view of mental illness and were little known outside the profession. Spitzer set out to make the DSM-III something quite different. He promised that it would be “a defense of the medical model as applied to psychiatric problems,” and the president of the APA in 1977, Jack Weinberg, said it would “clarify to anyone who may be in doubt that we regard psychiatry as a specialty of medicine.”
When Spitzer’s DSM-III was published in 1980, it contained 265 diagnoses (up from 182 in the previous edition), and it came into nearly universal use, not only by psychiatrists, but by insurance companies, hospitals, courts, prisons, schools, researchers, government agencies, and the rest of the medical profession. Its main goal was to bring consistency (usually referred to as “reliability”) to psychiatric diagnosis, that is, to ensure that psychiatrists who saw the same patient would agree on the diagnosis. To do that, each diagnosis was defined by a list of symptoms, with numerical thresholds. For example, having at least five of nine particular symptoms got you a full-fledged diagnosis of a major depressive episode within the broad category of “mood disorders.” But there was another goal—to justify the use of psychoactive drugs. The president of the APA last year, Carol Bernstein, in effect acknowledged that. “It became necessary in the 1970s,” she wrote, “to facilitate diagnostic agreement among clinicians, scientists, and regulatory authorities given the need to match patients with newly emerging pharmacologic treatments.”3
The DSM-III was almost certainly more “reliable” than the earlier versions, but reliability is not the same thing as validity. Reliability, as I have noted, is used to mean consistency; validity refers to correctness or soundness. If nearly all physicians agreed that freckles were a sign of cancer, the diagnosis would be “reliable,” but not valid. The problem with the DSM is that in all of its editions, it has simply reflected the opinions of its writers, and in the case of the DSM-III mainly of Spitzer himself, who has been justly called one of the most influential psychiatrists of the twentieth century.4 In his words, he “picked everybody that [he] was comfortable with” to serve with him on the fifteen-member task force, and there were complaints that he called too few meetings and generally ran the process in a haphazard but high-handed manner. Spitzer said in a 1989 interview, “I could just get my way by sweet talking and whatnot.” In a 1984 article entitled “The Disadvantages of DSM-III Outweigh Its Advantages,” George Vaillant, a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, wrote that the DSM-III represented “a bold series of choices based on guess, taste, prejudice, and hope,” which seems to be a fair description.
Not only did the DSM become the bible of psychiatry, but like the real Bible, it depended a lot on something akin to revelation. There are no citations of scientific studies to support its decisions. That is an astonishing omission, because in all medical publications, whether journal articles or textbooks, statements of fact are supposed to be supported by citations of published scientific studies. (There are four separate “sourcebooks” for the current edition of the DSM that present the rationale for some decisions, along with references, but that is not the same thing as specific references.) It may be of much interest for a group of experts to get together and offer their opinions, but unless these opinions can be buttressed by evidence, they do not warrant the extraordinary deference shown to the DSM. The DSM-III was supplanted by the DSM-III-R in 1987, the DSM-IV in 1994, and the current version, the DSM-IV-TR (text revised) in 2000, which contains 365 diagnoses. “With each subsequent edition,” writes Daniel Carlat in his absorbing book, “the number of diagnostic categories multiplied, and the books became larger and more expensive. Each became a best seller for the APA, and DSM is now one of the major sources of income for the organization.” The DSM-IV sold over a million copies.
As psychiatry became a drug-intensive specialty, the pharmaceutical industry was quick to see the advantages of forming an alliance with the psychiatric profession. Drug companies began to lavish attention and largesse on psychiatrists, both individually and collectively, directly and indirectly. They showered gifts and free samples on practicing psychiatrists, hired them as consultants and speakers, bought them meals, helped pay for them to attend conferences, and supplied them with “educational” materials. When Minnesota and Vermont implemented “sunshine laws” that require drug companies to report all payments to doctors, psychiatrists were found to receive more money than physicians in any other specialty. The pharmaceutical industry also subsidizes meetings of the APA and other psychiatric conferences. About a fifth of APA funding now comes from drug companies.
Drug companies are particularly eager to win over faculty psychiatrists at prestigious academic medical centers. Called “key opinion leaders” (KOLs) by the industry, these are the people who through their writing and teaching influence how mental illness will be diagnosed and treated. They also publish much of the clinical research on drugs and, most importantly, largely determine the content of the DSM. In a sense, they are the best sales force the industry could have, and are worth every cent spent on them. Of the 170 contributors to the current version of the DSM (the DSM-IV-TR), almost all of whom would be described as KOLs, ninety-five had financial ties to drug companies, including all of the contributors to the sections on mood disorders and schizophrenia.5
The drug industry, of course, supports other specialists and professional societies, too, but Carlat asks, “Why do psychiatrists consistently lead the pack of specialties when it comes to taking money from drug companies?” His answer: “Our diagnoses are subjective and expandable, and we have few rational reasons for choosing one treatment over another.” Unlike the conditions treated in most other branches of medicine, there are no objective signs or tests for mental illness—no lab data or MRI findings—and the boundaries between normal and abnormal are often unclear. That makes it possible to expand diagnostic boundaries or even create new diagnoses, in ways that would be impossible, say, in a field like cardiology. And drug companies have every interest in inducing psychiatrists to do just that.
In addition to the money spent on the psychiatric profession directly, drug companies heavily support many related patient advocacy groups and educational organizations. Whitaker writes that in the first quarter of 2009 alone, Eli Lilly gave $551,000 to NAMI [National Alliance on Mental Illness] and its local chapters, $465,000 to the National Mental Health Association, $130,000 to CHADD (an ADHD [attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder] patient-advocacy group), and $69,250 to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.
And that’s just one company in three months; one can imagine what the yearly total would be from all companies that make psychoactive drugs. These groups ostensibly exist to raise public awareness of psychiatric disorders, but they also have the effect of promoting the use of psychoactive drugs and influencing insurers to cover them. Whitaker summarizes the growth of industry influence after the publication of the DSM-III as follows:
In short, a powerful quartet of voices came together during the 1980’s eager to inform the public that mental disorders were brain diseases. Pharmaceutical companies provided the financial muscle. The APA and psychiatrists at top medical schools conferred intellectual legitimacy upon the enterprise. The NIMH [National Institute of Mental Health] put the government’s stamp of approval on the story. NAMI provided a moral authority.
1.                               1
See Marcia Angell, " The Epidemic of Mental Illness: Why? ," The New York Review , June 23, 2011. 
2.                               2
Eisenberg wrote about this transition in "Mindlessness and Brainlessness," British Journal of Psychiatry , No. 148 (1986). His last paper, completed by his stepson, was published after his death in 2009. See Eisenberg and L.B. Guttmacher, "Were We All Asleep at the Switch? A Personal Reminiscence of Psychiatry from 1940 to 2010," Acta Psychiatrica Scand. , No. 122 (2010). 
3.                               3
Carol A. Bernstein, "Meta-Structure in DSM-5 Process," Psychiatric News , March 4, 2011, p. 7. 
4.                               4
The history of the DSM is recounted in December 6, 2007 , and by me, January 15, 2009
Christopher Lane
's informative book Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness " (Yale University Press, 2007). Lane was given access to the American Psychiatric Association's archive of unpublished letters, transcripts, and memoranda, and he also interviewed Robert Spitzer. His book was reviewed by Frederick Crews in The New York Review ,
5.                               5
See L. Cosgrove et al., "Financial Ties Between DSM-IV Panel Members and the Pharmaceutical Industry," Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics , Vol. 75 (2006).