Why Freedom of Speech in the USA will be determined by the status of a French Cartoon.

First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. Their decision to publish the Islamic Prophet Mohammed was a profile in courage, an act of bravery and integrity.

So, why is it so important that it was published and should be allowed to be published in the USA and the world? In the US, we have freedom of speech, even if that speech offends or is even considered hate speech. While we cannot yell "fire!" in a movie theater, anything short of this is legal and free. If an intolerant group are allowed to determine what we say by simply becoming violent then we have no free speech. The intolerent group can then effectively legislate what we are allowed to say, for instance: If I said, "I think that the practice of forced female circumcism is a violation of human rights" and a particular group stormed a US embassy in say, an Islamic country, because they believed that this showed hatred towards their religion and expressing that belief then became illegal, groups everywhere would learn that all they had to do to suppress free speech would be to become violent.

One of the founders of our great nation, George Washington once said: "If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." And here is my quote: "When you allow others to determine the definition of evil; hear no evil, speak no evil, have no freedom of speech".

Elements of the islamic world are calling for the banning of this cartoon and the unfinished poorly done video "The innocence of Muslims", however we may or may not dislike them, we must protect them as if our lives depended upon it.

I call on free newspapers throughout the world to print images of the so called "Prophet" every day until we have 1 day without Muslim violence.

Girls with Guns

AARP throws senior citizens to the wolves in the name of profits.

AARP makes only about 20% of its revenue from membership dues, while it makes 34% of its profits from its healthcare insurance business. AARP's percentage of healthcare insurance profits is about to increase dramatically under Obamacare due to it's lobbying against its own memberships interests.

The AARP has carved out some nice loopholes for itself in order to increase profits from seniors. By suppressing reforms that would have lowered seniors premiums by $415.00 per year, AARP gets to increase its profits. AARP also lobbied to keep its own administrative costs exempt from new rules to lower them. This increases profits to AARP and increases costs to seniors.

Because the majority of AARP's revenue depends on insurance profits from senior citizens, it cannot function as an advocacy group for senior citizens. This conflict of interest does not serve senior citizens, AARP lobbies in the name of senior citizens against the interests of senior citizens. AARP stands to make billions of dollars in profits on the backs of senior citizens.

What Can You Do?

Switch any insurance you may have away from AARP. Do not renew your membership with AARP. There are many other senior advocacy groups that are actual advocates for seniors, find one that suits your needs. The fastest growing senior advocacy group is American Seniors Association at: http://www.americanseniors.org/ .

Girls With Guns

Today's Miss Liberty

A Sinister Pact

In mid December 2011 while Americans were innocently shopping for Christmas presents, the Obama Administration was signing a sinister pact. This pact will eventually lead to the criminalization of any criticism of Islam. The sinister pact that the Obama administration signed is called UN Resolution 16/18. The evil document is archived here: http://www.article19.org/data/files/medialibrary/2845/11-11-14-un---att1.pdf

The Evil pact has been pushed by the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation). One of the key provisions is: the criminalization of religious incitement to imminent violence. So essentially if you, an American says something and Muslims decide to get violent over it, you are now a criminal and should be prosecuted. So hypothetically, if I produced a film and stated that I thought it was wrong for Mohammed to marry a 5 year old girl, and this incited Muslims to violence, the feds could come to my house and perp walk me into an interrogation room? This is completely implausible. (tongue in cheek).

The Egyptian Prime Minister has already called for the arrest of the Filmmaker of "Innocence of Muslims" based on "International Charters" which clearly refers to the sinister pact UN Resolution 16/18. The Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu called the film "a deplorable act of incitement" clearly referring the UN Resolution section (f) "Adopting measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief".

The UN Resolution 16/18 is in direct conflict with the US Constitution Bill of Rights, 1st Amendment which prohibits abridging the freedom of speech.
 

We need to repeal this sinister pact. Don't allow it to go unnoticed, spread the word!

More articles to read on this topic:

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/dec/12/opinion/la-oe-turley-blasphemy-20111210

http://www.forbes.com/sites/abigailesman/2011/12/30/could-you-be-a-criminal-us-supports-un-anti-free-speech-measure/3/

Today's Miss Liberty

 

 

How the enemy thinks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5BtQgTGOI4&feature=player_embedded

September 11, 1683

On September 11, 1683, Europe pushed back the Muslim Hordes, saving western civilization from Islamization.  This was not the first time the Religion of Peace attempted to conquer Europe and it would not be the last.

Today these tyrannical forces of hate and intolerance are infiltrating every civilization on earth.  Building their mosques and teaching hate to converts while professing their innocence.  Our governments aid and assist them in their efforts and we are told to tolerate their intolerance.

Tolerating intolerance is not consistent with the common good, it is not consistent with individual liberty, individual life or the pursuit of happiness.  Tolerating intolerance is intellectual cowardice.