• The Ukrainian Joke is on! (but it’s not funny)

    Not exactly your Good Friday message, but if the first stages of a Jewish Holocaust are underway the story should be told


    The Ukrainian Joke is on! (but it’s not funny)

    Reading the BBC report on the Ukrainian situation is roughly equivalent to the stance you’d expect from CNN or Reuters. They bend over backwards to be ‘fair and balanced’ as another network puts it instead in this case its equal time split between relative truth and outright propaganda as competing ideals.

    The BBC Website reported: “Following the Geneva talks, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Ukraine's Foreign Minister Andriy Deshchytsia, US Secretary of State John Kerry and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said there was agreement that all illegal military formations in Ukraine must be dissolved, and that everyone occupying buildings must be disarmed and leave them.”

    I don't think we can be sure of anything at this point
    - Obama - who has no idea what to do

    Everyone assumes that ‘everyone occupying buildings’ means that pro-Russian militants, widely understood to be agents of Moscow, must disarm. But the Russians who have lied at every step of the situation intend to give themselves plenty of wiggle room to re-interpret scenarios at a later date.

    The BBC then says: ”They added that there would be an amnesty for all anti-government protesters under the agreement, and talk of "inclusivity" - possibly a suggestion that Russian-speaking areas of Ukraine might be granted more autonomy.”

    Well right there score one for Moscow. Regardless of the sovereign rights of the Ukraine, international negotiators have decided that in order to stop the violence there needs to be autonomy for Russian speaking areas. Meanwhile Russian agents that served as instigators can walk free.

    The position of the likes of John Kerry (Lurch) and Catherine Ashton is that the violence must be stopped no matter how much of a victory you hand to those that started it in the first place. This sends a message around the globe that anyone is there for the taking, just start some trouble and the US and EU will give you half of what you stole after the smoke clears.

    Completely under-reported in the wild chain of events is the anti-Semitic activity of the Russian forces. Jews in eastern Ukraine received notices from pro-Moscow forces in Donetsk demanding that they register themselves as Jewish. These notices, not surprisingly, have caused alarm in the Jewish community, although the BBC says their authenticity has not yet been verified.

    This seems to have escaped President Barack Obama – certified political genius – who stated: “I don't think we can be sure of anything at this point. We have put in place additional consequences that we can impose on the Russians if we do not see actual improvement of the situation.”

    Brilliant! The Russians are playing Obama just like the Iranians do! They both know that America will do no more than economic sanctions and international name-calling so their only decision is whether the gain is worth the sanctions. Besides, the Russians no doubt plan on making good later on, without giving up any of their land grab.

    A Nebraska elementary school recently put out a much derided nine point plan on how children should deal with bullies. The authors must be the same people who advise the President how to deal with Vladimir Putin.

    Rule 4 for example says not to defend yourself against a bully since you only do this with enemies! Apparently bullies like Putin do not fall into the category of enemies since they were only bullying and not, well, invading or annexing anything like that.

    Meanwhile Rule 8 says not be a sore loser and to ‘lose gracefully’. This is how liberals think you deal with abuse in school and how America’s national leaders think you deal with it on the world stage. Losing gracefully, in their minds, will lead to an epiphany whereby the abuser (I mean the bully) comes to understand the error of their ways.

    Perhaps it’s seen in a lefty sought of Biblical way? After all Jesus was crucified while turning the other cheek but unlike with God there is no gain for mankind if any of us give our lives to an aggressor for nothing.

    All the while we see the 1930’s repeating themselves. State by state Hitler pushed Nazi Germany to occupy and reclassify with the immediate promise that things had gone far enough – ‘just allow this and we’ll be done’. Until the next move!

    Even the move against the Jewish peoples is once again underway. Yet it seems the Western governments have lost sight of both who God’s people are and of what has happened historically, unable to believe that it could happen again.

    Lurch meanwhile according to the BBC described the talks as "a good day's work", but said words had to be turned into actions and that he would have no choice but to impose tougher sanctions on Russia if Moscow failed to demonstrate that it was serious about lowering tensions in Ukraine.

    Russia is solely responsible for the tensions in Ukraine in the first place. Anything other than complete reversal with compensation is ceding ground to hostile actions which will only bring forth more of the same. Kerry seems oblivious to the fact that proven liars have given him assurances and is content to claim a win based on their allusions to peace.

    Sadly it seems that there is nobody on the horizon to stop the atrocities this time around. At best, the efforts of Western nations may delay the chain of events. But the world must come to a realization that history can repeat itself.

  • British Political Establishment braces for impact in upcoming Euro elections

    UKIP is establishing a new ideological position in the British political landscape

    British Political Establishment braces for impact in upcoming Euro elections

    by David C Jennings - published at Canada Free Press

    Britain’s ‘big three’ political parties don’t just look over their shoulder at the upstart UK Independence Party anymore, often times they now look up ahead at them. And with Euro elections (UKIP’s strong point) approaching in May for the first time there seems to be real concern amongst political and media elites that a permanent shift is taking place.

    Mahatma Gandhi once said “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.” UKIP has completed the first two of Gandhi’s four stages and they are now approaching stage three – a fight where the challenger is given equal credibility going in.

    UKIP is a bunch of “fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists” - Cameron

    A combination of the two most recent polls shows Labour winning the elections next month with 35.5% while the Conservatives garner 29.5%. UKIP looks solid in third place at 19%. But ‘the polling factor’ remains to be answered. How accurate is the methodology and how honest are the answers?

    Polls before last year’s local elections showed UKIP garnering about 11% just days before the election. Yet they doubled those percentages and elected 150 new councilors across the country. The answer likely goes back to Gandhi – “then they ridicule you”.

    The major political parties and the mainstream British media (particularly conservative stalwarts like the Daily Mail & Daily Telegraph) have engaged in ridiculing UKIP and highlighting every mishap any one of its members has, whilst comparable offences by other politicians are treated as routine. This successfully creates the impression amongst some voters that, as the Prime Minister so aptly put it, UKIP is a bunch of “fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists”.

    Now where have we heard that kind of language before? That’s right, just seven hours across ‘the pond’ in a Jumbo, American media outlets in New York City, the city ironically of Lady Liberty fame, spew out the same kind of deceit about the American Tea Party like an old fashioned Telex trying to report on a barking Chihuahua.

    Some of the British simply won’t admit to pollsters, depending on the methods employed, that they will vote for the fruitcakes. However polling has detected that UKIP has a favorability rating several points higher suggesting that a chunk of voters may yet switch late as they did before or just won’t admit that they already intend to do so.

    Metro, a free paper circulated on the London Underground from the publishers of the Daily Mail exclaimed in its Monday headline “This Ukip thing is getting out of control!” Author Alex Stevenson goes on to point out that Westminster is unmoved because inside the Westminster bubble UKIP have no presence – yet. But he says “Their kneejerk jingoistic patriotism might leave an unpleasant taste in the mouth. But it’s exactly that willingness to speak bluntly which makes Ukip so compelling to voters.”

    Meanwhile Sky News Political Correspondent Anushka Asthana said: “We’re only a few weeks out from the European elections and UKIP are kind of what the Lib Dems used to be - the party that stands against the establishment. They used to just talk about Europe - now it is local, popular issues such as HS2. (High Speed Rail) The Conservatives are really badly hit by UKIP rising because that tends to split the right. And pollsters say if UKIP get anything over eight points in a general election they would split the right and would stop David Cameron from winning an overall majority. So he will be very worried about that.”

    But Asthana illustrates her upbringing in places like the very establishment London Times. UKIP doesn’t run as an alternative to the establishment like the Lib. Dems. have for 65 years (having previously been part of it). UKIP is anti-establishment and that’s a difference that people are recognising.

    She also quickly gravitates to the notion that UKIP is taking only Conservative Party voters, whereas last year’s elections and current polling shows that they take slightly more support from the failing Lib. Dems., a party who’ve never really established who they are.

    UKIP on the other hand is establishing a new ideological position in the British political landscape. True conservatives are working their way over like ants moving a colony across the street. Meanwhile anti-establishment libertarians have arrived in bluster. Some traditional Lib. Dem. voters fall into the ‘none of the above crowd’ and these too are ever so cautiously arriving in the Nigel Farage camp but they won’t easily put down roots.

    These groups have a lot of common or similar enough positions but it will take great political skill to knit them together into a common magazine of ideas. So far party leader Nigel Farage seems to be up to the task having demonstrated the ability to engage in debate, damage control and statesmanlike appearances.

    If the Tories (Conservative Party) do fall into third place in the upcoming Euros it will further enhance the credibility of UKIP, it could mortally wound the Lib. Dems., and there will again be questions from Tory insiders as to whether Cameron is the right man to continue to lead them.

  • Christian Concern sues Cameron government department for anti-Christian positions

    How out of touch politicians and journalists can become


    Christian Concern sues Cameron government department for anti-Christian positions

    by David C Jennings - published at Canada Free Press

    British Christian activist group Christian Concern has targeted Eric Pickles, David Cameron’s Communities Secretary, for what they consider discrimination against Christians by the government despite its claims to hold to Christian values.

    Pickles department, which runs the QEII Conference Centre in London, cancelled hosting a conference on marriage, run by Christian Concern, the day before the event was scheduled to take place stating that it was “inappropriate” for it to be held at a government venue.

    But if their (Cameron & Pickles) comments are going to be more than just hollow soundbites, somebody needs to back up these words with action.

    But on April 6th Pickles was widely reported as saying that militant atheists should “get over it” and accept that Britain is a Christian country. This brought a response from Christian Concern Director Andrea Williams live on BBC Radio 4, who challenged Pickles to testify against his own department (in their suit brought against his department) if those were in fact his beliefs.

    Williams stated: “We’ve heard the Prime Minister and now the Communities Secretary defend Britain’s Christian heritage. But if their comments are going to be more than just hollow soundbites, somebody needs to back up these words with action. Mr Pickles now has that opportunity by giving evidence against his own department. He should intervene to stop the centre from pursuing costs against us, and ensure that the centre is open to us in the future.”

    Williams and Christian Concern backed up their claims in a letter to Pickles which has been made publicly available and can be seen here.

    The letter states in part that the planned conference was originally scheduled to be held at the Law Society who also cancelled, apparently for politically correct reasons. The wording in the letter suggests that a settlement was reached with Christian Concern and that the terms include no further discussion.

    Subsequently the QEII Conference Center was employed as a new host. The letter to Pickles states that “Many high profile speakers agreed to speak, including, inter alia, a High Court Judge, Christine Odone of the Daily Telegraph and Mr Phillip Blond of Respublica. Many varied views not just Christian views were going to be expressed at this conference.”

    The letter goes on to point out facts that will no doubt feature in the court case against the government showing their discrimination against Christians. In employment law for example the government has advocated against the wearing of Christian Crosses but in favour of the wearing of the Hijab. Furthermore the government has suggested that Christians should leave their jobs if they cannot suitably express their faith in the workplace. Muslims it seems are always accommodated!

    Christian Concern also points out the lecture by Lady Hale at Yale University last month when she states that the government’s Equality and Human Rights Commission “has previously described Christian beliefs on sexual morality as akin to infection”.

    The case, according to the Christian Concern website, is now in the Central London County Court with Christian Concern and Andrea Williams as claimants and Eric Pickles and the QEII Conference Centre as defendants. Pickles department is already estimating costs of £50,000, which they will claim against Williams and Christian Concern if they win.

    “This kind of threat”, states the letter to the Communities Secretary “has a profound chilling impact on any person or organisation wishing to challenge the closing down of freedom of speech and expression.” Williams goes on to say: “The British public has the right to know whether the expression of Christian belief and values on the subject of marriage (and other issues) is ‘inappropriate’ to be heard at a venue run by your Department. … You are the Minister responsible and should answer for the policy of the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre.”

    Ironically this past Sunday Pickles was covered by the left-wing Guardian attacking atheists highlighted by the “atheists get over it” statement. The Guardian story shows that Pickles authored law that ensured that English parish councils could not face legal challenges for including prayers in public meetings.

    Further, according to the Guardian, he told delegates at the Conservative spring forum in London that non-believers should not be able to impose ‘politically correct intolerance’ on others. He also said, that “the government had backed British values by stopping Whitehall from ‘appeasing extremism’, whether it came from the English Defence League, militant Islamists or ‘the thuggish hard left’.”

    But it seems that Pickles, a key player in the Cameron 2010 election team as party Chair, has his own ideas on what Christianity should and shouldn’t tolerate. When he talks of not imposing politically correct intolerance this seems to cover anything he doesn’t believe. And that includes evangelical Christian beliefs!

    Following on from the ongoing fiasco with London Mayor Boris Johnson refusing traditional marriage ads on London Buses, the government appears to have taken too big a bite from the proverbial apple for some people’s likes.

    The Bristol Post has reportedly lost “thousands of sales” after publishing a picture of two homosexual men kissing on its front page to mark the city’s first same-sex marriage. Editor Mike Norton said the drop in sales surprised him as the paper received only nine complaints.

    This illustrates how out of touch politicians and journalists can become, especially when they become consumed with promoting an ideological agenda regardless of the facts, the actual news, or the direction of public opinion.

    Cameron and his political team either need to wake up and smell the coffee they have brewed for the last four years or, as is almost certain, they will face major judgment at the ballot box in the May Euro elections.

  • A Climate Change Nazi in Ireland

    Nazi’s, like communists, take power by force and rule just as forcefully

    Irish Independent

    A Climate Change Nazi in Ireland

    By David C Jennings - Published at Canada Free Press

    One of the delightful things about the global warming advocates is that they all seem to be on the same page, changing their arguments in synch so as to move the conversation into a different place. It’s so Orwellian, and I hate to keep using the same reference, but there just isn’t a better one.

    The latest moves have included the incessant change of subject from Global Warming to Climate Change. This is a very convenient shift considering the earth has not actually warmed in fifteen years and it allows the Global Warming Nazis (GWM’s) to characterize any kind of weather as climate change.

    Give me ten minutes or I’m not staying in the studio

    The second strategic shift had been the beginning of demonizing the opposition. It has always been the case that opposing arguments were mocked, ridiculed and disregarded in the usual liberal fashion but the GWM’s have taken it to another level.

    It now appears to be an offence to criticize the ‘science‘ of ‘climate change’. Simply stating their flawed evidence has not worked and skepticism grows. Now, seething anger is being revealed and because the stakes are so great opposition must be silenced, by law if necessary, to save the planet.

    This can be seen by the appearance of Duncan Stewart on RTE radio, the national broadcaster in Ireland. According to Raheem Kassam writing for Breitbart London, Stewart broke down live on air Monday morning, refusing to discuss the topic of climate change unless he was given 10 minutes of unopposed airtime to speak about the issue.

    Host Shane Coleman explained as what became the 18-minute segment began that Stewart was quitting RTE employment because of its bias on the global warming issue. Stewart then insisted that global warming was proven science and when Coleman tried to challenge things he said, Stewart went into a tirade about not having enough time to speak and threatening to walk out if he didn’t get his 10 minutes.

    Stewart ranted:

    “How much time have I got? Tell me how much I’ve got! I want to know. I can walk out of this studio this minute if you wish. If I’ve only got seven minutes, I’m not staying. It’s not worth my time, I’m going to go to another station. There’s plenty of people that want to hear. Give me ten minutes or I’m not staying in the studio”.

    The station should have let him walk but they caved after a couple of minutes of this with Coleman very reasonably and politely resisting. Not only did this GWN get his way but apparently he was actually angling for free electioneering time as he contradicted himself on whether he would be running for office.

    Stewart, tripping on his own words said: “I have three or four options at the moment, and I will make a decision in the coming days whether I do or don’t [go into politics]. I know it’s going to be dirty, I know people are going to knock me and going to judge me. Believe me, nothing’s going to hold me back when I get to Europe. [Getting elected] is a simple matter”.

    So his statements slowly concede that in fact he plans to run for the European Parliament in May, meaning he had bullied his way into some free coverage no doubt for the purpose of advancing his personal agenda. In fact Coleman couldn’t have said it better: “All this stuff… I have to put it to you, sounds like a most cynical, opportunistic attempt to just ride a storm of controversy to get elected to the European Parliament”.

    Now some might take exception at the term Nazi to describe a man like this. I do not! Nazi’s, like communists, take power by force and rule just as forcefully. The state’s position is then considered gospel and their opponents suffer severe consequences.

    The difference between the two is that communists set up a perpetual system designed to keep an aristocracy in charge. Nazi’s are more about an individual forcing their way to the top of a previously open society and instituting dictatorial rule. The American Democrats, as a whole, appear to have employed a hybrid of these two systems.

    Global warming is losing credibility fast because, despite the claims of its proponents, the facts are not supporting it. People being proved wrong become desperate and the ramifications for the ultimate rejection of climate change fiction is the entire credibility of lefties, liberals and progressives the world over.

    It is not surprising then to see the level of hostility that is now emerging, but if truth is to prevail then those that cling to it must hold fast and stare down the lies once and for all so that all the mammoth waste associated with this can be done away with.

  • The Lazy Man (or Woman) is a control-freak

    Lazy hands make for poverty, but diligent hands bring wealth. - Proverbs 10:4

    One of the interesting things about lazy people is that you usually find they are quite capable of getting things done and quite willing to when the circumstances are right for them. One of my friends would say this conclusion is very anecdotal but I watch how people behave and sometimes can reach conclusions in generality.

    There are only four or five basic personality types and human behavior can be quite predictable. As King Solomon declared in the scriptures - "there's nothing new under the sun". So by following the threads of social action you can frequently figure out more or less where somebody or something will end up.

    Passive-aggressive behavior is,
    put simply, indirect transferred resistance.

    Laziness is I believe a form of passive-aggressive behavior. A person declines to do certain tasks not so much out of not wanting to but because the heart of the issue is control. The controlling person declines to do a task because by doing so they gain control – even though it’s in a negative way.

    Passive-aggressive behavior is, put simply, indirect transferred resistance. A person wants to tell another person something. But they are insecure within themselves which in some individuals leads to a passive-aggressive response. Instead of just saying “you broke it you should replace it” they leave the damaged item in a place where they know the other person will see it.

    This vulgar and in-your-face hint dropping is how Mr. /Mrs. Passive-Aggressive accomplish their task. The recipient can either comply (be controlled), ignore it (anger builds in both parties), or confront the matter themselves.

    Having someone else set a schedule, or even negotiating with someone else what should be done and when cedes control. Remember that controlling people are insecure and their actions are an attempt to gain security. Unfortunately the security evaporates very quickly and so the insecure person is driven to control over and over until they confront themselves.

  • Christian Street Preacher in Manchester awarded damages after false arrest

    if you answer a question someone poses to you in the city square by quoting verses from the Bible to them you stand to be arrested like John Craven, a fifty-seven-year-old street preacher

    Christian Street Preacher in Manchester awarded damages after false arrest

    by David C Jennings - published at Canada Free Press

    Manchester, England – the unofficial capital of the north. John Craven, a fifty-seven-year-old street preacher was doing just that – preaching the gospel - in Manchester city centre in September 2011 when he was approached by two teenage boys who asked him to explain his opinion about homosexuals.

    Craven responded by quoting from the Bible, adding that “whilst God hates sin, He loves the sinner”. The boys, according to the Christian Institute, then kissed in front of him and taunted him with suggestive sexual acts before complaining about his comments to Police Constable Alistair McKittrick.

    Nobody should face 19 hours in custody for simply answering a question about their beliefs. The disgraceful way in which Mr Craven was treated fell well below what the public deserve.

    Cavern was subsequently arrested and investigated by Greater Manchester Police for allegedly using insulting words with the intention of causing harassment, alarm or distress. It doesn’t matter that he may have found the boys kissing offensive.

    He was held and denied access to medication for his rheumatoid arthritis and not offered food until, after almost 15 hours, he was given a bowl of cereal and a microwave meal following a complaint to the police from his friend.

    Craven has been street preaching for seven years and said: “I never intended to cause anyone harassment, alarm or distress. In fact, quite the opposite. I preach the gospel which means good news and the love of God for all. The actions of the police have left me feeling nervous and anxious. I found the whole episode extremely distressing. It appears that the actions of the police were calculated to give me and other street preachers the impression that we could not preach the gospel in public without breaking the law and if we did we would be arrested.”

    The Preacher will now receive £13,000 (of Taxpayer money) as compensation for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and breach of his human rights. Under the European Convention on Human Rights people have the freedom to manifest their religion (Article 9) and freedom of expression, which includes the freedom to impart information and ideas without interference by a public authority (Article 10). The total cost for Greater Manchester Police (The Taxpayer), including both parties’ legal bills, will be over £50,000.

    Colin Hart, Director of The Christian Institute, who legally represented Craven said: “Nobody should face 19 hours in custody for simply answering a question about their beliefs. The disgraceful way in which Mr Craven was treated fell well below what the public deserve. In terms of the infringement of religious liberty, it was one of the worst cases we have ever dealt with. Freedom of expression is a very basic human right. The very foundations of our liberty depend upon it. I hope that Greater Manchester Police learn lessons for the future from this case and make every effort to ensure that it never happens again. I am delighted for Mr Craven that a settlement has been reached.”

    This BBC report, posted on Youtube, fills in the details.

    Craven added: “At the end of the day God loves everybody, but homosexuality is a sin and I am not going to contradict the word of God. The actions of the police have left me feeling nervous and anxious. I was in a cell on my own. I was fingerprinted, swabbed and had my photo taken. They took my shoelaces from me. They said I would not be interviewed until the next day and then they left me.”

    This and other episodes of improper action by police against Christian Evangelists are raising the appropriate questions about whether police are trained to adjudicate such matters correctly. Or is there a Christian bias present in UK police forces that has to be addressed and rooted out.

    Four years ago a Muslim bus driver in London stopped his bus with passengers on board, rolled out his prayer mat in the middle of the aisle, faced Mecca and began to chant in Arabic. Now it’s one thing if he does that in on his own the middle of the park but this inconvenienced passengers at the least and had some thinking a terrorist attack was imminent.

    The Daily Telegraph reported that “TfL (Transport for London) has apologised to all the passengers for the delay to their journey and the driver has been reprimanded.” Reprimanded for making people feel a terrorist attack was imminent, breaking company policy and inconveniencing the public.

    Meanwhile if you answer a question someone poses to you in the city square by quoting verses from the Bible to them you stand to be arrested and held for almost 24 hours without food and water. America couldn’t get away with treating the prisoners at Gitmo like that.

    It is not enough that financial damages were paid. Either the arresting officer was grossly negligent or his training was. Police departments must be held to a high standard beyond reproach and their personnel must be the greatest examples. Likewise the Taxpayers deserve answers when they have to foot the bill for the government’s mistakes.

  • The continuing adventures of Obamacare

    Covered California is covering more than your healthcare, it is now leaning on you to register to vote and in at least one case it is choosing the Democratic Party for you

    Continuing adventures of ObamaCare – Covered California is now a voter registration project

    by David C Jennings - published at Canada Free Press

    Twelve weeks ago I wrote about my test subjects in Covered California – the Golden State’s expedition into running its own version of ObamaCare. Since that time when the absolute bureaucratic debacle demonstrating the complete unpreparedness of the organizations involved was first exposed, things have developed.

    My second subjects Ricky and Carolyn abandoned their efforts after being offered a more expensive private sector option. It seems the delay of mandates meant that the plan they thought they could no longer stay in will still be around, at least for a while and they preferred it.

    Thank you for using Covered California for your health insurance needs. Covered California is a voter registration agency.

    Meanwhile my first subjects Charles and Lorraine have soldiered on. They have had the wherewithal to get set up and make the required payments despite all the obstacles, which were considerable. Online bill pay was initially denied to them because they were not registered and registration couldn’t be completed without making a payment. This was a classical government snafu requiring literally hours of waiting on hold to fix.

    I suspect this has caused many people to stop in their tracks, meaning the claims of how many people have registered will not be backed up by how many people have actually started paying. And having made their first payment, my subjects then found the second payment didn’t clear the Health Net system for over a month, meaning making the third payment on time was not possible (since the second one was still pending, although the money had been taken four weeks earlier).

    Confused – this is what many enrollees are going through if they are being diligent. I suspect many are not, but those figures are not being released. Charles and Lorraine have yet to receive a bill in the mail despite the request being clearly indicated in the system. But other stuff does come in the mail including (trumpets sounding) a voter registration form.

    It seems almost incredulous to hear our favorite talk show personalities calling Covered California a voter registration project but Lorraine has showed me it in writing. The opening wording to the letter she received was jaw dropping:

    “Dear Lorriane: Thank you for using Covered California for your health insurance needs. Covered California is a voter registration agency. This notice provides you the opportunity to register to vote“. There is then a lot of blurb about how to do this and an enclosed form. The letter concludes “The next statewide primary election is Tuesday June 3rd. Thank you, (signed) Covered California Voter Registration Coordinator. (There is no actual signature)

    You most certainly will have to ‘pass the bill to find out what’s in it’ as Ms. Pelosi accidentally revealed. Covered California is covering more than your healthcare, it is now leaning on you to register to vote and in at least one case it is choosing the Democratic Party for you.

    The Daily Caller reports that a couple in La Mesa, California (near San Diego) received their friendly voter registration solicitation with a form enclosed already marked up for the individual or couple to register as a Democrat. It seems someone at Covered California Central has decided this is the correct answer to the question “do you want to choose a political party preference?”

    The La Mesa couple was told by Covered California to contact the Secretary of State’s office since they provide the forms, no one from that office could be contacted and the San Diego County Registrar of Voters told the couple to contact Covered California. Clearly, like much of the Obama White House shenanigans, nobody plans on being held accountable.

    And beyond choosing your party for you the folks at Covered California HQ have decided that gay couples can shop together for health insurance but an unmarried heterosexual couple cannot, since they have the option to marry.

    Is Covered California guilty of discrimination against unmarried heterosexual domestic couples?

    California allows domestic couples of any gender to file their state taxes jointly. My third subjects – Andrew & Nina – do just that. Unmarried they file Federal taxes separately but file their State taxes as a domestic couple consistent with State law.

    The rules though are different for the lesbian couple who live in the apartment downstairs in a moderately attractive part of Long Beach. Because heterosexual domestic couples in the State cannot register their relationship they cannot shop jointly through Covered California “because they have the option to marry”, said Leigh Kretzschmar, a San Diego attorney specializing in domestic partnerships who was speaking to The Voice of San Diego.

    Which now leads us to a whole new question? Is Covered California guilty of discrimination against unmarried heterosexual domestic couples? Their civil rights, one can claim are being violated, since they are being denied by the State the same opportunities through government as homosexual couples. It just goes to show that the more the government gets involved in something the more messed up it becomes.

  • Farage gains “aura of respectability” after handily winning debate on EU membership

    Election by election, Farage and his team are chipping away at the political establishment


    Farage gains “aura of respectability” after handily winning debate on EU membership

    by David C Jennings - published at Canada Free Press

    It was billed as ‘the great debate’ as the leaders from Britain’s third and fourth placed parties put on the gloves and went at it for an hour on LBC radio and the Sky News Channel on the question of EU membership for Britain and a national referendum.

    Polly Toynbee, writing for the Guardian, actually got it spot on for the first paragraph of her ‘coverage’. Unfortunately, the said reporting quickly de-generated into almost a plea for the establishment class to rise up and boldly make the case for staying in.

    Nick Clegg, dead in the polls, had everything to gain from his strong stand on “in” – virtually his last unsullied point of principle.

    She wrote: “Britain inched a step closer to a European exit this week. Simply by giving the UK Independence party (UKIP) a mighty national platform raises the credibility of the ‘outs’. Nick Clegg, dead in the polls, had everything to gain from his strong stand on “in” – virtually his last unsullied point of principle. Yet in the process he gifted Nigel Farage, and the act of voting Ukip, an aura of respectability.”

    It was at about this point that dear Polly stopped sounding smart. But the point had been made. Clegg, leader of the Lib. Dems. and Deputy Prime Minister, is becoming increasingly irrelevant as UKIP have supplanted his party in third place. And it’s not a politically seasonal shift, the Liberal Democratic Party is on life-support and death row as Euro elections are less than eight weeks away.

    UKIP leader Nigel Farage meanwhile went toe to toe with the Deputy PM on live national media and cleaned his clock. Clegg had little choice in ‘going deep’ to coin NFL terminology but a pass interception was always on the cards and Farage ran it back forty yards.

    Appearing on his regular LBC weekly slot the next day Clegg was already administering damage control by none other than changing the subject – sort of. Right at the end of the debate was a question about the situation in Crimea which Farage made no bones about being partly the fault of the EU.

    He said that the British government had geed up the European Union, to pursue an imperialist expansionist empire. “We’ve given false series of hopes to people in (Western) Ukraine. They toppled their own elected leader – provoking Putin; the EU has blood on its hands.” He went on to say he doesn’t want a Euro Army, Navy, Air Force or euro foreign policy, that it is not a thing for good.

    Clegg is using this bold statement to try and change the subject calling Farage’s remarks insulting. But the UKIP leader continually demonstrates why his party continues gaining by answering in common sense terms that people relate to.

    Friday, Match 28th also on LBC he responded to Clegg: “I don’t support Putin. I don’t like what he’s done, but I do understand if you provoke him, he will behave like that. Now what we see in Ukraine is the result of an absolutely stupid, almost imperialist EU policy that says like all empires it wants to expand and expand and expand. Its given false hope to all those predominantly Catholic western Ukrainians, leading them to rise up, topple their own democratically-elected leader. If you poke the Russian bear with a stick, he will react.”

    And again Farage demonstrates that he is light years ahead of Clegg and David Cameron for that matter in understanding Putin and the Russians. And it’s not really complicated. In fact Farage has a quality similar to Sarah Palin of making what establishment types have tied into knots into something simple and understandable.

    LBC – maybe with a tip from Candy Crowley, managed to throw in the gay marriage question (which becomes legal this weekend) into the debate despite the fact it was supposed to be strictly about matters pertaining to the EU and whether Britain should remain in. Clegg is all in on the subject, Farage carefully opted for re-visiting the question once the UK in out of the EU.

    Why did Farage win this debate? (and he did 57-36 according to YouGov) He understands the frustrations of the British people and is able to communicate. He talks, almost Thatcher-esque, of putting power back in people’s hands with statements like “trade is negotiated by consumers”.

    Clegg has no sense of humour, and is stuck making disingenuous arguments about such uninteresting topics as the European Arrest Warrant. Too many people, while not getting the fine print, can see through it. Farage meanwhile can joke about himself and others, complementing EU membership, for example, for improving the quality of British food. (Although random acts of microwaving would have done that)

    UKIP does represent real change because if they gain real power it will turn the political system on its head. That’s what makes some voters reluctant! But election by election, Farage and his team are chipping away at the political establishment.

  • Israelis, Christians & Journalists in Israel endure Hamas Cyber Terrorism Saturday

    Massive series of text messages threatening kidnapping and reprisals

    Israelis, Christians & Journalists in Israel endure Hamas Cyber Terrorism Saturday

    by David C Jennings - published at Canada Free Press

    This past Saturday Hamas targeted leading Israelis, Christian reporters active in Israel, and secular western journalists with a massive series of text messages threatening kidnapping and reprisals for actions by the Israeli government and their military.

    According to the Jerusalem Post, messages were reportedly sent on order of Hamas’s military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades to coincide with the 10-year anniversary of the death of Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, assassinated by Israel in 2004.

    “if Gaza is attacked, then the life of the Zionists will be hell”....
    “Kassam promised revenge and there was revenge. The account is not over; the worst is yet to come"

    Arutz Sheva, whose own journalists received pictures of Yassin, reported that some of the text messages are the result of a cyber-attack on the Israel Defense website, which exposed the cell phone numbers and email addresses of hundreds of registered users who received the messages. They added that the text messages are appearing from private or blocked numbers from Palestinian Arab area codes, as well as from reportedly false numbers from Israeli companies.

    Messages included the following: - “Al-Qassam has chosen you to be The next Shalite [sic]...Be Ready,” (Shalite – a captured Israeli soldier); “if Gaza is attacked, then the life of the Zionists will be hell”, also “Kassam promised revenge and there was revenge. The account is not over; the worst is yet to come, “ And finally “Israel established the injustice and the occupation and the fate of every entity of injustice and occupation is destruction…the Shaheed [martyr] Ahmed Yassin.”

    In addition to parliamentary aides and secular western journalists, recipients included Christian Broadcasting Network reporters. The Foreign Press Association responded, according to Charisma News, that the recipients had apparently come from a “carefully selected data base set up by the military wing of Hamas.”

    The text messages followed an Israel counter-terrorism raid in the West Bank city of Jenin over the weekend, in which a wanted Hamas member, 20-year-old Hamza Abu Alheja, along with two other Palestinians were killed. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the Alheja had organized terrorist attacks in the past and was currently planning attacks on innocent civilians.

    In response, the Palestinian Authority (PA), Islamic Jihad, and Hamas issued statements showing a rare solidarity in exacting revenge upon Israel. Senior Islamic Jihad official Nafez Azzam said “The United States and Israel want to force the Palestinians and the entire region to surrender, but Gaza and the West Bank resist this”. A demonstration was called for in the northern Gaza town Beit Lahiya later on Saturday to condemn the Jenin killings and “support resistance.” Meanwhile a spokesman for PA, Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, condemned the “continuing escalation against the Palestinian people”, for which he blamed Israel.

    Other recipients of the cyber attack included Eyal Shviki, aide to opposition leader Isaac Herzog (Labor), and Washington Post correspondent and former Jerusalem Post reporter Ruth Eglash, who both posted images of the messages on Facebook, and found that many of their colleagues had similar experiences. Eglash said: “I was confused when I first received them and thought they were directed only at me. At first I tried to call the number, but just got a weird buzzing sound.”

    The New York Times Jerusalem bureau Chief Jodi Rudoren was another recipient and tried calling back. “When I thought it was only coming to me, I planned to call Orange and perhaps the police today [Sunday] to trace the numbers, but [New York Times correspondent] Isabel [Kershner] got one shortly after… and Emily Harris of NPR, and then it was all over Facebook and the news, so I see no reason to report it”.

    The Foreign Press Association (FPA) condemned the messages, writing: “This is unacceptable. Journalists are not part of the Middle East conflict. They are observers who should be treated as such. The FPA calls on the Hamas government to take steps to guarantee this never happens again.”

    Unfortunately the FPA doesn’t quite grasp that Hamas doesn’t see things the same way. They see foreign reporters who try to by even handed even if not impartial as just another part of the enemy they are fighting. Journalists will remain either targets or tools of the terrorists unless they unremittingly adopt the Hamas position.

    The sophistication and intensity of the attack reveals a high level of commitment and co-ordination from Israel’s enemies on a whole new front. It also reveals that they posses tech. skills on a fairly high level which makes future hacking, along with worse cyber crimes, a realistic probability.

    The high tech knowledge required to hack into a very secure Israeli database suggests that there may well be outside forces lending a hand. The West should not be so naïve as to ignore the possibility of Russian involvement as they have repeatedly and recently shown a willingness to involve themselves in the affairs of the region.

  • Under pressure, Catherine Anaya walks-back news story

    Administration that will turn the might of every government department against those who will not co-operate with them, an administration that is accelerating the death of true journalism in America

    ASU News
    CATHERINE ANAYA (r) with a journalism student

    Under pressure, Catherine Anaya walks-back news story

    by David C Jennings - published at Canada Free Press

    It was a sad day Thursday as the slow death march of American journalism continued. Not only was a seasoned TV reporter forced to walk back a legitimate news story but the story was coverage of local journalists visiting the White House for the day and what the White House Press Secretary said.

    Catherine Anaya is still very youthful but she is a veteran local news reporter of 22 years having worked in Phoenix the whole time except for a four year stint in Los Angeles. She has won three local news Emmy’s and is the lead female anchor at Channel 5, the CBS Phoenix affiliate.

    reporters and correspondents, unless it’s breaking news, they provide the questions to him (Jay Carney) in advance so he is already preparing for the answer and in some cases he actually prepares that answer for them

    Subsequently she was one of a handful of locally based reporters selected to attend an event which is commonly held by Presidents, giving local reporters a day at the White House and in this case, each reporter got a four- minute interview with President Obama.

    However the controversy surrounded Anaya’s on air report from Washington which aired on the Channel Five evening news. In it she stated that her day started with White House Press Secretary Jay Carney who explained how his job works. During this explanation she reported with great confidence and clarity:

    “One of the things I found most interesting was that the reporters and correspondents, unless it’s breaking news, they provide the questions to him in advance so he is already preparing for the answer and sometimes, in some cases I should say, he actually prepares that answer for them so that they can have that to work on their reports later on”

    This revelation, that reporters already have the answers to questions they ask, caused a major uproar in political reporting circles. The Rush Limbaugh show ran with the audio of the clip after which the host predicted that the political journalism elite would not and could not allow the story to stand. He accurately predicted that Anaya would be forced into retracting the story in some way and was proved correct within hours.

    Following a chorus of online denials by insiders, highlighted by Jay Carney’s own tweet “Briefings would be a lot easier if this were true! Rest assured, it is not”; the walk-back began. First the TV Station issued a denial in Anaya’s name which was quickly retracted, then Anya issued a final ‘correction’ later in the evening which went as follows:

    “It seems much had been inferred about my observations following my White House visit yesterday. First, I did not take notes during our coffee with Jay Carney because it was off the record. But when I referenced the meeting in my live reports I did say that it was a great opportunity to talk about the challenges of his day and how he has to be so well-versed on many topics each day. In my live report I also wanted to share my impression of my experience in getting a question answered during the briefing. I was indeed asked to provide my question in advance.

    Because my question was largely of local interest, I chose to save it for my interview with the President instead. My mistake was to lump that experience with my coffee meeting reference, inadvertently giving Mr. Carney credit for that when in fact it did not come from him. I regret giving anyone the impression that it was from conversation I had with Mr. Carney. I do not attend those briefings regularly and cannot speak directly to the process for non-visiting journalists. None of my observations stemmed from my off-the-record meeting with Jay Carney.”

    As I stated earlier this is a veteran, award winning TV journalist and anchor with vast experience in presenting things with clarity. Her initial report was clear and concise and it is as believable as the Crimean independence vote that she ‘muddled up’ different accounts. The fact the TV station first issued a correction that had to be withdrawn, only to re-issue a virtually identical statement later in the evening shows the pressure the reporter and station were under, from someone.

    All of this pressure from the political and media establishments in Washington to whitewash the fact that many reporters do field questions ahead of time and receive answers. It makes the whole White House Press Conference set-up rather disingenuous and, well, staged.

    Just ask former CBS Network journalist Sharyl Attkisson. Talking to Chris Stigall Talk Radio 1210 WPHT Philadelphia she said : “I wouldn’t surprised if sometimes there is that level of cooperation with some questions. If I need something answered from the White House and they won’t tell me, I’ll call our White House Correspondent. They’re friendlier with the White House Correspondents in general. So the White House Correspondent may ask Jay Carney or one of his folks about an issue and they will be told ‘ask that at the briefing and we’ll answer it.’ They want to answer it in front of everybody. They do know it’s coming and they’ll call on you. There’s that kind of coordination sometimes. I wouldn’t be shocked if there’s sometimes more coordination. I don’t think it’s everybody on every briefing, every day. I’m pretty sure it’s not. But I think people would be surprised at the level of cooperation reporters have in general with politicians.”

    Later in the interview Attkisson revealed she is writing a book that deals how stories are reported in the media. She said: “I’ve been wanting to write about the unseen influences on the media by coordinated, paid factions, whether they’re from political, corporate or other special interests, the tactics they use to manipulate the images we see, not just in the news but on Facebook, Wikipedia, or fake Twitter accounts. It’s become a way of life and I don’t think the public is aware of how much nearly everything you see today may be influenced, in some fashion, by a paid interest that wants you to think something.”

    Attkisson has had to stand tall in investigating White House corruption, having been subject to home espionage by what can only be presumed to be a faction of Team Obama. Ultimately she walked away from CBS earlier this month with her integrity intact.

    Then it was no surprise that at the time of writing a Google search revealed on its first page only one print media source (the New York Daily News) covering the story . Such is the power of the liberal media and it’s collusion with the Democratic Party.

    Anaya could have stood tall in this situation and insisted on sticking with her reporting of the news but she folded after being subject to exactly what pressures we don’t know. This is a Presidential administration that will turn the might of every government department against those who will not co-operate with them, an administration that is accelerating the death of true journalism in America.


The content of this website belongs to a private person, is not responsible for the content of this website.