July 15, 2009

Take Action Immediately!! Democrats: "Protect Pedophiles or We Won't Pay Troops"

> URGENT "HATE CRIMES" PETITION! Please click, sign, and WE WILL FAX
> your personalized petition automatically to all 99 Senators, (saving
> you hours of labor)!
> We've already faxed 190,000 petitions to the full Senate...together
> with Worldnet Daily's 705,000 FedEx petitions, we have sent nearly
> 900,000...can you help reach 1 million? Even if you've signed our
> fax-petition before, you can sign again and we'll re-fax!
> What do homosexual rights have to do with Pentagon spending?
> Everything, if you're a Democrat trying to hide an unpopular
> "pedophile protection" bill from the American people. On Monday,
> Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) spoke on the floor of the U.S. Senate and
> argued essentially that since he couldn't get 60 honest votes to pass
> the "Punish Pastors, Protect Pedophiles" hate crimes S. 909 as a
> stand-alone bill, it should instead be attached as an amendment to S.
> 1390, the National Defense Authorization Act. Staffers for Senator
> Carl Levin (D-MI) then admitted the homosexual bill could be attached
> and voted on as early as Wednesday or Thursday. We may have just one
> more day to act.


> By hiding the hate bill as an amendment to Pentagon spending, moderate
> Democrats (and all but two Republicans) are faced with a difficult
> choice: either pass the Pedophile Protection Act or STOP PAYING OUR
> TROOPS serving overseas. Faced with a "poison pill" many moderates may
> falsely claim they have no choice but to swallow. We must demand they
> take a stand! We've identified 16 Democrats (plus the new Senator
> from Minnesota, Al Franken), who have NOT YET committed as co-sponsors
> to the hate bill. Unfortunately the two liberal RINO Republicans-In-
> Name-Only from Maine, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe have already
> co-sponsored the bill.
> https://secure.conservativedonations.com/pijn_hatecrimes_wnd/?a=2721

> So let's all telephone today all 18 of these "moderates" (plus Al
> (S.909) TO THE DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT (S. 1309) and don't punish
> our pastors for preaching the truth. Homosexual rights should have
> nothing to do with Pentagon spending.
> x
> Blanche Lincoln D- AR
> 202-224-4843
> x
> Byron L. Dorgan D- ND
> 202-224-2551
> x
> Herb Kohl D-WI
> 202-224-5653
> x
> James Webb D- VA
> 202-224-4024
> x
> Jon Tester D- MT
> 202-224-2644
> x
> Kay Hagan D- NC
> 202-224-6342
> x
> Kent Conrad D- ND
> 202-224-2043
> x
> Mark Pryor D- AR
> 202-224-2353
> x
> Mark Warner D- VA
> 202-224-2023
> x
> Max Baucus D- MT
> 202-224-2651
> x = undecided Democrat.
> x
> Michael Bennet D- CO
> 202-224-5852
> x
> Robert C. Byrd D- WV
> 202-224-3954
> x
> Russ Feingold D-WI
> 202-224-5323
> x
> Ted Kaufman D-DE
> 202-224-5042
> x
> Thomas Carper D- DE
> 202-224-2441
> x
> Tom Udall D- NM
> 202-224-6621
> x
> Al Franken D-MN
> 202-224-5641
> y
> Olympia Snowe R-ME
> 202-224-5344
> y
> Susan Collins R-ME
> 202-224-2523
> y = co-sponsoring Republican.
> But remember, 100 emails = 10 phone calls = 1 fax in political
> capital, since the Senate staffers must handle each paper and
> usually write a reply. So please join our automated fax-petition
> personalized petition.
> The Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings in late June on Senator
> Ted Kennedy's "Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act," (better
> known to conservatives as the "Pedophile Protection Act") but never
> voted on the stand-alone bill S.909. The bill broadly defines many
> "sexual orientations" requiring protection by federal prosecutors,
> endangering free speech.
> *Attorney General Eric Holder linked the bill to illegal immigrant
> rights, but "national origin" is already protected by 1994 law, and
> 75% of Hispanics oppose gay marriage. Holder also admitted Christian
> pastors would not be protected if assaulted by violent homosexuals.
> * Senator Leahy tried to link the bill to a shooting at the Holocaust
> museum, but "religion" is already protected by the 1994 hate-crimes
> bill, and shouldn't be tied to homosexual rights.
> * Senator Feinstein hailed Matthew Shepard's case, but ABC News 20/20
> quotes the lead investigator: "sexual orientation certainly wasn't the
> motive in [Shepard's] homicide.
> Even if mark-up amendments are permitted (which can be easily deleted
> in conference), the forthcoming S.909 will mirror a House bill H.R.
> 1913, already passed 249-175 along strict party lines, which makes
> "sexual orientation," "gender," and "gender identity" into
> federally-protected classes under the law, and codifies federal
> protection of up to 547 types of sexually deviant behaviors,
> including:
> * Incest - sex with one's offspring (a crime, of course)
> * Necrophilia - sexual relations with a corpse, also a crime
> * Pedophilia - sex with an underage child, another crime
> * Zoophilia - bestiality, a crime in numerous states
> * Voyeurism - a criminal offense in most states
> * Fronteurism - a man rubbing against an unknown woman's buttocks
> * Coprophilia - sexual arousal from feces
> * Urophilia - sexual arousal from urine
> Attempts by House Republicans to add amendments stating "pedophilia is
> not protected as a sexual orientation" were specifically blocked and
> defeated by House Democrats. Lesbian Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin
> (D-WI) expressed opposition to excluding pedophiles from the bill, and
> Democrats voted with her to strike any child-protection amendment. She
> claimed that pedophiles would not be defined within "sexual
> orientation," but wouldn't put that in writing, and refused to define
> that phrase "sexual orientation," which Congressman Steve King (R-IA)
> said will include all 547 sexual deviances listed in the American
> Psychiatric Association's DSM-III manual of clinical psychoses,
> including pedophilia, so now thanks to most Democrats, child molesters
> will be protected by federal law.
> In response on the House floor, Congressman Alcee Hastings (D-FL) not
> only admitted it would, but defended that all 547 psychoses SHOULD be
> defended by this new law, saying, "This bill addresses our resolve to
> end violence based on prejudice and to guarantee that all Americans
> regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual
> orientation, gender identity, or disability or all of these 'Philias'
> and fetishes and 'isms' that were put forward need not live in fear
> because of who they are. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this
> rule."
> Not only will sexually deviant behaviors gain legal protection, this
> legislation also lays the legal foundation to investigate, prosecute
> and persecute pastors, youth pastors, Bible teachers, and anyone else
> whose speech and thought is based upon and reflects the truths found
> in the Bible. How will this legislation over-rule the First Amendment?


> S. 909 broadly defines "intimidation," thus a pastor's sermon could be
> considered "hate speech" if heard by an individual who then acts
> aggressively against persons based on any "sexual orientation." The
> pastor could be prosecuted for "conspiracy to commit a hate crime" or
> for "inciting violence against gays" simply by quoting the Bible in
> church. And the First Amendment won't automatically protect pastors,
> since speech accused of "inciting violence" is not protected, and is
> punishable, under precedent of Supreme Court rulings. In 1993
> Wisconsin v. Mitchell, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a "hate speech"
> law providing enhanced punishments for violent crimes based on racial
> motives as revealed by speech of the accused, (which would now apply
> broadly to punish any "anti-gay motives" in the speech of accused
> pastor "co-conspirators.") But pastor, if a crazy person in your
> audience commits a crime against a heterosexual, don't worry, you'll
> get a comparative discount in your prison time.
> Any public prayer against the sin of homosexuality could be construed
> as "inciting violence" by easily offended listeners, especially if
> those prayers are offered "in Jesus name." When I served our country
> as a former Navy Chaplain, for example, I was told in writing by Chief
> of Chaplains Rear-Admiral Louis Iasiello, that "any chaplain's
> continued insistence on ending public prayers 'in Jesus' name'.could
> reasonably tend to denigrate those with different forms of faith."
> His policy prohibiting prayers "in Jesus name" was enforced against me
> at court-martial, before it was later rescinded by Congress in 2006.
> But this year I've already been falsely accused of "inciting violence"
> because I quoted verbatim from Psalm 109 in my public prayers, (for
> which secular activist Mikey Weinstein literally requested an FBI
> investigation against me!) Just imagine more anti-Christian
> aggression by law enforcement officials AFTER this hate-crimes bill
> becomes law.
> As a former Navy Chaplain who was punished (in writing, three times)
> for quoting the Bible in chapel during optionally-attended worship, I
> know exactly how they'll come after us. The enemies of religious
> liberty will simply declare certain gospel phrases "hateful" and
> "offensive" like my commanding officer who punished me for quoting
> John 3:36 in chapel, and was supported by government lawyers for
> "protecting" easily offended listeners from the "offensive" gospel of
> salvation through Jesus Christ.
> Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) agrees with me, saying pastors,
> rabbis, or imams could be charged with encouraging or inducing a "hate
> crime" if they preach against homosexuality. "Every preacher of the
> gospel, unless you cut out parts of it; every imam who mentions
> anything with regard to sexual immorality - they could be pursued,
> and in other countries they have been," says Gohmert. (Congressmen
> Gohmert is my personal advocate, with whom I preached last year at a
> pro-faith rally in Texas...and we both agree the gospel of freedom
> from sin really is "love speech" not "hate speech.")
> Hate crimes laws protecting homosexuals from criticism are already
> silencing pastors in Norway, where these dangerous laws specifically
> empower law enforcement officials to prosecute "intimidation" of
> homosexuals. For example, Congressman Gohmert warned "I was talking
> to a guy from Norway who was telling me that people are even afraid to
> say Mary was a virgin, because just bringing up sexuality at all can
> raise problems with law enforcement."
> In Sweden, Pastor Ake Green received a one-month jail sentence last
> year under a Swedish "hate crimes" law that forbids criticism of those
> who participate in homosexual behavior. The Goeta Appeals Court later
> overturned the decision. The government demanded the pastor be
> punished by appealing the case to the Swedish Supreme Court, which
> ruled the law unconstitutional. Yet here in America, the
> Reid-Kennedy-Obama trio is pushing to pass and enforce this same type
> of "anti-free speech" law, despite their acknowledgment that any such
> enforcement would be unconstitutional in America too. (They why pass
> the bill in the first place?)
> In Canada, where "hate crimes" laws already passed, the Alberta Human
> Rights Tribunal actively forbid evangelical pastor Stephen Boisson
> from expressing his moral opposition to homosexuality. The tribunal
> also ordered Boisson to pay $5,000 "damages for pain and suffering"
> and apologize to the "human rights" activist who filed the complaint.
> His crime? In 2002, the pastor wrote a letter to the editor of his
> local newspaper in which he denounced the homosexual agenda as
> "wicked" and stated that: "Children as young as five and six years of
> age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically
> damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school
> system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights." The
> Canadian government tribunal ordered the Christian pastor to "cease
> publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches,
> or on the internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and
> homosexuals." (This "re-education commission" reminds me of Big
> Brother from Orwell's 1984.)
> Can't happen in America? It already has. In 2004 my friend Michael
> Marcavage was arrested along with ten other Christians (including two
> elderly grandmothers), and charged with violating Pennsylvania's "hate
> crimes" laws, because they carried signs conveying God's love at a Gay
> Pride rally. One member of "The Philadelphia Eleven," Arlene
> Elshinnawy, 75 year-old grandmother of three, was holding a sign:
> "Truth is hate to those who hate the truth," before she was hauled off
> to jail by police officers. They were literally threatened with 50
> years in jail for preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ on a public
> sidewalk, because it offended gays. That hate crimes law was so
> outrageous it was later found unconstitutional by the Pennsylvania
> Supreme Court, but now Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama want to pass
> essentially that same discredited law nationwide.
> Thank you for reading our lengthy analysis. If you've read this far,
> we must agree, so now please forward this content widely to other
> pro-faith friends, and to pastors in all 50 states.
> God Bless you, in Jesus' name,


> Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt
> For media interviews, or to invite "Chaps" to
> speak to your church or crowd, select here.
> P.S. Time is urgent! The full Senate could vote any day to pass S.
> 909. Select and sign today, & we will forward your name immediately.
> Please don't wait another minute. Life, Liberty, and Jesus are too
> important to be banned by Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, and Barack Obama.
> Disclaimer: The views of Chaplain Klingenschmitt, who was honorably
> but involuntarily discharged from the Navy in 2007 after facing
> court-martial for praying "in Jesus name" in uniform, (but was later
> vindicated by Congress), are his own personal views, not the views of
> any political party, government, or organization.

Orders revoked for soldier challenging prez

Bombshell: Orders revoked for soldier challenging prez
Major victory for Army warrior questioning Obama's birthplace
Posted: July 14, 2009
9:53 pm Eastern

Chelsea Schilling and Joe Kovacs
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Dr. Orly Taitz

A U.S. Army Reserve major from Florida scheduled to report for
deployment to Afghanistan within days has had his military orders
revoked after arguing he should not be required to serve under a
president who has not proven his eligibility for office.

His attorney, Orly Taitz, confirmed to WND the military has rescinded
his impending deployment orders.

"We won! We won before we even arrived," she said with excitement. "It
means that the military has nothing to show for Obama. It means that
the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate –
and they cannot fight it. Therefore, they are revoking the order!"

She continued, "They just said, 'Order revoked.' No explanation. No
reasons – just revoked."

A hearing on the questions raised by Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, an
engineer who told WND he wants to serve his country in Afghanistan, was
scheduled for July 16 at 9:30 a.m.

Join the petition campaign to make President Obama reveal his
long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!

"As an officer in the armed forces of the United States, it is [my]
duty to gain clarification on any order we may believe illegal. With
that said, if President Obama is found not to be a 'natural-born
citizen,' he is not eligible to be commander-in-chief," he told WND
only hours after the case was filed.

"[Then] any order coming out of the presidency or his chain of command
is illegal. Should I deploy, I would essentially be following an
illegal [order]. If I happened to be captured by the enemy in a foreign
land, I would not be privy to the Geneva Convention protections," he

The order for the hearing in the federal court for the Middle District
of Georgia from U.S. District Judge Clay D. Land said the hearing on
the request for a temporary restraining order would be held Thursday.

Want to turn up the pressure to learn the facts? Get your signs and
postcards asking for the president's birth certificate documentation

Cook said without a legitimate president as commander-in-chief, members
of the U.S. military in overseas actions could be determined to be "war
criminals and subject to prosecution."

He said the vast array of information about Obama that is not available
to the public confirms to him "something is amiss."

"That and the fact the individual who is occupying the White House has
not been entirely truthful with anybody," he said. "Every time anyone
has made an inquiry, it has been either cast aside, it has been
maligned, it has been laughed at or just dismissed summarily without
further investigation.

"You know what. It would be so simple to solve. Just produce the
long-form document, certificate of live birth," he said.

Cook said he was scheduled to report for duty tomorrow, on July 15, to
deploy to Afghanistan as part of President Obama's plan to increase
pressure of insurgent forces there.

He told WND he would be prepared for a backlash against him as a
military officer, since members of the military swear to uphold and
follow their orders. However, he noted that following an illegal order
would be just as bad as failing to follow a legal order.

Before news of the orders being revoked were reported, MSNBC anchor
Keith Olbermann tonight called Cook a "jackass" and Taitz a "conwoman,"
as he labeled both of them the "worst persons in the world." He flayed
the soldier as "an embarrassment to all those who have served without

Named as defendants in the case are Col. Wanda Good, Col. Thomas
Macdonald, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Obama, described as
"de facto president of the United States."

According to the court filing, Cook affirmed when he joined the
military, he took the following oath: "I, Stefan Frederick Cook, do
solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and
that I will obey the orders of the president of the United States and
the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the
regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

According to the claim, "Plaintiff submits that it is implicit though
not expressly stated that an officer is and should be subject to
court-martial, because he will be derelict in the performance of his
duties, if he does not inquire as to the lawfulness, the legality, the
legitimacy of the orders which he has received, whether those orders
are specific or general."

The military courts offer no option for raising the question, so he
turned to civilian courts to consider "a question of paramount
constitutional and legal importance: the validity of the chain of
command under a president whose election, eligibility, and
constitutional status appear open to serious question."

"Barack Hussein Obama, in order to prove his constitutional eligibility
to serve as president, basically needs only produce a single unique
historical document for the Plaintiff's inspection and authentication:
namely, the 'long-form' birth certificate which will confirm whether
Barack Hussein Obama was in fact born to parents who were both citizens
of the United States in Honolulu, Hawaii, in or about 1961," explains
the complaint.

Taitz said she will attend the hearing to amend the temporary
restraining order to an injunction because more members of the military
have joined the cause.

"We are going to be asking for release of Obama's records because now
this completely undermines the military. It revoked this order, but it
can come up with another order tomorrow. It can come up with orders for
other people," she said. "Am I going to be flying around the country
1,000 times and paying the fees every time they issue an order?"

Taitz said the issue "must be resolved immediately," and she will
continue working to ensure Obama proves he is eligible for office.

"We're going to be asking the judge to issue an order for Obama to
provide his vital records to show he is legitimately president," she
said. "We're going to say, we have orders every day, and we'll have
revocations every day. This issue has to be decided."

She said there cannot be any harm to the president if he is
legitimately holding office.

"If he is legitimate, then his vital records will prove it," Taitz
said. "If he is illegitimate, then he should not have been there in the
first place."

Asked what this decision means for every other serviceman who objects
to deployment under a president who has not proven he is eligible for
office, Taitz responded:

"Now, we can have each and every member of the military – each and
every enlistee and officer – file something similar saying 'I will not
take orders until Obama is legitimately vetted.'"

Multiple questions have been raised about what that would mean to the
2008 election, to the orders and laws Obama has signed and other
issues, including whether he then is a valid commander-in-chief of the

Press Secretary Robert Gibbs refused to confirm the authenticity of the
alleged Jan. 24, 2009, letter from President Obama to his purported
place of birth, Kapi'olani Medical Center. His remarks begin at the
55:27 mark of the press briefing. (Click photo to view)

Obama has maintained he was born in Hawaii, and at least one hospital,
Honolulu's Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women and Children, claims it
received a letter from the president declaring his birth there.

As WND reported, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs refused to
confirm that the letter which was used by the hospital to solicit
donations is, in fact, a real correspondence.

When WND exposed doubts about the authenticity of the letter because it
was created with HTML computer code and had no presidential or White
House seal, the hospital which for nearly six months proudly declared
Obama was born at its facility commenced an active cover-up, hiding
that White House letter from its original webpage and refusing to
confirm such a letter actually exists.

WND also reported that just within the last week, at least two reports
have cited Obama's birth in Kenya. Wikipedia also was found to have
been reporting on Obama's birth in Kenya, before a series of scrubs
placed his birth in Honolulu.

And that came on the heels of several online information sites changing
the president's supposed birthplace from one hospital in Hawaii to
another, after WND broke the news of the letter said to be from the
White House.