Sixteen people banned from entering the UK are “named and shamed” by the Home Office.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said she decided to make public the names of 16 people banned since October last year so others could better understand what sort of behaviour Britain was not prepared to tolerate.

The list includes hate preachers, anti-gay protesters and a far- right US talk show host.

Dr Yunis Al-Astal
Hamas MP and dean of Sharia studies at The Islamic University of Gaza. Al Astal is claimed to have decreed that global Islam has to take over America’s dominance. He also decreed that killing Jews was relevant in our times.

Mike Guzofsky
Jewish militant, also known as Yekutiel Ben Yaakov. Hosted the internet TV show “Voice of Judea” and is considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by fermenting terrorist behaviour and provoking others to commit terrorist acts.

Stephen Donald Black
American white nationalist and founder of the Stormfront internet forum. He was a grand wizard in the Ku Klux Klan and a member of the American Nazi Party in the 1970s. He was convicted in 1981 for attempted armed overthrow of the Dominican government.

Eric Gliebe
President of the racist record label Resistance Records, with sales of $1m a year and whose groups promote the idea the US should be divided by race, sexual preference and religious creed.

Artur Ryno and Pavel Skachevsky
Last year a Russian court sentenced the group of skinheads led by Ryno and Skachevsky to between six and twenty years in prison. The court issued the ruling on the basis of the jury verdict, which found the seven group members guilty of 20 racially-motivated murders and 12 attacks.

Wadgy Abd El Hamied Mohamed Ghoneim
Muslim cleric suspected of terrorist ties. Deported from the US in 2004. He said: “I came to this country in peace. I did not come here to scare anybody.”

Abdullah Qadri Al Ahdal
Preacher considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs and fostering hatred that might lead to inter-community violence.

Michael Alan Weiner
Michael Alan Weiner, better known by his pseudonym Michael Savage, is an American radio host, author, and conservative political commentator. Some, including Savage himself, have characterized his views as conservative nationalism. He claims that liberalism and same-sex marriage are degrading American culture.

Safwat Hijazi
Islamic preacher. Issued a fatwa sanctioning “the killing of any Jews who visit Egypt or any other Islamic country.” He said later it was only “in reference to Israeli soldiers”.

Amir Siddique
Preacher. Considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by fomenting terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs.

Abdul Ali Musa
Muslim activist and director of Masjid Al-Islam in US. Member of the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought (ICIT) and a well-known speaker around the world. His name was previously Clarence Reams, and he was born in Arkansas in 1945. Considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by fomenting and glorifying terrorist violence.

Samir Al Quntar
Samir Kuntar is a Lebanese militant and a former member of the Palestine Liberation Front. In 1979, at the age of 16, he participated in the attempted kidnapping of an Israeli family in Nahariya that resulted in the deaths of four Israelis and two of his fellow kidnappers. He spent nearly three decades in prison before being released on July 16, 2008 as part of an Israel-Hezbollah prisoner swap.

Nasr Javed
Kashmiri militant group leader. Considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs.

Fred Waldron Phelps Snr and Shirley Phelps-Roper
American pastor and leading spokesman of Westboro Baptist Church. Considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by fostering hatred that might lead to inter-community violence in the UK. The 79-year-old and his daughter are barred for their anti-gay comments.
However, it is important to note that communists, dictators, black liberation theologists and preachers, black nationalists, black panther groups, national socialists and other statists on the left are all welcome to enter.  Just no right-wingers!  I was also surprised to see that Muslims were actually included in an English list… It appears that Gordon Brown’s administration is taking a page right out of Obama’s playbook!

Does this mean that Obama is banned for not advocating gay marriage either?

Why would you only single out a particular individual on the radio?  Are there not plenty of others that hold those same views?  And why would you bar someone from the country who just has an opinion that is different from other peoples’.  If he feels that gay marriage is degrading American culture than what is the big deal – is he not allowed to feel that way?  Can he not believe what he wants as long as he is not violent?  He doesn’t incite violence either… This sounds more fascist to me than anything else.  England says you must hold a particular view/opinion or else!

Paging Winston Churchill, England is about to pull another Neville Chamberlain – unfortunately, so is the United States!

Bill Ayers, Reverend Write, Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, Ted Turner and Jane Fonda are all on their way to England as we speak – they will be welcomed with open arms!  I heard Code Pink is piloting the plane.

Share on Facebook

To add insult to injury and as if the “lovely” Janet Napolitano hadn’t done enough already, she suddenly has a hankering for crow.  I was also thinking foot, since she likes to open her mouth and insert accordingly.

Sunday,  on CNN, Napolitano tried explaining that the DHS doesn’t see these vets as threats.  The DHS sees them as saps who don’t know any better than to fall into extremist traps:

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on Sunday portrayed veterans as victims – not perpetrators – of right-wing extremism as she sought to combat the political controversy arising out of an April 14 Homeland Security memo warning that returning soldiers could be ripe for domestic terrorism participation.

“The report is not saying that veterans are extremists.  Far from it,” Napolitano said on CNN’s State of the Union. “What it is saying is returning veterans are targets of right-wing extremist groups that are trying to recruit those to commit violent acts within the country. We want to do all we can to prevent that.”

So Janet feels that the men and women who have the strength, honor, and dignity to go overseas to fight our enemies lose that heart and determination, as well as character, when they return and are liable to fall prey to all those right-wing extremists?

The absurdity is the fact that there are no “right-wing extremists” as this report claims nor are conservatives usually the type of people who protest or get in other peoples’ faces, as we have seen from those on the left.  Conservatives are usually just hard working, faith-based Americans who are known as the “silent-majority.”

The report was nowhere near credible.  It truly was just an example of partisan “hackery.”  I feel as though a five-year-old could have written that report using better English, grammar, elaboration, and at least some citations for heaven’s sake!

Both political parties have one issue voters, that’s been the case for years and as much as I don’t agree with any side only voting on one issue, I will not call them extreme, some other words maybe… but not extreme and certainly nothing near a threat to society.

The report presumes that veterans have a predisposition to become violent extremists because of the difficulties that they have “reintegrating into their communities.”  It’s the latest corollary to the every-Vietnam-vet-is-a-powderkeg belief and it makes me sick to my stomach.  I know a lot of great men who served in Vietnam, Korea, Desert Storm and Iraq/Afghanistan and I would never classify them as anything less than gentlemanly, friendly and a lot of fun!

With discriminatory reports coming out of DHS and the Secretary of Homeland Security, it should come as no surprise to anyone that a Federal lawsuit has now been filed:

The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced last week that it filed a federal lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. The lawsuit claims that her Department’s “Right-wing Extremism Policy, ” as reflected in the recently publicized Intelligence Assessment, “Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment, ” violates the civil liberties of combat veterans as well as American citizens by targeting them for disfavored treatment on account of their political beliefs. Click here to read the complaint filed by the Thomas More Law Center.

Napolitano tried to blunt the public furor over the Report by a half-hearted apology to veterans, but she left out of her apology all of the other Americans her Department has targeted because of their political beliefs. In fact, officials in DHS now admit that their internal office of civil liberties objected to the language in the extremism report, but the Department issued it anyway.

Janet Napolitano is lying to the American people when she says the Report is not based on ideology or political beliefs. In fact, her report would have the admiration of the Gestapo and any current or past dictator in the way it targets political opponents. This incompetently written intelligence assessment, which directs law enforcement officials across the country to target and report on American citizens who have the political beliefs mentioned in the report, will be used as a tool to stifle political opposition and opinions. It will give a pretext for opponents of those Americans to report them to police as right-wing extremists and terrorists. You can imagine what happens then.

The Report specifically mentions the following political beliefs that law enforcement should use to determine whether someone is a “right-wing extremist”:

• Opposes restrictions on firearms
• Opposes lax immigration
• Opposes the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs
• Opposes continuation of free trade agreements
• Opposes same-sex marriage
• Has paranoia of foreign regimes
• Fear of Communist regimes
• Opposes one world government
• Bemoans the decline of U.S. stature in the world.
• Upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India

. . . and the list goes on.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show host, Michael Savage, Gregg Cunningham (President of the pro-life organization Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, Inc. (CBR)), and Iraqi War Marine veteran Kevin Murray. The Law Center claims that Napolitano’s Department (DHS) has violated the First and Fifth Amendment Constitutional rights of these three plaintiffs by attempting to chill their free speech, expressive association, and equal protection rights. The lawsuit further claims that the Department of Homeland Security encourages law enforcement officers throughout the nation to target and report citizens to federal officials as suspicious right-wing extremists and potential terrorists because of their political beliefs.

The Obama Administration has declared war on American patriots and our Constitution. The Report even admits that the Department has no specific information on any plans of violence by so-called “right-wing extremists.” Rather, what they do have is the expression of political opinions by certain individuals and organizations that oppose the Obama administration’s policies, and this expression is protected speech under the First Amendment.

The Law Center is asking the court to declare that the DHS policy violates the First and Fifth Amendments, to permanently enjoin the Policy and its application to the plaintiffs’ speech and other activities, and to award the plaintiffs their reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for having to bring the lawsuit.

Share on Facebook

Janet Napolitanos’ DHS last week issued a report that basically said returning veterans were being categorized as right wing extremists and possible domestic terror threats. The report noted U.S. service members specifically.
However, veterans groups and ordinary citizens were outraged the we in uniform would be tagged as right wing extremists. After all, it is those young men and women who are out there protecting freedom and liberty. Who is Ms Napolitano to label us anything less than proud Americans! So late this week she changed here tune after the fall out:

The head of homeland security said Sunday she regrets that some people took offense over a report warning that right-wing extremist groups were trying to recruit disgruntled troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

But Secretary Janet Napolitano added that “a number of groups far too numerous to mention” want to commit domestic terrorism attacks and are looking for new recruits.

She told a cable news network the warning report that went out to American law enforcement agencies was consistent with reports that were issued before.

“Here is the important point. The report is not saying that veterans are extremists. Far from it. What it is saying is returning veterans are targets of right-wing extremist groups that are trying to recruit those to commit violent acts within the country. We want to do all we can to prevent that,” she said.

Notice she did not take back the original asessment, but simply tries to clarify the position. But I guess we should be glad this is an “apologetic” administration. So I guess we still know how they really feel.

Share on Facebook

I guess she should consider herself an extremist with that gun – anyone who practices or believes in the 2nd amendment was placed in that 9 page report from the DHS a couple of days ago.  Conveniently, this all came out right before the nationwide Tea Party protests.

Napolitano is now getting a lot of flak for the reprehensible language in the report with regard to veterans returning home from war, who have fought to keep us free and safe from further terrorist attacks.  Instead of focusing all that energy on veterans and stating that they may be susceptible to right-wing extremism and domestic/homegrown terrorism, maybe she should focus on those who really do practice this type of violence against the United States and the West in general.  I think focus should be kept on Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela; who all seem to be acting together these days.

However, Cuba will now become the new vacation hot-spot under this administration; North Korea will receive a strongly worded letter from the U.N., more money, and food supplies for their patterned behavior; Iran will get a visit without preconditions, continue it’s collection of uranium, and production of a nuclear facility; Russia and China will continue to work behind the scenes, tap our grids, buy defense materials and missiles, and dump our dollar; while Hugo Chavez will continue to espouse tons of hot air and pontificate upon his hatred of the evil U.S. empire.  But then again, we are talking about the woman who could not refer to the real and very simple term “terrorism,” rather calling it a “man-made disaster;” and the war on terror is the “Overseas Contingency Operation.”

Republicans and officials associated with Veteran Affairs and Groups have blasted the Homeland Security Head and rightly so.

“To characterize men and women returning home after defending our country as potential terrorists is offensive and unacceptable,” said Boehner, R-Ohio.

[...]

David Rehbein, wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano expressing concern with the assessment, which made its way into the mainstream press after conservative bloggers got wind of the analysis.

Rehbein called the assessment incomplete and said it lacked statistical evidence. He said the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing by military veteran Timothy McVeigh, cited in the report, was one instance of a veteran becoming a domestic terrorist.

“To continue to use McVeigh as an example of the stereotypical ‘disgruntled military veteran’ is as unfair as using Osama bin Laden as the sole example of Islam,” Rehbein said in the April 13 letter.

[...]

“The department is engaging in political and ideological profiling of people who fought to keep our country safe from terrorism, uphold our nation’s immigration laws, and protect our constitutional right to keep and bear arms,” said Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla.,

[...]

Texas Rep. Lamar Smith accused the department of painting “law-abiding Americans, including war veterans, as ‘extremists.’”

[...]

Indiana Rep. Steve Buyer, the ranking Republican on the House Veterans’ Affairs committee, said it was “inconceivable” that the administration would consider military veterans a potential terrorist threat.

Upon hearing of the backlash, Napolitano did not initially apologize and she defended the assessment issued by the agency earlier this week:

“Let me be very clear — we monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States,” Napolitano said in a statement. “We don’t have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence.”

But she seemed to change her tune and become more apologetic a day later when the outcry reached its climax:

“To the extent veterans read it as an accusation … an apology is owed,” she said during an on-air interview on FOX News Thursday, a day after veterans’ groups and members of Congress blasted her for the report, which they said libeled members of the armed forces.

“This was an assessment, not an accusation,” Napolitano continued. “It was limited to extremists those who seek to commit violence within the United States. And all this was meant to do was to give law enforcement what we call ‘situational awareness.’”

“The last thing I want to do is offend or castigate all veterans. To the contrary, let’s meet and clear the air,” she said.

“I’m not running away from it, but I will say it was an assessment. It was not an accusation, and quite frankly, these are products that are produced and shared with law enforcement on a routine basis.”

Unfortunately, she still used language that did not completely denounce the assessment or the statements outright.

To make matters worse and to really grasp the partisanship, hypocrisy, and double standards that make up this administration of ideologues, we found out that earlier today on Morning Joe, Napolitano and her spokespeople would only allow the interviewer to ask one question in regard to the veteran issue within the DHS report.

Interview today on “Morning Joe” with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, under this subject line: “Administration Permits Only One Question, No Follow-Ups About Extremism Report.”

Today the Secretary went on Morning Joe but they were only allowed to ask one question.

“Apparently, when the Democrats promise an open administration, they really only mean open as long as you ask the questions they want asked and no follow-ups on controversial topics that everyone is reporting on,” staffer Joe Pounder wrote in an email.

My sentiments exactly Joe!  For the life of me, I can’t understand why Democrats and Liberals cannot witness their own hypocrisy.  They sat there and complained about Bush for 8 years stating that he was “hiding” things, was the least transparent president, and that he was violating our rights by being big brother and tapping wires.  However, Obama is continuing those policies and even expanding them.  He doesn’t allow the press into certain events, picks out the questions that the press is allowed to ask him, yells at and demeans reporters who ask something outside of the box, and his administration apparently can only be asked certain questions – meaning you don’t get the whole entire truth and you don’t have all the freedoms and liberties associated with knowing what is going on…”Change we can believe in.”/Sarc.

Share on Facebook