Is this what gay-rights means?
November 11, 2008
OK, you lose the battle to get rights for a lifestyle and what do you do? You start killing people?????? I thought these were loving people who just wanted everyone to recognize them for love, not for being the danger they are???? Here is an article that my friend Carl sends me…first his comments:
Remember way back when, when the gays used to whine and cry, protesting that straights were nothing but gay-bashing, violent thugs and that gays were the “refined” peaceful sophisticates??
The worm has certainly turned, now that BamBam has succeeded in Bam-boozling the country…
Carl
======================
QUEERLY BELOVED
‘Gay’ threats target Christians over same-sex ‘marriage’ ban
‘Burn their f—ing churches, then tax charred timbers’
Posted: November 05, 2008
11:00 pm Eastern© 2008 WorldNetDaily
Decisions by voters in Florida, Arizona and California to join residents of 27 other states with constitutional protections for traditional marriage have prompted threats of violence against Christians and their churches.
“Burn their f—ing churches to the ground, and then tax the charred timbers,” wrote “World O Jeff” on the JoeMyGod blogspot today within hours of California officials declaring Proposition 8 had been approved by a margin of 52 percent to 48 percent. Confirmation on voter approval of amendments in Florida and Arizona came earlier.
The amendments in all three states essentially limit marriage to one man and one woman. In California, the measure states the only marriages “valid and recognized” in the state are those between one man and one woman.
Thirty states now have adopted marriage amendments
. However, in California, the vitriol appeared especially high since the state Supreme Court in May created same-sex marriage for homosexuals. Proposition 8 overruled the court decision, readopting the marriage
On a blog website, “Tread” wrote, “I hope the No on 8 people have a long list and long knives.”
Another contributor to the JoeMyGod website said, “While financially I supported the Vote No, and was vocal to everyone and anyone who would listen, I have never considered being a violent radical extremist for our equal rights. But now I think maybe I should consider becoming one. Perhaps that is the only thing that will affect the change we so desperately need and deserve.”
definition California votersadopted in 2000.
A contributor identifying himself as “Joe” said, “I swear, I’d murder people with my bare hands this morning.”
Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs for Liberty Counsel, called the statements “hate crimes” for their intent to create violence against someone based on their beliefs.
“This is not just a matter of some people blowing off steam because they’re not happy with a political outcome. This is criminal activity,” he said. “The homosexual lobby is always calling for ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’ and playing the role of victim. They claim to deplore violence and ‘hate.’ Here we have homosexuals inciting, and directly threatening, violence against Christians.”
On the “Queerty” website, “Stenar” asked, “Can someone in CA please go burn down the Mormon temples there, PLEASE. I mean seriously. DO IT.”
“I’m going to give them something to be f—ing scared of. … I’m a radical who is now on a mission to make them all pay for what they’ve done,” wrote “Jonathan.”
Liberty Counsel’s Barber said, “This is not free speech; these are ‘hate crimes’ under the existing definition. Imagine if Christian websites were advocating such violence against homosexuals. There’d be outrage, and rightfully so. It’d be national front-page news. Federal authorities should immediately investigate these threats and prosecute the perpetrators to the fullest extent of the law.”
On yet another site, “Americablog,” “scottinsf” wrote, “Trust me. I’ve got a big list of names of mormons and catholics that were big supporters of Prop 8. … As far as mormons and catholics … I warn them to watch their backs.”
“I hope they all rot in hell, those servants of a lying, corrupt devil! BAN RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM,” wrote Angelo.
One contributor went so far as to threaten to take out his frustrations on his own family.
“You want me to come back to Idaho for Christmas? Oh wait, my partner and I can’t share the same bed? We can’t show any affection or any outward sign of our love for each other? Well sorry family … no Uncle Adam and all his expensive gifts and delicious cooking for you. Your childrens’ presents will now be donations in their name to the equal rights organization of my choosing. As will their and your birthday presents, wedding presents, graduation presents, and everything else I give going forward.”
The writer continued, “Remember, I’m angry. And I’m strong from my years at the gym and really am ready to take my frustration out on someone or something.”
Barber said the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and “other leaders within the homosexual lobby” should call immediately for an end to such threats.
There were suggestions of a different type of violence, too.
“Hope the gay waiters at their hotel p—ed in all the drinks they served these cretins,” “Jake” wrote about protectors of traditional marriage.
“If you’re planning a heterosexual wedding in California … be prepared for picketers. Designate someone to watch the parking lot … You’re going to have lots of unexpected expenses. Add $500 to your budget for security. … Be prepared for the flowers not lasting to the reception or the tuxedos showing up two sizes too small or the music at the reception being a way too loud or the cake tasting a little funny,” stated another threat. “Be afraid. Be very afraid. We are everywhere.”
Another even listed addresses of Mormon facilities. Mormon, Catholic and other religious groups were active in supporting the marriage definition.
“I do not openly advocate firebombing or vandalism. What you do with the information is your own choice,” wrote Jeremy.
So I guess now San Fran will be a war zone?
Steve
Obama Bombshell–The Constitution still matters
November 11, 2008
Boy is this a powerful article or what? You may say, we’ve heard all of this before….Well to that I say…”you haven’t heard all of it until you view and listen to the info below..I’ve included one of the videos on the page along with the link below….I would say “Houston we have a problem”…….just read this explosive article from Worldnet Daily and Janet Porter…..you can listen to her November 10, 2008 program with Jerome Corsi and Phillip J Berg attorney discussing this matter by going to her website archives at Action2Faith here or look down below and click on listen or download the program from this article below:
November 10
Guests: Philip J. Berg (Berg v. Obama lawsuit) and Dr. Jerome Corsi (WorldNetDaily)
Topics: Citizenship issues surrounding President-elect Obama
Listen – Real Audio Download MP3
The Constitution still matters
Posted: November 11, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
© 2008
“Therefore do not fear them, ‘For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.’”–Matthew 10:26
Hold on. Just a minute. Not only was there no landslide and no mandate, there was no election. The Electoral College doesn’t even vote until Dec. 15. And there’s one thing that may stand in their way from affirming last Tuesday’s popular vote: the Constitution.
For the electors to uphold the Constitution that they’re sworn to do with their upcoming vote, they must first know for sure that the candidates meet the basic constitutional requirements for the office of president. He must be a natural-born citizen, at least 35 years old, and have at least 14 years of residency in these United States. That’s not a lot to ask. Pretty basic, really.
And pretty easy. Either you are a natural born citizen or you aren’t. Just deliver the original birth certificate and everyone can be on their way. That’s just what Phillip J. Berg has asked the United States Supreme Court to do. And the Supreme Court has asked for a response from Barack Obama along with the Democratic National Committee and Federal Elections Commission. And they have until Dec. 1 to respond.
Surely a guy couldn’t get this far without meeting the basic requirements, could he? Turns out … he could. Especially if the political party whose job it is to verify that their candidate is qualified has a conflict of interest – they want their guy to win.
That’s why there’s a clamor to see if those basic requirements are actually met.
Not extreme. Not fringe. Just constitutional. Obama says he’s qualified? Phil Berg, multiple legal suits and growing number of Americans say: “Prove it.”
Why is there any doubt?
Exhibit A: The Grandmother’s tape
I was in the delivery room in [Mombosa,] Kenya, when he was born Aug. 4, 1961.– Obama’s paternal grandmother
This is the link where Obama’s grandmother says Barack Obama is a native Kenyan.
Here’s the phone call where Obama’s grandmother says Obama was born in Kenya.
While politicians are known for it, grandmothers seldom lie.
Exhibit B: No birth certificate
Experts have called the Certificate of Live Birth posted online a forgery. Phil Berg reported on my Faith2Action radio program yesterday, “It’s clearly been altered,” which invalidates it, according to the document itself. Berg added that there is no indication even on this certificate as to specifically where the birth took place. And it turns out that Hawaiian law at the time allowed people to register for this non-hospital short form certificate (without a doctor’s signature) up to one year from the date of the child’s birth.
Exhibit C: The matter of Indonesian citizenship
Only Indonesian citizens could attend Indonesian schools at the time Barack Obama attended school in Indonesia where was registered as Barry Soetoro. His citizenship was listed as Indonesian and his religion as Islam. There was also no dual citizenship at the time.
If he was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather, he would have forfeited any U.S. citizenship he may have had, just as when a child is adopted in America, he or she becomes an American.
Exhibit D: Travel to Pakistan
U.S. citizens were prohibited from traveling to Pakistan in 1981 when Barack Obama made his visit – likely with a passport other than a U.S. passport.
Exhibit E: Immigration back to the U.S.
According to Phillip Berg on my radio program yesterday, if Barack Obama went through immigration as he re-entered the United States, he would have become “naturalized,” which also would not qualify him to become President. If he did not, said Berg, there is a likelihood that he is now an illegal alien – not even eligible to serve in the U.S. Senate. In fact, Berg suggested there has been no evidence that Barack Obama legally changed his name from Barry Soetoro.
In addition, according to U.S. law, from “Dec. 24, 1952, to Nov. 13, 1986,” a U.S. natural-born citizen at the time of Obama’s birth must be:
- A natural-born citizen;
- Born to two U.S. citizen parents; OR
- If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least 10 years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.
Since Barack Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama’s mother was only 18 at the time of his birth, she failed to meet the legal requirements of U.S. residency for at least five years after the age of 16.
Here’s the bottom line: either the Constitution matters or it doesn’t. And if we’re willing to ignore the constitutional requirements for the highest office in the land, what else are we willing to forgo? That part about free speech? Freedom of the press? Freedom of religion? If we are willing to shred one part of the Constitution, brace yourself to lose the rest.
Matthew 10:26 said it best: “Therefore do not fear them, ‘There is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.’” The question is whether it will come in time to avert a Constitutional crisis.
If you are a Democrat or Republican elector who cares about the Constitution even more than your party, please email me directly at jfolger@wnd.com. You are sworn to uphold the Constitution with your vote next month, and making sure the constitutional requirements are met is vital for you to uphold that oath.
Members of Congress also need to step up to the plate since they are the ones responsible to approve the vote of the Electoral College. They can be reached at: 202-224-3121. Seems to me a defender of the Constitution like Rep. Ron Paul would be a natural plaintiff in the case to verify that constitutional requirements have been met. Other members with courage to stand need to stand now or forever hold their peace.
Our Founding Fathers were right; the Constitution is still worth defending. Rise up and speak up while there is still time. Go Phil Berg’s www.ObamaCrimes.com and join the fight to defend the Constitution. Please forward this to everyone on your e-mail lists.
Hamas: We met Obama advisers in Secret !
November 11, 2008
Well I guess we can just read this and watch your blood pressure go up!
FROM WND’S JERUSALEM BUREAU
Hamas: We met Obama advisers
Terrorist group says campaign asked it to keep contact secret until after election
Posted: November 11, 2008
9:39 am Eastern
By Aaron Klein
JERUSALEM – Hamas held a meeting in the Gaza Strip several months ago with aides to President-elect Barack Obama, but the terror group was asked to keep the contacts secret until after last week’s elections, according to a senior Hamas official.
Ahmed Yousef, Hamas’ chief political adviser in Gaza, told the leading Al-Hayat Arabic-language newspaper Hamas has maintained regular communication with Obama aides that even continued during the past week.
“We were in contact with a number of Obama’s aides through the Internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza, but they advised us not to come out with any statements, as they may have a negative effect on his election campaign and be used by Republican candidate John McCain (to attack Obama),” Yousuf told Al-Hayat.
Yousuf said Hamas’s contact with Obama’s advisers was ongoing, adding that relations were maintained after Obama’s electoral victory last Tuesday.
Yousef could not be reached by WND for immediate comment. It wasn’t clear which Obama aides Hamas is claiming to have met in Gaza. Obama’s transition team did not immediately respond to a WND e-mail and phone message requesting comment.
Obama’s senior foreign policy adviser, Denis McDonough, told the Jerusalem Post today, “This assertion is just plain false.”
(This is not part of the Worldnet Daily article…but I’m inserting the interview with Ahmed Yousef, Hamas’ chief political adviser in Gaza with Worldnet Daily’s Aaron Klein and WABC’s radio John Batchelor Show):
Yousef gave WND a series of recent interviews in which he praised Obama as the leading candidate. Last week, he called Obama’s win a “historic victory” for the world and told WND that Hamas was sending a letter of congratulation to the president-elect.
Yousef said he believes an Obama administration will be more willing to engage in dialogue with Hamas.
He said Obama’s job will be to “restore America’s dignity in the world and put an end to the wars in the region.”
Yousef took the occasion to blast the policies of President Bush, commenting he hopes “that after January the Bush administration will not be heard from again.”
“We are sick of wars and conflict,” the Hamas official said.
Yousef seemed aware his comments may generate some negative publicity for Obama, but he said he feels it important to “reach out and to express our thoughts and engage.”
“I praised him six months ago, some people tried to use that against him. But I knew he would win. Like everyone else, we expected this important victory,” he said.
Yousef was referring to an interview he gave to WND and WABC Radio in April in which he praised Obama and then found his comments had fueled a firestorm of accusations in the presidential campaign.
In April, Yousef stated he hoped Obama would become president, comparing the Illinois senator to President John F. Kennedy.
“We like Mr. Obama, and we hope that he will win the election,” Yousef told WND at the time.
Also I’m including an article from 
about Obama adviser meeting with Hamas:
by Hana Levi Julianif (sLinkData != “”) document.write(“<a href=” + sLinkData + “Item.aspx?action=edit&item=128339>Edit</a><br>”);
(IsraelNN.com) Hamas is claiming close and ongoing ties with America’s upcoming Obama Administration, according to a report published Tuesday in the Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat. The relationship was kept under wraps until after the U.S. elections so as not to harm Obama’s election prospects. The U.S. has classified Hamas a terrorist organization.
The London-based publication interviewed Gaza-based political chief Ahmad Yousuf, advisor to Ismail Haniyeh, the head of the Hamas regime in Gaza, which seized power in a bloody coup d’etat in 2007. Yousuf declared that Hamas has been in regular contact with President-elect Barack Obama’s advisers for months.
“We were in contact with a number of Obama’s aides through the internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza,” the Hamas official was quoted as saying, “but they advised us not to come out with any statements, as that may have had a negative effect on his election campaign and be used by Republican candidate John McCain.”
Senior Obama foreign policy adviser Denis McDonough flatly denied the claim, telling The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday afternoon, “This assertion is just plain false.”
Contacts allegedly began during the presidential race and Yousuf expects the relationship to continue. He has also predicted that there will be “a change” in American foreign policy in the Middle East once Obama enters the White House. However, he said, the new president will focus more on domestic issues and pay less attention to the region “and the Palestinian issue” than did his predecessor.
Haniyeh sent Obama a telegram congratulating him on his “historic victory” in the U.S. elections, according to FrontPage Magazine.
My question here is ….what do these leaders of the US and other countries know that they aren’t telling us? You know my belief is that people can handle situations better if they know the truth as far as what is facing them, whether it is a crisis like these leaders are talking about or family crisis , health problems, etc. With all this fear being spread “worldwide ” a couple of things always come to my mind. One is what Benjamin Franklin said many years ago, “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.“ The more all this fear is spread around about terrorist and crisis happening..we are being lead to give up liberty for safety to our government and that has never turned out good for the citizens in history. The other quote that comes to mind is from the Bible speaking of the last days (of which I personally think we’re in the beginning of those days now): Luke 21 verses 25-26: And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26 Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
Isaiah 43:1 Hebrew Scripture Ring – Fear Not
“Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine.” in Hebrew
Enough of my ranting, here’s the article below from News from Jerusalem:
Warnings from world leaders all within 72 hours
“Australian PM Kevin Rudd – “Nuke strike would make 9/11 insignificant” and other weird warnings”
“Over the last 72 hours there has been a strange melange of cryptic messages leaked from world political leaders about what could be in store for America over the next few months.
These predictions of impending doom come from England, France, Australia and the United States.
Biden told the top Democratic donors that a “generated crisis” will develop within six months and Barak Obama will need the help of community leaders to control the population as unpopular decisions are made and Americans resist.(Like maybe Marital law and suspending the Constitution?)
Biden speaking at the fundraiser, “I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate, And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you – not financially to help him – we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”
Biden’s ominous language at the Seattle Sheraton are followed with statements by long time establishment insiders Colin Powell and Madeline Albright both say there is a massive crisis on the horizon and Biden was simply making a “statement in fact.”
“The problems will always be there and there’s going to be a crisis which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.” Powell told Meet the Press.
Lord West, adviser to Prime Minister Gordon Brown on national security says, “There is another great plot building up again and we are monitoring. It dipped slightly and is now rising again within the context of severe. The threat is huge. We have done all the things that we need to do, but the threat is building – the complex plots are building,”
Across the channel from England you have the French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner warning the press that he believes Israel will strike Iran before they can develope nuclear weapons completley ignoring the fact that the chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohammed ElBradei, said that Iran lacks the key components to produce an atomic weapon.
“The devastation that could be wreaked by one major nuclear weapons incident alone puts 9/11 and almost everything else [in] to the category of the insignificant,” Rudd said.
Why are there so many high level politicians around the world in a seemingly coordinated effort warning of huge threats and developing crisis’ that may include a nuclear device? Are they preparing the masses for an event or series of events that have been in the making for some time? Is the public being prepared for new and forming enemies with a potential to plunge the entire world into war?
—-end quote—
A number of notable public figures, to be sure; Biden, Rudd, Colin Powell, Matelaine Albright, Lord West and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner. Taken alone there are plenty of ready explanations, but within 72hrs.?
You can read the entire article here from News from Jerusalem
Steve Hilton
babybttrfly
Mike