Ivory Dome

Noam Chomsky is a widely known intellectual, political, activist, and critic of the foreign policy of the Government of the of the United States and other governments. Noam Chomsky describes himself as a libertarian socialist, a sympathizer of anarcho-syndicalism, and is considered to be a key intellectual figure within the Left wing of American politics.

Libertarian Socialist- Is a group of political philosophies that aim to create a society without political, economic or social hierarchies – a society in which all violent or coercive institutions would be dissolved, and in their place every person would have free, equal access to tools of information and production, or a society in which such coercive institutions and hierarchies were drastically reduced in scope.

This equality and freedom would be achieved through the abolition of authoritarian institutions and private property, in order that direct control of the means of production and resources will be gained by the working class and society as a whole. He’s a commie!

Anarcho-syndicalism -Is a branch of anarchism which focuses on the labour movement. Syndicalisme is a French word meaning “trade unionism” – hence, the “syndicalism” qualification. Anarcho-syndicalists view labour unions as a potential force for revolutionary social change, replacing capitalism and the State with a new society democratically self-managed by workers.  He’s a commie!

Left wing- Comprise those who prioritise (social) equality as a political end, in opposition to the right-wing who view this end (especially when accompanied by an increase in the power of the State) as a threat to individual/family/civil society liberties, and/or the continuance of inherited traditions. In general, the left-wing advocate a secular multicultural society. The term has been associated, in varying degrees, with Social liberalism (as opposed to Classical), American Liberalism and Canadian Liberalism, some forms of Populism and Deconstructive Unitarianism, Social Democracy, Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Syndicalism, Communalism, Communitarianism, Libertarian Socialism, Anarchism, Left-Libertarianism, Anti-colonialism, Green Politics, Progressivism, and the Religious Left.  He’s a commie!

He’s a commie, no wonder the red flag waivers at Panhandle Правда Squad , think him fascinating! I hear he has a commie video out there somewhere. Here is someone else about as fascinating as Chomsky I’m sure they will love. Same mentality at least.

One of the more damning aspects of the mult-cult paradise the Libs try so hard to make reality, is their insistence that no matter what country they come from, no matter what culture they practice, they should be treated as if they where good ol,  born and bred Americans.  As American as apple pie, and of the same allegiance as some he or she just rolled out of the dusty farm in Iowa.

Nothing I know of matches the relentless efforts of the leftist Elite when it comes to the tenacity through court judges, and certain other collaborators with in congress to put people of high risk to national security in jobs that offer them access to all manner of classified info. This has since 9-11 been particularly ture of any who are Muslim, Whether it is the military, military industry, or the highest levels of government, by law they have to be considered equal to all Americans in allegiance to this country. Even the right shares some blame in this as they help provide industry with cheap foreign labor to maximize the profit for CEO’s. (none of the savings of this cheap labor filter down to the tax payer) I could fill this post with examples but will start with the some of the latest examples and add others as they happen. This truly is a prime example of the insanity of the left and to a lesser degree the right.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,332225,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,311776,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,271205,00.html?sPage=fnc/specialsections/homelandsecurity

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330320,00.html

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/1/23/203153.shtml

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071221/NATION/676409066/1001

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=45842

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2007/11/shocker_hezboll.html

With the obvious exception of 1968 the American electoral scene has been spared the violence that nations like Pakistan are accustomed to come election time. Even after the turmoil of the 2000 recount the transfer of power ran smoothly and George Bush didn’t face the riots that greeted the election of Nicholas Sarkozy in last year’s French presidential election. In 2008 however the specter of violence has been rearing its ugly head with the candidacy of Barack Obama and the competitive Democratic presidential primary.  Former Virginia governor and Richmond mayor Douglas Wilder made this drastic threat on CBS with Bob Schiefer. Wilder proclaimed “If the superdelegates intervene and get in the way of it, and say, `Oh, no, we’re going to determine what’s best,’ there will be chaos at the convention…. And if you think 1968 was bad, you watch: 2008 will be worse.”  Source.

Barack Obama himself in a speech to a predominantly black audience at Hampton University on June 5, 2007, in the company of his radical minister, Jeremiah Wright, first raised the specter of the 1992 Los Angeles riots multiple times while addressing the disconnect between America and it’s black citizens. (Smoothly issuing orders as to what should happen if he is not elected.)

Yep, there remains no doubt about it the, ‘Elite” of the Democratic party want this. They have wanted, and worked hard for it, for a long time and there is a candidate more than qualified. But for some deeply buried, and disguised reason he won’t do. Only she has a debt to pay.

I wonder if the Elite, the “Superdelegates,” are sitting in some wretched room, among the shambles of Billary’s campaign, wringing their hands remembering the words of Sir Walter Scott? “Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive”  

This would be a good time to ensure you know, your 2nd ammendment rights.

 AFTER BATHING in the warm, fuzzy glow of the Mandela years, South Africans today are deeply demoralised people. The lights are going out in homes, mines, factories and shopping malls as the national power authority, Eskom – suffering from mismanagement, lack of foresight, a failure to maintain power stations and a flight of skilled engineers to other countries – implements rolling power cuts that plunge towns and cities into daily chaos.

Major industrial projects are on hold. The only healthy enterprise now worth being involved in is the sale of small diesel generators to powerless households but even this business has run out of supplies and spare parts from China.

The currency, the rand, has entered freefall. Crime, much of it gratuitously violent, is rampant, and the national police chief faces trial for corruption and defeating the ends of justice as a result of his alleged deals with a local mafia kingpin and dealer in hard drugs.

Newly elected African National Congress (ANC) leader Jacob Zuma, the state president-in-waiting, narrowly escaped being jailed for raping an HIV-positive woman last year, and faces trial later this year for soliciting and accepting bribes in connection with South Africa’s shady multi-billion-pound arms deal with British, German and French weapons manufacturers.

One local newspaper columnist suggests that Zuma has done for South Africa’s international image what Borat has done for Kazakhstan. ANC leaders in 2008 still speak in the spiritually dead jargon they learned in exile in pre-1989 Moscow, East Berlin and Sofia while promiscuously embracing capitalist icons – Mercedes 4×4s, Hugo Boss suits, Bruno Magli shoes and Louis Vuitton bags which they swing, packed with money passed to them under countless tables – as they wing their way to their houses in the south of France.

It all adds up to a hydra-headed crisis of huge proportions – a perfect storm as the Rainbow Nation slides off the end of the rainbow and descends in the direction of the massed ranks of failed African states. Eskom has warned foreign investors with millions to sink into big industrial and mining projects: we don’t want you here until at least 2013, when new power stations will be built.

More of what the liberal multi-cult press is trying so hard to bring here.

A top Hillary Clinton adviser on Saturday boldly predicted his candidate would lock down the nomination before the August convention by definitively winning over party insiders and officials known as superdelegates, claiming the number of state elections won by rival Barack Obama would be “irrelevant” to their decision.

Ickes said superdelegates must “exercise their (I wonder who the "their" is? Moveon.org? George Sorros? .) best judgment” about who can win the White House.

In essence, he argued the party’s 795 superdelegates (Connecticut Independent-Democrat Sen. Joe Lieberman recently was stripped of his superdelegate status) were in a better position to assess electability and suitability for the presidency than party regulars who will attend the national convention in late August as pledged delegates. …full story

——————————————————————–

This is so laughable, so full of irony. The frothing Elitist of the far left will now bring reality to the lies they slobbered and wailed about, during the Bush V. Gore election in Florida. Only now their rabid lies will fall on their own self admitted, unknowing and, illiterate underlings.

After all, only they can decide suitability for the Presidency. Seems there might be a tad more racism among the leftist Kings and Queen  of the grand ol’ ass party, than ever has been dared to be thunk! Just as with Bush v. Gore the majority is irrelevant. 

I wonder if a now, conservative supreme court vice the lib court during Florida, will decide who the dem candidate will be? I wonder if something like this will come out of the Dem convention? ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Al Qaeda’s latest display of terror has made its way onto the Internet, showing horrifying images of what appear to be prisoners in Iraq being doused with an inflammatory liquid and then burned alive.

The video, which appears to have been posted first on Google last December in an alleged anti-Al Qaeda Web film, shows five insurgents standing behind three blindfolded prisoners kneeling at the edge of a burning pit. ….. more

Again we see the truth and evil of Islam. We see what awaits us if we continue to allow the liberal, politically correct, "Religion of Peace propaganda". We see what awaits us if we don’t name the enemy, Islam.

Recently Imad Mughniyeh, who was one of the world’s most wanted fugitives, was killed in a car bomb in the Syrian capital Tuesday night. He was accused of masterminding attacks that killed hundreds of Americans in Lebanon, and hundreds if not thousands in other areas of the world in the 1980s.

The response from the religion of peace?

Thousands and thousands fill the streets swearing revenge against Israel and the US. Need more examples mostly of Muslims already massed in Europe?

Essentially not reported by the American MSM;

Muslim Youth Violence in Danish Cities Continues for 6th Night; 43 Arrested

COPENHAGEN, Denmark —  Groups of youths torched schools and cars in a sixth consecutive night of violence across Denmark, mostly in immigrant neighborhoods, police said Saturday. Forty-three people were arrested.

The spate of vandalism started last weekend and some believe it intensified with the reproduction of a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad in Danish newspapers Wednesday.

The unrest spread across Denmark, with youths torching dozens of cars and buildings and lobbing rocks at police and firefighters in Copenhagen, Aarhus, Ringsted, Slagelse and other cities, officials said. ….more

NANCY, France  —  Dozens of hooded youths attacked two police vehicles with metal bars, set fire to more than a dozen parked cars and torched a community center in northeast France, officials said Friday.

The rampage in a tough neighborhood in Saint-Dizier, about 120 miles east of Paris, revived memories of a wave of car burnings, vandalism and clashes with police by youths in 2005.

Authorities were not sure what sparked the violence by 30 to 40 youths late Thursday, which erupted as firefighters escorted by police entered the troubled Vertbois neighborhood in response to a report of a fire…more

Notice the PC thought police substitutions of "youths" instead of Islamic faithful?

The thought police use many words to try to minimize the reality of Islam but most often we see Islamic fundamentalism. What does the word fundamentalism mean?

From dictionary.com  as applied to Islam;

And what are some of the more fundamental aspects of Islam?

From the Qu’ran: – Regarding infidels (unbelievers), they are the Muslim’s "inveterate enemies" (Sura 4:101). Muslims are to "arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere" (Sura 9:5) for them. They are to "seize them and put them to death wherever you find them, kill them wherever you find them, seek out the enemies of Islam relentlessly" (Sura 4:90). "Fight them until Islam reigns supreme" (Sura 2:193). "Cut off their heads, and cut off the tips of their fingers" (Sura 8:12). More proof, and more.

The last, a speech by the Pope, set of violence and murder around the world, including shooting a Nun in the back four time’s. Remember the one where he said Islam is a religion of violence.

I guess you could add burn them alive in a pit. And much, much more. There are no innocent’s that adhere to the Qu’ran and the teachings of Mohammed (the name is spelled many ways).

The history of Islam from it’s very beginning has been a history of brutality (to its women and to any form of infidel) and extreme intolerance.  

Wake up people! It’s not about Iraq or Iran or Saudi, it’s about Islam. We will kill them or they will kill us.

Everyone be sure you know where your wives and daughters are. Oh, and you might want to lock away your cigars also.

A few posts back I was rightfully reminded that there is no such thing as a separation clause. There is an establishment clause. I quickly read back and to my embarrassment, it was true. I had repeated the lie of separation of church and state so relentlessly hammered down the throats of Americans by the MSM. I beat myself up about that for days afterward. Are they even getting to me, I thought? I, of course knew the proper wording and the true intent, but still I repeated the false words.  I had the need to purge this lie that had slipped from my mind and into the blogosphere.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; (shortened for relevance)

The words and meaning is clear, even in the less sophisticated vernacular of today.

I started to think about what lib appointed, commie, atheist Judge, legislating from the bench first used the word "separation".  It was neither lib or judge but Thomas Jefferson. 

The phrase "building a wall of separation between church and state" was written by Thomas Jefferson in a January 1, 1802  letter to the Danbury Baptist Association. But it didn’t take long to see that his meaning was intended to be a guarantee that people would be able to worship God in anyway they felt right. It was reaffirmation of the establishment clause. Jefferson said and believed this:

I have ever thought religion a concern purely between our God and our consciences, for which we were accountable to Him, and not to the priests. I never told my own religion, nor scrutinized that of another. I never attempted to make a convert nor wished to change another’s creed. I have ever judged of the religion of others by their lives for it is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read. — (My opinion, he was thinking and speaking of Christians only)

He also said;  Thus, for example, it is a religious duty to obey the laws of our country; the teacher of religion, therefore, must instruct us in those laws, that we may know how to obey them.

Well we certainly know that don’t happen any more. In fact, and correct me if wrong but political statements of any type can cause a church to lose it’s tax free status. Unless of course it’s from the Reverend Jackson or Sharpton.

Another early user of the term was James Madison. He said; "Strongly guarded is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States," Madison wrote, and he declared, "practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States." (again IMO speaking of Christianity)

So when did Separation become a road block to religion instead of a guarantee of freedom to worship?

The United States Supreme Court has referenced the separation of church and state metaphor more than 25 times, first in 1878. In Reynolds v. the US, the Court denied the free exercise claims of Mormons in the Utah territory who claimed polygamy was an aspect of their religious freedom. 

The Supreme Court recognized that under the First Amendment, the Congress cannot pass a law that prohibits the free exercise of religion. However it argued that the law prohibiting bigamy did not fall under this. The fact that a person could only be married to one person had existed since the times of King James 1 of England in English law on which United States law was based.

Although the constitution did not define religion, the Court investigated the history of religious freedom in the United States.

In the ruling, the court quoted a letter from Thomas Jefferson in which he stated, that there was a distinction between religious belief and action that flowed from religious belief. The former "lies solely between man and his God," therefore "the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions." The court argued that if we allowed polygamy, how long before someone argued that human sacrifice was a necessary part of their religion, and "to permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself."

The version of Jefferson’s Danbury letter which the Court used was in fact a mistaken transcription. While the Court quoted Jefferson as writing, "the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions", Jefferson’s original handwriting reads "the legitimate powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions." .

Polygamy right or wrong? A religious obligation, or an act against law? My opinion is that if all agree and there is no harm, that  prohibiting, the free exercise thereof, is exactly what happened to Reynolds. Being married to multiple willing participates hardly equates to human sacrifice. Yeah, lines should be drawn. Few would disagree. The difference, should be is the act harmful or not harmful.

The Court in 1878 believed the true spirit of the First Amendment was that Congress could not legislate against opinion but could legislate against action.

Today Prayer, Crosses, the Ten Commandments, Christmas, everything Christian is under attack if readily viewed by the public. All, are things that do no harm and are acts that violate, the "free exercise thereof clause".

It would seem that all of this has flowed from an incorrect reading of Jefferson’s letter, as these are not legislative acts by congress but illegitimate acts legislated by the judicial branch of government.

A mistake that modern secular, lib appointed, commie, atheist judges, seized upon and perpetuated. Illegitimate law that would never never have passed in congress.

Perhaps now, I won’t again repeat the lie of separation of Church and State again.