http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=Behind Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:07:20 -0400 Liveleak http://edge.liveleak.com/80281E/u/u/ll2/logo.gif http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=Behind Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:20:24 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9e0_1371680115 Brockk Ballistic, Beats Christian Ministry Workers With Her Purse Following Church vs. State Debate A woman who described herself as a teacher of the Constitution was caught on video clashing with members of a controversial Christian organization. Bradlee Dean, a figure TheBlaze has covered in the past, founded "You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International," a ministry that delivers assemblies and speeches in public schools. Members of this organization recently engaged a woman in a contentious conversation - one that led her to physically attack the Christian activists. Photo Credit: YouTube The incident, which was captured on video and later released by the group, shows the volatile exchange that unfolded at a 7-11 gas station in Florida. The debate erupted as Dean's ministry was apparently trying to nab support for the Bible and Christian values in public schools.A press release that the organization distributed following the incident explains what happened in detail (strictly from its own perspective, of course): The woman verbally and physically attacked two ministry workers Elizabeth Ilse and Chase Schomberg. "Ilse was standing behind one of her ministry's tables while distributing Christian literature to those visiting the gas station. She simply said, 'Hello,' to the woman, but after approaching and reading the sign on the ministry's table that said, 'Support Christianity in Public Schools, The Constitution, and Honoring Soldiers,' the woman viciously attacked the cause by screaming 'shame on you for wanting Christianity in schools,' calling Miss Ilse a 'bigot,' and stated that 'Christians are the problem.'" She threatens to call police, then yelled, "I'll tell police you are not just harassing, but are assaulting me." Then she blasts the cameraman with her bag. She speeds off, but returns a short time later to talk with police. She doesn't approach the ministry table again, but the police asked the ministry workers if they wanted to press charges against her. The ministry and Dean have not decided whether to press charges as of yet.In a short, edited video, the woman can be seen and heard telling Dean's staffers, "I know what's in our Constitution and you don't." Then, she claims that she teaches the Constitution, charging that the nation's most central document advocates for the "separation of church and state." From there, the clash between the two parties intensifies with the aforementioned details coming to fruition. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9e0_1371680115 Brockk Liberal school teacher attacked Christians at gas station Liberal, school, teacher, attacked, Christians, at, gas, station Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:05:52 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ec0_1371679179 aranger45 Today, inside, they dedicated a new statue of another American giant, Fredrick Douglas - a man born into slavery, but who knew instinctively that he was not born a slave. No man is. To keep a man a slave you do much the same as the cruel circus masters did to the elephant around the turn of last century. Clamp heavy chains around their legs and stake them to the ground. Then beat and terrorize them. After a while you no longer even have to stake the chain; the elephant gives up and just the mere rattle of the chain convinces the elephant there is no hope, so they give up and do what ever it is the circus requires. Fredrick Douglas was lucky enough to live in a house where he was taught to read, write and think. He knew God did not make men masters over others. Nor did he ever intend any man to impose unrighteous dominion over another man or beast. (Photo: TheBlaze) It is time we remind ourselves of this truth again, and begin to rise up against the intimidation before the handful of peanuts from our new political circus masters is considered a kindness and not the symbol of evil cruelty. In the building behind me, they are now excusing storing all data, phone calls, financial transactions, geotracking on every American for our "safety," while allowing anyone to cross our borders either on foot or in underground tunnels without any worry or consequence. They have not suspended or fired but promoted those at the IRS who rattled the chains of control to any group that disagreed with their policies. And now, after pushing misery and death through the so-called "Arab Spring" in country after country, they are plotting a new war with Syria. This will bring death and destruction the world over. We are told that we need to pick sides and arm those who are so far down the scale of decency that even Vladimir Putin asked Americans if they knew that those we are arming have literally eaten their enemies on the battlefield. The fact that he even needed to ask that question, and that most have never even seen the video of the commander of the rebel troops on TV engaging in this ungodly horror, is an indictment of our government officials and our media. I am surrounded today by some modern-day spiritual giants. All from different faiths, different backgrounds and many different views. But we all have one thing in common. We don't recognize our country anymore and because we know that God is just, we tremble for our children's future. We wonder, are we even worth defending anymore? If so, why? Who are we? And will we even notice or care when the chain is finally snapped around our legs? What will be written about us? The greatest generation has passed. We are who historians will watch. Will it be said that none called for justice not one pleaded for truth? They trusted in vanity and spoke lies. They conceived mischief and brought forth iniquity. What is it we even believe as a people anymore? Where did we get these ideas that now seem so popular? Our forbears came to these shores not for free stuff, but for freedom . The chance to make their own way, create a different life. They came here because they knew that God made them free to make their own way in life, take the risk, do their best and take responsibility for their own lives. They came here because they wanted to serve Him in the way they believed, not as they were told. But how many care about our history? And, of those who do care, how many really still believe? Some things are worth believing in. That the little guy can make it. Every single life has value and is worth living. That honor and integrity do matter. That justice will prevail - if not in this life - then the next, and that God does exist. And what we do in our lives matters. It is the meek and the humble that inherit the earth. Have we forgotten? We have declared ourselves masters of the earth - spread our troops all over the world, taught the world how to do banking like we do it here in America. Even though we can't even master our own homes, protect our neighborhoods, or simply balance a check book. How grotesque and garish we must appear to those looking in. I, for one, still believe in the silly notion of truth, justice and the American way. Your browser does not support iframes. Since our founding, a good percentage of our fellow citizens closed their eyes to the civil rights of all Americans. "I'm okay. I don't want to think of the bad things going on. I am busy. It doesn't affect me. It can't be that bad and even if it is, I am just one person and what can I do about it anyway?" Nothing has changed, except the chairs at the table. Someone has always been on the losing end of the stick of power. Blacks are the most obvious, the Chinese, the Native Americans, but lets not forget the Irish, the Catholics, the Mormons, the Jews, and now it seems all those of faith that will not conform. For those that think men make progress collectively: I warn you, history teaches that you couldn't be more wrong. We are redeemed one man at a time. There is no "family pass" ticket or park hopping pass to life. One ticket, one life at a time. Man doesn't vanquish hatred or bigotry. The target keeps moving. From the blacks to the Irish. Atheists to Christians. But as always, there are a few leaders: Ben Franklin, John Quincy Adams, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Abraham Lincoln, Fredrick Douglas, Booker T. Washington, Gandhi and Martin Luther King. They know that the march toward freedom never ends; man must be ever-vigilant and pray less with his lips and more with his legs. They never forget that truth, justice, and freedom are the wellspring from which the waters of man's civil rights come. And so they must be upheld for all men - those you know, those you do not, and maybe more importantly - they must be upheld for those who you do know but do not like or agree with at all. If they are lost for one, in the end they are lost for all. In the past, these historic stands which we now call civil rights movements were done by a small but dedicated portion of our citizens which led to great shifts in our culture. But those movements always came from the same institutions ... the church. And usually not the church with the popular preacher, but the one who put it on the line to tell the people the truth. Preachers like these men, who know that we are all born free, but that freedom comes at a great price - a profound responsibility to stand against injustice, hatred and bigotry. Our pulpits have gone quiet out of arrogance, fear and apathy. Their faith is found in the wisdom of man and not in the power of God. For some, losing tithing checks or the gold Rolex watch has become more important than losing man's freedom. Whatever the reason, too many are no longer willing to call evil by its name. There is no vision. And when there is no vision, the people perish. I humbly suggest to you that Martin Luther King knew the answer, and he lost more than congregants during his long march. Students are taught that his vision came from the ideas of Gandhi. Maybe a new radical 20th century progressive philospher was the one that taught MLK that "although we be free of all men, when we choose to make ourselves servants to all, we gain the more." Let's get a couple of things straight. What MLK and Gandhi did was not progressive or new. It was an ancient idea. Hollywood, Woodstock, nor the hippie culture was the source of power of the 1960s freedom movement. God was. He was leading those who risked their lives over that bridge in Selma, not Janice Joplin, Columbia University, or a labor union. It wasn't John Lennon that taught people about love and peaceful resistance - that job fell on the shoulders of a Jewish carpenter. And it is there that we will find the answers that will break the chains that are being forged for a new generation of slaves. Your browser does not support iframes. The rights that so many Americans ignorantly preach about so often are not really their rights. They belong to God and they are given to us for stewardship. They are pretty important and obvious. So obvious that we used to say they were "self-evident," meaning that humans don't need to be taught; you instinctively know that you have a right not to be executed without a trial, held without charge, searched without warrant or spied upon without cause. The government is no longer the protector of those civil rights, and so we must be. When we are told that it is okay for the IRS, EPA, ATF, FBI or anyone to hassle, threaten or intimidate others because of their skin color, religion or political belief, we stop being the country that we all want to build, and start being the country the world should fear. The long train of abuses regarding these rights are the same MLK marched against, and the very same our dusty founders warned us about losing. Men may make progress, but man never changes. Man loves power and money. No matter the skin color, religion or income level. These symbols of our nation make men drunk with power, who then justify their lust for more by claiming they are public servants. The only difference between Las Vegas and Washington, D.C. is that at least Vegas has the decency to admit the town is full of hookers and crooks. We must sober up and admit that too many of the Republicans and the Democrats have played us, lied to us and stolen from us, while the getaway car was driven by the media. A media that can no longer claim with a straight face the role of journalist. Journalists print the things the powerful don't want printed. What they do is public relations. Those PR firms will not print the truth about the average American who finds himself concerned with the direction of our country today. So we must. We are not violent. We are not racist. We are not anti immigrant. We are not anti-government. And we will not be silent anymore. Those who wish to use unrighteous dominion over mankind are not enemies of ours; they are enemies of God, and He will not be silent much longer either. We will no longer accept the lies, the corruption, or the information and data gathering. It is evil. And we come here today to send a message that we will surround all of those who wish to stand and break the cycle of corruption. We will use ourselves as shields to protect those in the system, the elected officials or whistle blowers with the courage to stand. We come here today to respectfully, but with the power of the spirit, demand to be treated as an equal member of society. I am a man, and I will be treated as such. I answer to only one king and His kingdom will come, His will be done. We have chosen sides and we choose God. America as a nation must do the same, as well. (Photo: TheBlaze) We come today to declare our independence, to reaffirm our founding principles. We, as a nation, acknowledge a creator. We acknowledge that he gives certain natural, guaranteed rights to man. We declare that government exists primarily to protect these natural, God-given rights. He has established right and wrong. He is just and therefore, man must pay for his mistakes either now on Earth, or through God's justice later. There is no such thing as social justice. Only God can balance things out, and we are not God. But honest and decent men can fight for and establish equal justice. There is no such thing as collective salvation. We, however, are going to be judged on how we treat our fellow brothers and sisters. Thus we must serve them, help them with charity toward all. "Malice toward none," Lincoln said. God said it slightly differently - vengeance is mine. Anyone who speaks of punishing their political enemies in on the wrong side. It is clearly evil and we have a responsibility to say so. America: it is now your time to rise up and boldly declare those same self-evident truths that changed the world, and demand that those truths remain the basis of our laws. My civil rights will not be trampled, and I say this not for me but for my children, and all those who yearn to breathe free. Those who make your Apple products at Foxxcon, those who languish in prisons in Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela. Those homosexuals who are stoned to death in the streets of Egypt or Iran, while our so-called civil rights leaders hold coffee klatches with third graders in the White House. We will stand not for our job, house or income, but we will stand for those immigrants who came here the right way, and not have their dreams destroyed by increasing competition at the lowest rung of the ladder while keeping the brightest and best minds out of the visa pool allowing for little competition at the top. We will not pervert women's rights and twist it into a gross silent defense of abortion doctors in Philly and Houston while turning our eyes from the forgotten women who have never had the civil right to walk alone on a street without a man, or to drive a car in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, and even those who now cower in fear with their faces covered in states like Florida, Virginia, New York and Minnesota. We will not waste another second shadow boxing the demons of the past when the fight to end actual slavery is still happening today. Call it what you will, but those who make your iPad in China - those who make your cute little Mao purses - are the very people you claim to care so much about. They are the ones yearning to breathe free. And worse, there is the oldest form of human degradation man has ever known, the sex slave trade that currently has in its coils over 2 million children. The biggest source of this evil is a wide open hole in our Arizona border. We beg the American people to wake up and help the 8-year-old children being sold into sex slavery. The press may say, 'How dare these men declare themselves the next Martin Luther King or civil rights leaders?' How blind to believe the civil rights movement ever ended. The civil rights movement never ends, and it never will. It has been marching since the beginning of time. Where Martin Luther King started is where Gandhi left off, and where he started, Abe Lincoln left off, and before that Whitfield all the way back to Moses. God has not moved. We have. But it is never too late. We are not at the mercy of these events. We can alter the course of history. We can stand against the dangerous arc of this story. &lt;a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/prnd/prn-theblaze;prntype=web;prngenre=conservative_talk;prnpage=interior;pos=bottom;sz=300x250;u=prntype*web!prngenre*conservative_talk!prnpage*interior!pos*bottom!sz*300x250;ord=123456789?" target="_blank"&gt;&lt;img src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/prnd/prn-theblaze;prntype=web;prngenre=conservative_talk;prnpage=interior;pos=bottom;sz=300x250;u=prntype*web!prngenre*conservative_talk!prnpage*interior!pos*bottom!sz*300x250;ord=123456789?" border="0" alt="" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;But we need people who are willing to speak truth. (Photo: TheBlaze) The last century was a century of genocide. A century where collectivist, national socialist, and communist evil rose up again and again... swallowing up the lives of millions. It happens every time man says the collective is more important than the right of the individual. That one phrase becomes in the end - every time - a license to kill anyone deemed to be standing in the way of progress. But evil met its match. Goodness eventually prevailed. People like Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King, Jr., Lech Walesa and Mother Theresa awoke the world. They gave their lives to the pursuit of human rights. They took the side of justice against injustice; they held aloft the torch of freedom to push out the darkness of hate. These men and women lived difficult lives. They often lived shortened lives. They were often born to relative privilege, but willing to take on suffering. They did want not to martyr themselves. They would have happily lived to the end of their natural lives in comfort... but to the righteous, there is no comfort when evil has taken root. But the cause of human rights has been taken over by organizations who share little with the individuals who led the movement. Human rights was once a cry for justice. Now it used as a threat. These organizations have become bullies and grotesque parodies of the principles they pretend to represent. They criticize free nations and spare the unfree. They denounce nations like Israel and America, who have high standards for freedom, and leave alone nations that have no freedom at all. They are nearly comical in their double-standards. They are no more than the enforcers or the attack dogs of those who wish to keep men confined in spaces they design. Whatever moral force they once had is spent. Their time is up. And so, we dismiss them. Today we take back the phrase "human rights" and place it where it belongs, as the first half of God's plan for humanity. The second half is responsibility. If we want to be endowed with rights - real human rights, we have to act with responsibility. We must not be comfortable with rights. We must be comfortable with responsibility. Who will protect your rights better? A king, president or you? Who will protect the truth? A reporter, a labor union or you? Who will protect and teach your children to seek truth? A textbook committee, an education bureaucrat, or you? Did a commission of wise men stop the Holocaust? Did a committee of Congress end Jim Crow? No. In each case, the work was done by individuals who would not abide convenient lies. They saw injustice and they called it out. They saw their nation wage war against a single group and they said "not in my name." They didn't wait for the conventions of society to catch up to God's laws. They pushed. They pressed. And they were victorious. (Photo: TheBlaze) Each of us have been waiting for a leader to rise from among us. And none have. How many have been called and refused to serve? How many must have failed to heed the call for the Lord to make it all the way down to us? I pray now that those who have heard the call to rise up in the tradition of peaceful resistance do so now before, as it was with Bonhoeffer, it is too late. I beg those with eyes and ears to heed the call and begin to train under the exact system used by MLK. Search his words out. You will find that your history professors and civil rights activists left out the real author of the words of Gandhi, King and Bonhoeffer. Read them, ponder them, and risk living them. Even though they will make you a target of the NSA, having your name on their list as an enemy may in the end be the way your name is forever etched in his book of life. Pastors, priests and rabbis: I challenge you. What have you done with your knowledge and priesthood power that those without have not done this week? If you cannot answer that with power every day, what does that say about you? Average citizens and college students: I challenge you. Martin Luther King didn't take a class, get a certificate and a bunch of permits. He saw injustice, studied eternal truths, exercised discipline and marched. &lt;a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/prnd/prn-theblaze;prntype=web;prngenre=conservative_talk;prnpage=interior;pos=bottom;sz=300x250;u=prntype*web!prngenre*conservative_talk!prnpage*interior!pos*bottom!sz*300x250;ord=123456789?" target="_blank"&gt;&lt;img src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/prnd/prn-theblaze;prntype=web;prngenre=conservative_talk;prnpage=interior;pos=bottom;sz=300x250;u=prntype*web!prngenre*conservative_talk!prnpage*interior!pos*bottom!sz*300x250;ord=123456789?" border="0" alt="" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;If you don't find a leader, perhaps it is because you were meant to lead. Christians: I believe in the free market. If your preacher is too afraid to preach it from the pulpit, maybe you should preach it from the street corner. Many are called. Will you answer? Our spiritual body is out of shape and we need intensive training right now. Get back to God, and know that some things are true and worth believing in. The good guys do win in the end. Evil does not stand unless good men never rise up. The time is now and we are the people the world is waiting for. We must never stop being the shore that others can come to for shelter and hope. But to do so we must realign ourselves with truth and rise up and stand. This is the vision. We must preach good tidings to the meek, bind up the brokenhearted, and proclaim liberty to those held captive. To declare vengeance belongs to God and God alone. We must give unto those who mourn - beauty for ashes and water the trees of righteousness. We shall not perish. I can't help that most of us don't like to hear the truth, but hear it we must: George Washington told us religion and morality are the only stable and lasting basis of individual life and public policy. If we are to survive, they must be part of our public policy rather than driven from it. It is no longer enough to just be a good person. We must work to be the next Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther King. It is noble to strive to be the size of the bronze giant they dedicated this morning in the building behind me. Fredrick Douglas' time was in the 1800; King's time has passed. This is our time. This is the next long march toward civil rights and we shall overcome. Stand without fear, lock arms and stare down the bullies that wish to enslave mankind yet again. Honor, courage and love are what is required, and they are contagious. Spread the word and proclaim liberty throughout the land. "Let us, today, raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair; the rest is in the hands of God." http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ec0_1371679179 aranger45 Tens of Thousands show up at Glenn Beck's Powerful Civil Rights Speech at Washington, D.C. Rally Tens of Thousands show up at Glenn Beck's Powerful Civil Rights Speech at Washington, D.C. Rally Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:59:08 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d95_1371678723 aranger45 Check out the FUPA on that hot Liberal babe!! I would call it a camel toe, but I think it's the whole dam camel!! A woman who described herself as a teacher of the Constitution was caught on video clashing with members of a controversial Christian organization. Bradlee Dean, a figure TheBlaze has covered in the past, founded "You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International," a ministry that delivers assemblies and speeches in public schools. Members of this organization recently engaged a woman in a contentious conversation - one that led her to physically attack the Christian activists. Photo Credit: YouTube The incident, which was captured on video and later released by the group, shows the volatile exchange that unfolded at a 7-11 gas station in Florida. The debate erupted as Dean's ministry was apparently trying to nab support for the Bible and Christian values in public schools. A press release that the organization distributed following the incident explains what happened in detail (strictly from its own perspective, of course): The woman verbally and physically attacked two ministry workers Elizabeth Ilse and Chase Schomberg. "Ilse was standing behind one of her ministry's tables while distributing Christian literature to those visiting the gas station. She simply said, 'Hello,' to the woman, but after approaching and reading the sign on the ministry's table that said, 'Support Christianity in Public Schools, The Constitution, and Honoring Soldiers,' the woman viciously attacked the cause by screaming 'shame on you for wanting Christianity in schools,' calling Miss Ilse a 'bigot,' and stated that 'Christians are the problem.'" She threatens to call police, then yelled, "I'll tell police you are not just harassing, but are assaulting me." Then she blasts the cameraman with her bag. She speeds off, but returns a short time later to talk with police. She doesn't approach the ministry table again, but the police asked the ministry workers if they wanted to press charges against her. The ministry and Dean have not decided whether to press charges as of yet. In a short, edited video, the woman can be seen and heard telling Dean's staffers, "I know what's in our Constitution and you don't." Then, she claims that she teaches the Constitution, charging that the nation's most central document advocates for the "separation of church and state." From there, the clash between the two parties intensifies with the aforementioned details coming to fruition. Watch the clip, below: Now, it should be noted that it's unclear how the debate between the two parties commenced. TheBlaze called Dean staffer Jake MacAulay to ask for a more complete and unedited clip. Following the call, he sent us a link to five minutes of footage that provides a bit more context. The longer clip shows the woman demanding that the ministry workers move away from both her and her vehicle. While she repeatedly asked the individual filming the incident to stop, the footage continued to be captured and these pleas were ignored. While not excusing her actions, it does help explain them. After apparently hitting the cameraman with her bag, she screamed, "Get away from my car!" Watch the more complete video, below: As the release notes, the ministry has not decided whether or not to press charges against the woman. For more about Dean and his ministry and the controversies they've been engaged in, read TheBlaze's past coverage . http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d95_1371678723 aranger45 Mentally unstable violent Liberal Teacher Goes Ballistic, Beats Christian Ministry Workers With Her Purse Mentally, unstable, violent, Liberal, Teacher, Goes, Ballistic, Beats, Christian, Ministry, Workers, With, Her, Purse Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:34:23 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bb7_1371673892 english-patriot33 http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Charge-UW-biology-student-raped-12-year-old-4607366.php http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/06/sex-jihad-muslim-uw-biology-student-rapes-12-year-old-girl.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&amp;utm Charge: muslim UW biology student raped 12-year-old runaway There are many, many cases all the time of sexual predators taking advantage of underage girls. This one, however, has two elements that show traces of the effects that Islamic supremacism can have on a human mind. Abdelbadie claims that this 12-year-old girl "seduced" him -- an idea that might occur easily to someone who, following Muhammad's example, sees girls as young as nine as sex objects. Also, he claims she was dressed "provocatively." Many Muslim clerics have justified sexual abuse of women by saying that they brought it on themselves with their immodest dress. If they had covered up, nothing would have happened. Muslim men in Islamic cultures have no obligation to control themselves. Women have to make sure they don't get attacked by not "provoking" the men. This little girl was a victim of that mentality. This is same modus operandi behind the scores of Muslim child sex trafficking gangs in Europe. Vulnerable pre-teen plied with durgs and alcohol. Sex jihad .... this is how it starts. "Charge: UW biology student raped 12-year-old runaway" Seattle PI, June 18, 2013 University of Washington student accused of having sex with a 12-year-old girl he picked up in the University District has been charged with child rape. Currently free after posting bond, UW Senior Omar Abdelbadie is alleged to have plied the girl with marijuana, brought her back to his apartment and had sex with her hours after they met. Abdelbadie, a 22-year-old originally from Bellevue, was described by prosecutors as a threat to community safety, despite his lack of a criminal history. "The defendant is a danger to children given the circumstances of this crime where he met a 12 year old girl on the street, exposed her to marijuana, and took her to his home, where they had sexual intercourse," Senior Deputy Prosecutor Carol Spoor said in court papers. Having left home that evening, the girl ended up in the U District just after midnight on June 10, according to charging papers. She told police she was about to head home - she described the crowd there as "creepy" - when she encountered Abdelbadie. According to the girl's account, Abdelbadie approached and struck up a conversation with her, and then asked her to smoke marijuana with him. The girl said she told him her age several times before he brought her back to his apartment, where he had sex with her after claiming she had "seduced" him. The girl left Abdelbadie's home the following day. Abdelbadie and a friend are alleged to have walked her home, and watched hiding behind a fence as she walked up to the house. Abdelbadie's friend - who met Abdelbadie when signing him up for a children's charity -- then called 911 after arguing with Abdelbadie about his conduct with a young girl. Officers responded to the area and arrested Abdelbadie. According to charging papers, Abdelbadie told police he met the girl walking near University Avenue and claimed she was dressed "provocatively." He is alleged to have admitted he "hooked up" with the girl, but would not say whether he knew her true age. Abdelbadie has been charged with second-degree child rape. He likely faces 7 1/2 years in prison if convicted as charged. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bb7_1371673892 english-patriot33 Charge: UW biology student raped 12-year-old runaway islam, muslims, terrorists, pedophiles, outlaw islam in the free world, Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:22:11 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e15_1371669481 cajunmojo A woman who described herself as a teacher of the Constitution was caught on video clashing with members of a controversial Christian organization. Bradlee Dean, a figure TheBlaze has covered in the past, founded "You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International," a ministry that delivers assemblies and speeches in public schools. Members of this organization recently engaged a woman in a contentious conversation - one that led her to physically attack the Christian activists. The woman verbally and physically attacked two ministry workers Elizabeth Ilse and Chase Schomberg. "Ilse was standing behind one of her ministry's tables while distributing Christian literature to those visiting the gas station. She simply said, 'Hello,' to the woman, but after approaching and reading the sign on the ministry's table that said, 'Support Christianity in Public Schools, The Constitution, and Honoring Soldiers,' the woman viciously attacked the cause by screaming 'shame on you for wanting Christianity in schools,' calling Miss Ilse a 'bigot,' and stated that 'Christians are the problem.'"A press release that the organization distributed following the incident explains what happened in detail (strictly from its own perspective, of course): She threatens to call police, then yelled, "I'll tell police you are not just harassing, but are assaulting me." Then she blasts the cameraman with her bag. She speeds off, but returns a short time later to talk with police. She doesn't approach the ministry table again, but the police asked the ministry workers if they wanted to press charges against her. The ministry and Dean have not decided whether to press charges as of yet. From there, the clash between the two parties intensifies with the aforementioned details coming to fruition.In a short, edited video, the woman can be seen and heard telling Dean's staffers, "I know what's in our Constitution and you don't." Then, she claims that she teaches the Constitution, charging that the nation's most central document advocates for the "separation of church and state." Now, it should be noted that it's unclear how the debate between the two parties commenced. TheBlaze called Dean staffer Jake MacAulay to ask for a more complete and unedited clip. Following the call, he sent us a link to five minutes of footage that provides a bit more context. The longer clip shows the woman demanding that the ministry workers move away from both her and her vehicle. While she repeatedly asked the individual filming the incident to stop, the footage continued to be captured and these pleas were ignored. While not excusing her actions, it does help explain them. After apparently hitting the cameraman with her bag, she screamed, "Get away from my car!" As the release notes, the ministry has not decided whether or not to press charges against the woman. For more about Dean and his ministry and the controversies they've been engaged in, read TheBlaze's past coverage . http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e15_1371669481 cajunmojo TEACHER GOES BALLISTIC, BEATS CHRISTIAN MINISTRY WORKERS WITH HER PURSE FOLLOWING CHURCH VS. STATE DEBATE Liberal, democrats, teachers , Elizabeth Ilse, Chase Schomberg. Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:42:15 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e05_1371659875 socialism-rocks Who was the first president of the United States? Ask any school child and they will readily tell you "George Washington." And of course, they would be wrong-at least technically. Washington was not inaugurated until April 30, 1789. And yet, the United States continually had functioning governments from as early as September 5, 1774 and operated as a confederated nation from as early as July 4, 1776. During that nearly fifteen year interval, Congress-first the Continental Congress and then later the Confederation Congress-was always moderated by a duly elected president. As the chief executive officer of the government of the United States, the president was recognized as the head of state. Washington was thus the fifteenth in a long line of distinguished presidents-and he led the seventeenth administration-he just happened to be the first under the current constitution. So who were the luminaries who preceded him? The following brief biographies profile these "forgotten presidents." Peyton Randolph of Virginia (1723-1775) When delegates gathered in Philadelphia for the first Continental Congress, they promptly elected the former King's Attorney of Virginia as the moderator and president of their convocation. He was a propitious choice. He was a legal prodigy-having studied at the Inner Temple in London, served as his native colony's Attorney General, and tutored many of the most able men of the South at William and Mary College-including the young Patrick Henry. His home in Williamsburg was the gathering place for Virginia's legal and political gentry-and it remains a popular attraction in the restored colonial capital. He had served as a delegate in the Virginia House of Burgesses, and had been a commander under William Byrd in the colonial militia. He was a scholar of some renown-having begun a self-guided reading of the classics when he was thirteen. Despite suffering poor health served the Continental Congress as president twice, in 1774 from September 5 to October 21, and then again for a few days in 1775 from May 10 to May 23. He never lived to see independence, yet was numbered among the nation's most revered founders. Henry Middleton (1717-1784) America's second elected president was one of the wealthiest planters in the South, the patriarch of the most powerful families anywhere in the nation. His public spirit was evident from an early age. He was a member of his state's Common House from 1744-1747. During the last two years he served as the Speaker. During 1755 he was the King's Commissioner of Indian Affairs. He was a member of the South Carolina Council from 1755-1770. His valor in the War with the Cherokees during 1760-1761 earned him wide recognition throughout the colonies-and demonstrated his cool leadership abilities while under pressure. He was elected as a delegate to the first session of the Continental Congress and when Peyton Randolph was forced to resign the presidency, his peers immediately turned to Middleton to complete the term. He served as the fledgling coalition's president from October 22, 1774 until Randolph was able to resume his duties briefly beginning on May 10, 1775. Afterward, he was a member of the Congressional Council of Safety and helped to establish the young nation's policy toward the encouragement and support of education. In February 1776 he resigned his political involvements in order to prepare his family and lands for what he believed was inevitable war-but he was replaced by his son Arthur who eventually became a signer of both the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation, served time as an English prisoner of war, and was twice elected Governor of his state. John Hancock (1737-1793) The third president was a patriot, rebel leader, merchant who signed his name into immortality in giant strokes on the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. The boldness of his signature has made it live in American minds as a perfect expression of the strength and freedom-and defiance-of the individual in the face of British tyranny. As President of the Continental Congress during two widely spaced terms-the first from May 24 1775 to October 30 1777 and the second from November 23 1885 to June 5, 1786-Hancock was the presiding officer when the members approved the Declaration of Independence. Because of his position, it was his official duty to sign the document first-but not necessarily as dramatically as he did. Hancock figured prominently in another historic event-the battle at Lexington: British troops who fought there April 10, 1775, had known Hancock and Samuel Adams were in Lexington and had come there to capture these rebel leaders. And the two would have been captured, if they had not been warned by Paul Revere. As early as 1768, Hancock defied the British by refusing to pay customs charges on the cargo of one of his ships. One of Boston's wealthiest merchants, he was recognized by the citizens, as well as by the British, as a rebel leader-and was elected President of the first Massachusetts Provincial Congress. After he was chosen President of the Continental Congress in 1775, Hancock became known beyond the borders of Massachusetts, and, having served as colonel of the Massachusetts Governor's Guards he hoped to be named commander of the American forces-until John Adams nominated George Washington. In 1778 Hancock was commissioned Major General and took part in an unsuccessful campaign in Rhode Island. But it was as a political leader that his real distinction was earned-as the first Governor of Massachusetts, as President of Congress, and as President of the Massachusetts constitutional ratification convention. He helped win ratification in Massachusetts, gaining enough popular recognition to make him a contender for the newly created Presidency of the United States, but again he saw Washington gain the prize. Like his rival, George Washington, Hancock was a wealthy man who risked much for the cause of independence. He was the wealthiest New Englander supporting the patriotic cause, and, although he lacked the brilliance of John Adams or the capacity to inspire of Samuel Adams, he became one of the foremost leaders of the new nation-perhaps, in part, because he was willing to commit so much at such risk to the cause of freedom. Henry Laurens (1724-1792) The only American president ever to be held as a prisoner of war by a foreign power, Laurens was heralded after he was released as "the father of our country," by no less a personage than George Washington. He was of Huguenot extraction, his ancestors having come to America from France after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes made the Reformed faith illegal. Raised and educated for a life of mercantilism at his home in Charleston, he also had the opportunity to spend more than a year in continental travel. It was while in Europe that he began to write revolutionary pamphlets-gaining him renown as a patriot. He served as vice-president of South Carolina in1776. He was then elected to the Continental Congress. He succeeded John Hancock as President of the newly independent but war beleaguered United States on November 1, 1777. He served until December 9, 1778 at which time he was appointed Ambassador to the Netherlands. Unfortunately for the cause of the young nation, he was captured by an English warship during his cross-Atlantic voyage and was confined to the Tower of London until the end of the war. After the Battle of Yorktown, the American government regained his freedom in a dramatic prisoner exchange-President Laurens for Lord Cornwallis. Ever the patriot, Laurens continued to serve his nation as one of the three representatives selected to negotiate terms at the Paris Peace Conference in 1782. John Jay (1745-1829) America's first Secretary of State, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, one of its first ambassadors, and author of some of the celebrated Federalist Papers, Jay was a Founding Father who, by a quirk of fate, missed signing the Declaration of Independence-at the time of the vote for independence and the signing, he had temporarily left the Continental Congress to serve in New York's revolutionary legislature. Nevertheless, he was chosen by his peers to succeed Henry Laurens as President of the United States-serving a term from December 10, 1778 to September 27, 1779. A conservative New York lawyer who was at first against the idea of independence for the colonies, the aristocratic Jay in 1776 turned into a patriot who was willing to give the next twenty-five years of his life to help establish the new nation. During those years, he won the regard of his peers as a dedicated and accomplished statesman and a man of unwavering principle. In the Continental Congress Jay prepared addresses to the people of Canada and Great Britain. In New York he drafted the State constitution and served as Chief Justice during the war. He was President of the Continental Congress before he undertook the difficult assignment, as ambassador, of trying to gain support and funds from Spain. After helping Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, and Laurens complete peace negotiations in Paris in 1783, Jay returned to become the first Secretary of State, called "Secretary of Foreign Affairs" under the Articles of Confederation. He negotiated valuable commercial treaties with Russia and Morocco, and dealt with the continuing controversy with Britain and Spain over the southern and western boundaries of the United States. He proposed that America and Britain establish a joint commission to arbitrate disputes that remained after the war-a proposal which, though not adopted, influenced the government's use of arbitration and diplomacy in settling later international problems. In this post Jay felt keenly the weakness of the Articles of Confederation and was one of the first to advocate a new governmental compact. He wrote five Federalist Papers supporting the Constitution, and he was a leader in the New York ratification convention. As first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Jay made the historic decision that a State could be sued by a citizen from another State, which led to the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution. On a special mission to London he concluded the "Jay Treaty," which helped avert a renewal of hostilities with Britain but won little popular favor at home-and it is probably for this treaty that this Founding Father is best remembered. Samuel Huntington (1732-1796) An industrious youth who mastered his studies of the law without the advantage of a school, a tutor, or a master-borrowing books and snatching opportunities to read and research between odd jobs-he was one of the greatest self-made men among the Founders. He was also one of the greatest legal minds of the age-all the more remarkable for his lack of advantage as a youth. In 1764, in recognition of his obvious abilities and initiative, he was elected to the General Assembly of Connecticut. The next year he was chosen to serve on the Executive Council. In 1774 he was appointed Associate Judge of the Superior Court and, as a delegate to the Continental Congress, was acknowledged to be a legal scholar of some respect. He served in Congress for five consecutive terms, during the last of which he was elected President. He served in that off ice from September 28, 1779 until ill health forced him to resign on July 9, 1781. He returned to his home in Connecticut-and as he recuperated, he accepted more Counciliar and Bench duties. He again took his seat in Congress in 1783, but left it to become Chief Justice of his state's Superior Court. He was elected Lieutenant Governor in 1785 and Governor in 1786. According to John Jay, he was "the most precisely trained Christian jurists ever to serve his country." Thomas McKean (1734-1817) During his astonishingly varied fifty-year career in public life he held almost every possible position-from deputy county attorney to President of the United States under the Confederation. Besides signing the Declaration of Independence, he contributed significantly to the development and establishment of constitutional government in both his home state of Delaware and the nation. At the Stamp Act Congress he proposed the voting procedure that Congress adopted: that each colony, regardless of size or population, have one vote-the practice adopted by the Continental Congress and the Congress of the Confederation, and the principle of state equality manifest in the composition of the Senate. And as county judge in 1765, he defied the British by ordering his court to work only with documents that did not bear the hated stamps. In June 1776, at the Continental Congress, McKean joined with Caesar Rodney to register Delaware's approval of the Declaration of Independence, over the negative vote of the third Delaware delegate, George Read-permitting it to be "The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States." And at a special Delaware convention, he drafted the constitution for that State. McKean also helped draft-and signed-the Articles of Confederation. It was during his tenure of service as President-from July 10, 1781 to November 4, 1782-when news arrived from General Washington in October 1781 that the British had surrendered following the Battle of Yorktown. As Chief Justice of the supreme court of Pennsylvania, he contributed to the establishment of the legal system in that State, and, in 1787, he strongly supported the Constitution at the Pennsylvania Ratification Convention, declaring it "the best the world has yet seen." At sixty-five, after over forty years of public service, McKean resigned from his post as Chief Justice. A candidate on the Democratic-Republican ticket in 1799, McKean was elected Governor of Pennsylvania. As Governor, he followed such a strict policy of appointing only fellow Republicans to office that he became the father of the spoils system in America. He served three tempestuous terms as Governor, completing one of the longest continuous careers of public service of any of the Founding Fathers. John Hanson (1715-1783) He was the heir of one of the greatest family traditions in the colonies and became the patriarch of a long line of American patriots-his great grandfather died at Lutzen beside the great King Gustavus Aldophus of Sweden; his grandfather was one of the founders of New Sweden along the Delaware River in Maryland; one of his nephews was the military secretary to George Washington; another was a signer of the Declaration; still another was a signer of the Constitution; yet another was Governor of Maryland during the Revolution; and still another was a member of the first Congress; two sons were killed in action with the Continental Army; a grandson served as a member of Congress under the new Constitution; and another grandson was a Maryland Senator. Thus, even if Hanson had not served as President himself, he would have greatly contributed to the life of the nation through his ancestry and progeny. As a youngster he began a self-guided reading of classics and rather quickly became an acknowledged expert in the juridicalism of Anselm and the practical philosophy of Seneca-both of which were influential in the development of the political philosophy of the great leaders of the Reformation. It was based upon these legal and theological studies that the young planter-his farm, Mulberry Grove was just across the Potomac from Mount Vernon-began to espouse the cause of the patriots. In 1775 he was elected to the Provincial Legislature of Maryland. Then in 1777, he became a member of Congress where he distinguished himself as a brilliant administrator. Thus, he was elected President in 1781. He served in that office from November 5, 1781 until November 3, 1782. He was the first President to serve a full term after the full ratification of the Articles of Confederation-and like so many of the Southern and New England Founders, he was strongly opposed to the Constitution when it was first discussed. He remained a confirmed anti-federalist until his untimely death. Elias Boudinot (1741-1802) He did not sign the Declaration, the Articles, or the Constitution. He did not serve in the Continental Army with distinction. He was not renowned for his legal mind or his political skills. He was instead a man who spent his entire career in foreign diplomacy. He earned the respect of his fellow patriots during the dangerous days following the traitorous action of Benedict Arnold. His deft handling of relations with Canada also earned him great praise. After being elected to the Congress from his home state of New Jersey, he served as the new nation's Secretary for Foreign Affairs-managing the influx of aid from France, Spain, and Holland. The in 1783 he was elected to the Presidency. He served in that office from November 4, 1782 until November 2, 1783. Like so many of the other early presidents, he was a classically trained scholar, of the Reformed faith, and an anti-federalist in political matters. He was the father and grandfather of frontiersmen-and one of his grandchildren and namesakes eventually became a leader of the Cherokee nation in its bid for independence from the sprawling expansion of the United States. Thomas Mifflin (1744-1800) By an ironic sort of providence, Thomas Mifflin served as George Washington's first aide-de-camp at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, and, when the war was over, he was the man, as President of the United States, who accepted Washington's resignation of his commission. In the years between, Mifflin greatly served the cause of freedom-and, apparently, his own cause-while serving as the first Quartermaster General of the Continental Army. He obtained desperately needed supplies for the new army-and was suspected of making excessive profit himself. Although experienced in business and successful in obtaining supplies for the war, Mifflin preferred the front lines, and he distinguished himself in military actions on Long Island and near Philadelphia. Born and reared a Quaker, he was excluded from their meetings for his military activities. A controversial figure, Mifflin lost favor with Washington and was part of the Conway Cabal-a rather notorious plan to replace Washington with General Horatio Gates. And Mifflin narrowly missed court-martial action over his handling of funds by resigning his commission in 1778. In spite of these problems-and of repeated charges that he was a drunkard-Mifflin continued to be elected to positions of responsibility-as President and Governor of Pennsylvania, delegate to the Constitutional Convention, as well as the highest office in the land-where he served from November 3, 1783 to November 29, 1784. Most of Mifflin's significant contributions occurred in his earlier years-in the First and Second Continental Congresses he was firm in his stand for independence and for fighting for it, and he helped obtain both men and supplies for Washington's army in the early critical period. In 1784, as President, he signed the treaty with Great Britain which ended the war. Although a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, he did not make a significant contribution-beyond signing the document. As Governor of Pennsylvania, although he was accused of negligence, he supported improvements of roads, and reformed the State penal and judicial systems. He had gradually become sympathetic to Jefferson's principles regarding State's rights, even so, he directed the Pennsylvania militia to support the Federal tax collectors in the Whiskey Rebellion. In spite of charges of corruption, the affable Mifflin remained a popular figure. A magnetic personality and an effective speaker, he managed to hold a variety of elective offices for almost thirty years of the critical Revolutionary period. Richard Henry Lee (1732-1794) His resolution "that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States," approved by the Continental Congress July 2, 1776, was the first official act of the United Colonies that set them irrevocably on the road to independence. It was not surprising that it came from Lee's pen-as early as 1768 he proposed the idea of committees of correspondence among the colonies, and in 1774 he proposed that the colonies meet in what became the Continental Congress. From the first, his eye was on independence. A wealthy Virginia planter whose ancestors had been granted extensive lands by King Charles II, Lee disdained the traditional aristocratic role and the aristocratic view. In the House of Burgesses he flatly denounced the practice of slavery. He saw independent America as "an asylum where the unhappy may find solace, and the persecuted repose." In 1764, when news of the proposed Stamp Act reached Virginia, Lee was a member of the committee of the House of Burgesses that drew up an address to the King, an official protest against such a tax. After the tax was established, Lee organized the citizens of his county into the Westmoreland Association, a group pledged to buy no British goods until the Stamp Act was repealed. At the First Continental Congress, Lee persuaded representatives from all the colonies to adopt this non-importation idea, leading to the formation of the Continental Association, which was one of the first steps toward union of the colonies. Lee also proposed to the First Continental Congress that a militia be organized and armed-the year before the first shots were fired at Lexington; but this and other proposals of his were considered too radical-at the time. Three days after Lee introduced his resolution, in June of 1776, he was appointed by Congress to the committee responsible for drafting a declaration of independence, but he was called home when his wife fell ill, and his place was taken by his young prot'eg'e, Thomas Jefferson. Thus Lee missed the chance to draft the document-though his influence greatly shaped it and he was able to return in time to sign it. He was elected President-serving from November 30, 1784 to November 22, 1785 when he was succeeded by the second administration of John Hancock. Elected to the Constitutional Convention, Lee refused to attend, but as a member of the Congress of the Confederation, he contributed to another great document, the Northwest Ordinance, which provided for the formation of new States from the Northwest Territory. When the completed Constitution was sent to the States for ratification, Lee opposed it as anti-democratic and anti-Christian. However, as one of Virginia's first Senators, he helped assure passage of the amendments that, he felt, corrected many of the document's gravest faults-the Bill of Rights. He was the great uncle of Robert E. Lee and the scion of a great family tradition. Nathaniel Gorham (1738-1796) Another self-made man, Gorham was one of the many successful Boston merchants who risked all he had for the cause of freedom. He was first elected to the Massachusetts General Court in 1771. His honesty and integrity won his acclaim and was thus among the first delegates chose to serve in the Continental Congress. He remained in public service throughout the war and into the Constitutional period, though his greatest contribution was his call for a stronger central government. But even though he was an avid federalist, he did not believe that the union could-or even should-be maintained peaceably for more than a hundred years. He was convinced that eventually, in order to avoid civil or cultural war, smaller regional interests should pursue an independent course. His support of a new constitution was rooted more in pragmatism than ideology. When John Hancock was unable to complete his second term as President, Gorham was elected to succeed him-serving from June 6, 1786 to February 1, 1787. It was during this time that the Congress actually entertained the idea of asking Prince Henry-the brother of Frederick II of Prussia-and Bonnie Prince Charlie-the leader of the ill-fated Scottish Jacobite Rising and heir of the Stuart royal line-to consider the possibility of establishing a constitutional monarch in America. It was a plan that had much to recommend it but eventually the advocates of republicanism held the day. During the final years of his life, Gorham was concerned with several speculative land deals which nearly cost him his entire fortune. Arthur St. Clair (1734-1818) Born and educated in Edinburgh, Scotland during the tumultuous days of the final Jacobite Rising and the Tartan Suppression, St. Clair was the only president of the United States born and bred on foreign soil. Though most of his family and friends abandoned their devastated homeland in the years following the Battle of Culloden-after which nearly a third of the land was depopulated through emigration to America-he stayed behind to learn the ways of the hated Hanoverian English in the Royal Navy. His plan was to learn of the enemy's military might in order to fight another day. During the global conflict of the Seven Years War-generally known as the French and Indian War-he was stationed in the American theater. Afterward, he decided to settle in Pennsylvania where many of his kin had established themselves. His civic-mindedness quickly became apparent: he helped to organize both the New Jersey and the Pennsylvania militias, led the Continental Army's Canadian expedition, and was elected Congress. His long years of training in the enemy camp was finally paying off. He was elected President in 1787-and he served from February 2 of that year until January 21 of the next. Following his term of duty in the highest office in the land, he became the first Governor of the Northwest Territory and the founder of Cincinnati. Though he briefly supported the idea of creating a constitutional monarchy under the Stuart's Bonnie Prince Charlie, he was a strident Anti-Federalist-believing that the proposed federal constitution would eventually allow for the intrusion of government into virtually every sphere and aspect of life. He even predicted that under the vastly expanded centralized power of the state the taxing powers of bureaucrats and other unelected officials would eventually confiscate as much as a quarter of the income of the citizens-a notion that seemed laughable at the time but that has proven to be ominously modest in light of our current governmental leviathan. St. Clair lived to see the hated English tyrants who destroyed his homeland defeated. But he despaired that his adopted home might actually create similar tyrannies and impose them upon themselves. Cyrus Griffin (1736-1796) Like Peyton Randolph, he was trained in London's Inner Temple to be a lawyer-and thus was counted among his nation's legal elite. Like so many other Virginians, he was an anti-federalist, though he eventually accepted the new Constitution with the promise of the Bill of Rights as a hedge against the establishment of an American monarchy-which still had a good deal of currency. The Articles of Confederation afforded such freedoms that he had become convinced that even with the incumbent loss of liberty, some new form of government would be required. A prot'eg'e of George Washington-having worked with him on several speculative land deals in the West-he was a reluctant supporter of the Constitutional ratifying process. It was during his term in the office of the Presidency-the last before the new national compact went into effect-that ratification was formalized and finalized. He served as the nation's chief executive from January 22, 1788 until George Washington's inauguration on April 30, 1789. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e05_1371659875 socialism-rocks The Forgotten Presidents (The presidents before George Washington) history Wed, 19 Jun 2013 09:38:33 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=29a_1371648890 english-patriot33 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/online-quran-teaching-pakistan Concerns over online Qur'an teaching as ex-Pakistan militants instruct pupils Religious websites and instructors enjoy mini-boom reading Qur'an online as British Muslims tap into distance teaching With his track record as a member of the political arm of a banned terrorist organisation, Mian Shahzib is unlikely to ever be given a visa to enter Britain. But that does not stop the jovial 33-year-old from giving British children religious instruction every day from the comfort of his home in Pakistan. He spends hours each night sitting under a fluorescent light in the courtyard of a small mosque in Lahore, peering into a laptop as children first from the Middle East, then Europe and North America spend half an hour after school talking to him over a faltering Skype line. "Put on your cap and wash your hands," he told a 12-year-old boy sitting in a large office chair in his parents' home in Edinburgh. After checking the boy had memorised various prayers to get him through the day, including a special blessing for exiting and entering the toilet, he got down to business, helping the boy read aloud the classical Arabic of a few verses of the Qur'an. The fact that a hardcore Islamist and long-term follower of the UN-proscribed Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) has daily access to children in the west is likely to fuel concerns about religious radicals spreading their message. Shahzib's website, Easy Qur'an Memorising, makes no mention of his history and is one of hundreds of such online companies, some of which advertise on satellite channels broadcasting to the Pakistani diaspora. They are part of a little-known outsourcing boom fuelled by parents of Pakistani origin turning to Qur'an teachers in Pakistan. "It's just like a call centre where you are saving a lot of money by getting someone overseas to do it much more cheaply," said Fawad Rana, a property developer in Solihull who has used Qur'an teachers for his two sons for the past three years. Rana makes an online payment of lb30 a month to Faiz-e-Quran, one of the larger online religious education companies, which gets his children three half-hour sessions a week. "And there's the convenience factor - the last thing kids want to do is spend half an hour travelling to the nearest mosque and then not even getting 10 minutes of one-on-one tuition," he said. Although Faiz-e-Quran say it takes care to scrutinise and monitor all the teachers it employs, the industry is increasingly dominated by one-man operations. After several years working on his business, Shahzib now has about a dozen students aged 12 to 18 scattered all over the world. It's a long way from his past role as an activist with JuD, a Pakistani Islamist organisation known for its holy war against Indian rule in the contested region of Kashmir. The organisation is on the UN's list of sanctioned organisations because of its alleged association with al-Qaida and is considered a front for Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group behind the 2008 terrorist attacks on Mumbai. As a young man, Shahzib helped prepare young JuD militants before they crossed the line of control that marks the unrecognised border between Pakistani and Indian-held Kashmir. His job was to motivate them with religious teachings and to fill their heads with tales of Indian soldiers raping Muslim women. He was briefly arrested after falling out with his old mentor, Hafiz Saeed, the JuD leader, who lives openly in Lahore but who is subject to a US reward of $10m (lb6.36m) for information leading to his arrest. Shahzib believes Saeed has bent to demands from Pakistan's security establishment to rein in militancy in Kashmir. "I told him to his face that he had betrayed the jihad," he said. These days he still follows the "philosophy" of JuD, even if he is not an active member. He supports the fight against foreign forces in Afghanistan. But he does not think the struggle should be taken to the streets of Britain. "It is completely wrong to attack soldiers in Britain," he said. "If a young man in the UK wants to support jihad I support that, but come to Afghanistan to fight, not the UK." The Guardian was told of other online tutors with radical backgrounds or who are members of extreme or sectarian organisations, but it is impossible to know how widespread the phenomenon is in a completely unregulated industry. Sultan Chaudri, the owner of Faiz-e-Quran, said his company is at pains to scrutinise all 13 teachers who work for him to ensure radicals are not employed. "All the problems we are seeing in Pakistan and Afghanistan is because these young children get sent to madrasas where no one knows what sort of education they are getting or what kind of indoctrination is taking place." When Chaudri, a retired colonel, started his business four years ago his marketing team had to assure parents that there would be no such risk with online teaching. "They used to say we are not going to get education from a maulvi in Pakistan because he is going to teach bad things to my child," he said. "Parents realise now that there is no risk because they can see the lessons right in front of their own eyes." Inspired by a call-centre model of global outsourcing, Chaudri's staff work in shifts from an office in Lahore. In a country plagued by power shortages his office uses three generators and subscribes to four different internet providers managed by a duty IT supervisor. Five clocks show the time in all the areas where his 200 students live. Outsourced Qur'an teaching started about six years ago and there are now a handful of big players. Although there are no reliable figures on how many children around the world are being taught by Pakistan-based teachers everyone seems to think it is growing fast. "We were recommended it by a cousin in America, and we've passed it on to lots of our friends," said Rana. "When we first found out we just thought, wow, what a wonderful service they are providing." According to Chaudri, the business is fragmenting, with teachers striking off on their own to establish "one computer academies", often poaching customers from companies such as Faiz-e-Quran. "They are so dishonest," he said. "In the last four years I have seen so many teachers that have run away with so many students." For young men who have only had a religious training and often struggle to find regular employment, the prospect of earning decent wages teaching Qur'an reading online is extremely attractive. Chaudri does not allow his staff to use a webcam when teaching. Instead, the teachers in Lahore simply share a page of text from the Qur'an which the student, who will rarely be able to understand the Arabic words, then attempts to read. "It is not good to let them see into the houses," he said. "I have seen that after 10 days the teachers will fall in love with the lady of the house, or the daughter of the house; they will send letters saying 'I love you very much.'" Also, he wants to spare his clients from having to look at the unkempt religious young men who work for him. "They don't take care of their beard. They are not very pleasant to look at." http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=29a_1371648890 english-patriot33 Concerns over online Qur'an teaching as ex-Pakistan militants instruct pupils islam, muslims,quaran book of evil , outlaw islam, Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:46:45 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4dc_1371641860 Grover3 Will apocalyptic genocide soon occur in our own country with Americans the victims of a scheme as diabolical as something out of a third world dictatorship or the theme of a grotesque horror movie? Are FEMA camps already set up across the land, ready to house those who don't go along with a 'new world order'? Are foreign troops ready to help enslave Americans, making us prisoners in our home land? Videographer Michal Richter has put together this video giving us a great overview of what has happened to America behind the scenes the past several years and a terrifying glimpse into our possible future. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4dc_1371641860 Grover3 FEMA CAMPS AND CAPTIVITY FEMA camps, USA, revolution, genocide, NWO Wed, 19 Jun 2013 03:12:16 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fa0_1371625343 socialism-rocks Is it advisable for one who is not an expert on economic and social issues to express views on the subject of socialism? I believe for a number of reasons that it is. Let us first consider the question from the point of view of scientific knowledge. It might appear that there are no essential methodological differences between astronomy and economics: scientists in both fields attempt to discover laws of general acceptability for a circumscribed group of phenomena in order to make the interconnection of these phenomena as clearly understandable as possible. But in reality such methodological differences do exist. The discovery of general laws in the field of economics is made difficult by the circumstance that observed economic phenomena are often affected by many factors which are very hard to evaluate separately. In addition, the experience which has accumulated since the beginning of the so-called civilized period of human history has -- as is well known -- been largely influenced and limited by causes which are by no means exclusively economic in nature. For example, most of the major states of history owed their existence to conquest. The conquering peoples established themselves, legally and economically, as the privileged class of the conquered country. They seized for themselves a monopoly of the land ownership and appointed a priesthood from among their own ranks. The priests, in control of education, made the class division of society into a permanent institution and created a system of values by which the people were thenceforth, to a large extent unconsciously, guided in their social behavior. But historic tradition is, so to speak, of yesterday; nowhere have we really overcome what Thorstein Veblen called "the predatory phase" of human development. The observable economic facts belong to that phase and even such laws as we can derive from them are not applicable to other phases. Since the real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development, economic science in its present state can throw little light on the socialist society of the future. Second, socialism is directed toward a social-ethical end. Science, however, cannot create ends and, even less, instill them in human beings; science, at most, can supply the means by which to attain certain ends. But the ends themselves are conceived by personalities with lofty ethical ideals and -- if these ends are not stillborn, but vital and vigorous -- are adopted and carried forward by those many human beings who, half-unconsciously, determine the slow evolution of society. For these reasons, we should be on our guard not to overestimate science and scientific methods when it is a question of human problems; and we should not assume that experts are the only ones who have a right to express themselves on questions affecting the organization of society. Innumerable voices have been asserting for some time now that human society is passing through a crisis, that its stability has been gravely shattered. It is characteristic of such a situation that individuals feel indifferent or even hostile toward the group, small or large, to which they belong. In order to illustrate my meaning, let me record here a personal experience. I recently discussed with an intelligent and well-disposed man the threat of another war, which in my opinion would seriously endanger the existence of mankind, and I remarked that only a supranational organization would offer protection from that danger. Thereupon my visitor, very calmly and coolly, said to me: "Why are you so deeply opposed to the disappearance of the human race?" I am sure that as little as a century ago no one would have so lightly made a statement of this kind. It is the statement of a man who has striven in vain to attain an equilibrium within himself and has more or less lost hope of succeeding. It is the expression of a painful solitude and isolation from which so many people are suffering in these days. What is the cause? Is there a way out? It is easy to raise such questions, but difficult to answer them with any degree of assurance. I must try, however, as best I can, although I am very conscious of the fact that our feelings and strivings are often contradictory and obscure and that they cannot be expressed in easy and simple formulas. Man is, at one and the same time, a solitary being and a social being. As a solitary being, he attempts to protect his own existence and that of those who are closest to him, to satisfy his personal desires, and to develop his innate abilities. As a social being, he seeks to gain the recognition and affection of his fellow human beings, to share in their pleasures, to comfort them in their sorrows, and to improve their conditions of life. Only the existence of these varied, frequently conflicting strivings accounts for the special character of a man, and their specific combination determines the extent to which an individual can achieve an inner equilibrium and can contribute to the well-being of society. It is quite possible that the relative strength of these two drives is, in the main, fixed by inheritance. But the personality that finally emerges is largely formed by the environment in which a man happens to find himself during his development, by the structure of the society in which he grows up, by the tradition of that society, and by its appraisal of particular types of behavior. The abstract concept "society" means to the individual human being the sum total of his direct and indirect relations to his contemporaries and to all the people of earlier generations. The individual is able to think, feel, strive, and work by himself; but he depends so much upon society -- in his physical, intellectual, and emotional existence -- that it is impossible to think of him, or to understand him, outside the framework of society. It is "society" which provides man with food, clothing, a home, the tools of work, language, the forms of thought, and most of the content of thought; his life is made possible through the labor and the accomplishments of the many millions past and present who are all hidden behind the small word "society." It is evident, therefore, that the dependence of the individual upon society is a fact of nature which cannot be abolished -- just as in the case of ants and bees. However, while the whole life process of ants and bees is fixed down to the smallest detail by rigid, hereditary instincts, the social pattern and interrelationships of human beings are very variable and susceptible to change. Memory, the capacity to make new combinations, the gift of oral communication have made possible developments among human beings which are not dictated by biological necessities. Such developments manifest themselves in traditions, institutions, and organizations; in literature; in scientific and engineering accomplishments; in works of art. This explains how it happens that, in a certain sense, man can influence his life through his own conduct, and that in this process conscious thinking and wanting can play a part. Man acquires at birth, through heredity, a biological constitution which we must consider fixed and unalterable, including the natural urges which are characteristic of the human species. In addition, during his lifetime, he acquires a cultural constitution which he adopts from society through communication and through many other types of influences. It is this cultural constitution which, with the passage of time, is subject to change and which determines to a very large extent the relationship between the individual and society Modern anthropology has taught us, through comparative investigation of so-called primitive cultures, that the social behavior of human beings may differ greatly, depending upon prevailing cultural patterns and the types of organization which predominate in society. It is on this that those who are striving to improve the lot of man may ground their hopes: human beings are not condemned, because of their biological constitution, to annihilate each other or to be at the mercy of a cruel, self-inflicted fate. If we ask ourselves how the structure of society and the cultural attitude of man should be changed in order to make human life as satisfying as possible, we should constantly be conscious of the fact that there are certain conditions which we are unable to modify. As mentioned before, the biological nature of man is, for all practical purposes, not subject to change. Furthermore, technological and demographic developments of the last few centuries have created conditions which are here to stay. In relatively densely settled populations with the goods which are indispensable to their continued existence, an extreme division of labor and a highly centralized productive apparatus are absolutely necessary. The time -- which, looking back, seems so idyllic -- is gone forever when individuals or relatively small groups could be completely self-sufficient. It is only a slight exaggeration to say that mankind constitutes even now a planetary community of production and consumption. I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society. The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labor -- not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. In this respect, it is important to realize that the means of production -- that is to say, the entire productive capacity that is needed for producing consumer goods as well as additional capital goods -- may legally be, and for the most part are, the private property of individuals. For the sake of simplicity, in the discussion that follows I shall call "workers" all those who do not share in the ownership of the means of production -- although this does not quite correspond to the customary use of the term. The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. In so far as the labor contract is "free," what the worker receives is determined not by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by the capitalists' requirements for labor power in relation to the number of workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his product. Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of the smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights. The situation prevailing in an economy based on the private ownership of capital is thus characterized main principles: first, means of production (capital) are privately owned and the owners dispose of them as they see fit; second, the labor contract is free. Of course, there is no such thing as a pure capitalist society in this sense. In particular, it should be noted that the workers, through long and bitter political struggles, have succeeded in securing a somewhat improved form of the "free labor contract" for certain categories of workers. But taken as a whole, the present-day economy does not differ much from "pure" capitalism. Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those able and willing to work will always be in a position to find employment; an "army of unemployed" almost always exists. The worker is constantly in fear of losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid workers do not provide a profitable market, the production of consumers' goods is restricted, and great hardship is the consequence. Technological progress frequently results in more unemployment rather than in an easing of the burden of work for all. The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before. This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow-men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society. Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet socialism. A planned economy as such may be accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. The achievement of socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it possible, in view of the far-reaching centralization of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured? http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fa0_1371625343 socialism-rocks Why Socialism? By Albert Einstein socialism einstien Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:11:23 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fb9_1371604030 Detroit Iron NEW YORK - Jackhammers are digging under a New York City house once occupied by a famous gangster who is said to have buried victims in familiar places. The digging started Monday in Queens' South Ozone neighborhood. It was home to James Burke, a Lucchese crime family associate known as "Jimmy the Gent." A character based on Burke was played by Robert De Niro in the movie "Goodfellas." Burke died behind bars in 1996, two decades after authorities say he masterminded a nearly $6 million robbery at New York's Kennedy Airport. The Queens house is still owned by the Burke family, but others now live there. An FBI spokesman confirmed agents were investigating but gave no details. Burke owned a Queens saloon that fellow mobster Henry Hill described as Burke's private cemetery. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/18/fbi-digging-for-remains-at-former-home-ny-mobster-who-inspired-robert-de-niro/#ixzz2WcVYX19D http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fb9_1371604030 Detroit Iron FBI digging for remains at former home of NY mobster who inspired Robert De Niro character James Burke, Robert De Niro, &quot;Goodfellas.&quot; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:04:00 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=dc9_1371502742 john4891 Everyone is wondering (at least I am) who is Ben Rhodes, a 30-something who ascended from literally nowhere to be what seems a main driving force behind Obama's foreign policy. He is credited with convincing the president to embrace the Arab Spring, convincing the president to bomb Libya, and, now, convincing the president to start yet another war, this time against Syria. Who is he? How did a 24-year old aspiring fiction-writer in 2002 suddenly become one of the drafters of not only the 9/11 Commission report but also the Iraq Study Group Report? Then move on to Obama's presidential campaign as a speechwriter and then to Deputy National Security Advisor, from which he announced the beginning of a US war on Syria while the president met with supporters in the East Room of the White House? Those familiar with Washington know that such miraculous ascents rarely happen on their own and are equally rarely the result of pure, raw talent. There might be some clues to his brother David's also improbable rise -- from a lowly production assistant at Fox News at the end of the 1990s to covering presidential elections for Fox News (including the one where his brother was writing Obama's speeches) to the lofty position of president of CBS news by 2011! The excellent Russ Baker was wondering about all this way back in March, when he noticed a typical New York Times gloss-over article on Rhodes. Aside from his quite unbelievable rise, we do know that he was catastrophically wrong on Libya, where a Time Magazine article pointed out at the time that he was the strong counter-weight to those who argued for more caution on the use of force. Here is how Time put it back in 2011, when the interventionists were on the verge of their triumph: Obama and his aides know they are taking a big risk. "It's a huge gamble," says the senior administration official. The administration knows, for example, that al Qaeda, which has active cells in Libya, will try to exploit the power vacuum that will come with a weak or ousted Gaddafi. They also know that the U.S. will have to rely on other countries for the crucial task of rebuilding Libya and that the region may in fact be further destabilized by intervention. Outweighing that, the National Security Council's Ben Rhodes says, are the long-term benefits of saving lives, protecting the possibility of democratic change elsewhere in the region and-tellingly-ensuring "the ability of collective action to be a tool in circumstances like this." Rhodes carried the day on Libya and he was completely incorrect in his assessment, his analysis, his prediction, and his prescription. Anyone who bothers to look at Libya today, which is run by gangs of roving extremist death squads would see what a fool Ben Rhodes is for his promise of "democratic change" in Libya -- and how much more foolish is the president for following the advice of such a person. Rhodes is named as the source of the White House-altered CIA talking points on Benghazi, where references to the Islamist extremist role in the attack on US Ambassador Chris Stevens were erased. It is understandable why the fiction writer Rhodes would want to toss that reference in the circular file: that particular sub-plot did not fit in with the main theme he had already painstakingly written, namely that the US attack on Libya would end the killing, stabilize the country, and bring about a democratic revolution that would continue to spread through the region. Fiction writers understand that a sub-plot could take your readers too far off the main narrative of the story and cause serious structural problems. That is why there are so many rounds of re-writes. The killing of Stevens and the rise of murderous -- and racist -- extremists did not fit the plot, so it had to be deleted. Being wrong on war when you are on the sending end of death and destruction is less obvious to your countrymen than when you are on the receiving end. But anyone living in Libya after Rhodes' "life-saving" mission knows full well the kind of liberation that comes at the tip of a US missile. And neighboring countries know as well what happens when a nation armed to the teeth with weapons, including chemical weapons, completely implodes after its infrastructure is destroyed by foreign attack. In Washington, though, being catastrophically wrong on Libya eminently qualifies Ben Rhodes to take the lead on US Syria policy. http://tinyurl.com/kwf9oq2 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=dc9_1371502742 john4891 Ben Rhodes, the Zionist <span class="highlight">Behind</span> Obama's Libya and Syria Policies Syria, Libya, Benghazi Sat, 15 Jun 2013 15:21:03 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f6e_1371323261 Its_Avril_Fools If you've played the video game Bioshock Infinite you're familiar with your charge Elizabeth. She is your reason d'etre in the game as you are charged with saving her while fighting off villains with machine guns and magic powers in the city in the sky called "Columbia". Here's the women doing the voice acting and the girl selected by Irrational as the official face of Elizabeth. BioShock Infinite Cosplayer Becomes Official Face of ElizabethAnna Moleva will portray Elizabeth in box art, key art, ads and at events. Irrational has hired Russian cosplayer Anna Moleva as the official face of BioShock Infinite's Elizabeth. In a blog post on Irrational's official site, creative director Ken Levine explains that Moleva's stunning Elizabeth cosplay inspired the team to bring her on to represent the character. Elizabeth Cosplayer Anna Moliva "We were so amazed by her dedication and her resemblance to Elizabeth that we decided to ask her if she'd like to be involved in helping bring Elizabeth to life in our box, our key art and our upcoming television ad," Levine wrote. "Today we are very pleased and delighted to announce that Anna is the official face of Elizabeth!" In addition to appearing in promotional art and advertisements, Moleva will also make "special appearances at select events." "As soon as I saw her, I knew I HAD to do it," Moleva said of her Elizabeth cosplay. "I love the first two parts of BioShock, so ever since Infinite was announced I followed the promotion campaign. Then when Liz's appearance was finalized - and I saw what I think is a remarkable resemblance between us - I as a cosplayer couldn't just ignore it. It was really hard, because cosplay isn't just about recreating the appearance. It's about acting, portraying the character as a whole. At the moment, we knew very little - almost nothing - about her as a character (in fact, we don't know much now, either). So I'm really glad that everything worked out for me." http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/12/03/bioshock-infinite-cosplayer-becomes-official-face-of-elizabeth For more on the other woman behind Elizabeth -- voice actress Courtnee Draper -- watch the behind-the-scenes video Courtney Draper http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f6e_1371323261 Its_Avril_Fools The Women <span class="highlight">Behind</span> the Voice and Face of Elizabeth from Bioshock Infinite bioshock infinite, video games