Shocking: Watch This Toddler Show Just How Terrifying Radical Islam Is In Only 44 Seconds

childwithak47

In many American schools, if a child points his finger like a gun, or shapes a Pop-Tart into a pistol, or wears an NRA t-shirt, the anti-gun folks will overreact with threats of suspension or worse. However, in Afghanistan, a three-year-old will threaten a cameraman with his very own AK-47 just for filming him. A BBC cameraman was talking to a Taliban toddler at his village outside of Kabul when he asked the boy what he was going to do with the gun. The boy replied,

“I’m going to shoot people, tak-tak-tak.”

The boy asked why the cameraman was taking his picture. The cameraman told him,

“We are taking your picture because you are sitting with a gun.”

The boy responded with, 

“Then watch out, I’ll shoot you. Now my father comes and he’ll beat you up.”

h/t: IJReview

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Chris Matthews: Democrat Candidates Avoiding Obama Like He “Has Ebola”

stabbed

With political backing dwindling for Obama nationwide and his policies (foreign or domestic) not garnering any support, Democratic candidates are distancing themselves from Obama for this year’s midterm election.

“It’s like Obama has Ebola,” MSNBC host Chris Matthews said after seeing video of Michelle Nunn (D-GA) and Mark Begich (D-AK) avoiding questions directed at them about voting for President Obama in 2008 and 2012.

“I wasn’t near him! I didn’t touch him,” Matthews mocked, portraying the candidates who could do nothing but walk past silently to avoid positioning themselves with Obama in order to get elected.

“They can tell they don’t want to be caught on camera, because it’ll turn into an ad,” said Perry Bacon.

 

H/T TPNN

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

GOP Candidate Discovers Startling Voting Machine “Accident” That Could Cost Him Election

votingtouchscreen

When early voting began in Cook County, Illinois, Monday, a Republican state representative candidate attempted to vote for himself and, due to a technical glitch, the vote was cast for his opponent.

Watchdog.com reported earlier this week that Jim Moynihan attempted to vote for himself at Schaumburg Public Library Monday when he experienced the problem.

“I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast the vote for my opponent…You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.

Illinois Review, a right-of-center publication, noted that ultimately Moynihan was able to vote for the candidates of his choosing, but whenever he tried to vote for a Republican, a Democrat would be registered in the machine:

“While using a touch screen voting machine in Schaumburg, Moynihan voted for several races on the ballot, only to find that whenever he voted for a Republican candidate, the machine registered the vote for a Democrat in the same race.

“He notified the election judge at his polling place and demonstrated that it continued to cast a vote for the opposing candidate’s party. Moynihan was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates, including his own race. It is unknown if the machine in question has been removed from service or is still in operation.”

Moynihan told the Review he was concerned for voters that they might not get the opportunity to vote for the candidate of their choice, especially if they are in a hurry. He did not know if the glitch was intentional, however.

“I cannot say whether or not this was intentional, but Cook County voters deserve better and should not have their right to vote suppressed.”

 

H/T Fox News

Photo Credit: usembassy.gov

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Shocking: 3 Of The Last Americans You Would Ever Expect Just Got Caught Trying To Join ISIS

ISIS

Three teenage girls from suburban Denver may have been trying to join up with ISIS in Syria after stealing their parents’ money and flying to Germany.

The girls were reported missing after they skipped school Friday; but their families had no idea where they had gone, according to Glenn Thompson, bureau chief of the Araphoe County Sheriff’s Department.

However, FBI spokeswoman Suzie Payne said that the girls were stopped in the Frankfurt, Germany airport over the weekend and then returned to Colorado.

One official said the girls were heading to Turkey en route to Syria.

Another US official called the case “concerning” both to the community and the country. That official said that they would be trying to determine if there were “like-minded” people in the girls’ social circles.

The girls took their passports and $2,000 of their parents’ money.

What do you think? Why would three teenage girls from Colorado want to join up with the group of thugs known as ISIS?

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Hollow Justice And Courts Of Order In An Age Of Government-Sanctioned Tyranny

Photo credit: Talk Radio News Service (Flickr)

“The Constitution is not neutral. It was designed to take the government off the backs of the people.”—Justice William O. Douglas

Justice in America makes less sense with each passing day.

A Michigan couple that has been raising chickens in their backyard as a source of healthy food for their family could get up to 90 days in jail for violating a local ban on backyard hens. A Kentucky prison guard who was charged with 25 counts of sexual abuse against female inmates, trafficking controlled substances, and 50 counts of official misconduct walks away with no jail time and seven years’ probation. A 53-year-old Virginia man is facing 20 years in jail for kidnapping, despite the fact that key evidence shows him to be innocent and his accuser a liar; yet the courts claim they’re unable to do anything about it. Meanwhile, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent refusal to hear the case of Jones v. U.S., judges can now punish individuals for crimes of which they may never have been convicted or even charged.

With every ruling handed down, it becomes more apparent that we live in an age of hollow justice, with government courts, largely lacking in vision and scope, rendering narrow rulings focused on the letter of the law. This is true at all levels of the judiciary, but especially so in the highest court of the land, the U.S. Supreme Court, which is seemingly more concerned with establishing order and protecting government agents than with upholding the rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Given the turbulence of our age, with its police overreach, military training drills on American soil, domestic surveillance, SWAT team raids, asset forfeiture, wrongful convictions, and corporate corruption, the need for a guardian of the people’s rights has never been greater.

Yet when presented with an opportunity to weigh in on these issues, what does our current Supreme Court usually do? It ducks. Prevaricates. Remains silent. Speaks to the narrowest possible concern. More often than not, it gives the government and its corporate sponsors the benefit of the doubt. Rarely do the concerns of the populace prevail.

In this way, preoccupied with their personal politics; cocooned in a priggish world of privilege; partial to those with power, money, and influence; and narrowly focused on a shrinking docket (the court accepts on average 80 cases out of 8,000 each year), the justices of the current Supreme Court rarely venture beyond their rarefied comfort zones.

Every so often, the justices toss a bone to those who fear they have abdicated their allegiance to the Constitution. In Riley v. California, for instance, a unanimous Court ruled that police need warrants in order to physically search the cellphones of people they arrest. Even in that instance, the victory rang hollow to those who understand that government agents, equipped with military-grade surveillance equipment, don’t need physical access to our phones in order to know who we’ve been talking to or texting and what we’ve been saying.

Too often, however, as I document in A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, the Supreme Court tends to march in lockstep with the police state.

Pages: 1 2 3 4

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom