Category Archives: DHS

Homeland Security chief says we should “give voice to the plight of Muslims” as Obama administration opens immigration floodgates to Muslims

heads in sand

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a cabinet-level department of the federal government which is charged with the primary responsibilities of protecting the United States and its territories from and responding to terrorist attacks, man-made accidents, and natural disasters.

Like his boss, King Merde in the White House, DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson also adamantly refuses to call the Islamic State “Islamic” or a “state.”

Even a Democratic member of Congress, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), openly disagrees with the Obama administration’s ostrich-like denial. Beginning at the 2:54 mark in the video below, Gabbard says:

“Unless you accurately identify who your enemy is, then you can’t come up with an offensive strategy, a winning strategy, to defeat that enemy.”

Worse than his denial, at the recent 3-day White House summit on violent extremism that began with an opening prayer by an imam, Sheikh Sa’ad Musse Roble of the Minneapolis’ World Peace [sic] Organization, Johnson actually said (00:10 mark in the CSPAN video that you can view here):

We in the administration, in government, should give voice to the plight of Muslims living in this country and the discrimination that they face.

How come Obama isn’t giving voice to the plight of “right-wing” Americans, especially sovereign citizens, but instead identifies those Americans as “extremist terrorists”? (See “Obama downplays blood-thirsty ISIS but targets right-wing Americans as extremist terrorists“)

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is opening the floodgates to foreign Muslims.

Paul Sperry reports for Investor’s Business Daily, Feb. 19, 2015, that between 2010 and 2013, the Obama administration imported almost 300,000 new immigrants from Muslim nations — more (legal) immigrants than the U.S. let in from Central America and Mexico combined over that period.

Many of the recent Muslim immigrants are from terrorist hot spots like Iraq, where the Islamic State operates. From 2010-2013, Obama ushered in 41,094 Iraqi nationals from there.

Now the State Department says it will quadruple the number of refugees brought here from Syria, where ISIS is headquartered. The U.S. will admit as many as 2,000 Syrian nationals by the end of fiscal year 2015, up from 525 since fiscal 2011.

This is a sea change in immigration flows, and it threatens national security. But the threat Muslim immigrants pose to homeland security was not addressed during the White House summit on terrorism. Instead, VPOS Joe Biden assured Muslim groups gathered during one session of the summit that the “wave” of Muslim immigration is “not going to stop.”

H/t Clash Daily

~Éowyn

Obama downplays blood-thirsty ISIS but targets right-wing Americans as extremist terrorists

The jihadists who call themselves the Islamic State (formerly ISIS or ISIL) are Islamic fundamentalists who, convinced that the apocalypse is imminent and that they are its agents, are committed to purifying the world in the name of Allah by killing vast numbers of people. (See “Major U.S. magazine breaks with Obama admin by calling ISIS Islamic and apocalyptic“)

But Barack Obama simply refuses to call the Islamic State, who now controls a third of Syria, as either Islamic or a state. Instead, in his speech of Sept. 10, 2014 and since, he calls ISIS jihadists — who have been slaughtering Christians in Iraq, Syria, and most recently beheading 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians in Libya — generic “terrorists.”

Incredibly, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf recently proclaimed that America can’t win against the Islamic State “by killing them” and ought instead to focus on addressing their root problem of a poor economy and a lack of job opportunities.

While treating the jihadists with denial and kid gloves, Obama doesn’t hesitate to identify millions of “right wing” Americans as “extremist terrorists,” the latest example being an intelligence assessment by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Evan Perez and Wes Bruer report for CNN, Feb. 20, 2015, that a new intelligence assessment, circulated by the DHS this month, focuses on the “domestic terror threat from right-wing sovereign citizen extremists,” who reject government authority, carry out sporadic terror attacks on police, and threaten to attack other government buildings.

Some federal and local law enforcement groups view the domestic terror threat from sovereign citizen groups as equal to — and in some cases greater than — the threat from foreign Islamic terror groups, such as ISIS.​

Note: The sovereign citizen movement is a loosely affiliated group of Americans who believe they are free people and reject many elements of federal, state and local governance, including, but not limited to, taxation. According to Colorado Prowers County Undersheriff Ron Trowbridge, he was told at a Colorado State Police training session on April 1, 2013, that sovereign citizen groups include Americans who believe the United States was founded on godly principles and “fundamentalist” Christians who take the Bible literally. (See Trail Dust’s “Have you ever heard of a ‘Sovereign Citizen’?“)

The DHS report, produced in coordination with the FBI, defines sovereign citizens as “extremists” who believe they can ignore laws and that their individual rights are under attack in routine daily instances such as a traffic stop or being required to obey a court order. The report counts 24 “violent” sovereign citizen-related attacks across the U.S. since 2010, including:

  • In 2012, a father and son allegedly engaged in a shootout with police in Louisiana in which two officers were killed and several others wounded. The confrontation began with an officer pulling them over for a traffic violation. The men were sovereign citizen “extremists” who claimed police had no authority over them.
  • In 2013, a man who held anti-government views carried out a shooting attack on three Transportation Security Administration (TSA) employees at Los Angeles International Airport, killing one TSA officer.
  • In 2014, a couple killed two police officers and a bystander at a Las Vegas Walmart store.

Other findings in the DHS intelligence assessment include:

  • An expectation that sovereign citizen “violence during 2015 will occur most frequently during routine law enforcement encounters at a suspect’s home, during enforcement stops and at government offices.”
  • “Law enforcement officers will remain the primary target of (sovereign citizen) violence over the next year due to their role in physically enforcing laws and regulations.”

Mark Potok, a senior fellow at the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center, said that by some estimates, there are as many as 300,000 people involved in some way with sovereign citizen extremism, with a core of perhaps 100,000. Potok says sovereign citizen groups have attracted support because of poor economic conditions. Some groups travel the country pitching their ideology as a way to help homeowners escape foreclosure or get out of debt by simply ignoring the courts and bankruptcy law.

While groups like ISIS and al Qaeda garner the most attention, for many local cops, the danger is closer to home. A survey last year of state and local law enforcement officers listed “sovereign citizen terrorists” as the top domestic terror threat, ahead of foreign Islamists and domestic militia groups. The survey was part of a study produced by the University of Maryland’s National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism.

Sheikh Sa'ad Musse Roble at WH summit2nd and 3rd from left: Imam Abdisalam Adam of the Islamic Civil Society of America and Imam Sheikh Sa’ad Musse Roble

The DHS intelligence assessment coincides with the Obama administration’s convening of a White House summit on fighting “violent extremism” last week.

Penny Starr reports for CNS News, Feb. 19, 2015, that the second day of the summit had opened with a Muslim prayer by an imam, Sheikh Sa’ad Musse Roble of the Minneapolis’ World Peace [sic] Organization, following remarks by Obama administration officials and Democratic members of Congress. No other faiths were represented.

This is not the first time that the DHS identifies “right wing” Americans as “domestic terrorists.

In 2012, a DHS-funded study, Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970-2008 — by the same University of Maryland National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism that conducted the 2014 survey of state and local police officers — characterized Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.

In fact, University of Maryland’s National Consortium was launched with the aid of DHS, that is, taxpayers’, funding to the tune of $12 million.

See also:

H/t ZeroHedge and FOTM’s dee

~Éowyn

Obama emergency order to restart amnesty in defiance of federal judge Hanen

Obama gives America the finger

This creature in the White House really must be the devil himself.

Mike Lillis reports for The Hill, Feb. 20, 2015, that the Department of Justice (DOJ) plans to seek an emergency stay that would essentially undo U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen‘s injunction from earlier this week. If the stay is granted, the government could restart a pair of amnesty executive memoranda that will shield millions of illegals from deportation.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said DOJ will file for the stay by “Monday at the latest.”

The emergency stay had been sought by “immigrant rights” advocates like head of the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) Marielena Hincapié, who want to get the programs up and running as soon as possible while the appeals process plays out.

Marielena Hincapie
Making good on earlier vows, DOJ will also file a separate appeal seeking to restart the executive programs. Earnest said, “We will seek that appeal because we believe when you evaluate the legal merits of the arguments, that there is a solid legal foundation for the president to take the steps he announced last year to help reform our immigration system.”

At issue are two new initiatives launched unilaterally by Obama on Nov. 20:

  • The first expands eligibility for Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which halts deportations and allows work permits for certain undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children.
  • The second, known as DAPA, would extend similar benefits to the parents of U.S. citizens and permanent legal residents.

Combined, the programs could affect as many as 5 million immigrants living in the country illegally.

Republicans are seeking to stop both of Obama’s executive actions in a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security, but the bill has been blocked repeatedly by Senate Democrats, raising the possibility of a partial government shutdown next week.

Rep. Lamar Smith, a Republican from Texas and former Judiciary Committee chairman, ripped Obama’s request for an emergency stay, saying it’s “no surprise that the most partisan and imposing Department of Justice of our time would rush to defend the president’s lawless actions. Putting a stop to these overreaching executive actions isn’t about Republicans or Democrats; it’s about respecting and restoring the rule of law. This is why it’s even more important that Senate Democrats stop playing politics with the Constitution and stop blocking House legislation that would halt the president’s executive overreach.”

Many states have objected to Obama’s policies as well. Texas and 25 other states have filed a lawsuit contending the programs marked an abuse of executive authority that would cripple their budgets with exorbitant new costs.

It is that lawsuit that prompted Judge Hanen’s ruling announced near midnight last Monday to put a temporary halt on Obama’s amnesty so as to give the lawsuit the time to be heard. Hanen has not yet ruled on the merits of the states’ complaints, but said they have a significant enough case that both the DAPA and expanded DACA programs should be put on hold until the legal challenges are resolved.

The effects of the decision were immediate, as administration officials quickly announced that they would not begin accepting applications for either program until the court decisions are final. Before the ruling, the Homeland Security Department was poised to begin accepting applications for the expanded-DACA program this week, and the for the DAPA program in May. Both have been suspended indefinitely.

Hanen’s injunction does not affect the original DACA program, which remains up and running.

Gil Kerlikowske

Meanwhile, Judge Hanen’s decision is being ignored by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that is charged with border enforcement.

In an email sent to CBP agents on Wednesday, CBP Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske ordered border agents to continue the relaxed border enforcement guidelines that accompanied Obama’s executive amnesty. (National Review)

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV

See also:

~Éowyn

Federal judge stops Obama’s executive amnesty for illegals

king

To get around accusations that he bypasses Congress by issuing too many executive orders (195 at last count), Obama slyly resorts to the lesser-known presidential or executive memorandum instead, which has the same force of law as executive orders. In fact, analysis shows that Obama has issued more executive memos, numbering 198, than any U.S. president in history.

Unlike executive orders, executive memoranda are not numbered or indexed and therefore, until recently, difficult to quantify. As a result, executive memos have gone largely unexamined, despite the fact they often are as significant to everyday Americans than executive orders. (See “Obama has issued more executive orders than any U.S. president in history“)

In Obama’s case, some of the most significant actions of his presidency have come not by executive order but by presidential memoranda, notably his two executive memos last November which confer effective amnesty by refusing to deport as many as five million people who are in the U.S. illegally. Those memos are:

  1. An executive memo that expand a program that protects young immigrants from deportation if they were brought to the U.S. illegally as children. This is set to start taking effect tomorrow.
  2. An executive memo, to begin on May 19, which extends deportation protections to parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country illegally for some years.

The problem, as noted by Wikipedia, is there is no constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive actions like executive orders, executive or presidential memoranda, presidential determinations, and presidential notices. Instead, presidents look to the term “executive power” in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, which refers to the title of President as the executive, as well as Article II, Section 3, Clause 5’s instruction that the President “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” else he faces impeachment. Most executive orders therefore use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President’s sworn duties and powers as the nation’s chief executive.

All of which means that the legitimacy of executive orders, executive memos, and other executive actions is open to interpretation and dispute.

In the case of Obama’s two executive memoranda conferring effective amnesty on illegal aliens in the United States, their constitutionality is being challenged in the courts, no thanks to the supine members of Congress who actually are charged by the U.S. Constitution to make laws.

Judge Arthur J. Schwab

Judge Arthur J. Schwab

Last December, federal judge Arthur J. Schwab of the Western District of Pennsylvania, used a deportation decision to probe the constitutionality of Obama’s amnesty memorandum and declared it “unconstitutional.” Judge Schwab wrote:

President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for in the United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional.

Judge Schwab’s full decision here.

Judge Andrew Hanen

Judge Andrew Hanen

Yesterday, Feb. 16, 2015, another federal judge, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen, took it one important step further by temporarily blocking Obama’s amnesty so as to give a coalition of 26 states time to pursue a lawsuit that aims to permanently stop the orders. (My Way News)

Judge Hanen wrote in a memorandum accompanying his order that the lawsuit should go forward and that without a preliminary injunction the states will “suffer irreparable harm in this case” because “The genie would be impossible to put back into the bottle” once Obama’s amnesty memoranda are put into effect. The presence of millions of illegals aliens would then be sanctioned, which would be a “virtually irreversible” action.

The coalition of states, led by Texas and made up of mostly conservative states in the South and Midwest, argues that Obama has violated the “Take Care Clause” of the U.S. Constitution, which they say limits the scope of presidential power. They also say the order will force increased investment in law enforcement, health care and education.

In their request for the injunction, the coalition said it was necessary because it would be “difficult or impossible to undo the President’s lawlessness after the Defendants start granting applications for deferred action.”

Greg Abbott

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott

In a statement late yesterday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton called Judge Hanen’s decision a “victory for the rule of law in America.” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who as the state’s former attorney general had led the state into the lawsuit, said Hanen’s decision “rightly stops the President’s overreach in its tracks.”

Andrew Hanen, who’s been on the federal court since 2002 after being nominated by President George W. Bush, regularly handles border cases but wasn’t known for being outspoken on immigration until a 2013 case. In an order in that case, Hanen suggested the Homeland Security Department should be arresting parents living in the U.S. illegally who induce their children to cross the border illegally.

Congressional Republicans have vowed to block Obama’s actions by cutting off Homeland Security Department spending for the program. Earlier this year, the Republican-controlled House passed a $39.7 billion spending bill to fund the department through the end of the budget year, but attached language to undo Obama’s executive actions. The fate of that House-passed bill is unclear as Republicans in the Senate do not have the 60-vote majority needed to advance most legislation.

Among those supporting Obama’s executive order is a group of 12 mostly liberal states, including Washington, California, and the District of Columbia. They filed a motion with Hanen in support of Obama, arguing incredibly that the directives will substantially benefit states (!) and will further the public interest (!).

A group of law enforcement officials, including the Major Cities Chiefs Association and more than 20 police chiefs and sheriffs from across the country, also filed a motion in support of Obama’s executive amnesty. They argue that amnesty will improve public safety by encouraging cooperation between police and individuals with concerns about their immigration status.

In a statement early today, the Obama White House defended his amnesty memos as within the president’s legal authority, saying that the U.S. Supreme Court and Congress have said federal officials can set priorities in enforcing immigration laws: “The district court’s decision wrongly prevents these lawful, commonsense policies from taking effect and the Department of Justice has indicated that it will appeal that decision.”

The White House is appealing Judge Hanen’s ruling. The appeal will be heard by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV and glenda

~Éowyn

What is Obsidian, the company that allegedly “wrote the script” for Sandy Hook?

In an interview with Alex Jones, school shooting consultant and former state trooper Wolfgang Halbig claims that Obsidian, a company in Washington D.C., “wrote the script” for the fake Sandy Hook school massacre of December 14, 2012. (See “Sandy Hook massacre was a “contrived event,” says former state trooper Wolfgang Halbig”)

 H/t “Barry Soetoro, Esq.”

I don’t know how Halbig came to this conclusion, nor do I know if Obsidian indeed is the script writer and orchestrator of Sandy Hoax. But this is what I found out about Obsidian.

Name

Obsidian Analysis Inc.

  • ranks #217 in the 2014 Inc. 500 listing
  • 5th-fastest growing private company in the District of Columbia
  • Although Obsidian Analysis Inc. is among the Inc. 500, curiously Wikipedia does not have an entry on this company.

Meaning of Obsidian

The dictionary says the word “obsidian” has only one meaning. It is a noun for a hard, dark (black or blackish green in color), opaque, glasslike volcanic rock formed by the rapid solidification of lava without crystallization.

Logo

Note the black pyramidal shape in place of the letter A.

Obsidian logo

Here’s a picture on Obsidian’s website making clear its corporate symbol is a black pyramid. The pyramid has occult Illuminati associations.

Obsidian

address

Just as I was thinking that what’s missing in the pyramid is the single eye — also an Illuminati Masonic symbol — here’s the eye! Obsidian Analysis Inc. is located on Eye St. in D.C.! You can’t make this stuff up.

1776 Eye St NW 4th Floor | Washington DC 20006 | p: 202.459.0500 | info@obsidiandc.com

I’ve been to Washington, D.C., at least 5 times, but I don’t recall there being an Eye St. So I searched for “1776 Eye St. NW, Washington DC 20006″ on Google Map, and just I had suspected, there is no Eye St., but there is an I St.

Here’s a screenshot I took from Google Map (note Obsidian’s proximity to the White House, a mere 2 blocks away!):

Obsidian on Google Map

Now ask yourself this question:

Why would Obsidian Analysis Inc. present its address on its website as 1776 Eye St., instead of 1776 I St.?

What is Obsidian Analysis Inc.?

Obisdian says its clients are government (U.S.) and private sector. Obsidian describes itself as:

Obsidian Analysis provides superior management consulting services to decision makers across the full range of security and resilience domains. Our capabilities cover the entire life-cycle of decision making – from analysis and assessment; to planning; to course of action development; to incident operations; to evaluation; to training and exercising; as well as to stakeholder outreach and engagement.

This is interesting — “Exercise, Training, and Education“:

Obsidian Analysis provides expert, professional, and relevant exercises, training, and education to clients in both the government and the private sector. Obsidian supports and develops high-impact crisis simulations and exercises across a variety of security and resilience challenges: including Cybersecurity, natural hazards, terrorist attacks, as well; as climate adaptation. Obsidian applies a rigorous methodology to help organizations test plans, evaluate capabilities, and assess relationships among key partners and stakeholders. Obsidian has developed, executed, and evaluated 155 crisis simulations and exercises from the local level through the Federal Cabinet, including the President of the United States.

Obsidian Analysis plans, directs, and coordinates Training and Education programs that enhance the knowledge and skills of our clients’ workforces. By rigorously assessing training and education needs, Obsidian training and education programs focus resources on building the most relevant and mission-critical knowledge and skills.

Obsidian’s Leadership Team

Many of what Obsidian calls its “leadership team” of 20 (16 men, 4 women) formerly worked for BAE Systems (formerly Detica and DFI Government Services) and/or some agency of the federal government, typically DHS, NSA, or FEMA. Below are the 3 top leaders.

Note: BAE Systems is a British multinational defense, security and aerospace company headquartered in London, with operations worldwide. It is among the world’s largest defense contractors — the second-largest based on applicable 2012 revenues.Its largest operations are in the United Kingdom and United States, where its BAE Systems Inc. subsidiary is one of the six largest suppliers to the US Department of Defense.

Kevin O'Prey1. Kevin P. O’Prey, Ph.D.: Co-founder, chairman & president of Obsidian. Ph.D. in Political Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; B.A. in International Relations from Grinnell College. Author of several books on international security; formerly a fellow at the Brookings Institution, Managing Partner of the Palisades Group, and President of DFI Government Services.

matthew-travis2. Matthew Travis: Co-founder and executive VP of Obsidian. Former president of Detica, Inc. (formerly DFI International). A former naval officer, Mr. Travis served as engineering officer aboard USS CARR (FFG 52) and as White House Liaison to the Secretary of the Navy. A graduate of the University of Notre Dame, Mr. Travis also earned a Master’s Degree in National Security Studies from Georgetown University and an Executive Education Certificate from Harvard Business School.

Jason McNamara3. Jason McNamara: VP of Obsidian. Former chief-of-staff of FEMA. B.A. in Sociology and Psychology from Johns Hopkins University; M.A. in Urban Affairs and Public Policy from University of Delaware.

For all the posts FOTM has published on Sandy Hoax, go to our “Sandy Hook Massacre” page.

~Éowyn 

Are you a potential terrorist? Take this quiz to find out!

Many Americans assume that only “bad people” have to worry about draconian anti-terror laws. There have been so many anti-terrorism laws passed since 9/11, as well as Homeland Security memoranda on “potential terrorists” that are not yet laws, that it is hard for Americans to keep up on what kinds of beliefs and behaviors might get us on the government’s “list” of suspected bad guys.

Most of the items on the checklists below come from Washington’s Blog of Feb. 21, 2012. The checklists are in two categories “Behaviors” and “Beliefs,” so that you can see if you might be identified by your government as a potential terrorist. Each attribute on the checklists is embedded with a link to a source.

Since Washington’s Blog compiled the checklists 3 years ago, I’m sure the Obama administration, especially the good folks at Homeland Security, has added more identifying markers to the lists.

The checklists below are a quiz. See how many items on the checklists apply to you!

terrorist

A. Behaviors

The following actions may get an American citizen living on U.S. soil labeled as a “suspected terrorist” today:

  1. Speaking out against government policies
  2. Protesting anything
  3. Questioning war (even though war reduces our national security; and see this)
  4. Criticizing the government’s targeting of innocent civilians with drones (although killing innocent civilians with drones is one of the main things which increases terrorism. And see this)
  5. Asking questions about pollution (even at a public Congressional hearing?)
  6. Paying cash at an Internet cafe
  7. Asking questions about Wall Street shenanigans
  8. Holding gold
  9. Creating alternative currencies
  10. Stocking up on more than 7 days of food (even though all Mormons are taught to stockpile food, and most Hawaiians store up on extra food)
  11. Having bumper stickers saying things like “Know Your Rights Or Lose Them”
  12. Investigating factory farming
  13. Infringing a copyright
  14. Taking pictures or videos
  15. Talking to police officers
  16. Wearing a hoodie
  17. Driving a van
  18. Writing on a piece of paper
  19. Belonging to a militia
  20. Not having a Facebook account may soon be added

B. Beliefs

Holding the following beliefs may also be considered grounds for suspected terrorism:

  1. Valuing online privacy
  2. Supporting Ron Paul or being a libertarian
  3. Liking the Founding Fathers
  4. Being a Christian, especially if you’re an Evangelical or Catholic
  5. Being an ultra-orthodox Jew
  6. Being anti-tax, anti-regulation or for the gold standard
  7. Being reverent of individual liberty
  8. Being anti-nuclear
  9. Believe in conspiracy theories
  10. A belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack
  11. Impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)
  12. Insert religion into the political sphere
  13. Those who seek to politicize religion
  14. Supported political movements for autonomy
  15. Being anti-abortion and pro-life
  16. Being “far right
  17. Being a member of the Tea Party
  18. Being anti-global
  19. Suspicious of centralized federal authority
  20. Fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)
  21. A belief in the need to be prepared for an attack…by participating in … survivalism
  22. Opposing genetically engineered food
  23. Opposing surveillance

So how did you do?

I checked off 11 items on the A list, and 20 items on the B list. I’m in trouble! LOL

As you might have noticed, the checklists are in complete violation of our rights under the United States Constitution, especially our First Amendment right to freedom of speech. When even Supreme Court Justices and congressmen worry that we are drifting into dictatorship, we should all be concerned.

H/t FOTM’s maziel

~Éowyn

When did transgenders become all the rage?

Something is going on to which the American people are not privy.

Every evidence we have is that those who identify themselves as LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) comprise no more than 5% of the U.S. population:

  • Gallup poll data say they’re 5%.
  • A 2011 study by UCLA School of Law’s gay and lesbian think tank the Williams Institute says it’s 3.5%.
  • The CDC says it’s 2.3%.

The above percentages are for LGBT, which means transgenders must be less than 1% of the U.S. population. And yet, if we go by the pervasive news about transgenders and the relentless drumbeat for “transgender rights” by every institution of the Left — by the media, pop culture, academia, and the Obama administration — you would think every other person you meet is a transgender.

On May 30, 2014, the Obama administration ended a 33-year ban on Medicare coverage for gender reassignment surgery.

Imagine that: Americans 65 years or older can now have Medicare taxpayers pay for body-mutilating surgery, which is what “gender reassignment” surgery really is. The simple truth is that a person’s sex or gender is determined by the sex hormones: females have XX chromosomes; males have XY chromosomes. That means no amount of surgical mutilation and hormone “therapy” can actually transform a man into a woman by creating an ovary, uterus or milk-producing breasts; nor can surgery transform a woman into a man by creating sperm, testicles, and a real penis. Those are determined by birth — by our chromosomal DNA. (See “A transsexual regrets his ‘gender-reassignment’ surgery“)

That is why psychiatrist Joseph Berger, M.D. says from a medical and scientific perspective, there is no such thing as a transgendered person.

10 days after the Obama administration lifted the ban on Medicare paying for gender-reassignment surgery body mutilation, Time magazine’s cover of June 9, 2014 proclaimed that we’re at a “Transgender Tipping Point: America’s Next Civil Rights Frontier.”

Time transgender cover

A month later, Joan Rivers outed First Lady Michelle Obama as a “tranny” and Obama as “gay.”

Two months to the day of Rivers’ outing of the Obamas, she was declared dead after she had stopped breathing during a routine endoscopy in a clinic.

The latest transgender in the news is 65-year-old 1976 Olympics decathlon gold medalist Bruce Jenner (and step-father of Kim Kardashian), who is morphing before our eyes into a “woman.” Reportedly, Jenner will “come out” in an interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer in May about a “docuseries” chronicling his “transition” into a “woman.”

Click image below to enlarge

1978 Sports Celebrities Awards Party

Here are two more recent transgender-related developments:

1. University of Vermont recognizes a third gender

From the New York Times:

While colleges across the country have been grappling with concerns related to students transitioning from one gender to another, Vermont is at the forefront in recognizing the next step in identity politics: the validation of a third gender.

The university allows students like [transgender Rocko] Gieselman to select their own identity — a new first name, regardless of whether they’ve legally changed it, as well as a chosen pronoun — and records these details in the campuswide information system so that professors have the correct terminology at their fingertips.

2. Transgender illegals in detention have a “right” to hormone “therapy”

Melanie Hunter reports for CNS News, Jan. 30, 2015, that an official with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement testified Friday during a discussion on immigration detention facilities, hosted by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that transgender individuals are guaranteed “a right to hormone therapy.”

Kevin Landy, assistant director of the ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) office of detention policy and planning, said, “Our ICE House Service Corps is very vigilant on that issue to ensuring that individuals receive necessary hormone therapy.”

According to ICE’s operations manual for its detention facilities, Operations Manual ICE Performance-Based National Detention Standards, “Transgender detainees who were already receiving hormone therapy when taken into ICE custody shall have continued access. All transgender detainees shall have access to mental health care, and other transgender-related health care and medication based on medical need. Treatment shall follow accepted guidelines regarding medically necessary transition-related care.”

Is it just me, or has this country gone stark raving mad?

~Éowyn