Archive for November, 2013

marine

Google’s famous doodles, that are often featured on the search engine’s homepage for national, and international holidays, have honored everything from Caesar Chavez to the Panamanian Independence Day. The birthday of the United States Marine Corps is one holiday that Google chooses to ignore.

READ MORE…

Advertisements
Obama Booed at Missouri Football Game (via http://misguidedchildren.com)

data-recalc-dims=”1″> Share this: Facebook Twitter Google Patriotslink More

Obama

Obama crying 😥

At the Missouri-Tennessee football game this Saturday, new members of the Missouri National Guard were being sworn in during the game’s halftime ceremony.

While the fresh faced new guardsmen were repeating their oath an out of place booing could be heard from the crowded Memorial Stadium.

When they got to the line of the oath, “I will obey the order of the president of the United States,” part of the crowd of 70,000 people started booing.

Just like when the rodeo clown at the Missouri State Fair dressed as Obama during a skit and his crowd booed the mention of the Commander in Chief, the local politicians are coming down hard on the Mizzou fans.

For the full story follow the link at the top!

(more…)

French police fired tear gas at tens of thousands of protesters, on Saturday, after some protesters reportedly threw stones and iron bars at them during an anti-tax protest.

I reported last month that a French poll showed 70% of French citizens were unhappy with their high taxes. This weekend that frustration boiled over during the large protest in Quimper, Brittany in north-west France.

Protest organizers claim there were 30,000 people protesting, while government officials estimate the number to be closer to 15,000.

The specific tax being protested was a “green tax” on French and foreign-made vehicles transporting commercial goods, weighing over 3.5 tons. Though the tax has not yet gone into effect it is having a negative impact on the hauling industry and related business.

Read the full article by following the link below!

Protesters Hit with Tear Gas During Anti-Tax Protest in France (via http://misguidedchildren.com)

data-recalc-dims=”1″> Email Email data-recalc-dims=”1″> Share this: Facebook Twitter Google Patriotslink More

(more…)

20131101-000801.jpgThe Alamo is once again under siege from a foreign tyranny, 177 years after the battle that made the Spanish mission famous. This time it isn’t a Mexican Army and Santa Anna, it is the United Nations.

Julián Castro, the mayor of San Antonio, Texas is in negotiations with the United Nations about making the Alamo a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Site. In other words; Castro is negotiating for the surrender of the “shrine of liberty” to the United Nations.

This means that the 2.5 million annual visitors to the Alamo could be seeing a nice new UN blue flag flying atop the iconic Alamo Chappell.

The World Heritage Site status was created in a 1972 international agreement to promote international, collective assistance to preserve historic sites around the world. That is probably a great idea in counties that can’t administer their own historic sites. But in the United States we can do it ourselves. We don’t need the UN planting their flag and locking us out of our monumentally historic landmarks.

“San Antonio has the opportunity for its five Spanish Colonial Missions to be nominated to be the first UNESCO World Heritage site in the State of Texas and the 22nd World Heritage designation in the United States,” the October 2013 City of San Antonio newsletter reads, on it’s front page.

The Alamo Chappell, which is the iconic building that most people think of when they hear Alamo, is maintained by the Daughters of the Republic of Texas in conjunction with the Texas General Land Office. The surrounding Alamo Plaza is administered by the City of San Antonio.

WHAT WILL CHANGE UNDER UN CONTROL?

In the UNESCO manual, “Managing Tourism at World Heritage Sites,” it lists the expectations that site managers are expected to follow. One thing it mentions is “the duty of the international community as a whole to cooperate” in managing World Heritage Sites. That could only mean one thing; foriegn nations and bureaucrats involved in the management in the opperation of our most treasured landmarks.

One of the obligations of the site is to display the UNESCO logo, meaning, at the very least, they would have UN symbols hanging around the Alamo Plaza, and at the most, there could be a big, blue UN flag flying high at the Alamo.

A glimpse at the future?

A glimpse at the future?

The Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site in Illinois was accepted as the United States’ tenth World Heritage Site in 1982 and proudly flies the UN flag in compliance with the WHC guidlines.

The city of San Antonio has already felt some of the effects of the World Heritage status, and it hasn’t even been made official yet.

Last September the city denied a proposal for a downtown hotel tower near the Alamo, simply because the construction would have disqualified the city’s missons from the “opportunity,” according to the WHC guidelines.

The buisnesses that are already in the area could suffer as well. The terms set by the 1972 World Heritage Convention expect governments to protect the sites beyond their borders. As with most things labeled as environmentalism, private property and property rights take a backseat to the goals of the “collective.”

That is displayed plainly in the case of Yellowstone. Bill Clinton asked the UN to designate Yellowstone as a World Heritage site in distress in 1995, and they accepted the offering. Once that was done, he had an “international obligation” to protect the site, even outside of it’s borders. He shut down a coal mine that was three miles away from the park, even though it was 150 years older than the park, not to mention the fact that it was on private property.

When our government submitts to the UN, property rights go out the window.

UNESCO already has control of 21 of our nation’s treasures, including the Statue of Liberty, Monticello, and Independance Hall. Even if you believe that there are no negative intentions behind this, it is still important that the United States control and manage it’s own resources, cultural and otherwise.

Satellite view showing all 21 current UNESCO WHC sites

Satellite view showing all 21 current UNESCO WHC sites

The bad news is that San Antonio’s infamous Alamo isn’t the only historic American site in UNESCO’s crosshairs.

In 2008 the Department of the Interior submitted 13 sites to the UN that are still on their “tentative list.” Other than the Alamo, the list includes various civil rights sites, Thomas Jefferson buildings, and Mount Vernon, which you may remember was blocked off during the government shutdown, even though it is not operated by the government.

The good news is that the status of the Alamo is not set in stone, yet.

It is still possible that, for whatever reason, the status doesn’t go through. The urging of some kind citizens like yourselves could push Mayor Castro one way or the other.

The UN’s Agenda 21 clearly has it’s grip on the world and it is starting to tighten on the “land of the free.” If we cease to be the “home of the brave” it won’t be long until we cease to be a sovereign nation. We have to do everything we can to fight the tyranny that is masquerading as environmentalism and conservationism.