The Supreme Court will be hearing the ACLU’s attempt to supress religious freedom by tearing down a war memorial tomorrow.  This will be a historic case that will affect future views on our First Amendment.  Former ACLU lawyer and good friend of mine, Rees Lloyd writes a good article to get people tuning in to how important this is.

From Joseph Infranco and Rees Lloyd’s email:

General Douglas MacArthur famously noted that “old soldiers never die; they just fade away.” Sometimes, though, before they fade away, they get angry. And a case being argued in the Supreme Court Wednesday has veterans seeing red, white, and blue — but mostly red.

Unsurprisingly, the case will go to the court courtesy of an ACLU lawsuit.

The object at the center of the case is a small, unadorned cross sitting in a remote part of the Mojave Desert Preserve in Southeast California. A veterans’ group erected this memorial cross on private land in 1934 to honor the dead of all wars.

Driving by this secluded location today, however, you’ll see a curious-looking plywood box hiding the memorial, the way someone might cover a condemned building. That box is there because one person filed suit, with the help of ACLU attorneys, claiming he was “offended” by the memorial cross. One offended man has somehow trumped the wishes of millions of veterans.

If a federal appeals court has its way, the box and the memorial soon will be gone forever. Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court will review the ruling at the request of the Department of Justice, and in this case, millions of veterans, speaking through The American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars, have added their voices in support. In fact, the American Legion Department of California and the Alliance Defense Fund have joined forces and filed a brief in support of the Department of Justice, asking the Supreme Court to dismiss the lawsuit.

The U.S. Government recently acquired the land on which the memorial sits when the site became part of the Mojave Federal Preserve. After the ACLU lawsuit was filed, Congress worked with veterans to honor their wishes and preserve the monument. It took an act of Congress to rescue the memorial from a federal court decision ordering its destruction. As part of its action, Congress voted to give an acre of land containing the memorial back to the veterans who maintained it for decades, in exchange for five acres deeded to the government. Giving up one acre to get five, and honoring veterans in the process, seemed like a good deal.

But not to the ACLU and its “offended” client. To them, even this reasonable arrangement was intolerable. They pressed forward with their lawsuit saying the memorial must not be allowed to stand and the land transfer must be overturned; their hostility to a passive symbol of this sort is simply too great.

However, as bad as this case is, veterans know much more is at stake in this case than one memorial in the California desert.

Military memorials commonly use the cross as part of a display to honor those who paid the ultimate sacrifice to defend our nation. While the cross is a religious symbol, the military has also used it as a symbol of courage, sacrifice, and honor. For example, the nation’s second highest military award is the Distinguished Service Cross. Visitors to the hallowed grounds of Arlington National Cemetery can see several commemorative crosses, like the Canadian Cross of Sacrifice, a gift from former Canadian Prime Minister MacKenzie King that was dedicated at Arlington in 1927.

If the Supreme Court does not overturn the appeals court, religious symbols that have graced monuments for many decades may become a thing of the past. Memorials to military veterans, police officers, firefighters, and other heroes will be whitewashed, covered up, or torn out to appease the politically correct agenda of intolerant extremists.

Veterans are being asked to surrender to the thin-skinned sensitivity of an individual who has managed to be offended by a small memorial, literally in the middle of a desert. Is this truly an offense worthy of a lawsuit? Apparently, the fanatical agenda of the ACLU to expunge religious symbols has really come this far, and now the Supreme Court has the opportunity to weigh in.

One person’s offense should not diminish the sacrifice made by America’s heroes and their families. Why would we not wish to allow the men and women who have served and defended this nation to choose how they wish to honor their dead? Even if old soldiers “fade away,” their memory should not.

[Cross-posted from Stop the ACLU.]

The federal-local law enforcement partnership to deal with criminal aliens has been weakened by the Obama administration.

As most of you may already know, the federal government has a program called “Program 287g” which allows local law enforcement to cooperate with federal law enforcement to enforce immigration law. This program is in operation in dozens of states and counties around the country and has been a great success wherever it has been established. It was set up to allow local police to detain, interrogate, and even begin deportation procedures on illegal immigrants.

Well, now the Obama administration, in the person of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Chief Janet Napolitano, is doing everything possible to undermine Program 287(g). I suspect that the thinking in the Obama administration is that they don’t want to do anything that might lower the number of illegals in the US as they want as many of them as possible around for the day when they expect to push through amnesty for them.

Now Judicial Watch is fighting back. They have filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the DHS to fight their undermining of Program 287g.

Judicial Watch Files FOIA Lawsuit Againt DHS

Local communities across the country are taking advantage of a federal program, called 287(g), to train law enforcement officers in illegal immigration enforcement techniques. And it’s working. These newly trained police officers are shutting down illegal alien crime and helping to deport illegal alien criminals out of the country.

What is the Obama administration’s response to the success of this program? Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano decided to implement “reforms” to weaken it as part of her comprehensive “review” of all border security policies. Judicial Watch, of course, wants to know everything about how and why this incomprehensible decision was made, which is why we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) last week….

We filed our original FOIA request on July 20. The DHS acknowledged receipt of the request on July 30 and then granted itself extra time to process it. (We see this quite a bit with our FOIA requests — the federal government simply ignores the statutory 20-day response window and allocates more time for processing.) However, DHS has not abided by its own extended deadline and has not provided Judicial Watch with a date certain when it will provide responsive documents or demonstrate that responsive records are exempt from production.

As you may recall from previous installments in this space, law enforcement officers have indicated that 287(g) has helped them to significantly reduce crime rates. And, thanks to Judicial Watch’s public education efforts highlighting the program, at least 67 local law enforcement agencies currently take advantage of 287(g), up from 27 in 2006.

According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the program has identified more than 70,000 individuals suspected of being in the country illegally since January 2006….

However, despite the fact that 287(g) is clearly working, the Obama administration seems intent on undermining the program. Arizona’s Maricopa County Sherriff Joe Arpaio is a particular target of this “reform.” Because of his successful and comprehensive implementation of 287 (g), “America’s Toughest Sherriff” has been the target of attacks by the usual pro-illegal alien suspects, such as the ACLU and so-called Hispanic rights groups. Leftists in the Obama Justice Department also initiated a “civil rights” investigation that seems like straight-up intimidation and harassment.

The vast majority of Americans want federal immigration laws enforced. Local law enforcement officers can contribute to this process and they have every legal right to do so. You can be sure that 287(g) is under attack because Obama appointees have an “amnesty” agenda at odds with enforcing the law. No wonder we’ve had such a difficult time getting these documents.

America’s toughest sheriff, Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona, has been using 287(g) to good advantage — SHERIFF’S FEDERALLY TRAINED DEPUTIES MAKE 40 MORE ARRESTS

(Phoenix, AZ) Maricopa County Sheriff’s federally trained deputies (under the 287g agreement) last night arrested 40 illegal aliens during a human smuggling saturation patrol in the North Valley over a four hour period. The arrests were made during four separate traffic stops near Anthem Way.

Sheriff Arpaio stated that his human smuggling deputies arrested 25 illegal aliens during the investigation on state felony human smuggling charges which is a class four felony. Those arrested last night on state human smuggling charges admitted to paying between $1,000 and $5,000 for illegal entry into the United States from Mexico.

The remaining 15 illegal aliens arrested were processed by sheriff’s deputies and turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Last night’s arrests bring the total booked under state felony human smuggling charges by sheriff’s deputies to 1,637 since the law was enacted.

Sheriff Arpaio commented on recent reports that claim the flow of illegal aliens has slowed down into the United States but every time his deputies have gone out they have had no problem making numerous arrests in short periods of time.

These same human smuggling deputies arrested four Chinese illegal aliens originating from Beijing less than a week ago at the exact same location. They also appeared to be using Mexican smugglers to gain illegal entry into the United States through Mexico.

Program 287(g) adds the resources of state and local law enforcement to the efforts of the federal government to defend our national security from criminal invaders.  We should support Judicial Watch in their efforts to prevent Janet Napolitano from weakening the program with “reforms.”

The American Hunting and Shooting Association (AHSA) is actually an anti-gun-rights group. It was formed a few years ago under a blanket of political and media camouflage.

Billing itself as an alternative to the National Rifle Association (NRA), the group claims to represent a middle ground, a compromise of the “extreme” positions of the NRA. However, their website contains myriad attacks on the NRA and its leadership -– by implication, attacks on you and me.

What AHSA really exists for is to provide political cover for anti-gun politicians so they may claim support from the outdoors and shooting fraternity in an effort to deceive you into voting for them.

The lead organizer of the group is Bob Ricker. He has served as a paid witness against firearms manufacturers in numerous state lawsuits that attempted to hold manufacturers liable for criminal misuse of firearms. He has brought into the group former Jimmy Carter advisor Jody Powell. Powell in turn brought in several ex-BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) agents. Powell and these agents have a record of using the BATF to crack down and criminalize law abiding citizens and dealers. Ricker is also a support of NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his coalition against “illegal guns.”

AHSA President Ray Schoenke has made numerous financial contributions to anti-gun politicians and organizations such as Handgun Control Inc, The Brady Campaign and such personalities as Al Gore, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton and more. Under his leadership, the group called the Washington, DC gun ban, which precipitated the Heller decision, a laudable effort. AHSA filed a brief stating that DC was within its rights to enact the ban because they are not a state.

Board member John Rosenthal is also a leader of a Massachusetts group “Stop Handgun Violence.” Rosenthals’ anti-gun profile was apparently too high as he recently resigned from AHSA.

AHSA attempts to use the tactic of divide and conquer by demeaning and personally attacking the leadership of our staunchest supporter -– the NRA. They financially support our enemies and provide distorted, if not false witness against us, all the while seeking us as members and professing to support our interests.

In addition to endorsing Eric Massa for Congress from the 29th District of New York, AHSA has also endorsed Barack Obama for President. For Obama’s record of anti-gun support I urge you to check out the website GunBaNObama. More information on AHSA can be found at the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action website.

I contacted Massa’s office for a copy of any questionaire he may have filled out that led to the endorsement. He and his office have ignored my request. Clearly, any group that would support Obama with his anti-gun record does not have our interests at heart. That endorsement alone speaks volumes about the true goals of AHSA and those they support.

For months, the mainstream media have totally stonewalled the controversy raging in the Blogosphere over Obama’s eligibility to run for president. Today, the first crack in the MSM appeared, as Greta van Susteren wrote a blog post about it on GretaWire.

October 24th, 2008 9:20 AM Eastern
OK … the internet rumors about the birth certificate: let’s end the rumors and the viral nature of them!
by Greta Van Susteren

Of course I know about all the internet gossip about Senator Obama’s birth. Many of you (thousands?) have written me saying he was not born in the USA (a Constitutional requirement for President) …. the rumors are flying around the internet and overloading my inbox and is viral. It doesn’t stop! I have thought the emails a waste of keyboard time and have ignored them.

However, since the emails just won’t stop…and since it really is a topic that should be put to rest and can be done with such ease, I now think Senator Obama should release his birth certificate but I also think, to be fair, so should the other 3 …. yes, all 4.

So, let’s have it! All 4 need to release their birth certificates to prove each was born in the USA and thus constitutionally able to serve as President. Let’s insist that all 4 release birth certificates and put the matter to rest! (and yes, stop the emails to me!)

Until this is done, the rumors simply will not stop and rumors are not fair … it is not fair to Senator Obama and he also should not be blackmailed into producing the records … so, if all 4 must produce, that seems fair.

Let’s see them …. and then let’s move on.

Greta recently moved her hour-long cable television show from CNN to Fox News, where she seems to feel freer to pursue balanced coverage. A couple of points here. First, John McCain voluntarily produced his birth certificate, to allay concerns about his birth in a US military hospital outside the continental US.

Second, and VERY TELLING, Greta is not covering this subject as a diligent journalist. By her own admission, she is simply trying to relieve immense pressure on her inbox. Which proves two things — there is still no real honest journalist in the MSM and intense pressure from all of us can make a difference.

As of this past Wednesday Friday, lawsuits are being pursued in eight nine ten states regarding Obama’s birth status:

1. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania — Plaintiff, Philip Berg
   

   Philip J. Berg, Esquire
   555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
   Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
   Cell (610) 662-3005
   (610) 825-3134
   (800) 993-PHIL [7445]
   Fax (610) 834-7659
   Email: philjberg@obamacrimes.com
   Web site: Obama Crimes

   UPDATE, Saturday, October 25  4AM EST — Philadelphia Daily News reports:

   Judge rejects Montco lawyer’s bid to have Obama removed from ballot

   A federal judge in Philadelphia last night threw out a complaint by a Montgomery County lawyer who claimed that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was not qualified to be president and that his name should be removed from the Nov. 4 ballot.

   Philip J. Berg alleged in a complaint filed in federal district court on Aug. 21 against Obama, the Democratic National Committee and the Federal Election Commission, that Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya.

   Berg claimed that the Democratic presidential standardbearer is not even an American citizen but a citizen of Indonesia and therefore ineligible to be president….

   In a 34-page memorandum and opinion, the judge said Berg’s allegations of harm were “too vague and too attenuated” to confer standing on him or any other voters….

   Berg plans to file an appeal.
    

2. Seattle, Washington — Plaintiff, Steve Marquis
   

   Steve Marquis
   Fall City, WA
   (425) 698-7084
   Email: peoplesvoice@peoplespassions.org
   Web site: People’s Voice

3. Honolulu, Hawaii — Plaintiff, Andy Martin
   

   Email: AndyMart20@aol.com

4. California — David Archbold
   

   Email: darchbo1@gmail.com

5. Florida
   

   Email:

6. Georgia — Tom Terry
   

   Email: kingdommatters@gmail.com

7. New York — Dan Smith
   

   Email: Dansmith1954@aol.com

8. Connecticut — Cort Wrotnowski
   

   Email: Metaqubit@aol.com

9. Richmond, Virginia — A Petition for Writ of Mandamus was filed in Richmond, Virginia on Wednesday, October 22 before the Honorable Walter W. Stout III. We’ll try to find out more and keep our readers posted.
    
10. Ohio — From the Cincinnati Enquirer
    

    Suit challenges Obama’s birth place
    By Janice Morse

    TURTLECREEK TWP. – A Warren County man is taking the long-simmering dispute over Barack Obama’s birthplace – Hawaii or Kenya? – to court.

    David M. Neal of Turtlecreek Township plunked down a $200 fee to file a lawsuit Friday in Warren Common Pleas Court in Lebanon.

    The suit seeks to force state and federal officials to take more steps to settle, once and for all, the question of Obama’s legitimacy as a potential president.

    The U.S. Constitution requires presidents to be natural-born citizens who are at least 35 years old. “Mr. Obama has failed to demonstrate that he is a ‘natural-born’ citizen,” Neal declares.

    He asserts that Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein all ought to be held responsible for verifying that Obama meets the constitutional requirements for president….

On the evening of October 23, Philip Berg was interviewed on the Michael Savage talk radio show. Berg stated that he had in his possession an audiotape of Obama’s Kenyan grandmother insisting that she was present at Obama’s birth in the hospital in Mombassa, Kenya, as well as sworn affidavits. Here’s the recording:

Philip J. Berg/Michael Savage Interview (Part 1 of 2)

Philip J. Berg/Michael Savage Interview (Part 2 of 2)

References:

America’s Right — Jeff Schreiber, legal writer by day and exhausted law student by night, is providing continuing coverage.

Citizen Wells is also providing continuing coverage.

October 24, 2008 — Finally we have coverage of the Philip J Berg lawsuit by major media players. Rush Limbaugh has mentioned the lawsuit and now Greta Van Sustern has a proposal to address the birth certificate issue….

Steve Marquis Press Release — from the plaintiff in the Washington state filing.

The Berg vs. Obama lawsuit in Philadelphia Federal Court has resulted in an Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgement against Obama.

ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56(c) is GRANTED. This Court Declares Barack Hussein Obama a/k/a Barry Hussein Obama a/k/a Barack Dunham a/k/a Barry Dunham a/k/a Barack Soetoro a/k/a Barry Soetoro is not a “natural born” or “naturalized” United States citizen and is ineligible to run for and/or serve as President of the United States. The Democratic National Committee is hereby enjoined from naming Barack Hussein Obama, et al as the Democratic Presidential Candidate on the ballot and both the Democratic National Committee and Barack Hussein Obama, et al are enjoined from any further campaigning on behalf of Barack Hussein Obama, et al for Office of the Presidency. It is an ORDER of this Court that Barack Hussein Obama’s, et al name be removed from any and all ballots for the Office of the President of the United States.

It is further ORDER of this Court; Defendants are to pay Plaintiff $48,300.00, representing all fees and costs associated with this suit to date.

IT IS SO ORDERED
Dated: October ________, 2008

____________________________
Hon. R. Barclay Surrick
United States District Court Judge
For the Eastern District of PA

Some are reporting that this has already happened. Others are trying to find out whether the judge has yet signed.

Our best understanding at this time is that Berg filed the “Motion for Summary Judgement” yesterday, and that a ruling was expected within one or two days.

What is not clear is whether the “Order on Plaintiff’s Motion” was prepared by Berg, and submitted along with his motion, or whether it was prepared by the court in response to his motion.

We are waiting with bated breath — we will keep our readers supplied with the most current info. Did Hillary know this all along? Talk about your October surprise!

This comes on the same day as breaking news about Obama’s close connection to American Negro communist Frank Marshall Davis, published author, dope user, and closet pornographer, who may be the photographer who took nude photographs of the free-spirited Anne Dunham, and who later was Obama’s childhood mentor for nine years. See the “Obama Mama” here, here, and here.

References:

Nude photos of Obama’s mother courtesy of the courageous Astute Blogger who is taking a tremendous risk to share information on the forces that shaped Obama’s psyche.

The liberal Lisa Derrick of Huffington Post writes an apologia for the pornography of Frank Marshall Davis.

We owe our “heads up” on this breaking news to the very brave lady who blogs as AmericanUnclassified because she refuses to succumb to a political party label. Read her recent article What Sarah Palin And Clay Aiken Have In Common. She has also cited several articles of interest:

Barack Obama is not Barack Obama — Radio talk show host and author (Obama: The Man Behind The Mask) Andy Martin is in Hawaii investigating the facts surrounding Obama’s birth. He concludes that the birth certificate is being suppressed because the father’s name was changed, and that Obama is really the illegitimate son of American Negro communist Frank Marshall Davis. No lightweight, Martin holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law.

On Matters of October Surprises and Media Malpractice — Family Security Matters, in a very well-organized article, documents the failure of the mainstream media to investigate or report on any of the stories concerning Obama’s negatives. The MSM appears to be skewing the polls, leveraging reverse racism, ignoring disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters, and failing to examine millions in foreign currency contributions to the Obama campaign.

Obama citizenship questions continue — West Palm Beach television station Channel 5 reports:

It’s been Internet gossip for months. Is Barack Obama a U.S. citizen?….

…an attorney in Philadelphia, Philip Berg, filed a lawsuit claiming Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian man. Berg says Obama failed to take an oath of allegiance when he turned 18.

Obama has attempted to silence any critics by producing a birth certificate from Hawaii, proving he was born there in 1961. Berg however is demanding an original, and not a copy from the Obama camp.

Obama’s team filed a motion to dismiss Berg’s lawsuit, but they also made a motion to block discovery….

There are currently three separate lawsuits regarding the circumstances of Obama’s birth:

Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083 in the Philadelphia Federal District Court.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT filed by Andy Martin on October 17th in Honolulu to get the Hawaiin Department of Health to release Obama’s birth certificate — an original birth certificate, and not a copy.

Citizen files Lawsuit demanding verification of Barack Obama’s citizenship status –Plaintiff Steven Marquis is suing the Washington Secretary of State, demanding that he verify Obama’s citizenship status before the election.

The complaint seeks specifically that the office of the Washington Secretary of State verify and certify that Mr. Obama is or is not a “natural born” citizen by producing original or certified verifiable official documents. The lawsuit argues that this certification should take place before the election to preclude a constitutional crisis and likely civil unrest should such certification, after the election, prove that Mr. Obama was not qualified for office.

The Complaint argues that the Secretary of State has the authority and duty to not only certify the voters but also and most importantly the candidates and in so doing prevent the wholesale disenfranchisement of voters who would had had an opportunity to choose from qualified candidates had the certification preceded the election process.

At this point, Mr. Obama has not allowed independent or official access to his birth records nor supporting hospital records. The Hawaii Health Department has violated Federal law by ignoring formal Freedom of Information requests for the same….

Audiotapes of Michelle Obama alternately threatening and cajoling bloggers over their coverage of her husband’s presidential campaign are soon to be released on Fox News, according to African Press International (API).

For those who are tuning in late, this is a credible group of African bloggers with journalistic credentials who have been operating unheralded for the last two years, providing general news coverage of events in Africa. Many of their nineteen reporters are actually in African countries, but their posting is headquartered in the relative safety of the Norwegian diaspora.

Back on October 13, Israel eNews posted an article describing the conflicting stories about Obama’s birth, and cited the Philip Berg lawsuit requiring Obama to produce a valid birth certificate. On October 14 API simply quoted the story, thinking it would be of interest to their African readers. API did not take a position on the story pro or con — they simply shared the Israel eNews material with their readers, leaving the readers to make their own judgement about the merits of the story.

To the complete surprise of the API folk, their Africa-targeted report caused a firestorm in the American Blogosphere. This apparently earned the wrath of Michelle Obama, who was reportedly put in touch with API by a mutual contact in Africa. The entire drama that unfolded then is described in our earlier article — Michelle Obama’s “Whitey” Moment.

The folk at API were truly caught off guard. They had never intended anything like this. Suddenly they were caught between demands of American conservatives for release of the tapes, and threats of legal action from Obama supporters. They had not advised Michelle Obama that the call was being recorded, something that they likely did not from nefarious motives but simply to take notes.

Understandably, it took API some time to seek counsel and cover for their predicament. The liberals have used the intervening time to attempt to discredit these ordinary bloggers, in much the same vicious way that they went after “Joe the Plumber.” And the original Israel eNews article has, at the time of this posting, been taken off-line. But not to worry, we have archived a copy here at ADMC!

If the current negotiations go through, Fox News is a good choice from the viewpoint of those in the US who simply want to know the truth. Any of the other networks are likely to excerpt the tapes in such a way as to make the material meaningless, or at least to hide the attempted intimidation. And if the Obama juggernaut is going to threaten our freedom of speech, we would like to know now.

Barack Obama announced plans to suspend campaigning for two days so he could fly to Hawaii and visit his ailing grandmother. And it is true that she has just come home from the hospital, with health problems described as “very serious.” (Source.)

But his trip to Hawaii also happens to coincide with the expiration of the thirty-day period for response to filings in the lawsuit requiring verification of his birth status (Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083 in Philadelphia Federal Court). Neither Obama nor the Democratic National Committee (DNC) made a “timely response” to the Berg filings. (Source).

And the announcement of Obama’s planned trip also comes one day after author Andy Martin (Obama: The Man Behind The Mask) filed petition in the Supreme Court of Hawaii for expedited examination of Obama’s birth status. (Source.)

Will the mainstream media scrutinize Obama and his entourage on this trip, to ensure that no one goes over to the Hawaii Department of Health to fiddle with the records? Probably not. Let us hope that there are some astute bloggers on the case.