Website: http://castle2016.com/
Donate: https://castle2016.nationbuilder.com/donate
Chad Koppie: Constitution Party US Senate Candidate for Illinois
Website: http://www.chadkoppie.com/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Chad-Koppie-Campaign-175035105892775
Donate: http://www.chadkoppie.com/donations.php
https://votevance2016.blogspot.com
Darryl Glenn: Republican Party US Senate Candidate for Colorado
Website: http://www.electdarrylglenn.com/
Donate: https://transaxt.com/Donate/6ECCUR/CommitteetoElectDarrylGlenn/?src=button
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CommitteeToElectDarrylGlenn/
Donate at Make DC Listen: https://secure.makedclisten.com/donate/d?c=c8c976b8a062bfcfa0d065e176ba3030
Note: [ ] = my additions
Petition: STOP MASS ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
http://americansecurity-coalition.com/stop-mass-illegal-immigration.aspx?pid=0823a
Petition: Stop Amnesty International’s Pro-Abortion Attack on Sovereign Nations
http://www.citizengo.org/en/lf/36812-time-defund-amnesty-intl-pushing-abortion-small-countries?dr=4611658::7f7bb99f165b41387e6b94ba4e27cb2f&utm_source=email&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT1RobE56Z3pZbVJsTVdSayIsInQiOiJYbTVMeWs1dVFIYjFwXC9CT3Z4cUJrUDY4MVo0a1c4ak9HdStCWHpSZFVWS3J0ZGlKeTZ1c25tWVVlTmllZ2J4anJBOVBsOUljY1liWklFYmd3Uk9iZ05SQWE4VWorS3pCbDlkelJpeG5uMGM9In0%3D
Petition: Pro-Life Christian Petition to Identifying Christian Schools
https://sfla.webconnex.com/pro-life-christian?src=nomp3
Restore the Constitution
Take Back the Nation
I am a Christian, Constitutionalist, conservative.
Petition: Oppose the establishment of an “International Safe Abortion Day” at the UN
http://www.citizengo.org/en/lf/36999-sign-here-oppose-establishment-international-safe-abortion-day-un?dr=4611658::7f7bb99f165b41387e6b94ba4e27cb2f&utm_source=email&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTXpsak1Ua3haVFptTlRkaCIsInQiOiJ1Nm9IQ00wZUtIcEp4WlwvdDI3RWtVcTJzYkV5RjNyNk1LMVFNcHlmZ091TjNoODdCeVJmS21lUVlXRGtwSFZxVW1hZHFyeE5Nb1BaMWlKWHNaWCtWSUJSVFwvdlwvZytibVI2a2NmNmIwNm5vTT0ifQ%3D%3D
“The international abortion lobby at the United Nations wants to establish an ‘International Safe Abortion Day’ on September 28th. Please join us in expressing outrage at this idea.
A few weeks ago, a coalition of 430 pro-abortion [Murder] groups sent a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, as well as to the heads of UN Women, the UN Development Programme, the World Health Organization, the UN Population Fund, the UN Children’s Fund, UNAIDS, and UNESCO, requesting the establishment of the would-be infamous date.
According to the letter, September 28th was declared an international day of action for the decriminalization of abortion [Murder] in 1990 by the so-called women’s health movement, and it has been ‘celebrated’ annually ever since.
Once more, the abortion lobby is using euphemistic expressions to push their agenda. But we know that no abortion [Murder] is safe, because there is always someone who gets killed [Murdered]. In 100% of abortions [Murders], an innocent baby dies, and in a number of cases, the mother also loses her life.
The letter from the abortion [Murder] lobby argues, ‘We are not criminals. None of us should be prosecuted for something that is a central fact of being a woman [Murdering one’s own child is a central fact of being a woman? In what immoral universe?] (…) Safe abortion is an essential health service for women [Lie! Abortion/murder is not healthcare!].’
Their goal is clear: to push for the legalization of abortion in countries where it’s still illegal [which should be EVERY country!], and to establish a ‘day’ that will be used to lobby for public funds to make pro-abortion propaganda.
The abortion [Murder] lobby has united, and now we must unite as an even louder voice for LIFE.
We must send a clear message to the UN: there is no safe abortion [Murder], and to celebrate the killing [Murdering] of innocent human beings goes against the most fundamental human right: the right to life.
When you sign this petition, your message will be sent directly to Secretary Ban Ki-moon. Please join us and thousands of others in asking him to decline this terrible proposal.
---
Further Resources:
- https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/group-seeks-un-blessing-for-its-worldw...”
“Oppose the establishment of an “International Safe Abortion Day” at the UN
Oppose the establishment of an ‘International Safe Abortion Day [An oxymoron if there ever was one! No abortion/murder is every safe for the innocent unborn child victim and often is not safe physically, emotionally, or both for the mother. And yes, she is a mother and becomes one at conception!]’
Dear UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon,
We, the undersigned, are aware that a coalition of pro-abortion groups recently sent you a letter requesting the establishment of an ‘International Safe Abortion Day’ at the United Nations. We are writing to express our opposition to this idea. An ‘International Safe Abortion Day’ must not be established at the UN.
There is no safe abortion [That is for sure!]. In every ‘successful’ procedure at least one person is killed [Murdered!]: the unborn baby in the mother’s womb. Pro-abortion NGO’s [non-governmental organization.] at the UN want to establish this ‘celebration’ day to euphemistically cover the reality of abortion [Murder].
We oppose abortion [Murder] in all cases, but we hope that even if you are personally pro-abortion [Murder], you will recognize that UN member countries have a wide variety of laws and customs regarding this practice. Pro-life countries should be respected and supported by the UN. Establishing a pro-abortion [Murder] day at the UN would be both disrespectful and divisive [And absolutely morally wrong!].
Do not establish an ‘International Safe Abortion Day’ at the United Nations.
Sincerely,
(Your Name)”
[One more reason in a long list of reasons for the US to get out of the UN and for the UN to get out of the US!]
Senator Cruz Urges Colleagues to Stop Obama’s Internet Giveaway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmqVW5v0wSw&feature=youtu.behttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmqVW5v0wSw&feature=youtu.be
https://www.cruz.senate.gov/internetcountdownclock/
“WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) today spoke on the Senate floor, outlining the possible dangers of the Obama administration’s radical proposal to relinquish oversight of the Internet to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), scheduled to take place on October 1, and urging Congress to stop the giveaway before it’s too late. Specifically, Senator Cruz detailed the risks of increasing the influence of countries like Russia, China, and Iran over the Internet, such as censorship of speech and uncertainty of the .gov and .mil top-level domains. Senator Cruz also took time during his speech to memorialize conservative leader Phyllis Schlafly, who passed away on Monday.”
“‘In 22 short days, if Congress fails to act, the Obama administration intends to give away control of the Internet to an international body akin to the United Nations, [Can’t constitutionally do it! He can not give away that which is not his to give!],’ Senator Cruz said. ‘I rise today to discuss the significant, irreparable damage this proposed Internet giveaway could wreak not only on our nation, but on free speech across the world. [You think it is bad when companies like google, facebook, and twitter censor conservatives on their sites? Wait until governments get control of the internet!].’
Cruz continued, ‘If the Obama administration hands control of the Internet over to this international organization, it’s not like the next president can magically snap his or her fingers and bring it back. Unscrambling those eggs may well not be possible. I suspect that’s why the Obama administration is trying to jam it through on September 30, to get it done in a way that the next president can’t undo it, that the Internet is lost for generations to come. To stop the giveaway of our Internet freedom, Congress should act by continuing and by strengthening the appropriations rider in the continuing resolution that we will be considering this month, by preventing the Obama administration from giving away control of the Internet. [Do you think the Capitulation Party (aka establishment Republican Party) will have the courage to act against President Obama in the face of a government shut down?] I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together, to stand together and ensure that we protect freedom of the Internet for generations to come.’”
“Watch Senator Cruz’s speech on Internet freedom here. Watch Senator Cruz’s remarks in honor of Phyllis Schlafly here.”
“Mr. President, today, our country faces a threat to the Internet as we know it. In 22 short days, if Congress fails to act, the Obama administration intends to give away control of the Internet to an international body akin to the United Nations.
I rise today to discuss the significant, irreparable damage this proposed Internet giveaway could wreak not only on our nation, but on free speech across the world. And so today, I urge my colleagues on both sides of aisle to join me along with Senators Lankford and Lee, along Mr. President with you and your leadership, along with Congressman Sean Duffy, to stop the Obama administration from relinquishing U.S. control of the Internet.
Many have stood with us in both chambers, and we are very grateful for Senators Thune, Grassley, Burr, Cotton, Sasse, Moran, Sessions, and Rubio, along with a number of our colleagues in the House, including Congressmen Duffy, Barton, Blackburn, Brady, Burgess, Culberson, and Flores.
And I urge even more of my colleagues to come together and stand united to stop the Obama administration’s Internet giveaway.
The Internet has been one of those transformational inventions that has changed how we communicate, how we do commerce, how we live our lives. For many, especially young people, it’s hard to even imagine life before the Internet. But look at what the Internet has done—it has created an oasis of freedom for billions across the world.
One of the great problems with someone trying to start a business is what is known as a ‘barrier to entry.’ What the Internet has done is dramatically reduce the barriers to entry for anyone who wants to be an entrepreneur.
If you’re a man or woman, or even a boy or girl somewhere across the country, or across the world, and you have an idea—a service you want to sell or a good you want to make—you can put up a website and instantly you’ve got an international marketing capacity. You have a portal to communicate with people, and anyone can go online and order whatever your good and service is, and between that and FedEx or UPS you can ship it anywhere in the world.
That is an extraordinary and transformational ability. That freedom—that you don’t have to go and get anyone’s approval, you don’t have to go a Board of Business Authorization if you want to create a new business—the Internet is democratizing in that effect.
The Internet empowers those with nothing but hope and a dream to be able to achieve those ambitions.
But right now, the Obama administration’s proposal to give away control of the Internet poses a significant threat to our freedom, and it’s one that many Americans don’t know about. It is scheduled to go into effect on September 30, 2016. 22 days away. Just over three weeks.
Now what does it mean to give away control of the Internet?
From the very first days of the Internet, when it was developed here in America, the United States Government has maintained its core functions to ensure equal access for everyone with no censorship. The government role isn’t to monitor what we say, it isn’t to censor what we say, it is simply to ensure that it works—that when you type in a website, it actually goes to that website and not somewhere else. And yet, that can change.
The Obama administration is instead pushing through a radical proposal to take control of Internet domain names and instead give it to an international organization, ICANN, that includes 162 foreign countries. And if that proposal goes through, it will empower countries like Russia, like China, like Iran to be able to censor speech on the Internet, your speech. Countries like China, Russia, and Iran are not our friends, and their interests are not our interests.
Imagine searching the Internet and instead of seeing your standard search results, you see a disclaimer that the information you were searching for is censored. It is not consistent with the standards of this new international body, it does not meet their approval. Now, if you’re in China, that situation could well come with the threat of arrest for daring to merely search for such a thing that didn’t meet the approval of the censors. Thankfully, that doesn’t happen in America [Yet?], but giving control of the Internet to an international body with Russia, and China, and Iran having power over it could lead to precisely that threat, and it’s going to take Congress acting affirmatively to stop it.
You look at the influence of foreign governments within ICANN, it should give us greater and greater concern.
For example, ICANN’s former CEO Fadi Chehadé left ICANN to lead a high-level working group for China’s World Internet Conference. Mr. Chehadé’s decision to use his insider knowledge of how ICANN operates to help the Chinese government and their conference is more than a little concerning.
This is the person who was leading ICANN, the body that we are being told to trust with our freedoms. Yet this man has since gone to work for the Chinese Internet Conference, which has rightly been criticized for banning members of the press such as The New York Times and The Washington Post.
But you know what, even reporters you may fundamentally disagree with have a right to report and say what they believe. And yet, the World Internet Conference banned them—said ‘we do not want these reporters here, presumably, because we don’t like what they’re saying.’—which led Reporters Without Borders to demand an international boycott of the conference, calling China the ‘enemy of the Internet.’ Mr. President, if China is the enemy of the Internet, do we want the enemy of the Internet having power over what you’re allowed to say, what you’re allowed to search for, what you’re allowed to read online? Do we want China, and Russia, and Iran having the power to determine if a website is unacceptable, it’s taken down?
I would note that once this transition happens, there are serious indications that ICANN intends to seek to flee U.S. jurisdiction and flee U.S. laws. Indeed, earlier this summer, ICANN held a global conference in Finland in which jurisdiction shopping was part of their agenda, trying to figure out what jurisdiction should we base control of the Internet out of across the globe.
A representative of Iran is already on record stating, ‘[w]e should not take it [for] granted that jurisdiction is already agreed to be totally based on U.S. law.’ Our enemies are not hiding what they intend to do.
Not only is there a concern of censorship and foreign jurisdictions stripping U.S. law from authority over the Internet, there are also real national security concerns. Congress has received no assurances from the Obama administration that the U.S. Government will continue to have exclusive ownership and control of the .gov and .mil top-level domains in perpetuity, which are vital to our national security. The Department of Defense, the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marines all use the .mil top-level domain. The White House, the CIA, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security all use .gov.
The only assurance ICANN has provided the federal government regarding .gov and .mil is that ICANN will notify the government in the future if it decides to give .gov and .mil to another entity. So if someone is going to the IRS, or what you think is the IRS, and you’re comforted that it’s on a .gov website so that you know it must be safe, you may instead find yourself victims of a foreign scam, a phishing scam, some other means of fraud with no basic protections.
Congress should not sit by and let this happen. Congress must not sit by and let censorship happen.
Now, some defenders of the Obama proposal say ‘this is not about censorship. It’s about handing control to a multi-stakeholder unit. They would never dream of censoring content on the Internet [Of course not??? Do not trust anything that the Obama Administration wants to do!!!].’
Well recently, leading technology companies in the United States—Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Microsoft—reached an agreement with the European Union, to remove ‘hate speech [Any speech you disagree with? Saying homosexual behavior is a sin is considered “hate speech” to some! Burning the American flag and showing it on youtube is considered “hate speech” by some! Who defines “hate speech?” Very, very dangerous!]’ from their online platforms within 24 hours. Giant U.S. corporations signing on with the government to say, ‘we are going to help you censor speech that is deemed unacceptable.’ And by the way, the definition of ‘hate speech’ we have seen can be very, very malleable depending upon what norms are trying to be enforced. For example, the Human Rights Campaign, which is active within ICANN, has featured the Family Research Institute, the National Organization for Marriage, the American Center for Law and Justice, and other conservative and religious groups in a report entitled ‘The Export of Hate.’ We are facing the real possibility of an international body having the ability to censor political speech if it is contrary to the norms they intend to enforce. In their view, it is hate to express a view different from whatever the prevailing orthodoxy is being enforced.
Now it is one thing dealing with government organizations that try to stifle speech, that is profoundly inconsistent with who we are as Americans. But to hand over control of the Internet, to potentially muzzle everybody on the Internet, is to ensure that what you say is only consistent with whatever is approved by the powers that be, and that ought to frighten everybody. And there is something we can do about it.
Along with Congressman Sean Duffy in the House, I have introduced the Protecting Internet Freedom Act, which if enacted will stop the Internet transition, and it will also ensure that the United States Government keeps exclusive ownership and control of the .gov and .mil top-level domains. Our legislation is supported by 17 key groups across the country, advocacy groups, consumer groups, and it also has the formal endorsement of the House Freedom Caucus.
This should be an issue that brings us all together—Republicans, Democrats, all of us coming together. There are partisan issues that divide us, there always will be. We can have Republicans and Democrats argue till the cows come home about the top marginal tax rate, and that is a good and healthy debate to have. But when it comes to the Internet, when it comes to basic principles of freedom, letting people speak online without being censored, that ought to bring every one of us together.
As members of the legislative branch, Congress should stand united to rein in this president, to protect the constitutional authority expressly given to Congress to control disposition of property of the United States. To put the matter very simply: the Obama administration does not have the authorization of Congress, and yet, they are endeavoring to give away this valuable, critical property, to give it away with no authorization in law [Impeach him! It should have happened a long time ago! Oh wait, the Capitulation Party has already declared that they will not use impeachment!]. I would note the government employees doing so are doing so in violation of federal law, and they risk personal liability in going forward contrary to law. That ought to trouble all of us.
Who in their right mind looks at the Internet and says ‘You know what we need? We need Russia to have more control over this.’ What is the thought process behind this? And what does it gain? What does it gain? When you look at the Internet, the Internet is working. The Internet works just fine. It lets us speak. It lets us operate. It lets us engage in commerce. Why would this administration risk giving it up? Mr. President, when you and I were children, Jimmy Carter gave away the Panama Canal; he gave it away even though Americans had built it. Americans had died building the Panama Canal; he nonetheless gave it away. For some reason, President Obama seems to want to embody the spirit of Jimmy Carter and wants to give away the Internet. We shouldn’t let him.
The United States Constitution prohibits transferring government property to anyone without the authorization of Congress. Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution explicitly requires congressional authorization. [Article IV Section 3 ¶ 2: “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”]
And Congress has for several years now prohibited the administration from using any funds to ‘relinquish’ control of the Internet. And yet, in typical lawless fashion, the Department of Commerce has been racing to prepare to relinquish control by September 30, directly violating federal law and using taxpayer funding to do so. The administration’s continued contempt for the law and the Constitution, while sadly not surprising anymore, is particularly dangerous here, as it is contempt in service of undermining Internet freedom for billions of people across the world.
With the federal government maintaining supervision over ICANN and domain names, it means that the First Amendment is protected. Other countries don’t have First Amendment protections, other countries don’t protect free speech the way America does. And America does that for the world, protecting free speech on the Internet by preventing the government from engaging in censorship. We shouldn’t muck it up.
And if the Obama administration jams this through, hands control of the Internet over to this international organization, this United Nations-like, unaccountable group, and they take it overseas— it’s not like the next president can magically snap his or her fingers and bring it back. Unscrambling those eggs may well not be possible. I suspect that’s why the Obama administration is trying to jam it through on September 30, to get it done in a way that the next president can’t undo it, that the Internet is lost for generations to come. To stop the giveaway of our Internet freedom, Congress should act by continuing and by strengthening the appropriations rider in the continuing resolution that we will be considering this month, by preventing the Obama administration from giving away control of the Internet.
Next week, I will be chairing a hearing on the harms to our freedom that come from the Obama administration’s proposal to give away the Internet.
As President Ronald Reagan stated, ‘Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States when men were free.’
I don’t want you and I to have to tell our children and our children’s children what it was once like when the Internet wasn’t censored, wasn’t in the control of the foreign governments.
And I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together, to stand together and ensure that we protect freedom of the Internet for generations to come. It is not too late to act, and I am encouraged by the leadership of members of both houses of Congress to stand up and protect freedom of the Internet going forward.”
Will Congress led by the Capitulation Party have the will to protect the internet and the Constitution?
Petition: Stop President Obama’s Surrender of the Internet
http://www.lcaction.cc/201676/share.asp?Ref_ID=37878&CID=201676&RID=47674602
You can not win the election if you do not run for the office. You can not win the election if you do not get on the ballot.
Vote Darrell Castle for President. The Constitutional Conservative!
I am a Christian, Constitutionalist, conservative.
Restore the Constitution
Take Back the Nation
For Life, for liberty
Don L. Vance
“With a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.