HOME/ABOUT  Prayer  SCOTUS  ProLife  BangList  Aliens  StatesRights  ConventionOfStates  WOT  HomosexualAgenda  GlobalWarming  Corruption  Taxes  Congress  Fraud  MediaBias  GovtAbuse  Tyranny  Obama  ObamaCare  Elections  Layoffs  NaturalBornCitizen  FastandFurious  OPSEC  Benghazi  Libya  IRS  Scandals  TalkRadio  TeaParty  FreeperBookClub  HTMLSandbox  FReeperEd  FReepathon  CopyrightList  Copyright/DMCA Notice 

Calling all FReepers: We need to wrap this baby up by the end of the month. If you have not yet made your donation, please do so today. We can do this. Thank you very much!!

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Free Republic 2nd Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $76,051
Woo hoo!! And now less than $12k to go!! We can do this. Thank you all very much!! Let's git 'er done!!

Posts by Steve Newton

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 10:10:03 PM PDT · 20 of 20
    Steve Newton to bike800


    Soon it will be up to the Sheriffs and cops to protect us from our own elected “leaders.”

  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 5:45:07 PM PDT · 18 of 20
    Steve Newton to bike800

    Understand what your saying.

    But again, there is that pesky oath thing.

    All I can say is that I personally would not want an officer to enforce something that is obviously un constitutional.

    Would you?

    As with a soldier there comes a time for you to decide: Is this order legal?

    Same thing. Sooner or later an officer is going to have to decide if something is wrong and make the right choice.

    I have been there. Sometimes the ramifications can be-—painful.

  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 12:51:38 PM PDT · 16 of 20
    Steve Newton to Yogafist

    I could not disagree with you more. We will just have to agree to disagree.

    One of our first lines of defense against tyrannical laws are our Sheriffs and Police.

    Just because a court has said something doesn’t mean that it is the be all, end all.

    Supporting an un constitutional law is a violation of their oath.

    How can you take an oath and then pick and choose when to obey it?

  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 12:24:51 PM PDT · 13 of 20
    Steve Newton to BuffaloJack


    Funny how that works.

  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 12:22:12 PM PDT · 11 of 20
    Steve Newton to backwoods-engineer


    This article will be published. I am hoping to “remind” our brothers and sisters of that oath.

  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 12:16:03 PM PDT · 9 of 20
    Steve Newton to Yogafist

    Lots of laws are not directly mentioned in the Constitution and are upheld by the courts.

    My opinion is if it is not Constitutional ignore it. You cannot pick and choose in regard to the Constitution.

    (I believe a case can be made the Miranda is Constitutional)

  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 12:06:44 PM PDT · 7 of 20
    Steve Newton to Old Sarge


    I have a survey I need to post. It is an estimate of the number of law enforcement and military that will not fire on American people. It is interesting but the source is dubious.

  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 12:01:38 PM PDT · 5 of 20
    Steve Newton to Old Sarge


    But a real police officer, or military person, or hopefully a lawmaker will do the right thing: Ignore the court.

  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 11:46:57 AM PDT · 3 of 20
    Steve Newton to mountainlion


    Do I get three guesses?

  • Duty to Obey

    05/25/2015 11:38:33 AM PDT · 1 of 20
    Steve Newton
    Duty to obey

    The wording of oaths taken by police officers, and other public officials, may vary slightly from state to state. However, they are all simple and straightforward. The affiant solemnly swears to support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States, the constitutions of their respective States, and to perform their duties with fidelity. The oath police officers in Utah swear to is found in Article IV, Section 10, of the Utah Constitution and reads: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State, and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity.”

    The International Association of Chiefs of Police has developed the following Oath of Honor that is designed to allow law enforcement officers worldwide to commit their professional lives to outstanding public service.

    On my honor, I will never betray my badge, my integrity, my character, or the public trust. I will always have the courage to hold myself and others accountable for our actions. I will always uphold the constitution my community and the agency I serve.

    The one thing all the oaths have in common is the “duty to obey and uphold the Constitution of the United States. Seems simple. But sometimes it isn’t.

    It has become increasing obvious that whatever side of the aisle one stands on, the government has become unmanageable and has strayed far from the Constitutional roots that our founders laid out as the cornerstone of our Republic, these being the enumerated powers granted to the federal government by the several states as put forth in Article 1 Section 8.

    Technically anything that is outside the enumerated powers given to Congress is not Constitutional. However, we live in the world of today as it has evolved from our founding.

    Still the “duty to obey” should always be on all of our minds when we are enforcing the laws of our cities, counties and states. Let’s look at an example:

    Your state passes a law stating that from “such and such” a date the possession of a firearm will become illegal and they have given you the responsibility to enforce this law. If you know your Constitution, and you should, you know that this law violates the 2nd Amendment and is therefore null and void.

    However, your supervisors give you no choice; you will enforce this law or look for another job. If you do not obey, you will lose your job, your pension and all the hard work it takes to become a law enforcement officer. What are you going to do?

    Upholding your oath doesn’t sound so simple now does it?

    This can’t happen in the United States you say? Example from Connecticut:

    With minor exceptions, state law prohibits giving an assault weapon to anyone; distributing, transporting, or importing an assault weapon; or keeping, offering, or exposing any such weapon for sale. It also, with minor exceptions, prohibits possession of an assault weapon unless the owner lawfully possessed the weapon before the ban took effect and obtained a certificate of possession from the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) for it (in effect, registered the weapon). http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0241.htm

    Lawmakers passed a law that is clearly not Constitutional, unenforceable and is widely ignored. It also made thousands of people criminals overnight. Fortunately they have backed off on enforcing this law but what if they had demanded you follow the letter of the law?

    There’s that pesky oath again.

    In my long career I have seen many injustices occur to law enforcement officers who tried to follow their conscience and oath. It’s a shame but most will say it was worth it.

    Enjoy your career but forever keep in mind the oath you have taken. Follow it and you will always be able to hold your head up high. And that is the name of the game.

    God bless and stay safe out there

    Chief Steve Newton (ret)

  • Silver Star Service Banner Day-May 1st

    04/30/2015 4:53:10 PM PDT · 4 of 4
    Steve Newton to yarddog

    I agree

  • Silver Star Service Banner Day-May 1st

    04/30/2015 4:11:44 PM PDT · 2 of 4
    Steve Newton to Steve Newton

    Let’s take a moment tomorrow and remember those who have paid the price of our freedom.

  • Silver Star Service Banner Day-May 1st

    04/30/2015 4:09:50 PM PDT · 1 of 4
    Steve Newton
    114th CONGRESS 1st Session

    S. RES. 136

    Expressing support for the designation of May 1, 2015, as “Silver Star Service Banner Day”.


    April 16, 2015

    Mr. Blunt (for himself and Mrs. McCaskill) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services


    Expressing support for the designation of May 1, 2015, as “Silver Star Service Banner Day”.

    Whereas the Senate has always honored the sacrifices made by the wounded and ill members of the Armed Forces;

    Whereas the Silver Star Service Banner has come to represent the members of the Armed Forces and veterans who were wounded or became ill in combat in the wars fought by the United States;

    Whereas the Silver Star Families of America was formed to help the people of the United States remember the sacrifices made by the wounded and ill members of the Armed Forces by designing and manufacturing Silver Star Service Banners and Silver Star Flags for that purpose;

    Whereas the sole mission of the Silver Star Families of America is to evoke memories of the sacrifices of members of the Armed Forces and veterans on behalf of the United States through the presence of a Silver Star Service Banner in a window or a Silver Star Flag flying;

    Whereas the sacrifices of members of the Armed Forces and veterans on behalf of the United States should never be forgotten; and

    Whereas May 1, 2015, is an appropriate date to designate as “Silver Star Service Banner Day”: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That the Senate supports the designation of May 1, 2015, as “Silver Star Service Banner Day” and calls upon the people of the United States to observe the day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.

  • James O’Keefe Exposes Another University Sympathetic to ISIS [A Catholic University !]

    03/31/2015 6:25:10 PM PDT · 15 of 17
    Steve Newton to dware

    Yes. But you have to start somewhere. I just don’t understand how they can ignore the 2nd Amendment.

    Well. This will give me “standing” to follow through.

  • James O’Keefe Exposes Another University Sympathetic to ISIS [A Catholic University !]

    03/31/2015 2:40:30 PM PDT · 9 of 17
    Steve Newton to dware


    I filed a request with the Capitol Police and a lot of other agencies, to hold a small ARMED protest.

    Received a call this morning. NO NO NO. I said would you put that in writing? NO

    I said how can you just suspend the 2nd Amendment.

    It’s the law!


  • Supreme Court ‘Bitterly Divided’ Over Obamacare

    03/05/2015 12:23:25 PM PST · 73 of 76
    Steve Newton to E. Pluribus Unum

    Very nice and informative. Thank you!

  • Report: Obama Threatened to Shoot Down IAF Iran Strike

    03/01/2015 12:24:33 PM PST · 129 of 215
    Steve Newton to doug from upland

    I agree.

    If true this is beyond treason. It could almost be Biblical.

  • THE ALARM Number 2

    02/26/2015 8:52:56 PM PST · 9 of 9
    Steve Newton to 82nd Bragger

    Is it that time 82nd? If so we will need to talk a little.


  • THE ALARM Number 2

    02/26/2015 4:13:08 PM PST · 7 of 9
    Steve Newton to grobdriver

    Ha. Who knows. But I am very interested in where this is going. Number 2? Sounds like more on the way.

  • THE ALARM Number 2

    02/26/2015 3:22:00 PM PST · 5 of 9
    Steve Newton to azkathy

    Your welcome. I look forward to the next article this “Rusticus” writes.


    02/26/2015 2:48:48 PM PST · 45 of 46
    Steve Newton to JGT
  • THE ALARM Number 2

    02/26/2015 2:42:54 PM PST · 3 of 9
    Steve Newton to Steve Newton
  • THE ALARM Number 2

    02/26/2015 2:41:24 PM PST · 2 of 9
    Steve Newton to Steve Newton

    Before anyone asks, I have no idea who Rusticus is or where he is. I received this in a no reply email from a mail forwarding service.

    This is the second article from Rusticus.

  • THE ALARM Number 2

    02/26/2015 2:39:24 PM PST · 1 of 9
    Steve Newton
    THE ALARM Number 2


    I am somewhat heartened by the responses I have seen to my first article. I say somewhat because I am surprised that the sovereign citizens of this Nation have not already rectified the tyranny forced upon them.

    And what surprises further, besides this now being a Nation of over 300 million souls, is that not every abled bodied man has not taken up arms, though the same lack of participation occurred in my time. Let this not trouble you. There are enough true patriots left to insure the Republic survives the upcoming turmoil.

    “Here I sit on Buttermilk Hill, who could blame me cry my fill? And every tear would turn a mill. Johnny has gone for a soldier.”

    Many have asked me what, exactly, has the government done to require us to forcibly return it to its roots? This question in itself shows how far we have fallen away from our Constitution and Divine beneficence. A Nation which allows its future, in the form of its children, to be killed is an immoral abomination.

    A Nation that forces its citizens to purchase something against their will, who confiscates property without due process, who spies on its own citizens, who has turned the whole Republic upside down, making the federal government the highest authority, the Patriot Act and NDAA allowing denial of habeas corpus and indefinite incarceration and having a president that rules by dictate, does not command loyalty but forcible reforming.

    All these things are so profound that, contrary to logic, the people may not understand how few rights they have left. Let me give some simple examples of freedoms lost: Can you, in your wildest imaginings, picture someone telling one of the founding fathers he cannot carry a weapon or indeed make him purchase a license to carry one?

    How about someone telling Washington he could not produce the wonderful spirits that he used to make and to which I have had the pleasure of enjoying?

    (I remember someone saying that on his midnight ride, Mr. Revere stopped at several pubs along his way to spread the word about the British. Not to give credence to what may be untrue but it can be surmised that Mr. Revere partook of the refreshments offered which has led to many amusing anecdotes)

    And who would tell the founders they could not grow tobacco and hemp, tell them what kind of milk they can drink and what their children could eat in school?

    The absurdity of your laws know no bounds. They infringe on your rights to be left alone of an overreaching government intent on meddling in every aspect of your life. How little they regard the laws of nature, the rights, liberties, or lives of men.

    People have also asked, “But who will guide us? Who will lead us, the few, against the most formidable Nation on earth?” To this I say: We faced the same odds as you. We fought the most powerful country in the world to win the day.

    Mr. Hamilton answered the question of leadership in this way:

    "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."

    A leader will arise among you, as it should be decided by God. But if one does not then rush in with courage and honor and do the job yourself!

    But should we, for now, cower in the dark?

    No, I say we will not.

    In my time we prayed for Divine guidance that we should prevail against the forces of evil. We bled and died so you may live in freedom and peace. Will you not do the same for your posterity? This Nation was born in the fire and that fire should still run in your veins unless you have turned away from God and Country. I pray not! Take arms!

    And what is your authority for this action? As the President said in 1795, "The Constitution is the guide which I never will abandon." God and the Constitution are your authority to revise the course of the Republic. PREPARE!



    02/24/2015 11:01:45 AM PST · 42 of 46
    Steve Newton to Olog-hai



    02/24/2015 10:59:21 AM PST · 41 of 46
    Steve Newton to LibertyBorn

    VERY WELL said LibertyBorn.


    02/24/2015 10:57:15 AM PST · 40 of 46
    Steve Newton to aquila48

    “... one also finds in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to want to bring the strong down to their level, and which reduces men to preferring equality in servitude to inequality in freedom.”

    Humm. Something to think about isn’t it?


    02/24/2015 10:54:43 AM PST · 39 of 46
    Steve Newton to wastoute

    I agree.

    And in thinking about it, it makes me ashamed.


    02/24/2015 10:53:56 AM PST · 38 of 46
    Steve Newton to INVAR

    But the process to resist tyranny is a biblical duty. Because to submit to tyranny is to break the First Commandment, no matter how clever the arguments are by the Beast to twist the scriptures to demand your allegiance.

    Wow. Thank you


    02/24/2015 10:52:15 AM PST · 37 of 46
    Steve Newton to PGalt


    Well Done and well researched


    02/23/2015 11:38:19 PM PST · 22 of 46
    Steve Newton to AppyPappy


    But sometimes its not the majority that writes the law. It can be a force full minority that brings change.

    We are not a democracy where the majority can rule by tyranny.

    We are a Republic of laws.

    It may be time to cut of the spigot.


    02/23/2015 11:33:15 PM PST · 21 of 46
    Steve Newton to Steve Newton

    In the meantime, many of you are asking, “what can we do?” We wrote the answer to that question in the Declaration of Independence. You just seem afraid to say it out loud and your fear shows me how far you have sunk into the despair of tyranny.

    How many of us have asked this question? What do we do?

    This Rusticus has finally said what we have all been thinking all along.

    Finally a person has said what must be said. And what must be thought about. It is an important article. We must decide how much we will put up with and what to do.

    Please. Folks think. What are we going to do?

    Will we let our country go to the trash bin of history? Or will we stand.

    Our call. Lets make the right one.


    02/23/2015 11:21:05 PM PST · 18 of 46
    Steve Newton to Secret Agent Man

    I agree. And that is why I will come out now and say I agree with this “Rusticus.” (What a name)

    As you say, we have fought for decades for fair treatment: Fair treatment of our unborn—a demand that our rights not be infringed.

    Ultimately we have been denied. All our boxes have been used but one.

    Maybe it is time to listen to this—whoever. They are the first I have ever heard that had the courage to use the R word.

    Time to take our country back?

    You decide


    02/23/2015 11:12:51 PM PST · 16 of 46
    Steve Newton to HMS Surprise

    Oh my.

    I have heard something like that. But never that stark. Where have we been?

    What have we been doing?

    Do we not still have the blood of our ancestors?

    30 per cent. What will it be in 2 years?

    Maybe this Rusticus is right

    Thank you


    02/23/2015 11:09:53 PM PST · 15 of 46
    Steve Newton to FreedomStar3028

    I agree 100 per cent.

    The nation need a reset. Who ever this Rusticus or whatever is, they have openly called for a “forced” change.

    Maybe it is time we choose. We have indeed neglected our duty.

    When push comes to shove, we will stand as freemen?

    Lord let it be so.


    02/23/2015 11:06:21 PM PST · 13 of 46
    Steve Newton to JGT

    Indeed. And thank you.

    It is indeed being talked about. That is why so many of us are arming.

    It is-—almost refreshing and uplifting to actually here the R word.

    God bless us. We will need Him.


    02/23/2015 11:04:37 PM PST · 12 of 46
    Steve Newton to Steve Newton

    Let me say this. I do not know who this “Rusticus” person is. Male or female. Black or white.

    But this is the first time I have ever heard someone come straight out and say if things don’t change then it is time for us to take action.

    Now. Whether that is PC or not, I don’t care.

    They have stated the truth.

    None of us have dared to do so for fear of our own government.

    Whoever they are they should be applauded.


    02/23/2015 11:00:09 PM PST · 9 of 46
    Steve Newton to who_would_fardels_bear

    I think what you have stated is well said. In the end it will fall to the states as is stated in the Constitution.

    Also the courts have no Constitutional right to tell us anything.

    The judiciary was given the least power by the Constitution to prevent a black rob tyranny.

    It is up to the states to decide what is or is not Constitutional.


    02/23/2015 10:55:05 PM PST · 8 of 46
    Steve Newton to JGT


    Or more. Now it ends. Or at least it ends by what this-—Rusticus says. I receive this article in an e mail with no return address. But it made sense.

    No one has openly called for a “forced” return to our Republican roots. Till now.

    I thought it worth posting.


    02/23/2015 10:49:41 PM PST · 5 of 46
    Steve Newton to Olog-hai

    I am not the writer of this article. But you are correct. God gave us our freedom. But did it not come at a price? Did not God give us our freedom through blood and sacrifice?

    How will we get our freedoms back? Will not God require us to sacrifice again?

    Freedom is worth whatever we must pay. And pay we will.


    02/23/2015 10:43:53 PM PST · 3 of 46
    Steve Newton to HMS Surprise


    What will we do to maintain our freedom?


    02/23/2015 10:36:45 PM PST · 1 of 46
    Steve Newton
    First let me apologize to my fellow Americans for my absence. In my defense I had high hopes that the erosion of freedom in this great nation would eventually bring about a revolution, and I am afraid I do not mean a revolution in thought.

    I had hopes that my fellow citizens in the several States would have already taken care to neutralize the power of the federal government as we had planned and provided for in the Constitution. This, unfortunately, has not occurred. Thus my return.

    Let me explain as simply as I can the situation we now find ourselves in: When we drew up the Constitution, we gave the several States most of the power. It was the States that created the federal government and the judiciary not the other way around. The federal government works for the several States.

    We made very plain in the Constitution what the federal government’s duties and responsibilities were. The enumerated powers. The rest of the power rested in the States, or the people themselves.

    The federal government has few enumerated powers and is, or was, strictly confined as was the judiciary. (Take a look at Article 1, Section 8) I can tell you for a fact that the founding fathers would not recognize the government they created in its present form. I can also tell you that they would already be shooting.

    The great abuses visited on the several states at the start of the revolution, pale in comparison to the abuses placed on us by the present bastardized form of our government. Read the Declaration of Independence and you will see that you are far more abused than we were.

    We did not put up with it but you have which I find profoundly disturbing. I can only assume that you have had your freedoms reduced or taken by such small amounts that you were not driven to giving the government a firm rebuke.

    Seeing this government from my perspective and seeing it today is a shock of such profound proportions as to stagger ones imagination. We did not create our Republic to morph into what it is today.

    The federal government has no authority under the Constitution to write laws applicable to the people of the states, and has no authority to own public lands within any State except under very strict limits. The judiciary has no authority to determine the Constitutionality of a law: That right is reserved to the States or to the people.

    I blame much of this on the current day news reporting. We had hoped the press would be another check on government. I must admit we did not foresee that the press would actually transform itself into a partisan, almost treasonous form. However you are indeed blessed by Providence that you now have a resource to get the news out that we did not—this internet.

    So. I will be using this new form of communication to lend my assistance where I find it is needed most.

    In the meantime, many of you are asking, “what can we do?” We wrote the answer to that question in the Declaration of Independence. You just seem afraid to say it out loud and your fear shows me how far you have sunk into the despair of tyranny.

    You should never be afraid of your government.

    If you value your freedom, prepare for an uprising. If you do not love freedom, then go from us in peace. We need you not.

    To be continued--------


  • Revocation of Islamic organizations tax exempt status

    02/13/2015 11:29:12 AM PST · 158 of 159
    Steve Newton to Star Traveler

    I has been my honor!

  • Revocation of Islamic organizations tax exempt status

    02/12/2015 5:35:59 PM PST · 156 of 159
    Steve Newton to Star Traveler

    Sorry. Everything after the first sentence of my last post should be in ()

  • Revocation of Islamic organizations tax exempt status

    02/12/2015 5:31:13 PM PST · 155 of 159
    Steve Newton to Star Traveler

    I would hope you are correct about the AIFD. But I have my doubts.

    Some want to cite the Founders and then disregard everything they inherently recognized religion and our country to be, even sequestering religion itself. That’s a typical distortion and a deliberate abuse of the Founders intent. The Founders are not theirs to manipulate in the grave.

    In this country the 1st Amendment guarantees that religion not be established or limited by the state. The reason being is that religion can be used to dictate and coerce and should have no direct affiliation with our government. This is not to say that the individual members of government cannot be religious or are prohibited from personally referencing religion.

    Islam is essentially and inherently incongruous with this country’s principles.

    First, I will begin stating that Islam is not a bona fide religion. When I make this very un-”PC” statement I am using the phrase “bona fide” as its literal meaning, that being “good faith”. Islam is not a bona fide (good faith) religion because it does not allow the freedom of faith, even within its own religion, with apostasy often being viewed as a greater crime than even non-belief. Often religion is referenced to be synonymous with the term “faith”, but if one’s faith is not freely given and free to be withdrawn, then it can accurately be said to be no real “faith” at all, for it is merely both a tool and a result of coercion. Our founders were dead set against religion being used as a tool of coercion, as well as being coerced by the state, or even being the state itself (a Caliphate being the goal of Islamic society).

    Beyond that, Islam’s primary text praises, extols, institutionalizes, and gives its highest honor (entry into heaven) to acts of terrorism and varying degrees of coercion. Unlike evidence of violence in the Bible where it is describing historic details and events, those admonitions and promotions in Islamic text are not temporally or situationally limited.

    Given these and other considerations, I do believe it is a falsehood to extend to Islam the blind belief its benefice is on par with Judaism and Christianity, however it is still entitled to the same freedoms we extend all religion in this country. That we extend this freedom to Islam when Islamists and Islam’s most central texts themselves openly define themselves to be enemies of what this country stands for, shows we have no realistic sense of self preservation. Our founders clearly erred more toward giving more freedom rather than to elevating judgments of what is a threat.

    Quite obviously not every Islamist has acted as a terrorist, indeed the vast majority are not, nor should they be condemned and held accountable for the actions of others in their religion. However it is unreasonable to hold blameless these non-terrorist pacifists when the religion they subscribe to so definitively commands acts of terrorism. The fact remains that the very fundamental tenets of Islam are not only just incongruous with our society, but an anathema, openly hostile to, and incompatible with, our every freedom and liberty

  • Revocation of Islamic organizations tax exempt status

    02/12/2015 5:01:22 PM PST · 152 of 159
    Steve Newton to Star Traveler

    Star I get your point.

    Here is mine very simply: If found that we can indeed revoke Islams status, it will be a black eye for them. It will diminish their status.

    They will loss face.

    Think on this.

  • Revocation of Islamic organizations tax exempt status

    02/12/2015 4:15:48 PM PST · 149 of 159
    Steve Newton to Star Traveler

    From CAIR’s own site:

    In a 2013 update emailed to online Stylebook subscribers, AP modified the “Islamist” reference to:

    “An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists. Where possible, be specific and use the name of militant affiliations: al-Qaida-linked, Hezbollah, Taliban, etc. Those who view the Quran as a political model encompass a wide range of Muslims, from mainstream politicians to militants known as jihadi.”

    Mr. Hooper goes on to decry the use of the term “Islamist” but does not apparently take exception with the definition the AP developed:

    “An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam”


    Sounds political to me

  • Revocation of Islamic organizations tax exempt status

    02/12/2015 4:00:34 PM PST · 148 of 159
    Steve Newton to Star Traveler

    That’s the whole point Star Traveler. They ALREADY are operating as a political entity.

    We might as well make them pay for it, don’t you think?

  • Revocation of Islamic organizations tax exempt status

    02/12/2015 3:15:52 PM PST · 145 of 159
    Steve Newton to Star Traveler

    Maybe. UNLESS you can get both parties to agree.

  • Revocation of Islamic organizations tax exempt status

    02/12/2015 2:54:51 PM PST · 143 of 159
    Steve Newton to Star Traveler

    You are making a regulatory issue into a federal case.