Obama’s Secret Service Has Plan to turn White House into Forbidden City

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 photo White_House_Front_Dusk_Alternate_zps8925fcea.jpg

Obama’s Secret Service unveils a plan to turn the White House into The Forbidden City

If the Secret Service gets their way, us peasants won’t be able to even look at the White House anymore. All because some guy jumped the fence on Friday, and caught them with their pants down.

Remember when the White House was The People’s House? Now it’ll be more like The Forbidden City.

The Secret Service is considering a number of proposals designed to prevent intruders from breaching the security perimeter around the White House, according to published reports.

The Associated Press reported that agency officials have had preliminary discussions about setting up checkpoints in public areas around the executive mansion. A law enforcement official told the AP that such a measure has previously been discussed. However, the issue has taken on added urgency after a Texas man carrying a knife jumped the perimeter fence Friday evening and made it inside the North Portico doors before he was apprehended.

The Washington Post reported that security checkpoints could be implemented as far as a block away from the White House entrance. The paper also reported that the Secret Service is also considering keeping people off the sidewalks around the perimeter fence and creating additional barriers.

If only your president would take the security of our Southern border so seriously.

But no, the riff-raff cannot be allowed to get within a mile of His Imperial Majesty. White House tours are still “suspended,” supposedly due to the Sequester. (Remember that? It was repealed like 2 years ago.) Schoolkids have to content themselves with watching a movie from the confines of the White House Visitor’s Center, located far, far away from the actual thing.

And now we won’t be able to even walk down the street in front of Mr. Obama’s Executive Fortress. For our own good, of course. He’s better than us. His wife is better than your wife. His kids are better than your kids. And his house is off-limits. Avert your eyes, lest you catch a glimpse of the Emperor, for which the penalty is … death.

Share

Obama’s Border Policies Put Us in a Pre-9/11 Stance

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

illegal alien kids

Hat/Tip to Town Hall.

Former Border Patrol Deputy Chief: Thanks to Obama Administration, We’re Back to a Pre-9/11 Security Situation

 

All the positive changes, the strides we’ve made since 9/11 have been erased by Obama and his open borders policy.

Hundreds of unaccompanied minors are crossing into the U.S. daily, and one of the major security concerns with the influx of illegal immigration is that we have no idea who is coming here. Because of this, Ronald Colburn, former national deputy chief of the U.S. Border Patrol, says all the progress that was made after 9/11 is now gone.

Via National Review Online:

 “We’re back to a pre-9/11 situation basically, and this administration did that in the past five years,” he says. “All of the good that was done after 9/11 up to now has been reversed singlehandedly.”

 Colburn, who spent more than 30 years working for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, says the resulting national-security risk has to do with the “clutter” of people at the border. He says all of the gains made since 9/11 came as a result of reducing the number of people crossing the border. The Border Patrol’s task is to sort through the haystack of people as they come across, he says. “What this situation on the border is doing is growing the haystack, is adding clutter, so that those dangerous needles get through because we’re tied up capturing, instead, juvenile children from Guatemala and El Salvador,” he says. “When you see the cartels — the Zetas and MS-13 and the Gulf Cartel — laughing about this on the Internet, you know what’s behind it.”

This is what a feckless, inept, bumbling Marxist has brought our country to.

brownsville 001

Share

Warnings from George Washington

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

I noticed the other day while scouring liberal web sites that one liberal in typical liberal fashion asked, “What happened to the ‘small arms treaty’ conservatives have been so paranoid about? You know, BIG government wants to take your guns! It appears it’s just like all the other paranoia right-wings are attracted to … nothing to it!” Now, that’s paraphrasing, but here is the actual post:

Via: American Liberal Times

Whatever Happened To The So-Called “U.N. Small Arms Treaty?”

Not so long ago . . . in a land far far away . . . (The land where some “Righties” spend their days in a kind of smug self-satisfied fog of fantasy and delusion) . . . there was a lot of talk about how a proposed United Nations “Small Arms” treaty was going to be used as a mechanism to attack the Second Amendment Rights of American Citizens and which would also lead to confiscation of all privately-owned guns in These United States.
I am still waiting to see any of that paranoia come to pass.  What about you?
Anybody from the “Gubmint” come to collect YOUR guns yet?

To me it’s fascinating the way folks, especially liberals have the propensity to think that because something doesn’t happen right away … it isn’t going to.

In response to the above it appears the Small Arms Treaty is alive and well. I suggest folks read what Mr. John Kerry has been up to. Anyone who believes this guy deserves what they get.

READ RIGHT HERE

The wonderful thing about America is that our founding fathers made it very difficult for anyone to destroy this nation rapidly. They built checks and balances into the Constitution so that no one person could rule. To take away our Constitutional rights is something that would have to be done incrementally:  Change the attitude of the people. Make them more afraid of “terrorists” than the government. Convince them to give up liberties so the government will make them feel safe. Convince law abiding people to allow the government to monitor their every move under the guise of “national security”.  Allow mass shootings to outrage the public so as to make gun control seem like “common sense”.

Just because something unsavory hasn’t actually happened yet does not mean it isn’t being worked on.

~~~

sfra

The president is supposed to be a natural born citizen so there would be no possibility of dual affinity. George Washington warned of foreign influence corrupting our republic. In his Farewell Address 1796 he said:

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.  (emphasis mine)

Liberalism has been chipping away in contrast to everything that President Washington warned about in his Farewell Address. I read all the time where liberals mock any politician, actually anyone who adheres to their religious beliefs. Especially those of the Christian faith. You know the “holier than thou” kind of mockery if a politician quotes the Bible.  I’ve also read many times where folks mock those who claim that morality is important in the character of one who would be president. Morality in a president has given way to having one who’s considered “cool” because he smoked crack and marijuana.

We’ve been inundated with the “separation of church and state” crap for decades now, until it’s reached the point where a child cannot even pass out candy canes to his school friends without some teacher stopping him, saying “Jesus isn’t allowed in this school!”

This is a small example of the decline in America’s greatness, a greatness that George Washington cautioned could be lost when national morality excludes religious principle.

Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

To those who blindly follow those who speak of patriotism and love for America, but in deed weaken the moral values, economic structure and the might of our military, be not deceived. We were warned, now centuries ago that insidious forces from without and from within will attempt to weaken this nation to the point of surrendering the sovereignty of the United States:

The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed … (emphasis mine)

And finally folks, we see every day the Constitution being ignored and usurped by the president and the members of Congress do nothing. Yea, they are complicit, and many partakers in the destruction of this nation. We citizens have allowed the government far too much power over us. I think Washington informs us who really should be in charge …

The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.

Our established government does not have the power to keep us from establishing another, and we have the right to expel those who violate the Constitution.

Original Post:  Cry and Howl

Share

Karl Pierson, Liberal School Shooter, Was Stopped by ARMED School Security Guard

Share

In another turn that will undoubtedly make liberals hold their ears, stomp their feet, and cry, it has been revealed that an ARMED School Security guard ended the mass shooting spree of Karl Pierson.

You mean, a man with a gun stopped another man with a gun?

Why yes, yes he did.

Here is the coverage. 

Pierson, an indoctrinated 18 year-old, was a committed socialist who hated Republicans.

According to the latest reports, an armed school guard saved students at the school from the deranged leftist.
— The shooting was over in 80 seconds.
The CSMonitor reported, via Breitbart:

As they investigate the latest school shooting in the United States – Friday at Arapahoe High School in Centennial, Colo. – one thing is clear to law enforcement officials there: The presence of an armed deputy sheriff on regular duty at the school was the key factor in preventing more deaths and injuries.

As soon as he heard the first of five gunshots, that officer and the two school administrators he was talking to raced toward the commotion shouting their presence and ordering students and staff to follow the school’s lock-down protocol.

As a result, Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson said at a briefing Saturday afternoon, the heavily-armed shooter realized he was about to be confronted by an armed officer, and he took his own life.

So, if liberals had their way, Karl Pierson would have been free to shoot as man people as he had rounds.  There would have been no one there to stop him.  Ironically, Karl Pierson was a gun grabber, which obviously means that he thought only HE should have guns.

Also, it appears that Pierson was suspended, and kicked off the debate team for threatening to kill the coach.

Share

Not Only is the ObamaCare Website is Identity Thief’s Dream, The Government Doesn’t Have to Tell You When You’re Information is Stolen

Share

What is a government’s response to utter failure?  It can vary.  They can  go the path of blaming someone else, and that is the most typical excuse used by the Obama administration.  However, you can also go the path of simply not acknowledging the existence of the problem.  I would estimate, for most totalitarian states, that this would be the primary defense.  After all, if the media is controlled, and doesn’t report it, it isn’t happening, right?  NBC is practicing this with ObamaCare, by simply under reporting the issues.  However, the democrats still have not shut down talk radio, FOX News, and bloggers, so true information still gets out.

That does not mean that deniabilty has no use, as it seems to be the first course with dealing with the lack of security on the ObamaCare website.  I will not be linking it, as it has already been identified as a risk for identity theft.  However, even if your information is known to be accessed or stolen from it, the Federal government has no obligation to tell you  in fact, they intentionally refused to obligate themselves to tell you…

Americans who buy health insurance through the federal Obamacare exchange website could have their personal information stolen by hackers and never even know it.

Most of the state-run health exchange websites will be covered by state laws that require notification when government databases are breached by hackers. But there is no law requiring notification when databases run by the federal government are breached, and even though the Department of Health and Human Services was asked to include a notification provision in the rules being drawn up for the new federal exchange, it declined to do so.

Other protections for individuals’ privacy, like the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, do not apply to the government-run exchange, only to health providers and insurance companies operating within the exchange.

Privacy advocates and cyber-security experts have had concerns about the lack of a federal notification law for years and hope the scrutiny of the Obamacare exchange will finally bringchange.

“The notification requirement is a very important part of overall security,” said Deven McGraw, director of the Health Privacy Project at the Center for Democracy and Technology. “People should be told when their information is at-risk.”

The lack of a notification requirement is particularly bad for the health insurance exchange website because of all the questions surrounding the site’s security. Poor security, coupled with the website’s high-profile problems, could make it a target for hackers either seeking to steal identities or embarrass the government.

Unfortunately, security is often an afterthought for the government, said David Kennedy, CEO of TrustedSEC, an Ohio-based cyber-security firm. Kennedy has testified before Congress about security threats in the Obamacare exchange and the need for notification laws.

We covered Mr. Kennedy’s observations last week.

So, this is where we are concerning the ObamaCare website.

1.  There is no security for the site.

2.  If your information is stolen, you’ll only find out when you check your credit report, or your bank account get’s emptied, because the government decided that they don’t need to tell you if it is.

It would seem that they want to give themselves from plausible deniability.   If they don’t admit there is a problem, they can use their first line, lie and deny strategy.  “Some hacker, probably a teabagger, emptied your bank account, it could not have been our beautiful ObamaCare website, HATER!  Expect your IRS audit.”

And, if it get’s ugly enough, they’ll blame someone else…maybe Bush.

Isn’t that nice of them?

Share

Obama to Close Vatican Embassy, Latest in Long List of Shots at Catholics

Share

While it can be argued that Barak Obama doesn’t like Christians, he seems to harbor particualr hatred towards Catholics.  For the background, here is some content from Town Hall…

There was his slam on Catholic education. His embrace of pro-abortion extremism. His willingness to have priests arrested if they performed mass on military bases (even voluntarily) during the sequester. And, of course, the hideous ObamaCare HHS mandate falls with particular violence on the First Amendment rights of Catholics.

Now, for the most recent slight, the Obama administration is closing the freestanding Embassy to the Vatican.  The Washington Times has more…

The Obama administration, in what’s been called an egregious slap in the face to the Vatican, has moved to shut down the U.S. Embassy to the Holy See — a free-standing facility — and relocate offices onto the grounds of the larger American Embassy in Italy.

The new offices will be in a separate building on the property, Breitbart reported.And while U.S. officials are touting the relocation as a security measure that’s a cautionary reaction to last year’s attacks on America’s facility in Benghazi, several former American envoys are raising the red flag.

It’s a “massive downgrade of U.S.-Vatican ties,” said former U.S. Ambassador James Nicholson in the National Catholic Reporter. “It’s turning this embassy into a stepchild of the embassy to Italy. The Holy See is a pivot point for international affairs and a major listening post for the United States, and … [it’s] an insult to American Catholics and to the Vatican.”

Relocating an embassy out of the Vatican due to security concerns?  Because, as we all know, the Vatican is a hotbed of terrorist activity?   I think this sends a clear message to the Pope, and US Catholics.  The message is simple.  It reads, F*CK YOU!

NOTE:  I’m not Catholic.

 

Share

Mayor Bloomberg’s twisted “interpretation” of America

Share

mike-bloomberg-611x620Mayor Michael Bloomberg believes our interpretation of the constitution needs to change to allow for greater security to stave off future attacks like the Boston Marathon bombings.  And my guess is sadly many people agree with him.  During a press conference Mr. Bloomberg said, “The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry, but we live in a complex world where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.

Does this guy know anything about our constitution and why the Founding Fathers crafted in the manner they did?  It’s apparent he does not.  By trading our liberties for some sort of perceived sense of security we are allowing the terrorists to win.  This is exactly what they want.  They hate our constitution, our freedoms, our liberties, and our culture.  They want us to alter our society and surrender our liberties and Mayor Bloomberg is more than willing to help this along with his twisted view on what we should do to ensure we’re all safer.  His answer is changing our interpretation of the constitution so that the government is unshackled from the limitations it places on it.  That’s a dangerous and reckless position to advance because it steamrolls our liberties and freedoms.

Additionally I would argue that in the “olden days” early settlers taming the “Wild West” faced more challenges and life threatening situations than the average American does today.  And somehow they not only survived but thrived with little to no government intervention.  They didn’t feel the need to change their interpretation of the constitution.  Maybe because back then most people carried a Colt sidearm or a rifle on their person at all times to defend their lives and property.  They didn’t need a nanny state to protect them.  They took matters into their own hands.  Something to think about.

Mr. Bloomberg went on to say, “Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11.  We have to understand that in the world going forward, we’re going to have more cameras and that kind of stuff. That’s good in some sense, but it’s different from what we are used to.

What Mr. Bloomberg fails to understand is that “those people” who seek to take our freedoms could end up being the government and by changing our interpretation of the constitution we’re surrendering our liberties and setting up the conditions for that to happen.  Our founders feared a government growing out of control and becoming tyrannical and usurping the peoples’ rights.  They lived under tyranny, fought against tyranny, beat back tyranny, and crafted a framework of government that strictly limited the federal government’s ability to impose its will on the people.  Mr. Bloomberg apparently believes that this line of thinking is flawed and we must do the opposite to protect ourselves.  What a tool.

You can read the entire article here.

Folks Mayor Bloomberg is only saying what is on the minds of many statists in this country.  His twisted interpretation of America tells me he doesn’t have a clue about our history or who we are as a people.  We need to take this narrative he is trying to push and stop it dead in its tracks.  There are many people out there who think along the same lines and this flawed thinking seeks to steal your liberties.  Don’t stand for it.  When you run into someone promoting this garbage call them out on it.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Benjamin Franklin, 1755

Liberty forever, freedom for all.


You can support the Conservative Hideout with your Amazon purchases!
Share

The Benghazi Fiasco. Why? Why? WHY?!!!

Share

Nearly eight weeks after the Benghazi fiasco on September 11, 2912 and we have no answers. All we have are questions. WHY?

The answer obviously is this administration, this President, this Commander-in-Chief refuses to tell us what happened and why. And, apart from Fox News, the rest of the media has treated the Benghazi attack the killed an US ambassador for the first time in thirty years and three other Americans as a non-event. WHY?

We are left to surmise that President Obama wanted to keep a lid on things until after the election when supposedly he could be more flexible. And, of course, the Left Stream Media was complicit.

Lack of Security Prior to the Attack

Without  rehashing all the information that has come out since the attack, let me give a short review. We know from e-mail leaks and other sources reported by Fox News that   the Ambassador and others had reported heightened activity of militants in Benghazi including an attack on the British Consulate and our own consulate. We know our Ambassador was worried about the lack of security and made requests to improve the security. We know after the fact that those requests were denied. Worse yet, not only were the requests for additional security denied, we learned that five weeks before the attack the sixteen man security force under Lt. Col. Andy Wood was ordered out of Libya against his recommendation to the contrary. Why? We know that in House Oversight Committee hearing that Congressman Darrel Issa asked Charlene Lamb,, the head of Diplomatic Security Services, about the lack of security in Benghazi. Ms. Lamb responded that they had the “correct level”  of security. When Issa went off on her for that answer, she then said that the Benghazi Consulate had the “approved level” of security. The approved level? Who decided that essentially no security  was the “approved or correct level”? Why?

America’s Non-Response to Americans Under Attack

Thanks to so far unidentified whistle  blowers we know that the White House and all the upper echelons of our government were in voice communications with the people at the CIA annex from the within minutes of the attack beginning until it ended seven hours later. We also know they had real-time visual of the attack via our drones in Benghazi. We know that two ex-Navy Seals wanted to go to the aid of the Ambassador immediately but were told to stand down. By whom? Why?We know that an hour later our two ex-Navy Seals disobayed a second order to stand down. We know that they fought their way into the Consulate and saved many people there, but they could not find the Ambassador. With the rescued people from the Consulate, they fought their way back to the CIA annex and defended the annex for another six hours before being killed by a mortar round. We know they asked for reinforcements and air support but none came. Why? We know that we had special force teams ready to go to the aid of our people in Benghazi but they were not sent. We know that General Ham had a team ready to send to Benghazi but he said he never received the order. Why?

The Shame Gets Worse

If you missed this Fox News story on Friday, please consider it a must read. There is a lot of disturbing information in this article. But, it is this that is tearing my guts apart:

British intelligence sources said that unarmed drones routinely flew over Benghazi every night in flight patterns and that armed drones which fly over chemical sites, some a short flight from Benghazi, “were always said to be on call.” American sources confirmed this and questioned “why was a drone armed only with a camera dispatched?”

There were armed drones in the Benghazi area and we didn’t use to protect our people. Why? Why? WHY?!!!  And, there is more:

British sources on the ground in Benghazi said they are extremely frustrated by the attack and are still wondering why they weren’t called for help. “We have more people on the ground here than the Americans and I just don’t know why we didn’t get the call?” one said.

Both American and British sources said, at the very least, the security situation on the ground and the lack of proper response were the result of “complete incompetence.”…

So, let’s recap this fiasco in Benghazi, Libya that cost the lives of our Ambassador and three other brave Americans. Our government under the “leadership” of Barack Obama intentionally provided no security to the “Diplomatic Mission” in one of the most dangerous areas in the world. Then when the Mission comes under attack, in spite of having a multitude of options to come to the aid of our people, our government under Barack Obama decides to do nothing. Why?!!!

The story that is picking up steam is that our President was illegally running gums being bought and/or collected from militant groups in Libya and sending to dissidents in Syria via Turkey. Is this what the President is trying to cover up? Does Obama have his very own “Iran-Contra” affair going on? Is that why for two weeks after the attacks, even though we now know they had all of facts, the President, the Secretary of the UN, and the Secretary of State tried to convince America and the world that the attack was a spontaneous reaction to a video insulting to Islam? This is why our Mission in Benghazi had no security and why no aid was given after the attack began? Is the average American on Main Street as OUTRAGED as I am? I am outraged this piss poor excuse for a human being could even consider asking the American people to give him a second term. Why?

Well, now you know what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:  Conservatives on Fire

Share

WordPress Security Tips – Keeping Your WordPress Website Safe

Share

NOTE:  This is a guest post by LD Jackson, of Political Realities.  It is re-posted in it’s entirety, with Mr. Jackson’s permission.   Given my last post on Bloggers being targeted, so to speak, I remembered this post from Larry.   Kindly give it a look…

I realize this post will not be of much interest to my readers, unless you are using a self-hosted installation of WordPress to write a blog or build a website. If you are one who does, I hope this selection of WordPress security tips will point you in the right direction to help keep your blog safe from hackers. It’s been quite some time since I wrote about a technology subject, if you can call this such. These tips may or may not be new to you and I would encourage you to leave a comment on how you keep your own blog safe from harm.

WordPress Security Tips #1

The first thing you should do when setting up your WordPress website is simple enough. Remember the default user name created Wordpress Security Tipsby Wordpress? It’s called “admin”. After you log into that user account, go to “Users” in the dashboard side panel and use that dialog to create another user, with a name of your choice and with full administrator privileges. Following that, log out of the default admin account and log into the new user account you just created. Once there, go straight to the “Users” dialog and delete the default admin user. By doing so, you will have eliminated one of the most glaring holes in any WordPress installation.

Stop and think about it for a moment. How does a hacker gain access to your website? One of the easiest ways is to simply log in by using an existing user account. If said hacker already knows the user name, they have half the battle won, before they even begin. All they have to do then is to crack your password, which can be done, if one has the software and the time. If they have no idea what the username is, it makes it that much more difficult to hack into that account.

For those of you who have a user account on your blog that may be suspect in its strength, have no fear. You can easily create another user account that is identical to your current account, but with a more secure username. You can then log into the new account and delete the old, weaker account. Don’t worry, when you delete the account, it will give you the option to attribute all of its posts to a different user.

WordPress Security Tips #2

There is another way to create another layer of security at the login level of your WordPress website. I use a plugin called Login LockDown to limit the number of login attempts from the same IP address within a certain length of time. This will effectively prevent what is called a brute force password discovery attack. It’s simple enough to set up and I know it works. One of the authors on this blog had forgotten his password and it locked him out. I had to release his IP address from the blocked list, but it proved to me that it does the job for which it is intended.

WordPress Security Tips #3

This next tip has somewhat less to do with the actual security of your WordPress website. It has more to do with eliminating annoying users who hang around and leave useless comments that add nothing to the discussions we try to have on our websites. There is a way to prevent those visitors from even having access to your blog. It’s calledWP-Ban and it can ban visitors from a defined IP address, IP range, host name, or referer url. Thankfully, I have only had to use it once, but it does work. The message the banned visitors see can easily be customized to show the message of your choice.

WordPress Security Tips #4

Do you use software on your computer to detect viruses and malware? I’ll wager you do, unless you happen to use Linux as your operating system. Why wouldn’t you use some for of security software to protect your WordPress website? I am currently using the WordPress Security Plugin from WebsiteDefender. It’s not the only security plugin out there, but it is the one I choose to use. Once you register for your free account, you WordPress website will be scanned and monitored for suspicious activity. You also have access to the security information about your website, from within your installation of WordPress. The plugin will tell you if there is a problem that needs to be addressed.

WordPress Security Tips #5

Backup, backup, backup. Did I mention backup your website? There are many tools available to do this seemingly innocuous job, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that it may be the most important thing you do for your website. Pick a tool, plugin, etc., and use it weekly, at least. I receive a backup of my website in an email every Sunday morning. I then transfer the backup to my laptop. Thankfully, I have yet to need such a backup (knocking on wood right now), but if I ever do, I plan to have one handy.

By no means is this an exhaustive list of the security precautions that can be taken to keep your WordPress website safe from harm. I do hope it will point you in the right direction and who knows, some of you may have a tip or two of your own. Please feel free to leave them in the comments.

Original Comment:  Political Realities

Share

September 11, 2011: Tenth Anniversary Post

Share

Throughout our history, our nation has faced many evils.  Sadly, man has the unerring tendency to engage in the most despicable of behaviors, all in the name of serving a “greater” power or cause.  It would seem that the United States has often been caught in the cross-hairs of these evils.   The very birth of our nation was predicated on the defeat of tyranny, namely, the “Divine Right of Kings.”  The nation was split, literally and figuratively, on the question of whether or not one man could hold a fellow man as property.   We, as a people, were horrified by the Rape of Nanjing, the attack of Pearl Harbor, the Death Camps of Nazi Germany, the Gulags of the Soviet Union, the Killing Fields of Cambodia- the list could go on and on.  In many of these examples, thousands of Americans died to end the atrocities.

Over the years, the evils that man perpetrates against man became something that we read about in the newspaper, saw on TV, or saw on-line.  We became desensitized to it because we thought we could still hide behind our oceans, and pretend it just happened in other countries-not here.  Of course, we had the occasional crime spree, serial killer, and even the World Trade Center bombing in the 90’s, but none of those caught the public’s imagination in a truly significant way.

Then came September 11, 2001.  All of us were going about our daily routines, thinking of nothing more than having a routine day. Then, we were shocked out of our complacency.

There was panic.

There was surprise.

There was horror.

Our hearts sank when the towers fell.

Then, something happened.  Something American-something good, came out of nowhere.  All over the nation people gave blood; volunteers from all over the US poured into New York to lend assistance; and Americans were more united than they had been in decades, much to the dismay of some.

On September 11, 2001, the United States faced evil once again.  And in the face of that evil, we were united. We became united in our Revolution, we were re-united in the Civil War, and we were united in WWII.  When we face evil, we seem to have that gift of setting everything else aside, and uniting along our common beliefs.  That is, perhaps, our greatest gift as a people. And while we should never forget the evil that was committed on that day, we also must be reminded that there is a second, more insidious evil at work.  The second evil consists of the forces that did not like our being united on September 12, 2001.  In fact, it was ridiculed.  It consists of the factions that do not want us to remember what happened on September 11.  It is the evil that wants us disunited.  It is the evil that would have us trade our freedom for security.  It is the evil that will explain away the events of September 11, and tell us that we should just let it go.  It is the evil that walks among us, and the evil that controls many of our institutions, and sits in the halls of power in this nation.  Remember the religious zealots that committed the atrocity, and do not trust those that would call it by any other name, as they are just as much your enemy as those that would kill you in the name of their god.

God bless the Unites States of America, and may we always be united in the face of evil.

Share

Freedom vs. Security: Where Do You Stand?

Share

Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, we have witnessed a frightening trend in which we Americans have been willing to exchange our constitutionally protected freedoms for supposed improvements to our security. The Patriot Act and its ramifications, since enacted by President Bush, is a case in point.

For much of my nearly 19 years in Venezuela, my only source of news about the United States was the little bit of superficial coverage provided by CNN Español. I usually didn’t pay much attention to it. But after the attacks of September 11, 2011,  I was glued to CNN Español for weeks. I remember when Bush announced the Patriot Act saying we would have to give up some of our constitutional rights so that the government could do a better job of protecting America from any future terrorist attacks. I remember feeling sick to my stomach as I explained to my Venezuelan family that out of fear of terrorism Americans had given up some of their very important freedoms.

Under the Obama administration, we have seen further attacks on our freedoms, especially the right to free speech, in their attempts to put in place again the Fairness Doctrine and their efforts tocontrol wide band access to the Internet  and  their Net Neutrality Law. This, my friends, is a very dangerous trend we are seeing. It is a very slippery slope for a freedom loving people to be standing on. Where will we draw the line? Have we already crossed that line?

I submit to you that something very serious happened recently in San Francisco that should put the fear of God in all freedom loving Americans. It seems that the transit police of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system had recently fatally shot a 45 year old man. Because they feared that there might be some violent demonstration against the shooting, BART officials decided to  cut off underground cellphone service for a few hours at several stations  Thursday to prevent potential demonstrators from using the Internet to organize any such demonstrations. Fox News has the story.

Now, you might say that the BART officials were only being prudent and were only interested in protecting all transit system users so what they did was okay. But friends, as I said, this is a very slippery slope. Here is what  Loyola Law School  professor had to say:

“We can arrest and prosecute people for the crimes they commit,” he said. “You  are not allowed to shut down people’s cellphones and prevent them from speaking  because you think they might commit a crime in the future.”

And the ACLU agreed:

Michael Risher, the American Civil Liberty Union’s Northern California staff  attorney, echoed the sentiment in a blog: “The government shouldn’t be in the  business of cutting off the free flow of information. Shutting down access to  mobile phones is the wrong response to political protests, whether it’s halfway  around the world or right here in San Francisco.”

Do you see that suspending our constitutional rights to prevent a perceived future crime is a very dangerous president? What if it were the Federal government that decided to something similar nation wide? You think that could never happen? Well take a look at this from the same Fox News article:

Similar questions of censorship have arisen in  recent days as Britain’s government put the idea of curbing social media  services on the table in response to several nights of widespread looting and  violence in London and other English cities. Police claim that young criminals  used Twitter and Blackberry instant messages to coordinate looting sprees in  riots.

Prime Minister David Cameron said that the  government, spy agencies and the communications industry are looking at whether  there should be limits on the use of social media sites like Twitter and  Facebook or services like BlackBerry Messenger to spread disorder. The  suggestions have met with outrage — with some critics comparing Cameron to the  despots ousted during the Arab Spring.

Many are predicting that the violent demonstrations that we have seen spread across Europe will soon come to our shores. Would the Obama administration consider the same drastic steps that Prime Minister David Cameron  is now considering under similar circumstances here in America?

Folks, I think it is time that issue of freedom vs. security raises to the forefront of public debate. To that end, I would very much like to hear your responses to the following questions:

  1. How do you feel about the Patriot Act? A month or two ago it was re-authorized for four more years with bipartisan support in Congress and very little debate. Do you think the Patriot Act should be the subject of public debate?
  2. Where do you draw the line on the issue of freedom vs. security? And, how do we measure any gains or improvements in our security or is it nothing more than perception?
  3. What do you think about the action taken by the authorities of BART ? Do you think this is an example of government over-reach?
  4. Like Prime Minister Cameron, do you think President Obama would use the spread of violent demonstrations in America as an excuse to shut down or otherwise take control of the Internet?

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:  Conservatives on Fire

Share