Monthly Archives: April 2013

Dirty Wars – Jeremy Scahill pulling the veil from covert operations

Jeremy Scahill, known for his book <em>Blackwater</em>, is focusing on covert operations now. His latest book is <em>Dirty Wars</em>, and it has an accompanying documentary. See the official trailer below:

<code><iframe width=”480″ height=”270″ src=”http://www.youtube.com/embed/5KpzBAKJmig” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe></code>

As observed in the trailer, Scahill has definitely given readers and viewers quite a bit to consider – and much of it could arguably leave him in the crosshairs. But, for an investigative journalist, if someone is asking you if you’re looking over shoulder because of what you’ve exposed, it’s a good day. In this film, Scahill traces the rise of the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). This is the most secret tier of the U.S. military and intelligence operations, and JSOC has an unlimited “kill list”. No one is out of bounds – not even U.S. citizens. For more information about the film, screening dates and locations, and appearances by Scahill, visit the official “Dirty Wars” documentary <a href=”http://dirtywars.org/”>website</a>.

Conservative Media Elites, Progressives & The Blood of Boston

Well, bravo to the mainstream media – at least the Conservative mainstream media – for finally putting two-and-two together in understanding the role that political correctness plays in the ongoing conflict with violent jihadists and fundamentalist Islam. To say that they showed up “fashionably late” to the party is borderline sarcastic. Nevertheless, the subject has finally been broached and those of us who have had “three lanterns” in the church tower for over a decade are appreciative that this moment in time has come to pass. But this finally arrived at equation is just the first layer of a much deeper and more troubling convergence. And we all – each and every one of us – have to pray that a fickle news media will not “declare victory” in this singular realization.

For years, many of us in the new media have bared the full weight of speaking truth to power – power in this case being not only elected government, many of whom still choose to exist in denial of the facts, but the elites in the mainstream media as well, where fundamentalist Islamic violence is concerned. Many of us have been demonized and marginalized not only by those of a more liberal bent who level charges of bigotry and Islamophobia at us, but by those in the elite Conservative media who stood dedicated to ignore us for not having slapped down the $125,000 to get a “journalism” degree. Many outlets, both mainstream and on the Internet, cowered in the face of the issue, choosing not to run articles about the facts surrounding jihadi violence or ignoring the intellectual credentials of writers who carved out great swathes of their lives to fully understand the issue; autodidactic or otherwise.

It could be said that at this moment, those who have been ignored or rebuked by the “big boys and girls” with million-viewer television and 50,000 watt flamethrower radio shows, will prove their grit; prove their patriotism, by embracing the reality that it is the message, the education of our citizenry that matters, and not whether we gain fame or wealth examining an issue that threatens the very existence of a free world. As for me, I hope to be judged a patriot for the information I have advanced in an unselfish manner; simply asking for organizational support from time to time so that a roof could be maintained overhead and food could be placed on the table. Some answered unselfishly, most did not.

But now, after all of the “al Qaeda is on the run” rhetoric has been laid to waste, and the eyes of many in the Conservative mainstream media have been focused, it must be stated, without reservation, that our nation faces not a singular foe in a foreign ideology that seeks to expunge the American way of life from the face of the Earth, but three very real and very potent threats that, at present, are well on the path to seeing the demise of the United States of America, Islamofascism being only one of the three.

For years, I and others, including my wife Nancy, a dedicated educator and a formally trained constitutional expert, have been explaining the concept of “The Perfect Storm”; the convergence of three potent threats that together present a threat to our way of life in the United States, and through its destruction, the free world. Our non-profit organization, BasicsProject.org, is dedicated to educating the public on this “Perfect Storm.” Yet, for years the elites in the mainstream media have refused to acknowledge the hypothesis; have refused to allow our voices to be heard. So, it was with great happiness I began hearing the likes of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O’Reilly – Beck being the first among them to do so, and going “all in” in his efforts, I might add – identifying the role of political correctness in the advance of Islamofascism. It is my hope of hopes that they are inclusive of the grassroots and autodidacts in their efforts because, quite frankly, without a constant push for the citizenry to learn, this will become just another news story; just another cycle, and everyone will soon return to watching “Desperate Housewives of the Jersey Shore in Gator Country,” or whatever inane garbage is captivating the low- and no-information voters today.

“The Perfect Storm” scenario consists of an external threat (Islamofascism) coupled with and facilitated by an internal threat (Progressivism, whose chief manipulative tenet is political correctness) targeting a constitutionally illiterate American populace (a population who fails to understand the worth and value of their rights). Is this a Right-Left or Democrat-Libertarian-Republican issue? No. This is an American issue and one that extends to the free world, as well.

Islamofascism, rooted in an almost fanatical devotion to Sharia Law, places the theocratic dogma of Islam above the inalienable rights realized and codified in the Charters of Freedom – the Declaration of Independence, US Constitution and Bill of Rights (Nancy would also include the Magna Carta, and she is right to do so). In doing so, the rights to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press; all the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights and ensuing Amendments, are subjugated to the will of Sharia. A cursory examination of Sharia Law’s compatibility with the freedoms identified in the Charters of Freedom results in the realization of a total incompatibility between the two. One cannot live a life devoted to Islam and Sharia Law, and recognize the US Constitution as the law of the land, ergo; Islamofascism is a direct threat to the US Constitution.

Progressivism, essentially an American Fifth Column, emanates from the ideology of the Marxist/Leninist Era, and presents a menace from within. This ideology was first empowered under the Wilson reign – which advanced the lie of a “living Constitution” so as to expand government beyond the enumerated powers, and then enjoyed resurgence during the counter-culture revolution of the 1960s and 1970s. Today, this ideology, anathema to the Charters of Freedom, is taught at every level of our public education system – from pre-school to graduate school – in the form of “political correctness,” “multiculturalism” and “diversity.” This ideology – embraced by the likes of the “social justice” crowd – has evolved into a unique yet visionless one, and one which holds that our most basic constitutional tenets are the central cause for many of the social ills here in the United States and around the world.

This Secular-Progressive, Democratic-Socialist and/or neo-Marxist American Fifth Column ideology claims that our Constitutional Republic is, in fact, a Democracy, which our Founders and Framers vehemently opposed; understanding that Democracy did and does not protect minority rights. It employs the democratic process to promote moral relativism, multiculturalism and political correctness, doing so in an effort to silence those who would defend the basic foundational American principles, while pursuing an American form of Socialism in their place. This system of beliefs serves not only to grotesquely blur the lines between good and evil, bad behavior and civic responsibility, it goes to great lengths to negate the concepts all together.

The Progressive ideology promotes the utilization of an artificially created sense of self-esteem within our children while striving to denigrate the notion of individualism in deference to the group-think mentality, or the “it takes a village” philosophy, leaving them ill-prepared for the competitive world in which we live, and dependents of a state unable to compete at all.

The precepts of the American Fifth Column work to eliminate the benefits and rewards of a competition based free market society by instituting the notion that absolute socio-economic equality can be attained through government mandated entitlement and control, usurping the freedom of choice and alienating our constitutionally mandated individual liberty to define and pursue happiness. Anyone who dares to challenge the Progressive ideology is castigated as a “bigot,” a “racist,” and/or any litany of “phobes,” all in an effort to execute Rule No. 12 from Progressivism’s bible, Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky (who literally dedicated his book to Satan):

Rule No. 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

With just this very basic understanding of Progressivism – and I urge you to read more on this (DiscoverTheNetworks.org has an indispensable summary of the movement accessible here) – it is obvious to the honest that Progressivism is not only antithetical to Americanism, but a direct threat to the Charters of Freedom.

Couple these two major threats to our nation, to our Founding Documents, to our liberty, with the fact that since the Progressives’ capture of the American education system, the importance of studying history has been marginalized, so much so that our nation, but for what can only be described now as an alarmed minority, stands constitutionally illiterate; unable to understand the value of the inalienable rights mandated by our Founding Documents and bequeathed to us by Natural Law, not government.

I liken it to the old adage about two children who have received the same bike, one given the bike, the other made to earn the bike. Invariably, the child who was given the bike was more prone to neglecting it, not understanding its worth, while the child who was made to earn the bike; that understood its worth, maintained it. This basic truth applies to our American Heritage and the continued welfare of our nation.

Without a solid understanding of the basic principles used by our Founds and Framers in establishing our Constitution it is impossible for Americans to recognize the worth of the American ideal. When the full values of freedom and liberty are not realized it becomes easy to incrementally relinquish our rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

Today, we do not have a populace, a citizenry, which is literate in constitutional philosophy; that understands the worth of their rights…and so they cede them. Further, without a basic understanding of the value of our founding principles and the worth of the American ideal, the American public is less inclined to be concerned with an unfettered access to un-manipulated, fact-based information; information needed to address many of the serious issues facing our nation, our nation’s leaders and the world; issues like violent jihad on the streets of Boston, New York, Any Town, USA.

With regard to the Boston Marathon bombings, it is without question that the Progressives among us have blood on their hands. Progressives in the media, in elected office and in leadership positions have consistently and absolutely denied the American public their right to examine the violent tenets of Islam by saying that to do so wouldn’t be “politically correct,” by saying it would be “insensitive to Muslims,” or that those who want to examine the facts surrounding the truth about the dichotomy between Islam and terrorism are “racists,” “bigots,” Islamophobic or otherwise “intolerant.” Progressives are the ones who concocted the politically correct policies that keep law enforcement from even using the word “Middle Eastern” when putting out a BOLO about a suspected terrorist. Progressives are the ones who established political barriers between law enforcement and intelligence agencies, stunting our nation’s ability to defend our citizenry from the savage acts of the hate-filled.

Progressives will undoubtedly call me a “racist,” a “bigot,” and an “intolerant Islamophobe” because I dare to speak the truth; because I have dared, for over a decade, to speak the truth, about Islam, about Progressivism and about our constitutionally illiterate culture, doing so at great personal expense; unrecognized by the now finally engaged elite Conservative media. So be it…if that is the price I must pay to be a good citizen; if that is the price I have to pay to be a good American.

I just pray, in my anonymity, that now the media elites have been born into awareness about “The Perfect Storm,” that they see the story through to its successful resolution; that they don’t drop this issue of national survival for the next “blonde girl goes missing” news item of another Lindsay Lohan DUI-Rehab-Back-to-Spoiled-Brat story. Honestly, all of our lives, all of our freedoms, depend on whether they do or not. That’s why there is freedom of the press…for now.

I Had a Dream

Last night I had a dream about Barack Obama.

In the dream he was a shabby young man.  He had been abandoned by his father and left to be raised by his mom’s family.  His grandparents spent their life criticizing America, while basking in the wealth they had acquired.  His daddy, far away in Kenya, was known for criticizing America.

One day, while sitting on a bale of hay, Barack was told by a passing hippie that Martin Luther King, Jr. had provided equal rights for all black men.  Further, the hippie explained that some very rich white men had passed a law that allowed special groups of people in America to attend college at the expense of men who were a little less powerful than themselves.  So off to several colleges Barack scampered.  He was average in every sense of the word.  Yet, on occasion he was loud.

Time passed quickly in my dream.  I next saw Barack walking through one of his favorite places, a ghetto.  The people in the ghetto liked to trash-talk each other in order to make themselves feel better.  That was the example which he had grown up with.  His Grandparents and daddy always trash-talking.  He felt at home with the ghetto talk.

Yet, as he was walking through the ghetto he saw a man sitting in the corner of a rundown closed warehouse.  He recognized the man as an acquaintance of his grandparents.  The man had use to come to their home and complain about how unfair and evil the United States of America was.  Now, the man just sat there staring vacantly into space.  He was cold and shivering.  He told Barack that he had not eaten in days.  The man was in poor shape and Barack felt bad.

Time must have passed in my dream because I next saw Barack walking through a wealthy neighborhood.  He was surrounded by several servants and police to protect him.  I somehow realized that he had become president.  While walking through the wealthy neighborhood he peered into the window of one rich man.  President Obama looked at a list of people, and saw that the rich man was not one of his friends.

So, the President decided he would use his ample wisdom, as he saw it.  He observed that the rich man was eating a piece of steak.  On the table by the man’s plate was expensive silverware, including a delicately designed fork and solid carving knife.  On the man’s plate was the steak and a healthy portion of peas.  Above the plate was a fancy wine glass filled with wine.  The man himself was well dressed while eating except that he did not wear his shoes, only slippers with socks on.

President Obama looked at the wine with great desire.  Within a moment his past echoed through his mind.  Zealously, he pounded on the man’s door.  When it was answered he went to the dining room and chastised the rich man for eating and living with such plenty when others went without wine during their dinner.  “I am the president, and I will make this right”, he declared.

Within moments he had his policemen start to collect up all of the man’s food and even his slippers.  One of the President’s people whispered into his ear, “Mr. President, if you take everything the man has  than you will be trash-talked by the free marketists.  Go slowly and only take a little.  The time will come when you can take more, and the rich man will be too weak and tired to complain.”  So, the president seeing the wisdom in the deception gave new instruction to his police.

“We must not take all that he has.  However, we must have him pay his fair share.  Leave him his steak, but take the vegetables, as my wife would require.  Do not take all his silverware, only the knife because it is solid and will last longer in a harsh environment.  Leave him his slippers, but take his socks.  Give me his glass of wine.  We shall give all but a small portion of his goods to a friend of my grandparents so that he may eat and be warm.”

With that accomplished the president swallowed the rich man’s wine with one long slurp.  “Call the press”, he demanded, “I want them to report on the generosity of America’s president.”

The entire group then proceeded back to where the old family acquaintance still sat in the corner.  “His hands are freezing,” proclaimed the president to his staff and the media.  “Quickly, put the socks over his hands and sew them to his sleeves so that others cannot steal them.  Take the vegetables and silverware, the rich man fair-share, and place it before this poor fellow so he can eat.  Retrieve a bottle of water from the trunk of my limousine so he can drink.”  The media scurried off to praise the president for his great generosity and wisdom.

In my dream I flashed back to the house of the rich man.  A friend had arrived and was seated at, the now less-rich man’s, table.  “The man is a fool”, I overheard the rich man say, “he left my fork and steak, but nothing with which to cut it.  It is nearly impossible to eat.  Also, I have no socks to wear with my shoes, please go out and find me both new socks and a sharp knife?”

His friend quickly left to get the things which his companion had asked for.  As he passed an old warehouse he heard swearing from a dark corner.  Although weary of the neighborhood he felt he should investigate.  In the shadows he found a man cursing in anger.  He immediately recognized the quality of the socks on the man’s hands.  Then he spotted his friend’s expensive knife on the ground beside an empty plate, in the middle of vegetables spilled all about.  “What are you swearing about” he asked the stranger?

“The son of an old family friend decided to help me out,” the man explained.  “However, it does not matter what great position he holds, he is not very bright.  He brought me food and clothing which he said was my fair share of a rich man’s wealth.  He gave me a plate of peas and nothing but a knife to eat them.   I was unable to even pick up the peas with my fingers, because he bound my hands up in these old socks.  When I attempted to tip the plate so the food could slide into my mouth the whole thing spilled on the ground.  When I went to drink the water it was frozen from the cold.  I am now hungrier because I have been tempted.  The man is not very bright at all.”

Does Obamacare Apply to Lawmakers?

Talk about hypocrisy.  Key members of Congress are said to be working to find an ‘opt-out’ for themselves and their aides from Obamacare.obamacare fallout

Politico is reporting that “leaders in both parties are engaged in high-level, confidential talks about exempting lawmakers and Capitol Hill aides from the insurance exchanges they are mandated to join as part of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.”

For thee, but not for me… Really??? Both sides acutely aware of the potential for political fallout from giving carve-outs from the hugely controversial law to 535 lawmakers and thousands of their aides.

Is there ANY reason members of Congress, the very lawmakers who passed this atrocious bill, should be exempt from these mandates?

Read more at Politico or watch physician and Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) talk about this outrageous behavior by congress in the interview below:

 

Happy Days! Twinkies to Return Soon!

Hostess_twinkiesNo need to test the longevity of your Twinkies purchased pre company breakup, your favorite snack may be back on the shelves as soon as July!

A Columbus, Georgia Dolly Madison plant is scheduled to be up and running by July. The reformulated Hostess Brands expects the most popular products to be back on the shelves this summer.

In a bankruptcy forced liquidation Hostess due in part to a lengthy impasse by striking workers, the brand and five of the bakeries were bought in a joint venture by two private equity companies.

The Dolly Madison plant in Columbus, Ga., will be the first to reopen. The ‘new’ bakery is inviting former workers to apply for positions. There has been no talk of unions in the new company.

In its new iteration, the company will hire 200 workers for jobs starting this summer. Another 100 jobs will follow. Columbus Mayor Teresa Tomlinson said her town is better off with the opportunities — whether they’re union or not.

“I think we’re very happy to have the jobs back; 300 jobs is better than zero jobs,” she said.

Read more at CNN Money.

Anti-PC subject matter leads to threats against professor

Anti-PC subject matter leads to threats against professor

A professor at a New York university is facing the wrath of students who perceive the content of his lecture as insensitive to victims of abuse.
In reality, Dr. Theodore Everett’s SUNY Geneseo lecture was meant to bring attention the prevalence of fraudulent and exaggerated cases of sexual assault that  often cast doubt on the countless cases of actual attacks. Such clarification, though, has absolutely no bearing on the decisions of those already committed to demonizing and threatening him.
After merely announcing his intention to lead the discussion, called, “Against ‘Sexual’ ‘Assault’ ‘Awareness’,” extremists upset about its possible content began circulating a petition.
“I think Dr. Theodore [expletive deleted] Everett should be assaulted sexually,” reads an accompanying online post.
Lunatic leftists are notoriously shallow thinkers and cannot differentiate between criticism of fraud and criticism of victims. This phenomenon is demonstrated in various situations, such as when conservatives cite the rampant abuse of America’s welfare system and are immediately accused of hating the poor.
Since the knee-jerk reaction of Sam White – the student who started the petition – and the nearly 1,700 additional signees was to judge the presentation based largely on its title, Everett decided to break down his intent.
Obviously, the title is not meant to be taken literally, which the professor said is “precisely why [it] has those three words separately in quotes.”
He came up with the lecture as a way to express his “concern … that the sexual assault awareness movement counts too many borderline cases,” which he said includes acts such as continually asking someone for a kiss.
His true passion, though, is to give real victims the attention and resources they need.
The pursuit of each fraudulent report “diverts attention away from the truly damaging core cases of rape that everybody cares about and toward borderline cases that no one believes are equally important, even though they also should not happen.”
A professor dares suggest all sexual advances are not created equally and he is derided mercilessly by the liberal drones produced on American college campuses.
Universities – once looked upon as a place to experience a plethora of new ideas and values – is now a wasteland of failed political ideology and a continuation of the leftist indoctrination imposed during grade school.Unless more of us are willing to stand up and address the politically correct language and culture responsible for many of our current problems, I’m afraid we are doomed as a society.
Click here to get B. Christopher Agee’s latest book for less than $5! Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily.

Confession of Conviction

A couple weeks ago I decided to “like” several US Senators on Facebook.  Specifically, it was fourteen of the sixteen Republican Senators that voted, in contradiction of their oath of office, on a resolution regarding gun control.

Since that time I have also “friended” Bryan Hyde (StGeorgeNews.com and host of 1-4 pm program “Perspectives” on 1450 KZNU).  Today Bryan had posted a video of Mike Vanderboegh giving a speech regarding gun control.  His flatter of Mike’s speech was infectious to a guy like me who always loves to listen to a good motivational speech.  So, I listened.

Far better than I can summarize Mr. Vanderboegh boldly stated that he was a follower of the Constitution and laws that violate the constitution are void.  He then confessed to having violated some “void” laws.  He went further.  He confessed that he intended to violate other “void” laws.  For those who are alarmed at that behavior he cited a Judge’s ruling that stated that a law that violated the Constitution was in fact void.  That, however, is not the intent of this commentary.

What is relevant and consequently the intent of this commentary is that Mike Vanderboegh resolutely “Confessed His Conviction”.

Confession of Conviction!

It motivates other people to believe, to be emotional, to laugh or weep.  It motivates people occasionally to act!  It always invites others to confess their convictions.

Through history we have witnessed confessions of people with conviction.  They have changed the world.  Imagine standing beside Patrick Henry when he said,

“It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace – but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

He sort of just “laid it on the line”, didn’t he.  That is why his words are still quoted over 200 years later.  He had a conviction and he confessed boldly, as did most of the founders.

Ghandi was another such man.  He was constantly putting his own life at peril…for the things he was convicted to, the freedom and character of his people.  From the movie that bears his name Ben Kingsley did a remarkable portraying Ghandi.  I enjoyed the movie and his role.  However, for me the most moving scene was of his followers that caught his conviction and turned it into their own confession.  There is a point where hundreds of his devotees walk forward, without violence, and are beaten to the side of the road by their countrymen.  Yet, almost astonishingly, they kept coming.  In the end we know that their conviction, and willingness to confess it boldly, won the day.

I began this essay talking about “friending” several senators on Facebook.  Friending may be a misnomer.  In actuality I wanted access to their pages so that I could express my profound disappointment in their failure to honor the oath of office which they had taken.  I was not alone.  Dozens of fellow Americans used sound logic to absurd insults toward these elected officials to convey their frustration.

But, here is what I noticed.  In the following days senator after senator used their Facebook presence in an attempt to convince the reading public of their great value as leaders.  One senator, Pat Toomey, from Pennsylvania has very prominently tried to sell himself to voter by describing all of the wonderful things his field staff is doing.  Senator Lindsey Graham, on another hand has been posting repeatedly his attacks on President Obama, because the Chief Executive is doing precisely the same things which Graham himself did.  Senator Kelly Ayotte, of New Hampshire, is evading scrutiny by lauding war veterans at every turn.

Well, the series of dodges go on by these elected folks.  Although some of them speak up in opposition to a political opponent I have not seen any of them truly stand up FOR principles.  I see no confession of conviction by any of them.

Now, my attack may seem to be focused on the senate.  However, we see the same lack of integrity in the president.  On the one hand we hear his promises of catching people, whom he refuses to refer to as terrorists, who killed four Americans.  Yet, on the other hand he offers no opinion about a doctor that slaughtered thousands of children.  One on hand he seeks to restrict Americans of their constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms.  Yet, he then opts to arm those with a commitment to kill Americans.  He spend public fund on himself and his family without reservation.  Then he turns about and attempt to defend cutting essential and rightful government services.  He speaks with a forked tongue.

Congress has the lowest approval rating in its history.  The president’s approval rating is higher than congress, but only because he has the centralized effort and resources to focus his message.  I believe that the people doubt elected officials in general!

I also believe that they feel this way because these “leaders” have a lack of conviction.  If they are not lacking in conviction, than they are abundant in compromising the confession of their conviction.  That is why the people cannot find full faith and confidence in them.  That is why government is failing miserably to unite a nation, and, why the government officials are contributing to the disarray of America.

Friends and relatives had told me “you can’t say that”, it might be offensive.  On the contrary, “I must say that”, not to offend but rather to be just.  It is my sincere desire that our elected officials will discover their conviction, whether they agree with mine or not.  Then, I hope they will be willing to confess those convictions.  We do not need another Patrick Henry, George Washington, or even Ronald Reagan.  We are in desperate need of men willing to stand at the helm of the ship of state, when fury rages around them, prepared with the conviction to sail on confessing their confidence in course to follow.

 

Pentagon’s war on Christianity

Jesus_midimanWhen it is one situation, it’s possible to just say it’s an aberration. Two? Well, the likelihood that it’s a coincidence starts going down dramatically. Three? Like the baseball analogy, “three strikes, and you’re out!” And that is precisely where the U.S. military is right now.

Since April 5th, readers of Todd Starnes writing have been shown examples of the U.S. military adopting policies or actions that can’t be called anything but firmly anti-Christian. In that first report, Starnes pointed out that the U.S. Department of the Army had labeled Evangelical Christians and Catholics as religious extremists. That is sensitive terminology, because it is typically attached to potential security risks – individuals or groups that may engage in violent activities to promote their goals. Using that terminology in reference to those religious organizations places them on a list with terrorist organizations. Of course, objections to this classification have been lodged, but it remains to be seen whether or not there will be any changes made.

Then, there was a report about a directive given to soldiers, requiring that they remove a reference to a bible verse that is etched on the scopes of their weapons. There were instructions on a procedure to remove the references entirely, including filing and cleaning. The references were placed on the scopes by the vendor. Why the military considers a minuscule marking on the equipment such a danger to service members remains to be seen. It could be argued that it could be bothersome in the field, if the scopes were seen by enemy combatants. However, it is no secret to anyone that there are many Christians in the U.S. military.

Finally, there is a report about military personnel not being able to access the Southern Baptist Conference website from base computers. Other than preventing members of that denomination from being able to access information from their churches, it is also hampering the ability of Baptist Chaplains to perform their duties. And, apparently, this block isn’t being initiated by the Pentagon, but by “Team CONUS” – the entity that is in charge of maintaining security for the computer systems in question. As for the reason given to users about why the site is being blocked, they are shown a screen that states the site may contain “hostile content.”

Any one of these situations is not a good sign, and definitely runs contrary to the old military adage “there are no atheists in foxholes.” Put them all together, and it appears there is a trend building in the military to remove religious references entirely.

Will The Boston Marathon Bombing Be A Power Grab Excuse For Obama?

hahatango (CC)

hahatango (CC)

The bombing on Monday, April 15, 2013, at the finish line of the Boston Marathon and the fact that many innocent
people
were either killed or injured was, indeed, a tragedy.

As Jim Yardley said in an e-mail he sent to me that Monday afternoon: “My first reaction … was the similarity to the Reichstag fire in 1933 as a means to exert more government control over just about everything.” Further investigation suggests that Jim does make a compelling point.

On the night of February 27, 1933, Adolf Hitler was having dinner at the home of Dr. Joseph Goebbels, and was told of the Reichstag fire. Hitler and Goebbels went to the Reichstag, and were met there by Hermann Göring. Hitler, Goebbels, and Göring, without waiting for any evidence to be uncovered, declared that the fire was started by the Communists and Socialists, and the Sturmabteilung (SA, or Brown Shirts) was placed on alert to maintain order if and when the communist insurrection started. The SA rounded up as many communists as they could find. (On July 2, 2008, Obama said, “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” That sounds eerily like the SA.)

As with almost all that they did, Hitler and the Nazis tried to “legally gloss over” what they were doing in the name of “for their (the German public) own good.” The German public was told that the communists had burned down the Reichstag, and that the SA was doing all that it could to save the nation from the coming unrest. The Nazis arrested Dutch communist Marius van der Lubbe and four accomplices for arson. van der Lubbe “confessed” to setting the fire, although he insisted that he worked alone.

We all know what Hitler did once Germany was under control. What is presently happening is very similar to what happened in Germany in 1933. Are we going to be subjected to “control?”

Hearing of the Boston Marathon bombings, Dear Leader Barack Hussein Obama said:

“We still do not know who did this or why, and people shouldn’t jump to conclusions before we have all the facts, but make no mistake, we will get to the bottom of this, and we will find out who did this. Any responsible individuals, any responsible groups will feel the full weight of justice.”

We learned that the FBI and Boston police had a “clear picture” of a potential
suspect
and were trying to identify the suspect. The picture was taken by a security camera at the Lord & Taylor Department Store, situated along the marathon route. Is this suspect another Marius van der Lubbe?

We are now being told that this situation is the “new normal.” Retired General Michael Hayden, past director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the National Security Agency (NSA), said that the Boston-style attacks may be ‘The New Normal’ in the USA. Said Hayden: “This regrettably, if it does turn out to be al-Qaida based terrorism, might be the new normal.”

“Speculation” immediately started, even before anything was known and before the FBI released information about “persons of interest.” Peter Bergen, CNN national security analyst, twice said that “right-wing extremists” could be behind the bombings. Don’t you love the word “could” that Bergen used. Anyway, although Bergen said that “First reports are often erroneous,” that did not stop him from speculating about who set the bombs. Further, without even a shred of evidence, a government counterterrorist “expert” said: “… that pressure cooker bombs have also been a signature of extreme right-wing individuals in the United States who he said tend to revel in building homemade bombs.” The expert’s statement was completely unsubstantiated. The expert also failed to mention that al-Quadea used pressure cooker bombs.

“Damage control” has also begun. David Weigel, in a slate.com article entitled “Why the Conspiracy Theorists Will Have a Tough Time With Boston,” said:

“No politician really stands to gain. This was supposed to be the week of liberal breakthroughs on guns and immigration. Both of those issues, and related bills, fade from the priority list for a few days. If you give the 9/11
conspiracy theorist a ton of credit – and why would you? – he draws a line from the aftermath to the PATRIOT Act and the Iraq War. The Sandy Hook conspiracy theorist points out that we got a debate on gun control. The reaction to a bombing at a marathon will bring … what? Unenforceable security standards on all city streets? Further militarization of police forces, something that was already under way?

May I suggest, David, that Obama, our Conspiracy Theorist-in-Chief, read your article, especially the part about “unenforceable security standards,” before he goes off half-cocked and starts ranting that dangers lurk behind every bush, that what is needed are more laws. After all, he has done that before. Witness what he is presently doing with gun control.

Gosh, but all of this sounds familiar. Or am I just being paranoid? Is Obama pulling another “Reichstag fire” caper? Is this the “new normal?” I don’t think (or at least hope) Obama and/or anyone in his administration would stoop so low as to plant bombs that kill and injure people. But similarities are stacking up.

Was the speculation and damage control just “setting the stage” for Obama to call for more laws, to exert more control? With the MSM backing him, heralding what Obama does to curtail our freedoms in the name of “for our own good,” is the Boston Marathon bombing all that is required for Obama to initiate another power grab? Is Obama going to call for more laws and issue more executive orders so that we are more secure? Is history repeating itself? Only time will tell. We do have an historical precedent for power grab actions, and we know the final outcome.

Update: as of April 19, 2013, the FBI has identified two Chechen Muslims, one of whom has subsequently been killed, as primary bombing suspects. Substitute Muslim for communist and you have yet another similarity. One suspect dead, one captured but unable to speak, and speculation about the reason for the bombing is rampant. I’m betting that the other suspect will also die, thus eliminating his offering any reason for the bombings, opening the way for Obama to have a “knee-jerk reaction,” to say that we need more laws. And I’m betting that Obama will call for more laws that will ultimately restrict our freedoms “for our own good.”

The similarities just keep mounting. As Pamela Geller says,
“American homeland security is an abject failure. … We’ve lost so many of our freedoms to be ‘more secure.’ How are we more secure?”

But that’s just my opinion

Please visit RWNO, my personal, very conservative web site!

 

George W. Bush Speech at Presidential Library Dedication

George W. Bush was joined by all four living Presidents of the United States, for the dedication of the George W. Bush Presidential Center in Dallas, TX. The last time all five men had met was in 2009, shortly before President Obama’s inauguration. Following is George W. Bush’s dedication speech video, and transcript:

George W. Bush: I’m retired from politics – happily so, I might add, but not from public service. We’ll use our influence to help more children start life with a quality education, to help more Americans find jobs and economic opportunity. To help more countries overcome poverty, and disease. To help more people in every part of the world live in freedom. We’ll work to empower women around the world to transform their countries. Stand behind the courageous men and women, who have stepped forward to wear the uniform of the United States, to defend our flag, and our freedoms here at home. Ultimately the success of a nation depends on the character of its citizens. Mr. President, I had the privilege to see that character up close. I saw it in the first responders who charged up the stairs, into the flames, to save people’s lives from burning towers. I saw it in a Virginia Tech professor who barricaded his classroom door with his body, until his students escaped to safety. I saw it in the people of New Orleans, who made homemade boats to rescue their neighbors from the floods. I saw it in our service members, who laid down their lives to keep our nation safe, and to make other nations free. Franklin D. Roosevelt once described the dedication of a library as an act of faith. I dedicate this library with an unshakeable faith in the future of our country. It was the honor of a lifetime to lead a country as brave and as noble as the United States. Whatever challenges come before us, I will always believe our nation’s best days lie ahead.

There Is No Doubt About Obama Now

If there is any doubt in your mind about what Obama’s intentions have been, well wonder no more. There are many who believe that Obama truly wants to run this country into the ground, in his own words he has said that he wants to “fundamentally transform” our country, there should be no doubt that is exactly what he is doing.

We are all still feeling the effects of the mortgage meltdown that Bill Clinton started, when he launched a massive campaign of social engineering. Clinton thought that the mortgage industry was racist, (Jesus, do the Liberals know any other word?) Therefore, he decided to force banks to lower their standards for minorities, so that they can qualify for mortgages. Why minorities are not insulted because of that I will never understand, but that is another story for another day. Because of that bit of genius, millions were unable to pay their sub-prime loans, and they took the banks down with them. The housing market and the economy, are still recovering from that Liberal debacle. Now all those minorities that could not afford the house to begin with, are worse off now than when they started, because their credit is now shot, Liberal policies always do more harm than good, when will people learn?

In comes Obama with his new master plan, ignoring the lessons of the housing bubble, Obama has rehired many of the Clinton people who inflated it in the first place, pursuing the same misguided policies that try to force people into homes they can’t afford in the name of fairness. One banking official, ex-BB&T CEO John Allison, predicts that because of these policies, “There will be another incredibly destructive crisis in our financial system in the next 10 to 15 years.” The administration is launching sub-prime 2.0.

“It’s particularly galling that the people who are using the crisis to extend regulation are the same ones who sponsored the government policies that created the crisis,” said Peter Wallison, former member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, a government group created to look into the causes of the 2008 crash. Thanks to a failure of accountability, the same social engineers who caused the crisis have wormed their way back into power. Moreover, they are doubling down on their monstrous mistakes, inviting another housing calamity.

Only a Liberal would dust off a failed policy and call it a good policy, a policy that almost collapsed the American economy. However, we have to look at who we are dealing with, a President that was voted the most Liberal Senator in 2007 and has turn farther left since he has won re-election. I don’t know about you, but this says only one thing to me, he wants the collapse of America. Let’s face it; his policies so far have done nothing to bring back the economy, as a matter of fact, they have prevented our economy from growing, by instituting Obama-Care and a wave of new taxes and Government regulation.

Obama’s seemingly intent, is to bankrupt our nation, how can we perceive any different, after five years in office, his excuse for not having the economy turned around is that it “was the worst recession since the great depression,” how much longer is America going to believe his B.S. I still say the only way to get this economy turned around is to get rid of Obama and all his Liberal policies, we have a chance in 2014.

I want to bring up one thing, because I know it angers Liberals. George Bush tried to rein in Fannie and Freddie because he saw what a disaster it was becoming, but was stopped by the Democratic majority, had he been successful, we might not have had the housing melt down. Eat that Liberals.

My latest book “What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” is now available.  Click Here

Obama

 

This is one man’s opinion.

 

Answer to No One

I have found my new anthem- “Answer to No One” by Colt Ford!

Eric Boling featured this song on “The Five” this evening.

As Mike Brandstatt said in the comments on YouTube:

“Can i turn this up louder? I don’t think Obama can hear it yet.”

Can I get a “Hell yeah”?!

Secretary Napolitano Caught in Lie, Media Absent

Under oath!

Janet Napolitano
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee to discuss immigration policy and was quickly questioned about a Saudi national who was reported early in the investigation of the Boston Marathon bombings as a “person of interest.”

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) inquired about Abdul Rahman Ali al Harbi, about whom Napolitano refused to answer questions at a previous hearing. “Before the [Tsarnaev] brothers became the focus of the investigation, authorities questioned a Saudi student who reportedly was on a terror watchlist,” said Grassley, “…if so, how did he obtain a student visa?”

Napolitano’s response contradicts itself in just a few short sentences.

“He was not on a watchlist. What happened is — this student was, really when you back it out, he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was never a subject. He was never even really a person of interest. Because he was being interviewed, he was at that point put on a watchlist, and then when it was quickly determined he had nothing to do with the bombing, the watch listing status was removed.”

So which is it? Was he on a watchlist or not? If he wasn’t a “person of interest,” why was he being interviewed? If he was never a “subject,” why was he issued an event file designated 212 3B by federal authorities?

The media has been decidedly silent on the subject of Al Harbi. The front pages of ABCNews.com, CBSNews.com, NBCNews.com, and CNN.com do not contain information on the Saudi national, whose whereabouts has not been released by authorities as of the time of this posting.

Glenn Beck’s The Blaze news site has more information and documentation to support claims al Harbi is a dangerous person with a terrorist designation by federal authorities.

* Updates to this story will be posted, as needed, if more information is released.

Rand Loves The Drones? Not Quite…

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has learned another key lesson of the “age of sound bytes.” During an appearance on Neil Cavuto’s Fox Business Network show, Paul pointed out he didn’t mind using drones or any kind of technology against an “imminent threat,” whether it was a terrorist or “someone coming out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash.” He also said it didn’t matter if it was a cop or a drone who killed the criminal. To fans of his father, ex-Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the reaction was fast and it wasn’t pretty.

Rand Paul was called someone who was “bullsh—tting,” a “politician” (which he is), someone who supported “the militarizing of police” and someone who needed to get away from neoconservatives because they were “rotting your brain.” Even Matt Drudge threw up the clever headline, “RAND LEARNS TO LOVE THE DRONE!”

However, people are ignoring the second half of his quote. Paul specifically said it was different if a drone wanted to go over someone’s hot tub or yard just to look at you. Even when Cavuto asked what if police were searching for a criminal and accidentally found something “bad,” Paul didn’t budge. He said no one should be looking into someone’s backyard and didn’t want surveillance when there wasn’t “probable cause.” Paul made it very clear police must have a warrant to use a drone, unless there was a “killer on the loose” or someone “running around with a gun.”

 

This is very similar to what he said during his 13 hour filibuster and the comments he made afterward. It’s also part of the no domestic drone strike legislation he and Texas Senator Ted Cruz co-sponsored. Drones can only be used on “dangerous criminals” and people who poses an “imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury” to another person. So Paul is being consistent.

 

There are still problems with how Paul worded what he said. The definition of a “dangerous criminal” may mean someone like the Boston terrorists, who engaged in an active shootout with police. But, as Paul pointed out in his filibuster, the Fusion Center of Missouri considers “dangerous criminals” as people who have pro-life bumper stickers, people who may want more border security, support third party candidates or might be in the Constitution Party. Unless the “dangerous criminal” terminology is strictly defined, the use of drones by governments on American soil could end up being as slippery of a slope as warrant-less wiretapping. Even with the strictest of definitions, it may not be worth it, despite how awesome the technology is.

 

By making broad comments on an issue, Paul giving potential political enemies more ammunition against him. It also disappoints his supporters and those who consider him a “political hero.” Plus, the liquor store example is a bad example, which Paul realized. He made it clear in a statement he released Tuesday. After all, hindsight is 20-20.

 

There may be ways to figure out how people in the private sector (i.e. farmers) could use drones, without raising questions about privacy. Drone countermeasures are already being developed and sold to those who can afford it. That may be the ultimate solution.

 

But in the end, Lucius Fox may have it right when he raised questions about technology Bruce Wayne developed in The Dark Knight. Even when it was obvious Batman could use a city-wide tracking device to find the Joker, Fox said, “No one should have it,” because the tracker could be abused.

 

It may be time for us to listen to Lucius Fox on drones. Cool technology, but not worth using.