Bobusnr

Uncatagorized

Archive for the month “April, 2013”

Obama administration officials threatened whistle-blowers on Benghazi, lawyer says


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from FoxNews.com.

Posted by James Rosen

 

At least four career officials at the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency have retained lawyers or are in the process of doing so, as they prepare to provide sensitive information about the Benghazi attacks to Congress, Fox News has learned.

Victoria Toensing, a former Justice Department official and Republican counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee, is now representing one of the State Department employees. She told Fox News her client and some of the others, who consider themselves whistle-blowers, have been threatened by unnamed Obama administration officials.

“I’m not talking generally, I’m talking specifically about Benghazi – that people have been threatened,” Toensing said in an interview Monday. “And not just the State Department. People have been threatened at the CIA.”

Toensing declined to name her client. She also refused to say whether the individual was on the ground in Benghazi on the night of Sept. 11, 2012, when terrorist attacks on two U.S. installations in the Libyan city killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.

However, Toensing disclosed that her client has pertinent information on all three time periods investigators consider relevant to the attacks: the months that led up to the attack, when pleas by the ambassador and his staff for enhanced security in Benghazi were mostly rejected by senior officers at the State Department; the eight-hour time frame in which the attacks unfolded, and the eight-day period that followed the attacks, when Obama administration officials incorrectly described them as the result of a spontaneous protest over a video.

“It’s frightening, and they’re doing some very despicable threats to people,” she said. “Not ‘we’re going to kill you,’ or not ‘we’re going to prosecute you tomorrow,’ but they’re taking career people and making them well aware that their careers will be over [if they cooperate with congressional investigators].”

Federal law provides explicit protections for federal government employees who are identified as “whistle-blowers.” The laws aim to ensure these individuals will not face repercussions from their superiors, or from other quarters, in retaliation for their provision of information about corruption or other forms of wrongdoing to Congress, or to an agency’s inspector-general.

Rep. Darrell Issa, the Republican from California who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday to complain that the department has not provided a process by which attorneys like Toensing can receive the security clearances necessary for them to review classified documents and other key evidence.

“It is unavoidable that Department employees identifying themselves as witnesses in the Committee’s investigation will apply for a security clearance to allow their personal attorneys to handle sensitive or classified material,” Issa wrote. “The Department’s unwillingness to make the process for clearing an attorney more transparent appears to be an effort to interfere with the rights of employees to furnish information to Congress.”

The Obama administration maintains that it has been more than forthcoming on Benghazi and that it is time for the State Department to move on. At a recent hearing before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Kerry noted that administration officials have testified at eight hearings on Benghazi, provided 20 briefings on the subject and turned over to Congress some 25,000 documents related to the killings.

“So if you have additional questions or you think there’s some document that somehow you need, I’ll work with you to try to get it and see if we can provide that to you,” Kerry told committee Chairman Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., on April 17. But Kerry added: “I do not want to spend the next year coming up here talking about Benghazi.”

Asked about Issa’s complaints about attorneys not receiving security clearances, State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell on Monday indicated that – far from threatening anyone – the administration hasn’t been presented with any such cases. “I’m not aware of private counsel seeking security clearances or — or anything to that regard,” Ventrell told reporters. “I’m not aware of whistle-blowers one way or another.”

Ventrell cited the work of the FBI – whose probe of the attacks continues almost eight months later and without any known instances of perpetrators being brought to justice – and the Accountability Review Board. The board was an internal State Department review panel led by former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Thomas Pickering and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen. An unclassified version of the board’s final report that was released to the public contained no conclusions that suggested administration officials had willfully endangered their colleagues in Benghazi or had misled the public or Congress.

“And that should be enough,” Ventrell said at Monday’s press briefing. “Congress has its own prerogatives, but we’ve had a very thorough, independent investigation, which we completed and [which was] transparent and shared. And there are many folks who are, in a political manner, trying to sort of use this for their own political means, or ends.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/29/obama-administration-officials-have-threatened-whistle-blowers-on-benghazi/#ixzz2Ry3qcV8y

Advertisements

Female DNA Found on Bomb in Boston


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://online.wsj.com .

Posted by EVAN PEREZ , ALAN CULLISON and DEVLIN BARRETT

Investigators Unsure Whether Evidence Means a Woman Aided in the Attack; Russians Allege Suspect’s Ties to Jihadists

[image]FBI/Associated Press

Remnants of a pressure-cooker bomb used in the Boston attack that killed three people.

Investigators have found female DNA on at least one of the bombs used in the Boston Marathon attacks, though they haven’t determined whose DNA it is or whether its presence means a woman helped the two brothers suspected in the bombings, according to U.S. officials briefed on the probe.

In another development, Russian officials revealed details about contacts between the older brother and suspected Islamist radicals in the Caucasus, including Internet exchanges that led to concerns by investigators that he was trying to join up with jihadist fighters.

Speaking Monday about the DNA discovery, the U.S. officials cautioned that there could be multiple explanations for why genetic material from someone other than the two bombing suspects—Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his younger brother, Dzhokhar—could have been found on remnants of the exploded devices. It could have come, for example, from a store clerk who handled materials used in the bombs or a stray hair that ended up in the bomb.

Monday, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents visited the Rhode Island home of the parents of Katherine Russell, the widow of Tamerlan Tsarnaev. He died after a shootout with police four days after the April 15 bombings.

“The FBI is there as part of our ongoing investigation, but we aren’t permitted to discuss specific aspects of the case,” said FBI spokesman Jason Pack.

Ms. Russell has been staying with her parents since the bombings, and FBI agents have been seen posted outside the house since her late husband was identified as one of the bombers. Her lawyer has said she is “doing everything she can to assist with the investigation.”

image

 

image

Dagestan Federal Security Service

William Plotnikov, left, with an alleged member of the Islamist underground, in a photo released by the Dagestan Federal Security Service. Mr. Plotnikov exchanged emails with suspected Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev.

One official familiar with the case said agents went to the house Monday to collect a DNA sample from Ms. Russell, the culmination of days of negotiations. FBI officials also have been negotiating with Ms. Russell’s attorney in recent days to gain fuller access to question her, the officials familiar with the case said. The officials said the DNA request was needed to determine whether it matched the DNA found on the bomb remnants.

Ms. Russell is one of as many as a half-dozen people in whom investigators are interested as they seek to determine if the brothers had any help in the bomb attack or the days afterward, the officials said. Ms. Russell’s lawyer didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about the latest developments.

Investigators have no evidence that any of the associates of the brothers had knowledge of the bombing plot, and they believe that if anyone helped to dispose of evidence—a point that remains uncertain—it may have been unwitting, according to officials briefed on the investigation.

Both U.S. and Russian authorities are trying to learn more about Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s activities while staying in Russia from January to July of 2012. President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke by telephone Monday and agreed to boost antiterror cooperation, officials on both sides said.

Two Russian government officials said Tamerlan Tsarnaev exchanged notes over the Internet with William Plotnikov, a boxer who moved with his parents from Russia to Canada before joining militants in the North Caucasus. And they said Mr. Tsarnaev met several times in early 2012 with Mansur Makhmud Nidal, an alleged militant from the Russian province of Dagestan and suspected jihadist recruiter. The meetings happened in a mosque in Dagestan’s capital of Makhachkala known for its adherence to a puritanical strain of Islam, they said.

The Tsarnaevs’ parents have denied their sons were involved in terrorism.

Mr. Nidal died in a firefight in Makhachkala last May after a five-hour standoff that ended with him throwing a grenade at police officials, according to Russian authorities. Mr. Plotnikov died two months later, in mid-July, during a raid in the hinterland of Utamysh, a village southwest of Makhachkala.

Mr. Tsarnaev was in the region at the time of both raids but left Russia for the U.S. three days after the second one. He left before picking up a Russian passport that had been prepared for him at the local migration office in Dagestan’s capital.

“He intended to join the fighters, but he lost his contacts,” one of the Russian officials said. “In the end he picked an easier enemy in Boston.”

The Russian officials said it was unclear whether Mr. Tsarnaev and Mr. Plotnikov ever met in person. The parents of the two boxers say they don’t recall any interaction between the two. There are no indications that the two men ever boxed together, and Russian officials haven’t yet produced any of the online communication that they say exists.

A U.S. official said Russian authorities haven’t shared any information about Mr. Tsarnaev related to contact with any suspected militants during his trip last year to Dagestan. Several U.S. officials, however, said they believe Russia has more information about Mr. Tsarnaev that hasn’t been handed over.

—Paul Sonne contributed to this article.

 

Our ‘We don’t give a damm’ First Family


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.americanthinker.com .

Posted by Silvio Canto, Jr

.

The image is horrific:  The White House is closed to little kids, the children of taxpayers, but the First Family keeps on traveling paid for by the same taxpayers.

Where is the editorial about priorities?  Where is the question at the presidential news conference?   Better than that, where is the Democratic US Senator calling on the “First Family” to stop it?

What would the media be saying if “the traveling president” was a Republican from Texas opposed to abortion & same sex marriage?

The point is that President Obama and  family don’t care because our news media has not forced them to care.

President Obama is surrounded by a bunch of people who tell him what he wants to hear and a news media in the business of hero worship rather than journalism. How else do you explain their lifestyle at a time when we are releasing illegal aliens and threatening to cut back on government services because of the sequester?

This is so “over the top” that every American should stop this week and check out Joseph Curl’s article about their lavish lifestyle.

And these are the guys who ran against “rich guy Romney”?

Nobody is asking The First Family to stop enjoying life.  At the same time, do they have to spend so much money when they enjoy life?   Why can’t take a vacation in Chicago, go to the public beach and maybe do a little ‘Habitat for Humanity” on weekends?  Or maybe the daughters can spend a semester at the local public high school in DC?

Why don’t they set the example?  Why don’t they call President & Mrs Carter and learn a thing or two about humility.  I am not fan of President Carter but he led by example.  He may have been the last Democrat to send his daughter to a public school in DC!

They always told me growing up that people get the government that they deserve.

Well, you take “low information voters” plus a “in the tank news media” and the result is a First Family that frankly doesn’t give a damn.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/04

/_our_we_dont_give_a_damm_first_family.html#ixzz2RpQGunjf

 

Why Washington can’t cut the budget: Ex. #987


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.americanthinker.com .

Posted by Rick Moran

This is so unbelievable that it fits in with the notion that Washington lives in a fantasyland. In any other universe, The Federal Helium program – begun when zeppelins were criss crossing the sky – refuses to die despite the efforts of presidents going back to Ronald Reagan.

Washington Post:

The Federal Helium Program — left over from the age of zeppelins and an infamous symbol of Washington’s inability to cut what it no longer needs — will be terminated.

Unless it isn’t.

On Friday, in fact, the House voted 394 to 1 to keep it alive.

“Many people don’t believe that the federal government should be in the helium business. And I would agree,” Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) said on the House floor Thursday.

But at that very moment, Hastings was urging his colleagues to keep the government in the helium business a little while longer. “We must recognize the realities of our current situation,” he said.

The problem is that the private sector has not done what some politicians predicted it would — step into a role that government was giving up. The Federal Helium Program sells vast amounts of the gas to U.S. companies that use it in everything from party balloons to MRI machines.

If the government stops, no one else is ready. There are fears of shortages.

So Congress faces an awkward task. In a time of austerity, it may reach back into the past and undo a rare victory for downsizing government.

“If we cannot at this point dispense with the helium reserve — the purpose of which is no longer valid — then we cannot undo anything,” then-Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said back in 1996, when Congress thought it finally killed the program.

Today, the program is another reminder that, in the world of the federal budget, the dead are never really gone. Even when programs are cut, their constituencies remain, pushing for a revival.

There isn’t a single entrepreneur willing to take the place of government in selling helium?

Congress says private industry didn’t step up to supply more helium, in part because the federal government was selling its helium so cheaply. In industry, it’s said that demand for helium has spiked and that finding new supplies isn’t easy. That requires drilling in a certain kind of natural gas field, where helium comes up along with the gas.

All sides, however, seem to agree on the solution.

The helium program can’t die.

Both bills in Congress seek to alter the program as they save it, to raise more money by selling the gas closer to market price. And both anticipate closing down the reserve. They are confident the private sector will be ready soon (there is hope in particular for a new helium plant starting up in Wyoming).

Despite widespread agreement that this program has got to go, Congress won’t bite the bullet and kill it. A remarkable demonstration of what WaPo calls the “zombielike” attributes of government programs.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/04/why_washington_

cant_cut_the_budget_ex_987.html#ixzz2RpOIklai

 

The Most Unconstitutional Law In American History


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.westernjournalism.com .

Posted by FLOYD BROWN

CISPA SC The Most Unconstitutional Law in American History

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but something has happened that you need to know about.

Last week, while our attention was diverted to the Boston Marathon bombing manhunt, the U.S. House of Representatives snuck in and struck a blow to civil liberties.

They passed new legislation called the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA; and it has substantial implications for online freedom.

Although the President hasn’t officially signed CISPA yet, the Obama Administration has embraced Total Information Awareness –“TIA” for short – which refers to the government’s power to accumulate a massive, searchable database of every conceivable type of electronic information.

And I’m not even talking about the agencies already compiling virtually billions of phone and email records. CISPA has taken all of that to a new level. The United States government now has more power than ever to snoop on you.

CISPA advocates say the bill is an essential tool to protect Americans from foreign “hackers.”

But in actuality, it further erodes Americans’ internet privacy. CISPA is a clear example of politicos convincing the citizenry to abandon their liberties by manipulating fearfulness.

The End of Privacy

Under CISPA, corporations fork over the private data of American citizens to federal agents, as long as they can excuse the encroachment of your privacy in the name of protecting the vague mandate called “cyber security.”

And nothing will go untouched by those monitoring our activities.

At risk are emails… texts… Facebook (FB) posts… Tweets. Skype conversations. Discussion boards. Web pages. Travel records. Banking records. Credit card transactions. Stock market trades. Google (GOOG) searches. Even our landline and cell phone traffic.

All of it – fair game.

Your smartphone’s GPS will even share your exact location so the government will know whether you’ve joined one of those “domestic terrorist” groups.

And on top of that, the bill furnishes these private companies with immunity from lawsuits. CISPA typifies a disturbing form of corporatism, where companies surrender all obligations to protect your privacy in exchange for litigation protection. Companies can now be held harmless, irrespective of the hurt caused by divulging information to the government.

And if that doesn’t make your blood boil, perhaps this will: CISPA violates the fourth amendment.

The fourth amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Our Founding Fathers instituted broad measures to protect our privacy. But CISPA will allow federal officials to collect private information without a warrant from a federal judge.

The bill also grants federal agencies the right to give your information to other federal officials without obtaining a warrant.

Fortifying the Surveillance State

By this flinging open a previously barred (sealed, locked, barricaded) window to your private information, the government has laid the groundwork for an uber-intrusive surveillance state.

This is how it begins…

In September, the National Security Agency will open a one-million-square-foot mega-database facility, built by an army of 10,000 construction workers.

Located in Bluffdale, Utah, the federal data center will store information by the yottabyte. A yottabyte (10 followed by 24 zeros), makes a terabyte look microscopic. Powering this colossus requires a 200-megawatt air conditioning system (larger than what was used for the two World-Trade Centers combined). So much for “green” energy… this beast uses as much power as 200,000 homes.

This massive database – storing our every move – will be available to the FBI, the CIA, the Department of Defense, and, of course, the White House. If it travels through wires or the air, you can bank on it living on for eternity in the Utah datacenter. In the past, only the IRS has been so bold as to claim this power, but now everyone in government has easy access to your private data.

Welcome to Barack Obama’s fundamental transformation of America.

 

Liberal News Analyst: ‘George W. Bush, Not Barack Obama, Is the Real American Hero in Africa’


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from newsbusters.org.

Posted by Noel Sheppard

Noel Sheppard's picture

NewsBusters readers know Ellen Ratner as the perilously liberal news analyst typically offering the left-wing views on Fox News Watch.

On Thursday, Ratner published an article titled George W. Bush Has Saved More Lives Than Any American President that is guaranteed to shock the heck out of you as it angers folks on her side of the aisle:

“George W. Bush, not Barack Obama, is the real American hero in Africa,” she amazingly began. “Take it from me, a liberal Democrat who voted for Obama twice.”

After discussing her knowledge of the problems on that continent, Ratner continued her praise of our 43rd president:

Back in early 2008, when I started my work in South Sudan–I have been working closely with Christian Solidarity International–everyone was excited about the possibility of Barack Obama becoming president. […]

Indeed, after Obama won the U.S. election in November of 2008, many Africans, in South Sudan, and everywhere else, were proud to wear T-shirts with photos of President Obama on them

Yet now that Obama’s first term has drawn to a close, the positive buzz about Obama has dramatically shifted; the Obama excitement, and the T-shirts, have most disappeared.

In fact, South Sudanese today are thinking more about another U.S. president: that would be Obama’s predecessor, Bush 43. As a liberal Democrat and Obama supporter, I was particularly struck by this. Yes, Bush is a hero in Africa, and Americans, too, should know why.

No American president, before or since, has had Bush’s vision and determination to save so many millions of lives.

As you likely surmised, Ratner was referring to Bush’s African AIDS program (PEPFAR).

“Five million children, women and men have received antiretroviral treatment under PEPFAR,” Ratner wrote. “In 2010 alone, 600,000 pregnant mothers received treatment so their newborn children would not be infected. Yes, millions of people live productive, healthy lives due to Bush 43.”

After discussing a new program the Bush’s are working on to fight cervical cancer, Ratner concluded, “”[T]his liberal commentator thanks president and Mrs. Bush every single day for their amazing and tireless work for humanity. They are wonderful role models for future leaders around the world. I wish more leaders would follow the shining example of George W. and Laura Bush.”

Indeed, and I wish more liberal media members would follow the shining example of Ellen Ratner by being willing to give praise to politicians on the other side of the aisle when they deserve.

Brava, Ellen! Brava!

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/04/27/liberal-news-analyst-george-w-bush-has-saved-more-lives-any-american#ixzz2RjQkq1QE

 

obama said WHAT????


Muslims…..

*Have you ever seen a Muslim hospital?*

*Have you heard a Muslim orchestra?*

*Have you seen a Muslim band march in a parade?*

*Have you witnessed a Muslim charity?*

*Have you seen Muslims, shaken hands with a Muslim Girl Scouts/guides

*Have you seen a Muslim Candy Striper?*

*Have your seen a Muslim do anything that contributes positively to the American and Canadian way of life ????

*The answer is no, you did not. Just ask yourself WHY ???*

Barack Obama, During his Cairo speech, said:

“I know, too, that Islam has always been apart of America ‘s history.”

AN AMERICAN CITIZEN’S RESPONSE

Dear Mr. Obama:

Were those Muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed?

Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.

Were those Muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day? Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.

Can you show me one Muslim signature on the: United States Constitution? Declaration of Independence ? Bill of Rights? Didn’t think so.

Did Muslims fight for this country’s freedom from England ? No.

Did Muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America ? No, they did not. In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human slavery.

Your own half-brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as “pug nosed slaves.”

Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family’s “rich Islamic heritage,” doesn’t it Mr. Obama?

Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country? Not present. There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with

Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.

Where were Muslims during this country’s Woman’s Suffrage era? Again, not present. In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture So much so, that often they are beaten for not wearing the ‘hajib’ or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their Husband. Yep, the Muslims are all for women’s rights, aren’t they?

Where were Muslims during World War II? They were aligned with Adolf Hitler. The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops And accepted support from the Nazi’s in killing Jews.

Finally, Mr. Obama,Where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001? If they weren’t flying planes into the World Trade Center , the Pentagon or A field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they Were rejoicing in the Middle East . No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news networks that day.

Strangely, the very “moderate” Muslims who’s butts you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo , Egypt, on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11. To many Americans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.

And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the “rich heritage” Muslims have here in America …

Oh, I’m sorry, I forgot to mention the Barbary Pirates. They were Muslims.

And now we can add November 5, 2009 -the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was Supposed to be counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan .

That, Mr. Obama Is the “Muslim heritage” in AmericaMuslim Heritage – baloney!

And if you don’t share this message, you are part of the problem!

 

RINO Blocks Investigation of Obama’s Birth Certificate


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from usjf.net.

Posted by Louise Hodges

When I discovered Obama’s mother’s passport files posted on the Internet, I sent copies to Sen. Mitch McConnell and Sen. Lindsey Graham, explaining the passport problem and asking for an investigation. I also wrote a piece for the Western Center on Journalism, explaining the problem with Ann Dunham’s passport files. I had one simple question: If Obama was born in Hawaii, why wasn’t he included on his mother’s passport files? Passport regulations required a photo of parent and child and a copy of a hospital birth certificate.

I have a home in Louisville, KY, so I used my Kentucky address. My legal residence, however, is Arizona. I am concerned that someone in Congress apparently does not want any investigation into Obama’s eligibility to proceed.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio has been subjected to public ridicule for investigating Obama’s records since Congress refused. The American people want to know if their President is a citizen of the United States. That is not too much to ask.

I received a response from Sen. McConnell today that reads as follows:

When you contacted my office, you mentioned your concerns regarding President Obama’s eligibility to serve as President of the United States. During the 2008 election season, President Obama released a copy of his birth certificate stating he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961. Since the election, several public officials — including Republican Governor Linda Lingle – have viewed and certified the original document. The consensus is clear that President Obama is a natural-born citizen.

Sen. McConnell specifically avoided any mention of the passport problem, obviously because he knows that whoever was altering or photoshopping records failed to look into his mother’s passport files.

I have a suggestion to make. Let’s make it a two-fer. Let’s get rid of Obama and his crony, Mitch McConnell, who has been stopping up the lawful investigation of Obama’s eligibility.

 

IS THIS MISSING PIECE TO BENGHAZI PUZZLE?


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives.

Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from WND.

Posted by AARON KLEIN

Congressional probe lacks crucial detail

author-image

hillary-clinton-gesture

JERUSALEM – A House Republican report released this week on the Obama administration’s response to the Sept. 11, 2012, Benghazi terror attack is missing one essential piece that could help to answer many of the questions raised in the report.

That piece is the alleged illicit activities transpiring inside the U.S. facilities that were attacked.

The 46-page report by five committees of the Republican-led House says the White House scrubbed terrorism and al-Qaida from talking points and misled the American public by blaming the attack on an obscure YouTube film.

The report further questions why the White House falsely claimed the U.S. facilities were targeted in unplanned, popular street protests while it was known to the government almost immediately that the Benghazi mission and nearby CIA annex were attacked by militants in a premeditated fashion.

One key question of the congressional probe centers on why the State Department chose to reduce security at the U.S. Benghazi mission and to deny multiple requests for more security assistance.

The report rejects State Department claims that funding was the reason for the security reductions.

States the report: “It is clear that funding – or a lack thereof – is not the reason for the reductions in security, as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Lamb testified and as emails reviewed by the Committees attest.

“Moreover, a lack of funding would not have been at issue with respect to the rejection of the request to extend the deployment of the [U.S. Military Security Support Team], as that team was provided via the Defense Department at no expense to the State Department.”

A key accusation in the report alleges the White House generated talking points for the public that “excluded details about the wide availability of weapons and experienced fighters in Libya, an exacerbating factor that contributed to the lethality of the attacks.”

The report does not mention that the weapons and fighters may actually be the reason for the coordinated assaults on the U.S. facilities. According to Middle Eastern security officials, the U.S. mission was allegedly used to help coordinate arms and other aid to the jihadist-led rebel; insurgencies in Libya and in Syria.

The U.S. mission’s alleged role in arming the rebels, as first exposed by WND, may help to answer many of the questions in the probe, including why the White House did not want to draw attention to al-Qaida’s role in the attacks.

It also could explain why security was reduced as the compound. An increased security presence at the U.S. mission would have drawn attention to the shabby, nondescript building that was allegedly being used for such sensitive purposes.

WND has filed numerous reports quoting Middle East security officials who described the mission in Benghazi as a meeting place to coordinate aid for the rebel-led insurgencies in the Middle East, including the transfer of weapons to rebels.

Two weeks after the Benghazi attack, WND also broke the story that murdered U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens himself played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, according to Egyptian security officials.

In November 2012, Middle Eastern security sources further described both the U.S. mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi as the main intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels that was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Many rebel fighters are openly members of terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida.

Among the tasks performed inside the Benghazi facility was collaborating with countries, most notably Turkey, on the recruitment of fighters – including jihadists – to target Assad’s regime, the security officials said.

Stevens served as a key contact with the Saudis to coordinate the recruitment by Saudi Arabia of Islamic fighters from North Africa and Libya, Egyptian security officials told WND. The jihadists were sent to Syria via Turkey to attack Assad’s forces, said the security officials.

The officials said Stevens also worked with the Saudis to send names of potential jihadi recruits to U.S. security organizations for review. Names found to be directly involved in previous attacks against the U.S., including in Iraq and Afghanistan, were ultimately not recruited by the Saudis to fight in Syria, said the officials.

White House officials previously denied aiding arms shipments to the rebels.

However, confirming WND’s exclusive reporting for over a year, the New York Times last month reported that since early 2012, the CIA has been aiding the Arab governments and Turkey in shopping for and transporting weapons to the Syrian rebels.

Previously, multiple establishment news media reports described the U.S. role in helping to arm the Libyan rebels attacking the regime of Moammar Ghadaffi. At the same time it was widely reported that al-Qaida groups were among the Libyan rebels.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/is-this-missing-piece-to-benghazi-puzzle/#P4HSKhUK7LLmkdzG.99

 

UN Official: Boston Deserved to be Bombed!


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

 I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 This is a Reblogged from http://www.mrconservative.com.

 Posted by Bookworm

Palestinians weren’t the only ones who rejoiced when they heard about the Boston bombing that killed three, including an 8-year-old boy, and terribly maimed dozens of others.  Richard Falk, the “expert” for the UN Human Rights Council, has written that America is an evil country, whose citizens deserve whatever bad things Islamic terrorists can do to them. Incidentally, Falk, who holds the title “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967,” also believes that 9/11 was an inside job.

Falk’s official rant at foreign policy.com is a masterpiece of hatred and delusional paranoia. He warms up by contending that the Bush administration committed the 9/11 attack so that it would have a justification to go to war.

After this throat-clearing, Falk is up and running about the Boston bombing, which he maintains is a result of America’s support for Israel:

(A)s long as Tel Aviv has the compliant ear of the American political establishment, those who wish for peace and justice in the world should not rest easy.

The fact that the bombers were Chechen Muslims who couldn’t care less about Israel was irrelevant to Falk’s rant. To him, this has nothing to do with direct cause-and-effect. Instead, any association with Israel has so soiled America that America deserves whatever she gets. Indeed, even without her Israel associations, Falk considers America an evil nation:

The American global domination project is bound to generate all kinds of resistance in the post-colonial world.

Again, Falk’s ideas are unrelated to rationality. America’s global domination comes about, not because she has become an occupying military force around the world, but because she has a dynamic capitalist culture that other countries want to emulate, whether it’s by buying the goods she sells or by aping the culture she models.

Just to make sure that everyone reading his screed understands what he’s saying – that Americans deserve to die at the hands of Muslim terrorists – Falk quotes W.H. Auden to drive home his point: “To whom evil is done/do evil in return.”

Falk’s malevolence towards America and Israel is precisely why he’s been designated as the UN Human Rights Council’s expert. According to a Breitbart.com post by Anne Bayefsky, who is a genuine expert when it comes to the UN,

That world view is shared by the 56 member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), who only a week ago at UN Headquarters refused to define terrorism unless an exception clause was created for “legitimate struggle.”

The OIC controls the balance of power at the UN’s top human rights body, by holding majorities in both the African and Asian regional groups. Africa and Asia, in turn, control 26 of the 47 seats on the Council. With the backing of the OIC, therefore, Falk has been encouraged and protected.

As of right now, Falk has officially declared that attacks against American are “legitimate struggles” that cannot be deemed terrorism. Keep this in mind as you contemplate the fact that Barack Obama is doing everything he possibly can to enable the passage of the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty, even without an official United States vote. Once in effect, the Treaty can shut down Americans’ ability to buy guns from abroad or to sell them abroad. This last could hurt American arms manufacturers quite badly.

What’s tragic is that the venomous Falk is not alone in blaming America for the savage attack against her by two young men who were welcomed to this country. That MSNBC’s hard-left talking head Melissa Harris-Perry might blame American movie culture was not surprising, of course, but it was a bit odd to hear Tom Brokaw also say that America’s chickens are coming home to roost. As far as he’s concerned, Americans deserved what they got because of our drone policy (or, what Brokaw wouldn’t admit, Obama’s drone policy).

 

POLICE TOLD TO CHOOSE: GUN CONTROL OR CONSTITUTION


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

 I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 This is a Reblogged from WND.

 Posted by DREW ZAHN

Video warns military, too – D.C. lawmakers about to commit ‘treason’

author-image

130415timetochoose

“This is a message to every member of law enforcement and the military,” a sizzling new YouTube video begins. “You know you have a choice to make.”

The video, produced by a man identified on Facebook as Aaron Hawkins, is a challenge to those who enforce America’s laws, warning them the day is coming when gun-control legislation will undermine the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment and police forces will be asked to restrict or even confiscate American citizens’ firearms.

On that day, the video warns, America’s lawmakers will have committed “treason,” and the nation’s police and military will be forced to choose “which side of history you’re going to be on.”

The video, titled “Police & Military – Time to Choose,” cites alleged offenses already enacted against the Constitution from both current and past presidential administrations, including the Patriot Act – which expanded the federal government’s use of domestic security and surveillance powers – and the National Defense Authorization Act – which many worry opens the door to indefinite detention of American citizens without trial.

“At this juncture in history, there can be no question that those holding the reins of power in Congress and the Senate and in the executive branch no longer represent the rule of law,” the video continues, “By destroying the Constitution with the Patriot Act and the NDAA and numerous other police-state measures, they have abandoned every shred of legitimacy and have made themselves into enemies of the people.”

Hawkins, who administers a site called StormCloudsGathering.com, paints the picture in stark terms, but says he hopes principled police and military will rather refuse to enforce the laws than permit a conflict over firearms turn to civil war.

“You took an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic,” the video reminds the police and military. “The Congress, the Senate and the executive branch have made themselves into a domestic enemy, and they are going to attempt to use you to help them. It’s time to choose which side of history you’re going to be on.

“Any congressperson or senator who puts their name to any law which infringes on the right to bear arms should be arrested for treason. That would be a literal fulfillment of your oath,” Hawkins continues. “If you don’t want the situation to come to that … send a letter to every congressperson, senator and state lawmaker, a letter not asking them nicely to abide by the Constitution, but letting them no on no uncertain terms what will happen to them if they don’t. Make it clear to them that not only will you refuse to enforce their edicts, but they will be defining themselves as enemies of the Constitution and of the people, if they go down this road.”

The video can be seen below:

Hawkins

Hawkins’ video ends with an appeal to support Oathkeepers.org, which describes itself as “a non-partisan association of currently serving military, veterans, peace officers and firefighters who will fulfill the oath we swore to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God. Our oath is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and we will not obey unconstitutional (and thus illegal) and immoral orders, such as orders to disarm the American people.”

Though there is no indication the organization endorses Hawkins’ video, a similar call to choose the Constitution over gun-control legislation does appear on the Oath Keepers’ website from a New Jersey police officer identified as Oathkeeper151:

Oathkeeper151 includes in his call to fellow police officers a challenge similar to Hawkins, reminding them that laws are only as enforceable as those willing to enforce them.

Oathkeepers 151

“If [we] law enforcement officials and military remembered our oaths,” the Oath Keeper states, “[gun-grabbing legislators] wouldn’t be able to do anything.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/police-told-to-choose-gun-control-or-constitution/#SlHOHV4MuOtlvFAV.99

 

RAND PAUL: HILLARY’S BENGHAZI STORY UNRAVELING


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

 I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 This is a Reblogged from WND.

‘Surprised’ by claim she had no knowledge of arms deals

hillary-benghazi

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., was “surprised” by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s sworn testimony in a Senate hearing in which she claimed that she did not know whether the U.S. mission in Libya was procuring or transferring weapons to Turkey and other Arab countries.

It was Paul who asked Clinton the question during the hearings. His inquiry focused on alleged weapons shipments out of Benghazi to arm the rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

Speaking on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on New York’s WABC Radio, Paul was reacting to Clinton’s testimony in light of a New York Times report last month that claimed that since early 2012, the CIA has been helping Arab governments and Turkey obtain and ship weapons to the Syrian rebels.

The plan mirrors one the Times reported in February as being proposed by Clinton herself. The Times described Clinton as one of the driving forces advocating for arming the Syrian rebels via Turkish and Arab cut outs.

The New York Times reported Clinton and then-CIA Director David Petraeus had concocted the plan, which called for vetting rebels and arming Syrian fighters with the assistance of Arab countries.

If Clinton knew about the arms transfers, she may have committed perjury during her Benghazi testimony.

House GOP concludes Hillary Clinton blew Benghazi response

Any training or arming of the Syrian rebels would be considered highly controversial. A major issue is the inclusion of jihadists, including al-Qaida, among the ranks of the Free Syrian Army and other Syrian opposition groups.

Paul further charged during the radio interview that the alleged weapons shipments “may have something to do with” why the U.S. mission in Benghazi was attacked last September.

Regarding Clinton’s testimony, Paul stated: “I was surprised that she acted as if she never even heard of the whole concept of arms coming out of Libya through Turkey … since it had been reported in several mainstream media sources that this has been going on. So I was quite surprised that she acted as if she had never heard of any of this, because some of the reports said that she has been arguing for this.”

Paul said many public and government officials “keep this sort of veil of deniability, and the reason they can deny it is, well, maybe the U.S. wasn’t actually buying and transferring the arms.

“Maybe we were facilitating it. Simply coordinating with Turkish people who were doing it and they can simply try to stand by and say, ‘Well, no, we didn’t do it, the Turks did it.’ But in reality a lot of this may have involved our involvement.”

In the hearings over the Obama administration’s handling of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Clinton claimed to Paul that she did not know whether the U.S. was helping Turkey and other Arab countries in procure weapons.

Paul asked Clinton: “Is the U. S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling, anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?”

“To Turkey?” Clinton asked. “I will have to take that question for the record. Nobody has ever raised that with me.”

Continued Paul: “It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that may have weapons, and what I’d like to know is the annex that was close by, were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries, any countries, Turkey included?”

Clinton replied: “Well, Senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. I will see what information is available.”

“You’re saying you don’t know?” asked Paul.

“I do not know,” Clinton said. “I don’t have any information on that.”

See Hillary Clinton’s exchange with Sen. Rand Paul:

Clinton and Rand Paul go at it !

Clinton’s claims seem now to be unraveling. Her possible role in concocting the weapons transfer plan also now prompts a second look at the perplexing security decisions made by Clinton and other top Obama administration officials the night of the Benghazi attacks.

One of those key decisions reportedly delayed an investigative FBI team from arriving at the Benghazi site for 24 days. The site was widely reported to have contained classified documents.

Now, a closer reading of two separate reports from the New York Times paints a picture of Clinton as the leader of the plan to arm Syrian rebels.

Confirming WND’s exclusive reporting for over a year, the New York Times last week reported that since early 2012, the CIA has been aiding the Arab governments and Turkey in shopping for and transporting weapons to the Syrian rebels.

Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND since last year describe the U.S. mission in Benghazi and nearby CIA annex attacked last September as an intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels in the Middle East, particularly those fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

The aid, the sources stated, included weapons shipments and was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

(Listen to full interview of Rand Paul on WABC’s  Aaron Klein investigative Radio.)

Sen Rand Paul Interview

Speaking on Klein’s show, Paul charged the alleged weapons transfers may have been a reason for the attacks on the U.S. Benghazi facilities.

He said of the alleged shipments, “First of all, with regard to Benghazi I think it’s important because it may have something to do with why the compound was attacked if we were involved with shipping guns to Turkey.”

Paul said “there was a report that a ship left from Libya towards Turkey and that there were arms on it.

“In the weeks preceding this there were reports that our ambassador was meeting with the Turkish attaché. So I think with regards to figuring out what happened at Benghazi it is very important to know whether or not the CIA annex had anything to do with facilitating guns being sent to Turkey and ultimately to Syria.”

Clinton snagged in Benghazi cover-up?

A comparison of the Clinton plan to arms the rebels, as first reported by the Times in February, and last month’s Times report of American-aided shipments to the rebels since last year makes clear the Clinton plan was apparently put into action.

The Times reported in February that the idea of the Clinton plan was to “vet the rebel groups and train fighters, who would be supplied with weapons.”

Last month, the Times reported that since at least November 2012, the U.S. has been helping “the Arab governments shop for weapons, including a large procurement from Croatia, and have vetted rebel commanders and groups to determine who should receive the weapons as they arrive.”

The earlier Times article described Clinton as having instincts that were “often more activist than those of a White House that has kept a tight grip on foreign policy.”

In an administration often faulted for its timidity abroad, “Clinton wanted to lead from the front, not from behind,” Vali R. Nasr, a former State Department adviser on Afghanistan and Pakistan, told the Times.

Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND have said U.S.-aided weapons shipments go back more than a year, escalating before the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. facilities in Benghazi.

Last month, WND reported Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. stated in interview with Fox News that murdered U.S Ambassador Christopher Stevens was in Benghazi to keep weapons caches from falling into the hands of terrorists. Until that point, no official explanation for Stevens deployment to Libya has acknowledged any such activity.

Clinton’s perplexing security decisions

Meanwhile, the New York Times reporting on how the plan for arming the rebels was put into action has prompted major questions about the role Clinton played in the U.S. response to the Benghazi attacks, assaults against the very facilities where the arms-to-rebels scheme was allegedly being coordinated.

National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor confirmed to Fox News in November that Clinton herself worked on the immediate U.S. response to Benghazi.

“The most senior people in government worked on this issue from the minute it happened,” he said.

“That includes the secretary of defense, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, secretary of state, national security adviser, et cetera. Additionally, the Deputies Committee – the second in command at the relevant national security agencies – met at least once and more often twice a day to manage the issue.”

One of the key decisions by Clinton’s State Department that has perplexed many security experts was the determination not to deploy an interagency rapid response unit designed to respond to terrorist attacks known as a Foreign Emergency Support Team, or FEST.

FEST teams previously deployed immediately after al-Qaida bombings of U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998 and the USS Cole in 2000. But they were not used for Benghazi, confounding insiders speaking to the news media

Counterterrorism officials told Fox News in November that the FEST teams could have helped the FBI gain access to the site in Benghazi faster. It ultimately took the FBI 24 days.

The site reportedly contained a large volume of classified documents related to the activities of the Benghazi facilities.

Further, during the night of the attack, top counter terror officials felt out of the loop, according to emails shared with both Fox News and CBS News in November.

Counterterrorism sources and internal emails reviewed by CBS News expressed frustration that key responders were ready to deploy but were not called upon to help in the attack.

Besides strangely not deploying FEST, the Counterterrorism Security Group, or CSG, was never asked to meet the night of the attack or in subsequent days, according to two separate counterterrorism officials, as first reported by CBS News.

The CSG is composed of experts on terrorism from across government agencies and makes recommendations to the deputies who assist the president’s Cabinet in formulating a response to crises involving terrorism.

It is likely that the CSG task force, if contacted, would have recommended FEST aid, according to CBS.

CBS reported the lack of coordination with the Counterterrorism Security Group made the response to the Benghazi crisis still more confused.

One official told CBS News the FBI received a call during the attack representing Clinton and requesting agents be deployed. But he and his colleagues explained the call was just a gesture and could not be implemented.

He said his colleagues at the FBI agreed the agents “would not make any difference without security and other enablers to get them in the country and synch their efforts with military and diplomatic efforts to maximize their success.”

Recruiting jihadists

Days after the Benghazi attack, WND broke the story that Ambassador Stevens himself played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Assad’s regime in Syria, according to Egyptian and other Middle Eastern security officials.

Stevens served as a key contact with the Saudis to coordinate the recruitment by Saudi Arabia of Islamic fighters from North Africa and Libya. The jihadists were sent to Syria via Turkey to attack Assad’s forces, said the security officials.

The officials said Stevens also worked with the Saudis to send names of potential jihadi recruits to U.S. security organizations for review. Names found to be directly involved in previous attacks against the U.S., including in Iraq and Afghanistan, were ultimately not recruited by the Saudis to fight in Syria, said the officials.

The latest New York Times report has bolstered WND’s reporting, citing air traffic data, interviews with officials in several countries and the accounts of rebel commanders describing how the CIA has been working with Arab governments and Turkey to sharply increase arms shipments to Syrian rebels in recent months.

The Times reported that the weapons airlifts began on a small scale in early 2012 and continued intermittently through last fall, expanding into a steady and much heavier flow late last year, the data shows.

The Times further revealed that from offices at “secret locations,” American intelligence officers have helped the Arab governments shop for weapons, including a large procurement from Croatia. They have vetted rebel commanders and groups to determine who should receive the weapons as they arrive.

The CIA declined to comment to the Times on the shipments or its role in them.

The Times quoted a former American official as saying that David H. Petraeus, the CIA director until November, had been instrumental in helping set up an aviation network to fly in the weapons. The paper said Petraeus had prodded various countries to work together on the plan.

Petraeus did not return multiple emails from the Times asking for comment.

Both WND’s reporting, which first revealed the U.S.-coordinated arms shipments, and the Times reporting starkly contrast with statements from top U.S. officials who have denied aiding the supply of weapons to the rebels.

Rebel training

It’s not the first time WND’s original investigative reporting on U.S. support for the Syrian rebels was later confirmed by reporting in major media outlets. Other WND reporting indicates support for the Syrian rebels that goes beyond supplying arms, painting a larger picture of U.S. involvement in the Middle East revolutions.

A story by the German weekly Der Spiegel earlier this month reporting the U.S. is training Syrian rebels in Jordan was exclusively exposed by WND 14 months ago.

Quoting what it said were training participants and organizers, Der Spiegel reported it was not clear whether the Americans worked for private firms or were with the U.S. Army, but the magazine said some organizers wore uniforms.

The training in Jordan reportedly focused on use of anti-tank weaponry.

The German magazine reported some 200 men received the training over the previous three months amid U.S. plans to train a total of 1,200 members of the Free Syrian Army in two camps in the south and the east of Jordan.

Britain’s Guardian newspaper also reported U.S. trainers were aiding Syrian rebels in Jordan along with British and French instructors.

Reuters reported a spokesman for the U.S. Defense Department declined immediate comment on the Der Spiegel report. The French foreign ministry and Britain’s foreign and defense ministries also would not comment to Reuters.

While Der Spiegel quoted sources discussing training of the rebels in Jordan over the last three months, WND was first to report the training as far back as February 2012.

At the time, WND quoted knowledgeable Egyptian and Arab security officials claimed the U.S., Turkey and Jordan were running a training base for the Syrian rebels in the Jordanian town of Safawi in the country’s northern desert region.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/rand-paul-hillarys-benghazi-story-unraveling/#mQrF6fQgMBpbFseF.99

 

Beneficiary Rx Co-Pays Would Climb for a Decade


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

 I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 This is a Reblogged from http://www.military.com.

 Posted by TOM PHILPOTT

TRICARE Pharmacy Costs

Rahm Emanuel, while serving as President Obama’s first chief of staff, once advised not to let a “crisis go to waste” because that’s when politicians will do things they otherwise wouldn’t.

Defense officials seem to have taken that advice to heart amid the current debt crisis with their plan to boost co-payments on military family members and retirees who use TRICARE retail and mail order pharmacies.

For starters, the current $17 co-pay collected at retail outlets for 30-day prescriptions of brand name drugs found on the military formulary would jump to $26 on Oct. 1, start of the new fiscal year.  The retail co-pay then would be increased by $2 every October through 2017 and possibly for five years longer because budget document refers to a 10-year phase-in plan.

Also on Oct. 1, if Congress allows, brand name drugs not on the military-approved formulary would become unavailable using TRICARE at neighborhood drug outlets except on a very limited basis.

Since last year beneficiaries have faced a co-pay of $44 to get a non-formulary drug at retail. Under the administration’s new plan, non-formulary drugs would have to be obtained by mail order.  And that co-pay, for a three-month supply of pills, would be raised from $43 to $51 this fall and would see annual increases thereafter to reach $66 by fall 2017.

Meanwhile, the co-pay for formulary brand drugs via mail order would double from $13 to $26 this October and increase by $2 to $4 annually to reach $34 by fall 2017.  Again, budget documents suggest five more years of phased-in increases beyond 2017 though specific co-pays aren’t shown.

Beneficiaries could continue to have prescriptions filled for free at base pharmacies, and generic drugs would be filled at no charge by mail until 2017 when co-pays would begin at $9 per 90-day supply.  The current $5 co-pay for generic drugs at retail outlets would be increased by $1 a year starting in October 2014.

Last year’s defense authorization bill had allowed some increases in drug co-pays at retail and mail order.  Congress also authorized the department to begin a pilot program that will require TRICARE for Life beneficiaries — retirees and family members 65 or older — to obtain all of their maintenance drugs by mail order for at least one year starting this fall.

The new plan would shelve the pilot and require all retirees and family members, regardless of age, to use mail order or base pharmacies for drugs to control chronic conditions like high blood pressure and cholesterol.

Congress can block these proposals, support them all or reach a compromise. They are part of a larger TRICARE reform package that, as described here last week, also calls for higher out-of-pocket costs to beneficiaries using TRICARE Prime, Extra, Standard or TRICARE for Life.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the joint chiefs, defended the TRICARE increases during hearings over the past week on the fiscal 2014 defense budget request held by the House and Senate armed services and appropriations committees.

Hagel noted that survivors of service members who die on active duty and medically retired members would be spared any TRICARE increases.  Also, if Congress adopts these changes, said Hagel, a former enlisted combat veteran of the Vietnam War, TRICARE “will still remain a very substantial benefit.  These adjustments to pay and benefits were among the most carefully considered and most difficult choices in the budget.”

Hagel noted that raising TRICARE fees has the “strong support” of the joint chiefs and senior enlisted leaders because they know that “to sustain these benefits over the long term, without dramatically reducing the size or readiness of the force, these rising costs need to be brought under control.”

Earlier efforts to hike beneficiary health costs or take other controversial cost-saving actions “met fierce political resistance and were not implemented,” Hagel said.  “We are now in a completely different fiscal environment, dealing with new realities that will force us to more fully confront these tough and painful choices, and to make the reforms we need to put this department on the path to sustain…military strength for the 21st Century.”

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), chairman of the House armed services subcommittee on military personnel, has been part of the fierce resistance.  Last week, with Hagel and Dempsey, he sounded like he would be again.

Wilson challenged their arguments that the $49 billion-a-year military health care account is unsustainable, pointing to a $500 million surplus reported in 2011 and $709 million last year.  And Defense health costs grew by less than one percent in fiscal 2013, Wilson said.

“My concern is that we know this is a great program.  TRICARE people are very satisfied.  Military families appreciate this benefit.  Commitments have been made to our veterans and to military families,” Wilson said. “Why would we be increasing fees when, in fact, the program is working well?”

Hagel responded that despite recent surpluses, the health care benefit over the long term is unaffordable unless beneficiaries pay more.

Robert Hale, the Defense Department comptroller, warned Wilson that if Congress again rejects higher TRICARE fees and co-pays, the projected savings of $1 billion in fiscal 2014 would have to come “out of readiness or modernization” accounts.  Hagel, Dempsey and the service chiefs, Hale said, “feel strongly [that] the right thing to do is a balanced approach to meeting our defense needs with some modest increases in [TRICARE] fees.”

Dempsey added later that he speaks often to service members and families who ask why pay raises have to slow or tuition assistance might be cut or TRICARE fees need to be raised in this tight budget environment.

“The answer is unless we look across the board at all the levers we have to pull, whether its infrastructure, healthcare, pay and compensation, tuition assistance, we’ll have an extraordinarily well-compensated force that will be sitting at Fort Hood, Texas, or at Camp Lejeune, [N.C.] unable to train” for lack of funds.  “And therefore we will be putting them at risk.”

CAN YOU SAY BOVINE SCAT, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THIS IS PURE AND SIMPLE !

 

YOU HAVEN’T HEARD THIS ‘STAR-SPANGLED BANNER’


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from WND.

Band challenges nation to renew intimacy with patriotic theme

Madison Rising

If you think the nation’s anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner,” is out of date or out of touch, maybe it’s because you recall your high-school pep band’s slightly out-of-tune, arrhythmic version. Or one of those celebrity performances.

Might be why comedian Daniel Tosh points out, “No one has ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ on their iPod.”

But the rendition by Madison Rising, with its pulsating bass, screaming lead guitar and pounding drums all backing up the immemorial words, is NOT your high school pep band.

And now Madison Rising is challenging Americans to renew an intimacy with the meaning of America’s anthem and maybe make it the top rock song in the nation.

The group’s members issued a challenge before last November’s election to the nation to reach 1 million views online by Nov. 6. They made it, with weeks to spare.

A few weeks later, the total passed 2.5 million. Now they’re putting another goal in front of the American public: Can the plateau of 5 million views be reached by July 4?

With nearly 3.5 million views already, it seems possible.

On their website, the band members also quote WND columnist Bill Press saying, “The Star-Spangled Banner is stupid and embarrassing.”

“Let’s show Press and Tosh – and everyone else – that we still believe in this country and our national anthem,” the band says.

.

It’s not the first time the popular band has moved beyond key signatures and refrains to social commentary, with titles such as “Right to Bear,” “Honk if You Want Peace” and “Hallowed Ground.”

The members make a point of saying, “This band is on a mission to not only make great music, but also send a message that American culture is alive and well.”

Band manager Richard Mgrdechian confirmed: “We hit our goal of one million views on the video on the morning of September 14th – the exact date Francis Scott Key wrote the original version 198 years ago.

“There’s something bigger at work here, and we plan to do everything we can to take advantage of this serendipitous circumstance to continue to re-energize our national anthem and make it the No. 1 best selling rock song in the country.”

The song also can be downloaded directly to iPods and other devices.

The band reported that it, too, was on a roll, partnering with the National Anthem Celebration Foundation to help increase awareness of and appreciation for the anthem.

It recently has appeared in Orlando, Los Angeles, Orange County, New York and Clovis, N.M. Coming gigs are in Washington; Lancaster, Pa.; Harrisburg, Pa.; numerous Texas locations; and several places in Michigan and North Carolina.

This summer, the band will perform at the famed Motorcycle Rally in Sturgis, S.D., which annually attracts hundreds of thousands of riders.

Band members explain their aim to promote “liberty, independence, smaller government and personal responsibility.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/you-havent-heard-this-star-spangled-banner/#d032JwcjdJleAmfS.99

 

DUH!!! Report: Suspects had no gun licenses


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://thehill.com.

Posted by Mike Lillis

The two suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings were not licensed to have the firearms they used in several shootouts with police on Friday, Reuters reported Sunday night.

The news that the suspects were not authorized to own firearms will likely add fuel to calls for tougher gun laws – an issue that was put on the back-burner last week after the Senate blocked the central elements of a gun-control package backed by President Obama.

Because Massachusetts state law bars handgun ownership for those younger than 21, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, age 26, was the only brother who could have obtained a license from the town of Cambridge, Mass., where he lived. But he didn’t take that step, Dan Riviello, spokesman for the Cambridge Police Department, told Reuters.

“There is no record of him having a license to carry,” Riviello said, according to the news service.

WHEN ARE PEOPLE GOING TO LEARN CROOKS, MURDERS, ROBBERS, RADICAL ISLAMIST, GANGS AND OTHER EVIL FOLKS DO NOT BUY GUNS FROM STORES “THEY STEAL THEM OR BUY FROM FOLKS THAT STOLE THEM.”

 

Massachusetts state law allows residents under 21 to have rifles, but only those weapons holding 10 rounds of ammunition or less, and only then if the holder has a police-issued ID card. Several local jurisdictions where the younger brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, has lived and studied told Reuters they have no record of issuing him such a card.

 


More from The Hill:
• Boston surveillance footage sparks privacy debate
• Lawmakers question FBI handling of terror suspect
• George W. Bush: ‘No need to defend myself’
• Dems scramble to change subject after gun bill collapses
• Obama raised $43 million for second inauguration
• Senate poised to back Internet sales tax

 


Police say Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev went on a deadly shooting spree Thursday and Friday, killing a university policeman before confronting local officers in a wild firefight in the middle of a Watertown, Mass., street that left the elder brother dead and a transit policeman injured.

In between those two attacks, the brothers allegedly carjacked a motorist at gunpoint, later releasing the unnamed victim unharmed.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev then led law enforcers on an exhaustive manhunt, which ended in his capture Friday night after yet another dramatic shootout with police.

He remains in a Boston hospital in serious but stable condition, according to the head of the Boston police, recovering from injuries that may include a self-induced gunshot wound to his neck.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/295189-report-bombing-suspects-not-licensed-to-own-guns#ixzz2RF7pNyHh
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

 

How Your 2012 Tax Return Affects Health Care in 2014


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from http://www.cnbc.com

 

Getty Images

Barack Obama

For many Americans, the health reform law passed in 2010 will forevermore tie their health to their taxes.

And even though the big changes required by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care don’t start until 2014, the tax impact starts now.

“We’re undergoing some of the biggest changes to the tax code in 20 years,” said Meg Sutton, senior adviser for tax and healthcare services at tax preparation firm H&R Block Inc. “People need to start understanding how it will impact them.”

For starters, beginning in January 2014, every American will be required to have health coverage, and many will qualify for government help to pay for it. Whether or not you do will depend on the income you report to the Internal Revenue Service on your 2012 tax return.

Fewer than one-in four Americans understood that when H&R Block did a survey last fall, but an estimated 26 million people could be affected when they begin to turn to new health exchanges to buy their coverage for next year. Block is making a point of counseling their clients on whether they will qualify for subsidies.

Some people who are on the border may be able to reduce their 2012 income by making a last-minute retirement account contribution, for example, so they can get the extra help.

CARROTS AND STICKS

The new law’s individual mandate depends on income-dependent subsidies and penalties to make it work.

This will primarily affect people who don’t have insurance or buy their own and are likely to look to new state exchanges for their policies. When they choose their plans, they will receive tax credits if the cost of the coverage is deemed too high relative to their income.

Those who don’t buy coverage for 2014 will face penalties of $95 or 1 percent of household income, whichever is greater. That will increase each year to $695, or 2.5 percent, in 2016.

Subsidies will be available for families who earn as much as 400 percent of the federal poverty rate – roughly $45,000 for an individual or $92,000 for a family of four. For example, a family of four making $70,000 could expect a government tax credit of $5,504, which would cover about 45 percent of its insurance costs. That’s according to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s Health Reform Subsidy Calculator. (here )

GETTING INCOME RIGHT

Some taxpayers may run into trouble this year by underestimating their income and receiving a larger subsidy than they are ultimately eligible for, says Mark Steber, chief tax officer for Jackson Hewitt. “They will owe a large payment back to the IRS” down the road.

The formula for calculating subsidy eligibility adds some foreign income and tax-exempt interest income to adjusted gross income, so people may have little taxable income but still make too much to qualify for the subsidies. There’s another wrinkle: Even if you do everything right in 2012, you could end up owing some subsidy back on your 2014 taxes if you earn more then. But you won’t have to worry about that until 2015.

Make no mistake, though — the government wants to sweeten the pot for those buying insurance on their own as much as it can. Self-employed workers can still deduct the cost of their policies. And while workers may start seeing how much their companies are spending for their healthcare on their 2012 W-2 forms, that amount won’t be considered taxable income.

WRITE-OFFS WILL GET TOUGHER

The tax code will get less generous when it comes to writing off healthcare expenses other than insurance. The 2012 tax year is the last one for which medical costs over 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) can be deducted. Starting in 2013, that figure jumps to 10 percent. (An exception is individuals or spouses who turn 65 before the end of 2013, who will retain the 7.5 percent floor through the 2016 tax year.)

Finally, all employees will also find contributions to pre-tax health flexible-spending accounts capped at $2,500 this year. Working spouses, however, can each open an FSA with their respective employers, which would allow them to put aside a total of $5,000.

NEW TAXES, TOO

Other provisions of the Affordable Care Act will add to some taxpayers’ burdens.

High-income earners now pay an additional 0.9 percent Medicare payroll tax on income over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples. That comes on top of the previous Medicare tax of 1.45 percent.

Also starting in 2013, high earners pay a 3.8 percent Medicare tax on interest, dividends, capital gains, rent and royalty income.

And while employers have been withholding the extra payroll taxes from high-earning workers since January 2013, some people will now have to file estimated taxes as well, says Mark Raschiatore, partner at accounting firm CliftonLarsonAllen.

Those who have high investment income, or couples who together earn more than $250,000 but aren’t having the extra 0.9 percent taken out of their paychecks should consider paying extra taxes quarterly to the IRS, lest they end up owing extra – and penalties when they file their 2013 taxes.

There is a lot to learn. Most filers should use the next several months to educate themselves on — and budget for — changes ahead in 2014, says Sutton. It’ll be good preparation for reading all the small print on health exchanges.

 

Slapped Down by Senate, Obama Prepares Executive Gun Orders


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

 

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all

comments.

 

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 

This is a reblogged from. godfatherpolitics.com

 

Posted by Tad Cronn

A minor miracle occurred the other day when the Senate, despite months of buildup and lobbying by the Obama Administration, rejected an entire slate of gun-control proposals.

It doesn’t matter whether the Democrats who jumped party lines voted against the gun grab because of principle or because they fear for their jobs. Either way, they wound up doing the right thing.

And boy, was Obama ticked. If he had clenched his jaw any tighter during his press conference, his teeth would have started shooting out of his mouth from the pressure, like blown rivets.

The classic Obama tantrum should be taken as a warning sign. Obama’s not one of those guys who just takes his ball and goes home to brood. He’s the type who nurses thoughts of revenge.

On Thursday, “Crazy Uncle Joe” Biden briefed the troops to reassure them that the Man Who Would be King would not be so easily defeated by the majority of American rabble who want to keep their right to self-defense.

During a conference call which was supposed to be kept from the press, Biden assured gun-control groups, lobbyists and other participants that Obama would follow up his defeat in the Senate with new executive orders on guns.

It’s been Obama’s pattern throughout his presidency to go around Congress whenever he suffers a legislative defeat.

When Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of the House, she would find ways to bend the law, such as via the “Slaughter Rule,” to make sure that Obama got his way in the House, and she was usually able to bully Harry Reid into making the Senate roll over. Since voters knocked Pelosi off her dais, Obama either has resorted to ordering his “czars” and Cabinet members to implement incremental policies that don’t require congressional approval but have the same effect as the laws, or he has issued executive orders.

It’s the executive orders that are most dangerous to the country because they further solidify his monarchical approach to the presidency. The turning point was when Obama, frustrated by the failure of the Dream Act to pass in Congress, unilaterally wrote it into law with an executive order essentially granting amnesty to millions of children of illegal immigrants being educated in public schools.

Congress didn’t challenge that order, which completely ignored the constitutional separation of powers and secured for the president the power to initiate and pass laws.

So if Obama now wants to write an executive order on background checks, limiting gun magazines or even outright outlawing guns, Congress will have a much harder time challenging it, no matter how far Obama feels like pushing his gun-grab agenda.

Brace yourselves for federal gunfight, part two.

Read more: http://godfatherpolitics.com/10457/slapped-down-by-senate-obama-prepares-executive-gun-orders/#ixzz2R5KPtrXF

 

SAUDI REPORT: MICHELLE O VISITED ‘PERSON OF INTEREST’


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

 

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all

comments.

 

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 

This is a reblogged from http://www.wnd.com.

 

Posted by BOB UNRUH

Jeddah newspaper says first lady saw Alharbi in hospital

author-image

Michelle32

A Saudi Arabian newspaper is reporting that United States First Lady Michelle Obama visited in the hospital Saudi citizen Abdul Rahman Ali Issa Al-Salimi Alharbi, the young man who had been labeled a “person of interest” in the Boston Marathon bombing.

The newspaper accompanied its report with an image of  Obama, although the background was generic and it couldn’t be confirmed immediately that she was at the hospital where Alharbi was being treated at the time. He reportedly suffered injuries in the Boston bombing.

The newspaper’s Arabic-language report is being highlighted by Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim Brotherhood member who now is a peace activist.

“Okaz, the same prominent Saudi newspaper that published photos of Abdul Rahman Ali Issa Al-Salimi Alharbi in the hospital after the Boston Marathon bombings, is now reporting that the Saudi national was also visited by the first lady of the United States, Michelle Obama, during his hospital stay,” Shoebat reported.

The newspaper is more than half a century old and publishes out of Jeddah in Saudi Arabia. It also publishes simultaneously in Riyadh.

One of the oldest newspapers in Saudi Arabia, it also is brave, taking on banned issues such as lesbianism in the repressive Islamic kingdom. Its circulation is estimated at about 150,000 and the online version was reported by Forbes Middle East two years ago to be one of the Top 10 online newspapers in the Middle East region.

It was CBS in Boston, and other outlets, that reported that President Obama and Michelle visited some of the victims of the marathon terrorism at hospitals in the Boston area yesterday.

It was reported the first lady went to Boston Children’s Hospital, as well as Brigham and Women’s Hospital, but the visits were off-limits to the media.

Reported Shoebat, “There were multiple reports that Alharbi was hospitalized at Brigham and Women’s so that would seem [to] corroborate the Okaz report.

“Okaz stated further that the first lady also visited the other injured Saudi at the hospital, a female doctor named Nura Khalid Saleh al-Ajaji.”

Shoebat said there also were tweets from members of the Alharbi family that added “credibility” to the report.

Reported Shoebat, “Now, contrarians … with concerns about this visit will likely say that the first lady was simply paying visits to all the victims in the hospital, of which Alharbi was one and had been cleared two days earlier.”

But he added, “In light of recent reports that Alharbi was scheduled for deportation on ‘national security grounds’, the first lady’s visit takes on much added significance if those reports are true. We already know that the Alharbi clan consists of multiple al-Qaida members. This would seem to bolster the claims of scheduled deportation, not claims to the contrary made by the likes of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, who actually never really answered the question; she just got rankled and blew it off.”

Wrote Shoebat, “With the track record of this administration relative to things like blaming a video for two weeks after the Benghazi attacks, it should have a higher standard to meet and its credibility should be questioned by the American people. If these reports about Alharbi’s scheduled deportation for such reasons are correct, a visit by the first lady of the United States would indeed be significant in its importance. It would also be a major national security blunder because of the message it would send.”

WND reported earlier when an expert on terrorism said Alharbi, the original “person of interest” in the Monday bombing, was going to be deported on national security grounds.

News Report

Alharbi is a foreign student, and had been living in Revere, Mass.

“I just learned from my own sources that he is now going to be deported on national security grounds next Tuesday, which is very unusual,” Steve Emerson of the Investigative Project on Terrorism told Sean Hannity of Fox News Wednesday night.

The Reuters news agency reported Barack Obama met with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal on Wednesday, noting “the meeting was not on Obama’s public schedule.”

After that meeting was mentioned, Emerson told Hannity, “That’s very interesting because this is the way things are done with Saudi Arabia. You don’t arrest their citizens. You deport them, because they don’t want them to be embarrassed and that’s the way we appease them.”

Saudi national Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi, the original “person of interest” questioned in the Boston Marathon bombings.

Meanwhile, Tuesday morning, a meeting Secretary of State John Kerry held with the Saudi foreign minister was abruptly closed to press coverage.

Secretary of State

WND had reported Wednesday morning that the Saudi student Alharbi shares the same last name as a major Saudi clan that includes scores of al-Qaida operatives.

Some in the clan are senior al-Qaida members while others are reportedly being held by the U.S. in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba.

A large group of federal and state law enforcement agents reportedly raided Alharbi’s apartment in Revere, Mass.

CNN reported the search took place by consent, according to a federal law-enforcement source, meaning no search warrant was needed

Then the Saudi embassy in Washington said Alharbi was no longer under detention and is not a suspect in the bomb blasts.

Saudi diplomat Azzam bin Abdel Karim reportedly visited Alharbi in the hospital.

Nail Al-Jubeir, a spokesman for the Saudi mission in Washington, stated that U.S. authorities told the embassy “no Saudi national was a suspect in the Boston Marathon attack and that the Saudi national in question was a witness, not a suspect.”

While it is not clear whether the Alharbi questioned as part of the marathon probe is a member of the well-known Saudi clan, his Facebook page, reviewed by WND, lists him as Facebook friends with at least seven other Alharbis, located in both Boston and in Saudi Arabia.

One of the Alharbis on his Facebook friends list, Ahmed Alharbi, is listed as a pharmacy technician at the Saudi Ministry of Health. Most others live in Riyadh.

The Alharbi clan has long been active in al-Qaida. Khaled bin Ouda bin Mohammed al-Harbi, for example, is a Saudi national who joined Osama bin Laden’s mujahadeen group in the 1980s. He reportedly became an al-Qaida member in the mid-1990s. He turned himself in to Saudi authorities in 2004 as part of an amnesty deal.

The BBC reported Khaled Alharbi was married to the daughter of al-Qaida’s number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri. He reportedly appeared with bin Laden in a video praising the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Another top al-Qaida operative is Adel Radi Saqr al-Wahabi al-Harbi, a Saudi national identified by the State Department as “a key member of an al-Qaida network operating in Iran.”

The State Department has offered a multimillion-dollar reward for the capture of Abdel Alharbi, saying he is an Iran-based al-Qaida facilitator who serves as the deputy to Muhsin al-Fadhl, who runs al-Qaida’s Iran network.

On his website, Shoebat translated a list of the Saudi government’s 85 wanted al-Qaida members.

The list includes several members of the Alharbi clan:

  • Badr Saud Uwaid Al-Awufi Al-Harbi
  • Muhammad Atiq Uwaid Al-Awufi Al-Harbi
  • Khalid Salim Uwaid Al-Lahibi Al-Harbi
  • Raed Abdullah Salem Al-Thahiri Al-Harbi
  • Abdullah Abdul Rahman Muhammad Al-Harbi (leader)
  • Fayez Ghuneim Humeid Al-Hijri Al-Harbi

Shoebat also points out that several Alharbi clan members are being held by the U.S. government at Guantanamo Bay, including Salim Salman Awadallah Al-Saidi Al-Harbi, Majid Abdullah Hussein Al-Harbi, Muhammad Abdullah Saqr Al-Alawi Al-Harbi, Ghanem Abdul Rahman Ghanem Al-Harbi and Muhammad Atiq Uwaid Al-Awfi Al-Harbi.

Shoebat also reported Al-Harbi’s visa was up for revocation and his deportation was imminent.

He also reported that according to a YouTube channel used by Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the two Chechen Muslims blamed for the bombing, Alharbi admired Shaykh Feiz Mohammed, an Australian Mulsim preacher who is noted for his fundamentalist Islamist beliefs.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/saudi-paper-michelle-o-visited-person-of-interest/#rjmUpWmx4dFtOjf1.99

 

CONGRESS ‘ASTONISHED’ BY MILITARY SMEAR OF CHRISTIANS


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

 

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all

comments.

 

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 

This is a reblogged from http://www.wnd.com.

Dozens demand Army secretary rescind ‘briefing’ immediately

SunsetCross

Members of Congress have expressed astonishment that the U.S. Army Reserve would use a training brief that slams Catholics, evangelical Christians and others and are demanding the practice come to a halt – now.

“Our nation needs to have an honest conversation about religious extremism and what we can do to avoid religious violence. However, labeling these major world religions as extremists is wrong and hurtful,” said a letter by Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., that was signed by dozens of other members.

It was addressed to Army Secretary John. M . McHugh at the Pentagon.

“We call on you to rescind this briefing and set the record straight on the Army’s view on these faith groups by providing a balanced briefing on religious extremism,” the letter said.

The letter was prompted by reports that soldiers were taught that evangelical Christians are an extremist threat to America along with groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, KKK, Nation of Islam, al-Qaida and Hamas.

“Men and women of faith who have served the Army faithfully for centuries shouldn’t be likened to those who have regularly threatened the peace and security of the United States,” said retired Col. Ron Crews, executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty. “It is dishonorable for any U.S. military entity to allow this type of wrongheaded characterization. It also appears that some military entities are using definitions of ‘hate’ and ‘extreme’ from the lists of anti-Christian political organizations. That violates the apolitical stance appropriate for the military.”

The U.S. Army Reserve Equal Opportunity training briefing, given to an Army reserve unit in Pennsylvania, was titled “Extremism and Extremist Organizations.”

The material mentions neo-Nazis, the KKK and other white supremacist organizations. Pictures are shown on various slides of people in Klan attire and Nazi flags. The significance of gang tattoos, racist acronyms and numbers was also discussed.

While the material on gangs and racist organizations is similar to what one might receive from a local police briefing on gang issues, after teaching on neo-Nazis in the military such as Timothy McVeigh, the material makes a remarkable link.

A slide titled “Religious Extremism” lists multiple organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaida, Hamas, the Nation of Islam, the Ku Klux Klan and the Christian Identity movement as examples of extremist groups.

However, the first group on the list is evangelical Christianity. Catholicism and ultra-orthodox Judaism are also on the list of religious extremist organizations.

The letter said the members of Congress were concerned to learn of the training brief.

“This is astonishing and offensive and we urge you to immediately rescind this briefing,” said the letter.

“Religious extremism is a very serious topic, but equating these major world religions with violent extremist groups is simply not acceptable. As you know, the Army is a microcosm of our country and is filled with faithful and peace-loving Catholics, Jews, Muslims and evangelical Christians who are proudly serving our country. This briefing reveals an anti-religion bias rather than a rational approach to religious extremism.”

The signatories, along with Lamborn, were Reps. John Fleming, Robert Pittenger, Scott Garrett, Alan Nunnelee, Tim Huelskamp, Trent Franks, Walter Jones, Vicky Hartzler, Jack Kingston, Steve King, Gus Bilirakis, Vern Buchanan, Tim Walberg, Michele Bachmann, Bill Nuisenga, Mike Kelly, Duncan Hunter, Dan Lipinski, Lynn Jenkins, Ron DeSantis, Randy Weber, Lynn Westmoreland, Jason Chaffetz, Ander Crenshaw, Steven Palazzo, Marsha Blackburn, Bill Posey, James Lankford, Patrick McHenry, Stephen Fincher, Doug LaMalfa, Michael Burgess, Paul Broun, Frank Wolf, Michael Conaway, Jeff Duncan, Dan Benishek, Virginia Foxx, Steve Stockman, Ken Calvert and Jeff Miller.

WND reported that after the military briefing a soldier who describes himself as an evangelical told the trainer he was offended by the material and asked for a copy of it. After receiving a copy, he forwarded the material to Crews.

The material describes religious extremists as those having beliefs, attitudes, feelings or actions that are “far removed from the ordinary.” It then elaborates by saying that “every religion has some followers that believe that their beliefs, customs and traditions are the only ‘right way’ and that all others practicing their faith the ‘wrong way.’”

Crews said it is astounding that soldiers were taught that a key foundation of the Christian faith is now considered extreme and compared to those who want to implement Islamic law.

“The idea of salvation being exclusively through Christ is a key doctrine of the Christian faith,” Crews said. “It is amazing that the trainer felt they had the authority and right to list evangelical Christian, Catholics and orthodox Jews alongside groups like the Muslim Brotherhood.”

The brief does not provide any examples of how evangelical Christians and Catholics are a danger to those serving in the military. However, it offers several examples of Muslim extremists in the military. Among them are:

  • Navy petty officer Hassan Abujihad, who emailed classified information to jihadists for possible attacks while serving on a destroyer.
  • Ali Abdul Saoud Mohammed, an Army Special Forces instructor at the Special Ops Warfare School at Fort Bragg while simultaneously being a trainer for al-Qaida and traveling overseas to fight with jihadists.
  • Sgt Hasan Akbar, who killed two of his fellow soldiers and injured 14 others at a military base in Kuwait when he threw four grenades into three tents where soldiers were sleeping. His reasoning was to prevent the killing of his fellow Muslims.

Conspicuously missing was Muslim Maj. Nidal Hasan, who opened fire on fellow soldiers at Fort Hood while allegedly shouting “Allahu Akbar.” Hasan’s rampage left 13 dead and 30 injured.

The Army has gone to great lengths to minimize the Hasan attack, going so far as to call it simply a case of workplace violence, similar to when an employee gets into a fight with a co-worker.

The Army has doubled down on its decision by issuing a report to Congress claiming that recent legislation that would label the Fort Hood shootings a terrorist act in order to help survivors and victim’s families would jeopardize Hasan’s chances of receiving a fair trial.

“Passage of this legislation could directly and indirectly influence potential court-martial panel members, witnesses, or the chain of command, all of whom exercise a critical role under the Uniform Code of Military Justice,” the Army said. “Defense counsel will argue that Major Hasan cannot receive a fair trial because a branch of government has indirectly declared that Major Hasan is a terrorist – that he is criminally culpable.”

Crews said the major problem with the training brief is that it relies heavily on material provided by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has claimed that WND, the Family Research Council and other pro-family groups are hate groups and extremists.

“We’re concerned the use of the SPLC list is not isolated,” Crews said. “The Army should make sure its equal opportunity officers across the military do not fall prey and use this SPLC list that identifies Christian and conservative organizations as hate groups as the basis for their briefing.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/congress-astonished-by-military-smear-of-christians/#bs3dafRgOuSuoIqE.99

 

Letter From A Young Conservative Girl: Mr. Obama Your Gun Ban Failed Because YOU Lied To America


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

 

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

 

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

 

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

 

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all

comments.

 

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”.

However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 

This is a reblogged from http://www.mrconservative.com.

Posted By Katie Kieffer

 

Dear Mr. Obama: Let me tell you a little about myself. I grew up in a gun family. Hunting is part of my family’s culture. I was surrounded by Guns and Ammo, Pheasants Forever, blaze orange and camo growing up. At Thanksgiving, the first round of appetizers is always something wild—bison, elk or venison—whatever my father, brother or uncle’s latest trophy happens to be.

I sort of thought it was cool that my father occasionally painted his face before a hunt and wore a “cologne” called “fox urine masking scent.” I thought he looked equally nice in a suit and tie as in camouflage. As a little girl, I would watch my father clean and safely stow his firearms and ammunition. And, I understood that his guns and compound bow were not toys.

Growing up with mostly male cousins, I played “war” and “cops and robbers” all the time. Yes, we pretended to shoot each other with plastic toy guns. We were having fun. Aside from grass stains or scraped knees from running too fast, no one ever got hurt. Today, we are all responsible young adults.

Mr. President, today, you are indoctrinating young children to be afraid of guns. Your public school system is teaching 5-year-old children that if they so much as build a toy gun out of Legos, they could face a two-week suspension. This concerns me very much.

I know first-hand that growing up in a “culture of guns” does not turn young people into criminals. A culture of depression, anger and abusive families can. When children are loved, they usually learn to show love. My family, thankfully, showed me love.

What I do not understand is why you seem to want to disarm gun-owners like my father–and take away that feeling of comfort and safety that I experienced growing up. Why do you want to take the guns away from honest families like mine and leave us entirely vulnerable to criminals? Why can’t you just leave us to defend ourselves instead of forcing us to wait 20 minutes for a cop to show up?

Maybe it’s hard to for you to understand since you’ve spent so much time lounging around the White House, but living in middle America and spending time in the great outdoors requires hard work, self-sufficiency and the ability to rapidly defend oneself.

Bottom line: I’m not afraid of guns or gun owners. I feel SAFER around people who own and use guns. I believe that my first piece of private property is my OWN BODY and that I have NATURAL, CONSTITUTIONAL and GOD-GIVEN rights to defend it.

GirlHunting
Obama Lie #1: “90 percent of Americans” support the Manchin-Toomey bill for extended background checks.

False. According to the latest Gallup Poll, just 4 percent of Americans think that guns/gun control is the most important issue facing our country. That means 96 percent of Americans are NOT worried about this issue and would not support increased gun control, especially if they knew the truth about background checks. Dr. John Lott has shown that: “There is no real scientific evidence among criminologists and economists that background checks actually reduce crime.”


Obama Lie #2: 2nd Amendment supporters “willfully lied” about the Manchin-Toomey bill.

Gun owners did not lie. You lied and so did the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.V). He recently admitted on CBS “Meet the Press” that Newtown parents have told him: “We know the bill you are working on right now would not have prevented what happened to our babies.” You told us that this bill would help protect children from a repeat of the horrific Newtown tragedy. But there is no hard data showing that expanded background checks will protect children from insane people. “Gun-Free Zone” signs essentially attract mentally ill criminals. We don’t need more laws or signs.

obama gun control
Obama Lie #3: At a fundraiser on April 3, Obama said that Adam Lanza used a “fully automatic weapon” at Newtown.

I know you’re a pro skeet-shooter, Mr. President. But you know VIRTUALLY NOTHING about guns and are ARBITRARILY targeting specific guns for political advantage.

Obama, if you don’t know the difference between a semi-automatic and a fully-automatic firearm, then you are in NO position to tell other people what sort of firearm they may purchase. A fully-automatic weapon, just to refresh your kingly cranium is: one where you can pull the trigger and hold it back and it will automatically continue to fire rounds until you release the trigger. With a semi-automatic, you need to pull the trigger back each time you fire a round. Got that?

Your buddy, Sen. Diane Feinstein has been unfairly targeting AR-15s and other semi-automatic weapons for quite some time. But she does not seem to know what an AR-15 even is. Her amendment to ban so-called “assault” weapons failed by 20 votes yesterday. Good thing.

According to FBI records, a hammer or a fist is more likely to be used as an “assault” weapon than any kind of rifle. Also, semi-automatic rifles have only been used in about 14 percent of all mass shootings going back to the 1980′s.

An AR-15 or a semi-automatic rifle is not more dangerous than a handgun. That is entirely arbitrary and based on the situation. An AR-15 has a longer barrel, which means it can shoot farther, more accurately, long-range. But it is also big, meaning that you can’t conceal it as easily. A handgun could be much “deadlier” in the sense that it is easy to conceal.

girl_gun
Obama’s Lies to Women

AS A YOUNG WOMAN, I believe that I have a natural right to protect myself with whatever tool Ifeel most comfortable and proficient using if I am attacked. I find it highly offensive that liberals like you tell me that I should be reduced to holding off a rapist by urinating or puking. What a sexist thing to suggest.

Obama, you send the false message that gun control and extended background checks will protect women. Gun control legislation that has never been proven to save lives. The ONLY gun legislation that has consistently been proven to SAVE lives is concealed-carry permit legislation.

States that passed concealed-carry legislation reduced murder by 8.5 percent, rape by 5 percent and robbery by 3 percent. Mr. President: Do you accept ANY responsibility for the fact that your gun control efforts may effectively encourage 8.5 out of every 100 murders, 5 out of ever 100 rapes and 3 out of every 100 robberies?

If a young woman like myself has a stalking boyfriend or ex-spouse, delays in the gun-buying process merely hold me back from defending myself. Criminals will always find speedy methods of obtaining guns.

ktYou and your snobbish friends like Ms. Feinstein do not understand guns, Mr. President. All you want to do is seize guns from the people MOST qualified to use guns, namely VETERANS, and deny gun protection to the more vulnerable members of society, like women.

All the best,

Katie Kieffer

Post Navigation

Brittius

Honor America

China Daily Mail

News and Opinions From Inside China

sentinelblog

GOLD is the money of the KINGS, SILVER is the money of the GENTLEMEN, BARTER is the money of the PEASANTS, but DEBT is the money of the SLAVES!!!

Politically Short

The American Reality Outside The Beltway

My Opinion My Vote

America needs saving

America: Going Full Retard...

Word: They are acting. They are creating. They are framing their reality around you. And we … we bark at the end of our leashes. Our ambition for freedumb is at the end of our leash.

hillbillysurvival

The greatest WordPress.com site in all the land!

I am removing this blog and I have opened a new one at:

http://texasteapartypatriots.wordpress.com/

Reclaim Our Republic

Knowledge Is Power

Lissa's Humane Life | In Honor of George & All Targeted Individuals — END TIMES HARBINGER OF TRUTH ~ STANDING FIRM IN THE LAST HUMAN AGE OF A GENOCIDAL DARKNESS —

— Corporate whistle blower and workers’ comp claimant, now TARGETED INDIVIDUAL, whose claims exposed Misdeeds after the murder of my husband on their jobsite by the U.S. NWO Military Industrial Complex-JFK Warned Us—

Linux Power Wordpress.com

Just another WordPress.com weblog

redpillreport.wordpress.com/

The ‘red pill’ and its opposite, ‘blue pill,‘ are pop culture terms that have become symbolic of the choice between blissful ignorance (blue) and embracing the sometimes-painful truth of reality (red). It’s time for America to take the red pill and wake up from the fog of apathy.

The Mad Jewess

Mirror Site For Reflection

Freedom Is Just Another Word...

Rules?? What Are rules? I don't need no stinking rules!!!

sharia unveiled

illuminating minds

JUSTICE FOR RAYMOND

Sudden, unexplained, unattended death and a families search for answers

THE GOVERNMENT RAG BLOG

TGR Intelligence Briefing | Sign up for newsletter to receive notifications | Visit us at http://thegovernmentrag.com

Flyover-Press.com

Dedicated to freedom in our lifetimes

News You May Have Missed

News you need to know to stay informed

Automattic

Making the web a better place

%d bloggers like this: