Bobusnr

Uncatagorized

Archive for the month “November, 2013”

Maritime ‘black hole’: Russia launches new ‘stealth’ submarine


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!

 

 

 

Novorossiysk diesel electric submarine during the launching ceremony at Admiralteyskiye shipyards in St. Petersburg. (RIA Novosti / Igor Russak)

Russia has launched its new state-of-the-art Novorossiysk submarine, which set sail from a St Petersburg shipyard to become the first of six diesel-electric stealth subs delivered to the Russian Black Sea fleet in the next two years.

While obama is destroying our Naval Forces

The Novorossiysk belongs to the Varshavyanka-class (Project 636), which is characterized by advanced stealth technology, making it virtually undetectable when submerged.
“Our potential opponents call it the ‘Black Hole’ due to the very low noise emission and visibility of the submarine,” Konstantin Tabachny, captain of the Novorossiysk, told Channel One TV. “To be undetectable is the main quality for a submarine. And this whole project really fits its purpose.”
The construction of the Novorossiysk at St Petersburg’s Admiralty Shipyards took over three years, beginning in August 2010.
Construction was also started on two other Varshavyanka-class vessels – the Rostov-on-Don sub in November 2011 and the Stary Oskol in August 2012.

RIA Novosti / Igor Russak

RIA Novosti / Igor Russak

Project-636 submarines are mainly intended for anti-shipping and anti-submarine missions in relatively shallow waters.

Armed with 18 torpedoes and eight surface-to-air missiles, they have an extended combat range and can strike land, surface and underwater targets.
The Novorossiysk and other subs of its class can reach a speed of 20 knots (37 kilometers per hour).

RIA Novosti / Igor Russak

RIA Novosti / Igor Russak

With a cruising range of 400 miles on electric propulsion and max submission of 300 meters, the vessels have the ability to patrol for up to 45 days with a crew of 52 people onboard.  

The Varshavyanka-class subs will be tasked with patrolling Russia’s maritime borders and protecting Black Sea coastal territories.
The Novorossiysk will be deployed in its namesake port of Novorossiysk, on the Black Sea.
The sub will make the two-month journey to its home port under its own power, said Rear Admiral Victor Bursuk, the deputy commander of the Russian Navy.

RIA Novosti / Igor Russak

RIA Novosti / Igor Russak

 

The Gun Confiscation Notice an NYC Resident Reportedly Received Will Likely Send Chills Down Your Spine


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.theblaze.com

 

Posted by:Jason Howerton

New York City has reportedly started sending out confiscation notices ordering gun owners to “immediately surrender” rifles and/or shotguns capable of holding more than five rounds of ammunition. It is illegal to possess a rifle or shotgun with the capacity to hold more than five rounds in the city, according to NYC Administrative Code 10-306 (b).

An alleged notice sent to an NYC resident, dated Nov. 18, offers the gun owner the following options:

1. Immediately surrender your Rifle and/or Shotgun to your local police precinct, and notify this office of the invoice number. The firearm may be sold or permanently removed from the City of New York thereafter.

2. Permanently remove your Rifle and/or Shotgun from New York City…

[…]

3. You may call to discuss the matter if you believe your firearm is in compliance, or you may request the option to bring your firearm to a licensed gunsmith for a permanent modification and certification proving that it is permanently modified and in compliance.

New York City Sends Gun Confiscation Notice for Rifles, Shotguns

Source: Truth About Guns

and so it starts slow increments at a time

While the confiscation notice, reported by the Truth About Guns, very well may be a normal occurrence in New York City, gun owners in firearm-friendly states like Texas or Arizona will probably have a hard time even imagining receiving such a letter from authorities over a rifle or shotgun that could potentially hold more than five rounds.

The notice above deals directly with New York City gun regulations, but there are also concerns of a potential state-wide gun confiscation effort in New York following the passage of the SAFE Act.

In addition to outlawing an array of semi-automatic rifles, the SAFE Act restricted ammunition magazines to seven rounds, down from 10. The law was later changed to allow gun owners to purchase magazines with the capacity to hold 10 rounds, however, only seven rounds can be loaded unless the firearm is being used at a gun range or shooting competition.

The SAFE Act also creates a more comprehensive database of people barred from owning guns, and makes New York the first state to require background checks to buy bullets.The system was also said to help flag customers who buy large amounts of ammo. In another provision, therapists, doctors and other mental health professionals will be required to tell state authorities if a patient threatens to use a gun illegally. The patient’s weapon could then be taken away.

It wasn’t immediately clear how aggressively the state of New York is enforcing the new magazine restrictions or if law enforcement planned to send out similar notices to the one above to gun owners across the state. Phone calls made late Wednesday night to the Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s office, the NY State Police and the NYPD were not returned.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

Surprise Surprise and it keeps going! Where Are Obama’s Daughters’ Baby Pics & Birth Records?


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://beforeitsnews.com

 

Posted by:Dave McMullen

I got an email this morning from FOTM reader Dave McMullen, asking why there aren’t baby pictures of Obama’s two daughters, Malia and Sasha.

Wikipedia says Barack and Michelle Obama have two daughters: Malia Ann, born on July 4, 1998, and Natasha (known as Sasha), born on June 10, 2001.“

So I did a Google Image search for Obama’s daughters. I couldn’t find any baby pics of Malia or Sasha; neither could Dave.

The youngest-looking pic of the girls I found (see below) was in an article extolling Michelle Obama, dated August 20, 2007, on the website Afrobella. The pic is undated. If we go by the date of the Afrobella article, Malia would be 9 years old and Sasha would be 6 years old.

Afrobella pic of O family

In contrast, Dave found a website with a pic of Laura Bush, wife of President George W. Bush, holding their two-month-old twins, Jenna and Barbara.

Laura Bush with babies

I have seen pics of Barack and Michelle’s wedding, like this one below, but none of Michelle pregnant with child.

obama_Wedding

Then I went on the website Ancestry.com, and searched for birth records of Malia Obama, b. 1998, and Natasha Obama, b. 2001. These are the results:

Malia Obama 3

Natasha Obama3

In other words, Ancestry.com has no birth records for Malia or Natasha Obama.

Then I paid $9.95 for a trial membership in GenealogyBank.com so that I can search that website for the Obama girls’ birth records.

Below is a screenshot I took from genealogybank.com of the result of my search for Malia Obama. I’ve circled in read the date and time when I accessed the website. Click the image below to enlarge.

Malia Obama1

As you can see in above, the only thing genealogybank.com has in its newspaper archives on Malia Obama is an article by Sen. Obama titled “Progress on campaign finance reform,” in the Chicago newspaper Hyde Park Herald of August 26, 1998, in which Obama (presumably) mentioned Malia. Here’s the newspaper clip (the words are rather blurry):

Malia Obama2

Below is a screenshot I took from genealogybank.com of the result of my search for Natasha Obama. I’ve circled in read the date and time when I accessed the website. Click the image below to enlarge.

Natasha Obama1

The only thing genealogybank.com has on Natasha Obama is an article in CHyde Park Herald of  July 4, 2001, again by Sen. Obama titled “Tallying wins and losses in Springfield Springfield report,” in which he wrote “The newest edition to the Obama family — Natasha — was born on June 10th, and Michelle and I have been busy changing diapers.” Click image below to enlarge.

Natasha Obama2

In other words, I couldn’t find any birth records of either Malia Obama or Natasha Obama on either ancestry.com or genealogybank.com.

The same Wikipedia entry I had referenced at the beginning of this post states that Malia and Natasha Obama “were both delivered by their parents’ friend Dr. Anita Blanchard at University of Chicago Medical Center.”

Wikipedia’s source of that assertion is an article of Jodi Kantor titled “Obama’s Friends Form Strategy to Stay Close,” in The New York Times of December 13, 2008. The article is about a group of Obama’s closest friends in Chicago, among whom are Valerie Jarrett (now Obama’s senior White House adviser) and a black man named Martin Nesbitt who is now a real estate estate. Nesbitt’s wife is Dr. Anita Blanchard.

O's Chicago friends - Martin Nesbitt, Valerie Jarrett, Dr. Eric Whitaker

l to r: Martin Nesbitt, Valerie Jarrett, BHO, Dr. Eric Whitaker

Alas, the NYT article does NOT say that Dr. Blanchard had delivered Obama’s daughters. Instead, what the article says is “Mr. Nesbitt’s wife, Dr. Anita Blanchard, delivered nearly all the children [of the group of Obama’s close friends in Chicago], and the adults became their godparents.”

If anyone can find baby pictures and birth records of Malia Obama and/or Natasha Obama, please let me know!

H/t FOTM’s Dave McMullen

~Eowyn

It just keeps getting deeper and deeper of BS from obama, man cannot stop lying and hiding .

 

Confusion Over Celebration


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.theledger.com

 

Posted by:JOHN W. RODGERS

 

 

As we sit down to our Thanksgiving dinners this year, what are we giving thanks for? The pilgrims, who came to the new world looking for freedom from religious oppression and the squelching of their liberties, certainly knew why they were giving thanks. Are we in America experiencing many of the same things these early settlers felt in New England?

Our Founding Fathers also understood what it meant to feel the pressure of a system of government constraining the freedoms they were beginning to become accustomed to. Is political correctness becoming a standard by which we cater to the minority in detriment to the majority?

Dr. Ben Carson, in his book “America the Beautiful,” sums up political correctness succinctly. “Rather than spending so much time trying to figure out how not to offend people, it would be wonderful if we expended energy on teaching people not to be offended when someone offers a different opinion. Our emphasis should not be on unanimity of speech and thought, but rather on learning to be respectful and courteous to those with different opinions. I am fond of saying that if two people think and say the same thing about everything, then one of them is not necessary.”

Along those same lines are we as a country trying to remove from public thought what made this country great? In trying to distance ourselves from God, are we forgetting the principles which this great nation were founded? From Christopher Columbus to the Founding Fathers, these men had a deep belief that God would provide.

When I sit down with my family for Thanksgiving dinner, I will be thankful for all the sacrifices those before us have made, many of whom paid the ultimate price for our great country. I will also pray that we continue to be “one nation under God.”

JOHN W. RODGERS

Winter Haven

Deer repeatedly destroys Obama yard sign


The Buck does stop here haaaaa haaaaaa

Fellowship of the Minds

Animals have more sense than a majority of U.S. voters.

Remember this pic from 2008?

dog pees on O

Jason Howerton reports for The Blaze, Sept. 21, 2012, that for ten days in a row, a deer repeatedly attacked Tom and Beth Priem’s Obama yard sign although he spared other yard signs in the Priems’ Austin, Texas neighborhood.

6500 Colina Ln, Austin, TX

Tom Priem, a software support engineer, and his wife, Beth, were sick and tired of constantly finding the Obama sign in front of their home destroyed. They were certain it was a mischievous Republican who didn’t like Obama. Tom even called a city hotline to report the incident in case it turned out to be a dangerous offender.

“The sign had holes poked in it like somebody had stuck a knife through it,” Tom Priem told Fox News. “At first I thought it was somebody who didn’t like Obama.”

So imagine the Texas couple’s surprise…

View original post 130 more words

Irish respond to muslim invasion


GOOD FOR THE IRISH!!

Fellowship of the Minds

A violent letter has been sent to the mosques and schools of Ireland. We at FOTM do not support violence, but are aware of muslim intimidations against all free people. Some Irish have decided to turn the tide of the muslim invasion, and betrayed by their elected leaders, have issued a stark warning.

Irish Citizens Stand Against Muslim Invasion

Posted by: Rick Wells Posted date: November 27, 2013 
irish-islam-letter

Many Muslims in Ireland are shocked by a letter posted to schools and mosques declaring a war against them. They should be shocked that it has taken as long as it has for people across the world to start standing up against their campaign of intimidation.

Gutless politicians don’t stand with the people anymore. In seemingly every country across the globe, the political positions are occupied by self-serving, pandering wimps. This letter is clearly born out of a frustration with a lack…

View original post 459 more words

Iran: Armageddon at hand, prepare for war


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!

 

Reblogged from: http://www.wnd.com

 

Posted by: Reza Kahlili

Reza Kahlili, author of the award-winning book “A Time to Betray,” served in CIA Directorate of Operations, as a spy in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, counterterrorism expert; currently serves on the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, an advisory board to Congress and the advisory board of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran (FDI). He regularly appears in national and international media as an expert on Iran and counterterrorism in the Middle East.

(Courtesy Fars News Agency) Ali Larijanie, Islamic Republic’s Speaker of the Parliament at the 9th international conference on Mahdism Doctrine

Iran is again asserting that Armageddon is at hand and that the Islamic regime’s followers, indeed all of Islam, must prepare for a monumental change in the world.

Officials of the Islamic regime last month held their annual conference on the Mahdism Doctrine to prepare for the coming of the last Islamic messiah, the Shiites’ 12th Imam, Mahdi.

Shiites, whose clerics rule Iran with an iron fist, believe that at the end of times, Mahdi, a 9th century prophet, will reappear with Jesus Christ at his side, kill all the infidels and raise the flag of Islam in all four corners of the world, establishing worldwide Islamic governance.

Ali Larijani, the speaker of Iran’s parliament, said at the conference that, “I hope (Iran’s) Islamic Revolution is that of the righteous government before the coming,” according to Fars News Agency, the regime’s media outlet run by the Revolutionary Guards.

“Righteous government” is a key to Mahdi’s return, the Shiites believe.

“It has been stated in the Islamic hadith that a wave of uprisings (such as the current upheavals in the Arab world) … takes place before the main uprising and that the righteous government (takes place) before the coming, which I hope (Iran’s) Islamic Revolution is that.”

The speaker said that metaphysics and modern technology have diminished human spiritualism, causing a sense of nervousness in which people have lost hope, and that this effect will reach its maximum before the coming.

“All mental crises are rooted in hopelessness and despair in life,” Larijani said, “and from a society point of view, this is because the big powers of the world are pushing for a culture that has no identity and with their power give their illicit desires a legal aspect. With the help of their media, they explain away the biggest corruption.”

Many regime officials participated in this year’s conference, including military commanders, and several guests spoke of the importance of the Shiite ideology on Mahdi’s coming and the need for jihad for the final battle. The Mahdaviat conference is convened annually to prepare for the coming.

A high Iranian politician said recently that he believes the Syrian revolution could be the catalyst for sparking a worldwide conflagration that will usher in an era of Muslim domination of the world.

“One can smell from the crisis in Syria the coming … of the end of times and the coming of the last Islamic messiah,” said Ruhollah Hosseinian, a member of the Islamic regime’s parliament. Hosseinian has served as deputy of the Intelligence Ministry and a member of the board of trustees of the Islamic Revolution Document Center.

(Courtesy Fars News Agency) Islamic Republic’s officials at the 9th international conference on Mahdism Doctrine

Based on hadiths by Muhammad and his descendants, the Syrian revolution is a start to the coming of Mahdi, Hosseinian said in a speech quoted by Fars News Agency.

Hadiths from Ali, the Shiites’ 1st Imam, also state that a sign of the coming will be the fall of the walls of Damascus.

Hosseinian told the audience that they should prepare themselves for war.

“The coming of his highness is assured … the prophet has promised that people from the east, which according to the hadith means Iran, take power and prepare for the government of Imam Mahdi.”

Despite the Islamic regime being under crippling U.N., U.S. and EU sanctions, it has refused to stop its illicit nuclear program. Over a decade of negotiations with talks as recent as April with the 5+1 world powers have failed. The West hopes that it could restart negotiations once Iran’s new president, Hassan Rowhani, takes office in August.

The room in the Jamkaran Mosque located in the City of Qom, leading to the well where the regime officials believe, Imam Mahdi, Shiites 12th Imam is awaiting re-appearance

However, a former intelligence officer now defected to a Scandinavian country said the West must understand that even the election of Rowhani was by design by the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, only to buy time so that the regime could reach its goal of becoming a nuclear-armed state. Some analysts believe that Iran’s drive for nuclear weapons is to facilitate the coming.

Any new negotiations must be prompt and serious, making the Islamic regime understand that there will be no wasting time, said the source, adding that the world’s balance relies on how the West handles the regime’s nuclear ambitions.

Iranian media said Rowhani would nominate Mohammad Forouzandeh, a former chief of staff of the Revolutionary Guard and a former defense minister, to head Iran’s nuclear negotiating team.

Reza Kahlili translated this Iranian video about Islamic prophecies of a coming messiah and the destruction of Israel and America:

A Time to Betray

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/iran-armageddon-at-hand-prepare-for-war/#xEo0GWIwuyDZqUcm.99

 

Fouad Ajami: When the Obama Magic Died


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.wnd.com

 

Posted by:Fouad Ajami

 

There were no economic or cultural bonds among his coalition. He was all things to all people. Charisma ruled.

The current troubles of the Obama presidency can be read back into its beginnings. Rule by personal charisma has met its proper fate. The spell has been broken, and the magician stands exposed. We need no pollsters to tell us of the loss of faith in Mr. Obama’s policies—and, more significantly, in the man himself. Charisma is like that. Crowds come together and they project their needs onto an imagined redeemer. The redeemer leaves the crowd to its imagination: For as long as the charismatic moment lasts—a year, an era—the redeemer is above and beyond judgment. He glides through crises, he knits together groups of varied, often clashing, interests. Always there is that magical moment, and its beauty, as a reference point.

Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Fouad Ajami on why the President’s charisma can’t keep his coalition together. Photos: AP

Mr. Obama gave voice to this sentiment in a speech on Nov. 6 in Dallas: “Sometimes I worry because everybody had such a fun experience in ’08, at least that’s how it seemed in retrospect. And, ‘yes we can,’ and the slogans and the posters, et cetera, sometimes I worry that people forget change in this country has always been hard.” It’s a pity we can’t stay in that moment, says the redeemer: The fault lies in the country itself—everywhere, that is, except in the magician’s performance.

Forgive the personal reference, but from the very beginning of Mr. Obama’s astonishing rise, I felt that I was witnessing something old and familiar. My advantage owed nothing to any mastery of American political history. I was guided by my immersion in the political history of the Arab world and of a life studying Third World societies.

In 2008, seeing the Obama crowds in Portland, Denver and St. Louis spurred memories of the spectacles that had attended the rise and fall of Arab political pretenders. I had lived through the era of the Egyptian leader Gamal Abdul Nasser. He had emerged from a military cabal to become a demigod, immune to judgment. His followers clung to him even as he led the Arabs to a catastrophic military defeat in the Six Day War of 1967. He issued a kind of apology for his performance. But his reign was never about policies and performance. It was about political magic.

In trying to grapple with, and write about, the Obama phenomenon, I found guidance in a book of breathtaking erudition, “Crowds and Power” (1962) by the Nobel laureate Elias Canetti. Born in Bulgaria in 1905 and educated in Vienna and Britain, Canetti was unmatched in his understanding of the passions, and the delusions, of crowds. The crowd is a “mysterious and universal phenomenon,” he writes. It forms where there was nothing before. There comes a moment when “all who belong to the crowd get rid of their difference and feel equal.” Density gives the illusion of equality, a blessed moment when “no one is greater or better than another.” But the crowd also has a presentiment of its own disintegration, a time when those who belong to the crowd “creep back under their private burdens.”

Five years on, we can still recall how the Obama coalition was formed. There were the African-Americans justifiably proud of one of their own. There were upper-class white professionals who were drawn to the candidate’s “cool.” There were Latinos swayed by the promise of immigration reform. The white working class in the Rust Belt was the last bloc to embrace Mr. Obama—he wasn’t one of them, but they put their reservations aside during an economic storm and voted for the redistributive state and its protections. There were no economic or cultural bonds among this coalition. There was the new leader, all things to all people.

The Obama charisma was working well in June 2008 at a Bristow, Va., campaign stop. Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

A nemesis awaited the promise of this new presidency: Mr. Obama would turn out to be among the most polarizing of American leaders. No, it wasn’t his race, as Harry Reid would contend, that stirred up the opposition to him. It was his exalted views of himself, and his mission. The sharp lines were sharp between those who raised his banners and those who objected to his policies.

America holds presidential elections, we know. But Mr. Obama took his victory as a plebiscite on his reading of the American social contract. A president who constantly reminded his critics that he had won at the ballot box was bound to deepen the opposition of his critics.

A leader who set out to remake the health-care system in the country, a sixth of the national economy, on a razor-thin majority with no support whatsoever from the opposition party, misunderstood the nature of democratic politics. An election victory is the beginning of things, not the culmination. With Air Force One and the other prerogatives of office come the need for compromise, and for the disputations of democracy. A president who sought consensus would have never left his agenda on Capitol Hill in the hands of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.

Mr. Obama has shown scant regard for precedent in American history. To him, and to the coterie around him, his presidency was a radical discontinuity in American politics. There is no evidence in the record that Mr. Obama read, with discernment and appreciation, of the ordeal and struggles of his predecessors. At best there was a willful reading of that history. Early on, he was Abraham Lincoln resurrected (the new president, who hailed from Illinois, took the oath of office on the Lincoln Bible). He had been sworn in during an economic crisis, and thus he was FDR restored to the White House. He was stylish with two young children, so the Kennedy precedent was on offer.

In the oddest of twists, Mr. Obama claimed that his foreign policy was in the mold of Dwight Eisenhower’s . But Eisenhower knew war and peace, and the foreign world held him in high regard.

During his first campaign, Mr. Obama had paid tribute to Ronald Reagan as a “transformational” president and hinted that he aspired to a presidency of that kind. But the Reagan presidency was about America, and never about Ronald Reagan. Reagan was never a scold or a narcissist. He stood in awe of America, and of its capacity for renewal. There was forgiveness in Reagan, right alongside the belief in the things that mattered about America—free people charting their own path.

If Barack Obama seems like a man alone, with nervous Democrats up for re-election next year running for cover, and away from him, this was the world he made. No advisers of stature can question his policies; the price of access in the Obama court is quiescence before the leader’s will. The imperial presidency is in full bloom.

There are no stars in the Obama cabinet today, men and women of independent stature and outlook. It was after a walk on the White House grounds with his chief of staff, Denis McDonough, that Mr. Obama called off the attacks on the Syrian regime that he had threatened. If he had taken that walk with Henry Kissinger or George Shultz, one of those skilled statesmen might have explained to him the consequences of so abject a retreat. But Mr. Obama needs no sage advice, he rules through political handlers.

Valerie Jarrett, the president’s most trusted, probably most powerful, aide, once said in admiration that Mr. Obama has been bored his whole life. The implication was that he is above things, a man alone, and anointed. Perhaps this moment—a presidency coming apart, the incompetent social engineering of an entire health-care system—will now claim Mr. Obama’s attention.

— Mr. Ajami, a senior fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution, is the author, most recently, of “The Syrian Rebellion” (Hoover Press, 2012).

 

Twitter Toughening Its Security to Thwart Government Snoops


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com

 

Posted by:NICOLE PERLROTH and VINDU GOEL

Jacob Hoffman-Andrews, right, a security engineer at Twitter, had been pushing the company to adopt forward secrecy for some time, but did not get much support for the project until the recent revelations about the National Security Agency's surveillance practices.Noah Berger for The New York Times Jacob Hoffman-Andrews, right, a security engineer at Twitter, had been pushing the company to adopt forward secrecy for some time, but did not get much support for the project until the recent revelations about the National Security Agency’s surveillance practices.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Save
  • Email
  • Share
  • Print

A year ago, hardly anyone, save for cryptographers, had heard of Perfect Forward Secrecy. Now, some customers are demanding it, and technology companies are adding it, one by one, in large part to make government eavesdropping more difficult.

On Friday, Twitter will announce that it has added Perfect Forward Secrecy, after similar announcements by Google, Mozilla and Facebook. The technology adds an extra layer of security to Web encryption to thwart eavesdropping, or at least make the National Security Agency’s job much, much harder. (Update: Twitter has announced the security change on its blog.)

Until Edward J. Snowden began leaking classified documents last summer, billions of people relied on a more common type of security called Transport Layer Security or Secure Sockets Layer (S.S.L.) technology to protect the transmission of sensitive data like passwords, financial details, intellectual property and personal information. That technology is familiar to many Web users through the “https” and padlock symbol at the beginning of Web addresses that are encrypted.

But leaked N.S.A. documents make clear that the agency is recording high volumes of encrypted Internet traffic and retaining it for later cryptanalysis. And it’s hardly the only one: Iran, North Korea, and China all store vast amounts of Internet traffic. More recently, Saudi Arabia has been actively trying to intercept mobile data for Twitter and other communication tools.

The reason governments go to great lengths to store scrambled data is that if they later get the private S.S.L. keys to decrypt that data — via court order, hacking into a company’s servers where they are stored or through cryptanalysis — they can go back and decrypt past communications for millions of users.

Perfect Forward Secrecy ensures that even if an organization recording web traffic gets access to a company’s private keys, it cannot go back and unscramble past communications all at once. Perfect Forward Secrecy encrypts each web session with an ephemeral key that is discarded once the session is over. A determined adversary could still decrypt past communications, but with Perfect Forward Secrecy the keys for each individual session would have to be cracked to read the sessions’ contents.

Perfect Forward Secrecy was invented more than 20 years ago, and Paul Kocher, a leading cryptographer, put support for Perfect Forward Secrecy into the S.S.L .protocol. But companies have been reluctant to use it because it slows website and browser performance, uses resources and because — until Snowden — most consumers did not even know it existed. Unlike S.S.L. technology, there is no indication to a user that Perfect Forward Secrecy is enabled.

This tougher security is quickly becoming a must-have for Internet companies.

Earlier this week, Marissa Mayer, the chief executive of Yahoo, announced that Yahoo would introduce new security features in 2014. But, on Twitter, some consumers were quick to point out that Perfect Forward Secrecy was conspicuously absent from her blog post.

“With security, there are always the things you know you ought to do,” Mr. Kocher said in an interview. “But it’s not until you have a clear adversary that it’s much easier to justify the resources to go fix the problem.”

At Twitter, Jacob Hoffman-Andrews, a security engineer, had been pushing the company to adopt forward secrecy for some time, but did not get much support for the project until the Snowden leaks.

That showed “there really were organizations out there in the world that were scooping up encrypted data just so they could try to attack it at a large scale,” said Jeff Hodges, another Twitter software engineer. “We were like, oh, we need to actually spend some more time and really do this right.”

Actually installing and turning on the technology took only a few months, once Twitter decided to do it, both men said in an interview. That was in part because Google, an early pioneer in the technology, had worked out many of the kinks in Perfect Forward Secrecy and shared its knowledge with the security community.

Perfect Forward Secrecy does add a slight delay to a user’s initial connection to Twitter — about 150 milliseconds in the United States and up to a second in countries like Brazil that are farther away from Twitter’s servers. But the company said the extra protection was worth the delay.

Twitter said it turned on Perfect Forward Secrecy on Oct. 21, although it refrained from publicizing the change immediately to make sure there were no problems.

Twitter said it hoped that its example would prompt other companies to adopt the technology.

“A lot of services that don’t think they need it actually do,” Mr. Hodges said.

 

President Obama Delivers A Statement On Iran


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.mcclatchydc.com

 

Posted by:

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 23, 2013 Remarks As Prepared for Delivery by President Barack Obama First Step Agreement on Iran’s Nuclear Program Saturday, November 23, 2013

Today, the United States – together with our close allies and partners – took an important first step toward a comprehensive solution that addresses our concerns with the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear program.

Since I took office, I have made clear my determination to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. As I have said many times, my strong preference is to resolve this issue peacefully, and we have extended the hand of diplomacy. Yet for many years, Iran has been unwilling to meet its obligations to the international community. So my Administration worked with Congress, the U.N. Security Council and countries around the world to impose unprecedented sanctions on the Iranian government.

These sanctions have had a substantial impact on the Iranian economy, and with the election of a new Iranian President earlier this year, an opening for diplomacy emerged. I spoke personally with President Rouhani of Iran earlier this fall. Secretary Kerry has met multiple times with Iran’s Foreign Minister. And we have pursued intensive diplomacy – bilaterally with the Iranians, and together with our P5+1 partners: the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, and China, as well as the European Union.

Today, that diplomacy opened up a new path toward a world that is more secure – a future in which we can verify that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful, and that it cannot build a nuclear weapon.

While today’s announcement is just a first step, it achieves a great deal. For the first time in nearly a decade, we have halted the progress of the Iranian nuclear program, and key parts of the program will be rolled back. Iran has committed to halting certain levels of enrichment, and neutralizing part of its stockpile. Iran cannot use its next-generation centrifuges—which are used for enriching uranium. Iran cannot install or start up new centrifuges, and its production of centrifuges will be limited. Iran will halt work at its plutonium reactor. And new inspections will provide extensive access to Iran’s nuclear facilities, and allow the international community to verify whether Iran is keeping its commitments.

These are substantial limitations which will help prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon. Simply put, they cut off Iran’s most likely paths to a bomb. Meanwhile, this first step will create time and space over the next six months for more negotiations to fully address our comprehensive concerns about the Iranian program. And because of this agreement, Iran cannot use negotiations as cover to advance its program.

On our side, the United States and our friends and allies have agreed to provide Iran modest relief, while continuing to apply our toughest sanctions. We will refrain from imposing new sanctions, and we will allow the Iranian government access to a portion of the revenue that they have been denied through sanctions. But the broader architecture of sanctions will remain in place and we will continue to enforce them vigorously. And if Iran does not fully meet its commitments during this six month phase, we will turn off the relief, and ratchet up the pressure.

Over the next six months, we will work to negotiate a comprehensive solution. We approach these negotiations with a basic understanding: Iran, like any nation, should be able to access peaceful nuclear energy. But because of its record of violating its obligations, Iran must accept strict limitations on its nuclear program that make it impossible to develop a nuclear weapon.

In these negotiations, nothing will be agreed to until everything is agreed to. The burden is on Iran to prove to the world that its nuclear program will be for exclusively peaceful purposes. If Iran seizes this opportunity, the Iranian people will benefit from rejoining the international community, and we can begin to chip away at the mistrust between our two nations. This would provide Iran with a dignified path to forge a new beginning with the wider world based on mutual respect. But if Iran refuses, it will face growing pressure and isolation.

Over the last few years, Congress has been a key partner in imposing sanctions on the Iranian government, and that bipartisan effort made possible the progress that was achieved today. Going forward, we will continue to work closely with Congress. However, now is not the time to move forward on new sanctions – doing so would derail this promising first step, alienate us from our allies, and risk unraveling the coalition that enabled our sanctions to be enforced in the first place.

That international unity is on display today. The world is united in support of our determination to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Iran must know that security and prosperity will never come through the pursuit of nuclear weapons – it must be reached through fully verifiable agreements that make Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons impossible.

As we go forward, the resolve of the United States will remain firm, as will our commitment to our friends and allies – particularly Israel and our Gulf partners, who have good reason to be skeptical about Iran’s intentions.

Ultimately, only diplomacy can bring about a durable solution to the challenge posed by Iran’s nuclear program. As President and Commander in Chief, I will do what is necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. However, I have a profound responsibility to try to resolve our differences peacefully, rather than rush towards conflict. Today, we have a real opportunity to achieve a comprehensive, peaceful settlement, and I believe we must test it.

I’LL believe it when I see it. Other wise I have no trust in the muslim in chief obama the Liar!

The first step that we have taken today marks the most significant and tangible progress that we have made with Iran since I took office. Now, we must use the months ahead to pursue a lasting and comprehensive settlement that would resolve an issue that has threatened our security – and the security of our allies – for decades. It won’t be easy. Huge challenges remain ahead. But through strong and principled diplomacy, the United States of America will do our part on behalf of a world of greater peace, security, and cooperation among nations.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/23/209553/president-obama-delivers-a-statement.html#storylink=cpy

 

Obama’s overhaul of spy programs so far cloaked in more secrecy


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!

 

Reblogged from: http://www.mcclatchydc.com

 

Posted by: Anita Kumar

The White House in Washington D.C.

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama has faced withering criticism around the globe for his secret spying programs. How has he responded? With more secrecy.

Obama has been gradually tweaking his vast government surveillance policies. But he is not disclosing those changes to the public. Has he stopped spying on friendly world leaders? He won’t say. Has he stopped eavesdropping on the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund? He won’t say.

Even the report by the group Obama created to review and recommend changes to his surveillance programs has been kept secret.

Critics note that this comes after he famously promised the most open administration in history.

“They seem to have reverted to a much more traditional model of secrecy except when it’s politically advantageous,” said Steven Aftergood, who directs the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, and is an expert on – and prominent critic of – government secrecy. “That’s normal but not consistent with their pledge.”

For five months, former government contractor Edward Snowden has steadily released classified information to the media that shows the breadth of the federal government programs that have guided intelligence gathering since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Documents show the National Security Agency had been collecting telephone and email records on tens of millions of Americans and foreigners, eavesdropping on allies such as Germany and Brazil, and spying on a host of global institutions.

As criticism swelled at home and abroad, Obama said the nation should examine how the government can strike a balance between national security and privacy concerns. He said at an August news conference that Americans will resolve any disagreements about the NSA programs through “vigorous public debate.”

Yea right this will not happen

But what started out as a national examination largely turned into a private review with few public meetings, little document disclosure and next to no public debate, say some lawmakers, technology organizations and civil liberties groups. And now, as those behind-the-scenes reviews begin to wind down, Obama is not providing details of the results.

“As part of the overall review of our intelligence-gathering practices, decisions are being made by the president and implemented by the president, but beyond that, I have to ask you to wait until the reviews, the various reviews have been completed and we have more to say,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

Sherwin Siy, vice president of legal affairs at Public Knowledge, which promotes Internet openness and provided recommendations to the White House on this issue, said administration officials are asking Americans to trust them, but their past actions have provided no reason to do so. “Where are the reserves of trust supposed to come from?” he asked.

On his first day in office, Obama offered a sweeping promise of transparency, issuing a number of executive actions to provide more openness at every level of the federal government and greater disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

“My administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in government,” Obama wrote at the time. “Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in government.”

But over the last five years, watchdog groups say, Obama has relied on state secrets and secret laws to make national security decisions with little congressional or public oversight, much as did his predecessor, President George W. Bush.

In recent months, Obama and James Clapper, the director of the Office of National Intelligence, have made statements that diminished the scope of – or outright denied the existence of – surveillance programs.

Carney and other administration officials say they are prohibited by law from revealing more details because the surveillance programs are classified and revelations could threaten national security.

Sascha Meinrath, director of the Open Technology Institute at the New America Foundation, which pushes Internet freedom and provided recommendations to the White House on this issue, suggested it declassify more programs in order to talk about them. “The blowback is only going to get worse,” he said.

In the past several months the government has released some documents, primarily about phone and email record collections. Some are heavily redacted, with thick black lines obscuring numerous dates, names and entire paragraphs.

Clapper says that he has released them at Obama’s request to be more transparent, but many were released as a result of court orders as part of a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy advocacy group.

“The American people deserve an open conversation about how the administration is interpreting its authority to conduct surveillance of Americans,” said Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., who has advocated for NSA changes. “I believe we can protect our national security and our constitutional rights, and I would like to see the administration make a genuine effort to respond to the many legitimate concerns that have been raised. So far, its efforts have raised more questions than they have answered.”

In response to criticism about NSA programs, Obama expects to receive recommendations from at least two government groups – an advisory group he created this summer and an independent organization within the executive branch with presidentially nominated members.

The first panel – the Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technology – provided an interim report to National Security Adviser Susan Rice and Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Lisa Monaco last week, but it was not released to the public. A final report is due Dec. 15, but it’s not clear if the entire document would be made public. “We expect that the outcomes of their work will be made public in some way,” said Caitlin Hayden, a National Security Council spokeswoman.

The second panel – the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board – recently held its first substantive hearing since its creation by Congress in 2004. It plans to provide recommendations to the White House but has not released a timetable.

Mark Jaycox, a policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said he doesn’t expect the administration to change much even amid the intense criticism. This administration, he said, has always held fast against similar criticism. For example, it resisted for years bipartisan pressure to release more information about its top-secret targeted killing program.

“It’s a pattern of the Obama administration,” he said.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/25/209465/obamas-overhaul-of-spy-programs.html#storylink=cpy

Americans Are Finally Learning About False Flag Terror


Clinton did it even had a movie made about it ! Wagging the dog

Attempt to discredit Benghazi whistleblower backfires


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!

 

Reblogged from: http://www.wnd.com

 

Posted by: Aaron Klein

Leaked after-action report showed jihadists, not protesters, responsible

author-image

dylan_davies

An alleged attempt to discredit a Benghazi guard possibly has backfired.

A leaked four-page incident report could prove that two days before then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice famously told the nation that Benghazi was a spontaneous protest in response to a “hateful video,” the State Department was provided a first-person account stating the attack was a coordinated jihadist assault.

The unsigned report, dated Sept. 14, 2012, was allegedly written by Dylan Davies, a private security contractor at the Blue Mountain Group.

Davies has been in the news in recent days since releasing a book about Benghazi under the pseudonym Morgan Jones.

Davies also gave a news-making interview last week to “60 Minutes” in which he recounted his attempt to defend the U.S. compound. He criticized the government for not doing enough to prevent the attack despite what he said were early warning signs.

The Washington Post reported details of a Blue Mountain Group incident report it claimed was submitted by Davies to Blue Mountain three days after the attack. The report differed from the story Davies told in his book and in his CBS interview.

The incident report has been widely cited in media as evidence Davies is not credible.

Davies, however, told the Daily Beast he did not write the report and has never seen it. The report was not signed by anyone.

Whether Davies wrote the incident report or not, the State Department confirmed the report leaked to the Post matches the version sent to the U.S. government by the Blue Mountain Group.

The Post further reported the State Department and Republican congressional aides confirmed the Sept. 14, 2012, report “was included among tens of thousands of documents turned over to lawmakers by the State Department this year.”

If, indeed, the report was submitted Sept. 14, it would mean the State Department had in its possession a first-person account stating the incident was a planned jihadist attack and not a spontaneous protest.

On Sunday, Sept. 16, 2012, Rice appeared on five morning television programs to discuss the White House response to the Benghazi attack. In nearly identical statements, she asserted that the attack was a spontaneous protest in response to a “hateful video.”

Other Obama administration officials made similar claims.

The author of the report said he received a phone call at 9:30 p.m. local time on Sept. 11 stating that the U.S. mission was under “sustained attack” and that the front gate had been breached.

The writer said a man inside the mission told him the “attackers were all over the compound.”

Further indicating it was not a spontaneous protest, the author said he attempted to drive to the mission 30 minutes into the attack but could not get near it, because “roadblocks had been set up by the Sharia brigade.”

The author of the report said he went back to the U.S. mission the next morning to find jihadists still inside.

He said “there were five members of the Sharia brigade inside dressed in desert camouflage uniform.”

The writer stated he returned to his villa immediately after the attack while Davies writes in his book he attempted to reach the Benghazi compound but couldn’t do so because of Ansar al-Sharia roadblocks.

The report’s author said he learned of Stevens’ death from a Blue Mountain guard who had apparently secretly gone to the hospital and had taken a photo of the ambassador’s body. Davies writes in his book, however, he was the guard who infiltrated the hospital and verified Stevens was dead.

A State Department official confirmed that the report obtained by the Daily Beast matches a version sent to the U.S. government by the Blue Mountain Group. Davies told the Daily Beast he failed to report his personal involvement at the hospital and the fated compound because a top Blue Mountain executive had asked him to stand down.

While most of the news coverage surrounding the Blue Mountain report focuses on how the version conflicts with the story told by Davies in his book, a missed detail is how the report also conflicts with the original Obama administration talking points on Benghazi.

The talking points were reportedly edited to remove references to terrorism or other instances that would contradict the “spontaneous” demonstration narrative.

According to an interim House report on Benghazi, after a White House deputies meeting Sept. 15, 2012, the administration altered the talking points to remove references to the likely participation of Islamic extremists in the attack.

The administration also removed references to the threat of extremists linked to al-Qaida in Benghazi and eastern Libya, including information about at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi.

Charged the report: “Senior State Department officials requested – and the White House approved – that the details of the threats, specifics of the previous attacks, and previous warnings be removed to insulate the department from criticism that it ignored the threat environment in Benghazi.”

With additional research by Joshua Klein.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/attempt-to-discredit-benghazi-whistleblower-backfires/#431FAqDOsV6s2Hka.99

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!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.wnd.com

 

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/#8Mxd8Oi1usQ4iuqG.99

 

Media Matters snagged in Benghazi deceit


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.wnd.com

 

Posted by: Aaron Klein

Book claims Republicans, talk radio using attacks for partisan gain

author-image 

david-brock

JERUSALEM – In their new e-book, “The Benghazi Hoax,” Media Matters for America executives David Brock and Ari Rabin-Havt dispute the claim that highly trained Special Forces were available and could have been deployed in time to make a difference in the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.

The authors, however, fail to inform readers that Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, conceded highly trained Special Forces were stationed just a few hours away from Benghazi on the night of the attack but were not told to deploy to Libya, as WND was first to report.

Brock and Rabin-Ravt also did not raise the many questions prompted by Dempsey’s testimony, including an admission to the highly unusual move of changing command of the Special Forces in the middle of the Benghazi attack.

Instead, Brock and Rabin-Ravt attempt to refute an exclusive Fox News interview aired April 30 in which a special government operator, speaking on condition of anonymity, contradicted claims by the Obama administration and a State Department review that there wasn’t enough time for military forces to deploy the night of the attack.

“I know for a fact that C-110, the EUCOM CIF, was doing a training exercise in … not in the region of North Africa, but in Europe,” the special operator told Fox News’ Adam Housley. “And they had the ability to act and to respond.”

The operator told Fox News the C-110 forces were training in Croatia. The distance between Croatia’s capital, Zagreb, and Benghazi is about 925 miles. Fox News reported the forces were stationed just three and a half hours away.

“We had the ability to load out, get on birds and fly there, at a minimum stage,” the operator told Fox News. “C-110 had the ability to be there, in my opinion, in a matter of about four hours … four to six hours.”

The C-110 is a 40-man Special Ops force maintained for rapid response to emergencies such as the Benghazi attack.

Fox News’ interview with the whistleblower:

Whistleblower interview 

Brock and Rabin-Ravt assail the Fox News interview.

“It was a compelling argument, especially for a typical news consumer who possesses only a casual knowledge of military affairs,” they write.

“Military experts, however, dismissed these notions,” they said.

The authors quote former Defense Secretary Robert Gates stating the suggestion the military could have responded in time was based on “sort of a cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces.”

Brock and Rabin-Ravt further quote former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta saying last February a military response during the attack was unfeasible.

“The reason simply is because armed UAVs, AC-130 gunships or fixed-wing fighters, with the associated tanking, you’ve got to provide air refueling abilities; you’ve got to arm all the weapons before you put them on the planes; targeting and support facilities, were not in the vicinity of Libya. And because of the distance, it would have taken at least nine to 12 hours, if not more, to deploy these forces to Benghazi.”

Brock and Rabin-Ravt entirely ignore the news-making remarks of Dempsey, who not only conceded the C-110 Special Forces were stationed just a few hours away but also stated command of the forces was transferred from the military’s European command to AFRICOM, or the United States Africa Command, during the attack, a move that may warrant further investigation.

Dempsey did not state any reason for the strange transfer of command nor could he provide a timeline for the transfer the night of the attack.

Also, Dempsey’s comments on the travel time between Croatia and Benghazi were incorrect.

Dempsey was asked about the Fox News report on the C-110 Special Forces by Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis, at a senatorial hearing over Defense Department Budget requests.

Video of Johnson’s questions to Dempsey:

 Johnson’s questions Dempsey

Dempsey confirmed the C-110 was indeed at a training exercise. At first he claimed the Special Forces were training in Bosnia and then later stated they were training in Croatia. But he did not explain the discrepancies in his statements about their location nor did he note the discrepancies.

“It (the C-110) was on a training mission in Bosnia, that is correct,” stated Dempsey.

Dempsey had been asked whether they were training in Croatia, not Bosnia.

In further remarks, he stated the forces were in Croatia.

Dempsey was asked whether he agreed with the Fox News timeline that the C-110 could deploy in four to six hours.

“No, I would not agree to that timeline,” he stated. “The travel time alone would have been more than that, and that is if they were sitting on the tarmac.”

However, even a large passenger jet can travel from the furthest point of Croatia to Benghazi in about two and a half hours or less.

Dempsey further stated the command of the C-110, or the EUCOM CIF, was transferred the night of the attack, but he didn’t explain why.

“There was a point at which the CIF was transitioned over into Africom” from European command, he said.

He could not give a timeline of when the command was transferred, telling Johnson he would take the question for the record.

Asked whether the C-110 left Croatia that night, Dempsey stated, “They were told to begin preparations to leave Croatia and to return to their normal operating base” in Germany.

Dempsey’s statements confirmed the forces were not asked to deploy to Libya.

The whistleblower operator told Fox News the C-110 could have made a difference.

“They would have been there before the second attack,” he said. “They would have been there at a minimum to provide a quick reaction force that could facilitate their exfil out of the problem situation. Nobody knew how it was going to develop. And you hear a whole bunch of people and a whole bunch of advisers say, hey, we wouldn’t have sent them there because, you know, the security was unknown situation.”

Also, in his testimony, former U.S. deputy ambassador to Libya and whistleblower Gregory Hicks said he contacted Africom the night of the attack but received no support.

Stated Hicks: “At about 10:45 or 11 we confer, and I asked the defense attache who had been talking about AFRICOM and with the joint staff, ‘Is anything coming? Will they be sending us any help? Is there something out there?’ And he answered that, the nearest help was in Aviano, the nearest – where there were fighter planes. He said that it would take two to three hours for them to get onsite, but that there also were no tankers available for them to refuel. And I said, ‘Thank you very much,’ and we went on with our work.”

Aviano, Italy, is 1,044 miles from Benghazi, about 100 miles further than the Croatian capital.

Hicks’ testimony:

Hicks’ testimony

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/media-matters-snagged-in-benghazi-deceit/#KmTzeecQX0UV9HiX.99

 

U.S. generals now take action to watch Obama


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.wnd.com

 

Posted by:F. Michael Maloof

Retired Army, Air Force leaders say ‘government continues down path of destroying America’

author-image

WASHINGTON – After one of them called for the “forced resignations” of President Obama and congressional leaders in response to multiple grievances, including the alleged political purge of hundreds of senior military officers, two retired U.S. generals are creating a citizens’ commission to scrutinize Obama administration actions on national security and economic issues.

“America’s Provisional Leadership Council” will look at major concerns, as outlined by Army Gen. Paul E. Vallely and Air Force Brig. Gen. Charles Jones, in an eight-point paper titled “The Americans Project.”

Vallely told WND he sees The Americans Project as a “citizens’ commission” of prominent Americans to provide advice to legislative and executive branches of government.

America’s leaders, he said, will be “held to high standards of performance to solve the nation’s problems of governing. We will scrutinize and provide guidance to federally elected officials on behalf of the citizens.”

The Americans Project, Vallely added, is a “movement, not a new party necessarily. We want candidates to run as Americans first before being a Democrat, Republican or Independent.”

Vallely, who today is chairman of the organization Stand Up America, served as the deputy commanding general of Pacific Command.

Jones, who is vice chairman of The Americans Project of Stand Up America, held numerous Air Force command positions including a tactical fighter wing, a strategic airlift wing and a special operations group.

In calling for the forced resignations of Obama and the leadership of Congress, Vallely outlined suggestions for nationwide rallies and said a peaceful “civil uprising is still not out of question.”

The current crop of leaders, he said, must face a “demand resignation” process, which he explained requires massive grassroots protests and social networking which he envisions can be undertaken through his organization. And example of a “forced resignation,” he said, was that of President Richard Nixon.

“Our federal government continues down the path of destroying America,” Vallely said. “Americans must now stand up and put America back on the right track.”

Workable solution

Vallely and Jones in their paper say “The Americans” leadership has developed workable solutions to “help solve and fix what has without question stunted our nation’s ability to clearly, legally and peacefully function as a constitutional republic.”

“Honest, selfless political leadership is the first key to America’s economic and debt recovery and secure future for all citizens and their children,” they say. “That means voters must band together and vote for positive ‘America first’ leadership rather than self-serving greed and corruption within the two major political parties that have for decades and are now rapidly tearing the United States of America apart.”

In their paper, Vallely and Jones call for adherence to the Constitution with strict congressional oversight of all executive actions.

In an apparent reference to the cutback in overall U.S. military readiness, they call for a strong national defense but stipulate that “in no way” would the U.S. military ever be used against U.S. citizens, a reference to a growing concern among many Americans.

The paper decried the historic $17 trillion government debt, concerns over continued unemployment and excessive tax rates on businesses and citizens.

Their solutions? Vallely and Jones call for abolishing the Federal Reserve and the Internal Revenue Service system, the intended result of which would be that “all political plundering of the peoples’ wealth via taxation will be stopped.”

In abolishing the Federal Reserve System, all U.S. government financial and economic functions would be turned back to the U.S. Treasury.

The IRS would be immediately abolished and replaced by a sales tax on specified items for partial financing of the U.S. government.

The retired generals condemned the illegal alien “invasion,” which they said would be stopped with a secured border double fence, calling for penalties on employers who hire illegal aliens.

“There will be absolutely no jobs, no social services, no welfare nor medical services allowed to be provided to illegal alien invaders,” they say, with the exception of emergency medical care only until the illegals can be deported.

“American jobs are for U.S. citizens, returning military veterans, part-time high school students and the elderly,” they said. “When U.S. employers cannot find workers and can fully justify seeking foreign workers, government permission will be granted for hiring temporary foreign workers.”

Eliminating agencies

They also called for the elimination and consolidation of a number of federal agencies, some of which, like the Department of Homeland Security, they say, have exceeded their authority.

“The DHS with functions for national security and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) for emergencies have both grown far beyond the intentions of reasonable and responsible leadership control, budgeting, manpower, equipment and facilities,” they say.

“Deceptive political intentions for the potential use of facilities, weapons, massive purchases of ammunition plus military-type vehicles and railroad cars are greatly objectionable to American citizens and an insult to the economic deficit of the nation,” they said.

DHS jobs could be given to the Department of Defense and the Interior Department, they claim. And FEMA would be recast as the National Emergency Agency with a reduction in manpower and merged into the Interior Department to be deployed during national emergencies.

“All weapons, munitions and military-type vehicles will be transferred to the DOD immediately,” they add.

They’d get rid of the Department of Energy and, no surprise, repeal Obamacare.

“It is critically important for American citizens to know and understand that the United States of America cannot recover from the unsustainable manmade national debt crises unless satisfactory employment is archived for a majority of U.S. citizens and that requires the existing income tax and Federal Reserve Systems to be abolished, then changed to a greatly reduced method of funding the federal government,” they said.

With the elimination of the income tax, businesses and corporations would return to the U.S., making manufacturing more competitive worldwide, with jobs emerging “in great numbers” and resulting in a booming economy.

Destructing ‘before our very eyes’

Vallely told WND the nation he long defended is self-destructing “before our very eyes,” because of “our inept and incompetent leadership in Washington.”

“The battle is on,” he added, “and we shall not retreat.”

Vallely, who has also served as a Fox News military analyst, claimed the Obama administration and leadership of Congress have been leading the nation down a road of “progressive socialism.”

The retired general said the U.S. faces a battle that is unknown to generations of Americans, and that the fate of the nation is “now in our hands” to enforce the Constitution and “severely limit the federal government and its out-of-control spending.”

Vallely added that “politics as usual will not be effective or sufficient enough to turn the country around.”

“We are in a war for America,” he told WND, adding that Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Dr. Ben Carson, the noted brain surgeon and author of “America the Beautiful” and other bestselling books have made similar observations.

“A civil uprising is still not out of the question as ‘pain’ grips the country more each day,” Vallely said, adding that there is time to change the country in a peaceful way.

‘This means raising your voice now’

“This means raising your voice now to your neighbors, family, co-workers and friends,” he said. “Be the captains of your souls. I pray for another George Washington to appear within the year and lead us.”

One of the issues that alarms Vallely is the high number of senior officers in the U.S. military who have been fired under the Obama administration, a toll estimated at one officer per week. Indeed, Vallely has been very outspoken on what he calls a “purge” of the U.S. military by the Obama administration – with a stunning nine generals and flag officers relieved of duty this year alone.

WND has been reporting on the surge of firings, suspensions and dismissals, for which Vallely has assigned a good portion of the blame to Obama’s close adviser, Valerie Jarrett. Rampant “political correctness” due to her influence, Vallely tells WND, is now permeating the military and negatively affecting everyone from top generals to the ranks of the enlisted.

According to Vallely, Obama is “intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing the U.S. as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”

Vallely equated the current treatment of U.S. senior military officers watching over what is said and done among mid-level officers and enlisted ranks to that of the “political commissars from the Communist era.”

He also told WND that the White House won’t investigate its own officials, but finds it easy to fire military commanders “who have given their lives for their country.”

‘Bought into Obama’s ideology’

Obama will not purge a civilian or political appointee because they have bought into Obama’s ideology,” Vallely said. “The White House protects their own. That’s why they stalled on the investigation into Fast and Furious, Benghazi and Obamacare. … Anyone in the ranks who speaks out is being purged.”

He’s far from alone in his concerns about the military purge, as J.D. Gordon, a retired Navy commander and a former Pentagon spokesman in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, says the Obama administration is rushing to unload senior officers whom he believes have become “political pawns” dismissed for questionable reasons.

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady, a recipient of the U.S. military’s highest decoration, the Medal of Honor, similarly has told WND that Obama needs to apply the same standards to his political appointees as he does to the military.

“Just when you thought the leadership of this government could not get any worse, it does,” Brady said. “Never in history has an administration spawned another scandal to cover the current one.”

This was a reference to the recent firing of a number of generals to mask “Obama’s serial scandals, all prefaced by lies – Fast and Furious, Benghazi, NSA, IRS,” among others, said Brady, former president of the Congressional Medal of Honor Society.

Retired Army Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin, who was a founding member of Delta Force and later deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence under President George W. Bush, tells WND it is worrying that four-star generals are being retired at the rate that has occurred under Obama.

“Over the past three years, it is unprecedented for the number of four-star generals to be relieved of duty, and not necessarily relieved for cause,” Boykin said. “I believe there is a purging of the military. The problem is worse than we have ever seen.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/u-s-generals-now-take-action-to-watch-obama/#4VXaYG7WyktkDh8L.99

 

You’ll Never Believe Who Was Seen At 50th J.F.K. Assassination Memorial


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://thelibertydigest.com

 

Posted by:Pi Squared

Oswald 3

Media outlets enjoyed a blast to the past this weekend, running stories from the day of the J.F.K. assassination, fifty years ago now. Many radio stations were playing the old tapes from the reports they released, television channels were re-airing old broadcasts, and a nation that had mourned half a century ago mourned again.

People old enough to remember the event told their tales of where they were when the shots rang out from the grassy knoll and the book depository tower, the latter of which are the only shots allowed to be acknowledged by “the system,” and the former of which will get you labeled a “conspiracy theorist” for mentioning. Younger generations of Americans asked “Who is J.F.K.?” Yes, a sad but true fact. But most of them know who Miley Cyrus is, so it’s all good, right?

What few people and no media outlets have mentioned are the sightings of alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, who was seen by several different people to be in attendance at a 50th Memorial service held in Dallas, Texas.


KENNEDY-PLAZA_2743630b

*************************************************

I know it was him, as well as I know my own name,” an elderly woman, who reported to have seen a much older Oswald lingering in the crowd, said. We pressed her for her name, yet she refused to give it, out of fear that “they” would come for her if “they” knew she’d spread the story.

“Not even age could hide that face,” an old man who’d been in the same proximity as the old woman, said. “That face was seared into my brain for months after the shooting. I starteddoubting the story as soon as they’d told it, but the way they kept burning that image into my brain. Everyone’s brain. I still had my doubts, but after seeing Oswald at the memorial today, I have no doubts. Oswald did not kill Kennedy!”

Oswald 1

It’s old news that many people doubt the story of the Kennedy assassination. Most people who can think for themselves believe that either the C.I.A. had the president assassinated, because he wasn’t pushing hard enough for a nuclear war with Russia, and because he was actually doing all he could to prevent one, or that the F.B.I. had him killed, at the directive of Lyndon Johnson, so that Johnson could become president an garner the credit for the upcoming civil rights bill that he knew was coming, as well as lead us into all out war in Vietnam. It was no secret to anyone that Lyndon Johnson and F.B.I. director J. Edgar Hoover had been best of friends for decades, and that Hoover hated Kennedy and his brothers. Johnson’s strong desire for acknowledgement is what he built his career on and he would have, and may have killed, to reach the top.

Still, until now, a man who may not even be dead, has taken the fall for the assassination of one of the most famed leaders the world over. Perhaps some day we’ll know the truth.

Oswald 2

Thwarted Assassination Attempt Uncovered


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://thelibertydigest.com

 

Posted by:Jenna Natas

images

A truly grim Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) report circulating in the Kremlin today claims that the “traditional” Western allies of the United States are “in total shock” today over the near assassination of President Barack Obama during what was planned to be a massive terror attack on the subway and rail systems of Washington D.C. that were being “false flagged” by dissident elements of the US military.

According to this report, this false flag attack was timed to occur during past  week’s two-day GridEx II terror exercise that simulates a nationwide collapse of the electric grid due to cyberterror or other attacks upon the United States, but was thwarted when its chief architects were discovered and this plot was unmasked.

These chief architects have been identified by the GRU as Vice-Admiral Ted Branch and Rear Admiral Bruce Loveless who were the US Navy’s top intelligence officials, both of whom were removed from duty by Obama this past Friday.

Important to note about this current false flag attempt, this report says, is that Russian intelligence experts have long suspected that renegade elements of the US Navy intelligence services were “deeply complicate” in the 11 September 2001 (9/11) attacks upon the United States that was only able to be stopped after their main headquarters in the Pentagon were destroyed by a cruise missile.

Also, this report continues, it is important to note that the US militaries pattern of using a GridEx II type exercise as cover for a planned assassination and/or false flag terror attack was more than evidenced on 9/11 when no less than 5 terror exercises were currently ongoing when the Twin Towers were attacked and brought down.

In this current plot, the GRU says in their report, at least 5 casualties have been reported that include 4 US Marines killed yesterday when they attempted to defuse one of the explosive devices removed from a Washington D.C. subway car, and a “major co-conspirator” named Ronald Kirby who was gunned down in his home by loyal Obama forces on Monday.

Kirby, this report says, was described as a “giant in the room” due to his institutional knowledge of the Washington region’s transportation system — both on the highway and on the rails — that was unmatched and knew the most vital vulnerabilities of the D.C. subway system.

Two former US Naval Seals who were part of Obama’s Secret Service protective detail, Ignacio Zamora Jr. and Timothy Barraclough, have also been linked by the GRU to this plot, and like their US Naval intelligence overseers were likewise dismissed from duty this week.

As to why the US military would want to eliminate Obama this GRU report says can be gleaned from the information released by Secret Service agent Dan Bongino who this past week warned the American people about the Obama regime by stating:

We’re in a lot of trouble.

The President sees government – and I think it’s because of his lack of experience and maybe community organizing in the past – as this shiny new toy.

For all the disagreements I had with Clinton, Carter and Bush there were always limits… there was that line you just didn’t cross… We cross it seemingly every day. We’re lost in the scandals…

The Jamie Dimon shakedown at Chase… the HHS scandal.. Kathleen Sebelius shaking down the health care industry for money… the IRS… it’s to the point where these scandals in and of themselves would be huge back-breaking scandals [but] are just lost in the scandal fog of this administration…

It’s worse than people know… and I’m not trying to scare you either.”

The precedent for killing an American President for abusing his office, this report says, was established in 1963 with the planned assassination of John F. Kennedy who was a secret drug abuser and deathly ill due to Addisons Disease and whom the US military-industrial-complex detested for his failure to stand up to Soviet communism.

Kennedy, indeed all of America, had been warned about this danger when on 17 January 1961 President Dwight D. Eisenhower issued his prophetic warning about the military-industrial complex, anticipating the increased political, economic, military and even cultural influence of the Pentagon and its allies.

Several weeks earlier, he had privately told his senior advisers in the Oval Office, “God help this country when someone sits in this chair who doesn’t know the military as well as I do.”

Where Kennedy failed to heed Eisenhower’s warning, this report concludes, the same cannot be said of Obama who has during the past 5 years has purged the US military of nearly 200 of its top officers, created a Department of Homeland Security “spy grid”across the entire United States, established a National Security Agency that can track the location of each citizens phone even when it is turned off and the batteries have been removed, and now rules over a nation that has more prisoners in its gulag than high school teachers and engineers combined.

To the only modern-times world leader Obama can be compared to, this GRU report ends, is former Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin who during the 1934-1939 Great Purge, likewise, eliminated his military and political opposition while at the same time creating a police-state that has not been rivaled until the present day United States.

 

So You’re Offended, Are You?


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://canadafreepress.com

 

Posted by:Jim Yardley 

Author

Every day we see news stories in the main stream media reporting that activist atheists and non-religious groups, such as those involved in the LGBT community, attack any demonstration of religiosity.  Catholic hospitals, schools or charitable organizations, for example, who employ anyone who is not a nun, priest or brother, are being forced to ignore their own religious doctrines and supply contraceptives and abortifacients as part of the health insurance that they offer to their lay employees under the mandates of ObamaCare.

 

Christmas particularly seems to drive atheists wild for some reason.  The idea that a community wants to put up a Christmas tree in a public space (even when no public funds are involved) seems to cause the vapors among those groups.  And their passive-aggressive posture of being “offended” by any demonstration of Christmas, or singing Christmas carols in a school that have any connection to the idea that Christmas is actually connected to, you know, the birth of Jesus, will cause them to have a figurative brain hemorrhage.

This particular and peculiar obsession with Christmas makes one wonder why they never seem to sue to get the Saint Patrick’s Day parade shut down.  It is all about a saint, after all.

There seems to be ongoing and vicious assaults on Judeo-Christian beliefs in this country, and directed against Christians even more than Jews.  Many Christians are outraged at this assault in direct contravention of the First Amendment’s protections of religious freedom, of course when Christians find this to be offensive, they are simply viewed as being borderline retarded, and so they are ignored and marginalized.

Even non-religious organizations are bowing before the non-God of atheistic conformity, so we have stores referring to “holiday trees”, the “holiday season” or printing “holiday greeting cards.”

So what should Christians do?

My (sarcastic) answer to them would be very simple.  Offer to cooperate with the posturing fools who want to kill Christmas.  Let’s suggest to the atheists and Democrats (or is that redundant?) that they eliminate Christianity and Judaism altogether.  Wouldn’t that be great!  Think of all the benefits that would accrue to the country if actually did eliminate Christianity and Judaism along with their antiquated and obviously wrong-headed and ignorant ideas that form the basis of Judeo-Christian morality. 

Since Judeo-Christian morality is the basis for all law and governmental intrusion to moderate the activities of human beings in Western Civilization, what might happen?  Well, just hypothetically speaking of course, here are a couple of possibilities:

  1. The crime statistics would drop to nearly zero.  After all, 99.9% of all the laws in this country are based on the biblical Ten Commandments.  Get rid of that relic of a time long past and VOILA!  No crime, therefore no crime statistics.  It would be every man for himself in the realm of jurisprudence and police activity.
  2. Once crime is eliminated, think of the vast reductions in government spending that would ensue.  Welfare?  Gone.  It’s based on the religious concepts of three major religions (Judaism, Christianity as well as Islam) that preach that people should act charitably toward the less fortunate.  Get rid of religion, then charity, in all its governmentally coerced forms such as welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, ObamaCare, unemployment insurance, workers comp insurance, food stamps and all their supporting bureaucracy would vanish.  Cool, right?  We could save hundreds of billions, perhaps even a trillion or so, each and every year and wipe out our entire national debt in less than ten years.
  3. Gun and ammunition manufacturers would find their revenue stream increasing rapidly, since without those pesky, antiquated laws based on the so-called Ten Commandments, there would no longer be any restraints on anyone’s behavior.  So you’re daughter gets raped, what are you going to do?  Call a cop?  It’s not a crime anymore, right?  So get your gun, and start killing everyone that remotely resembles your daughter’s rapist.  Murder isn’t a crime either.  Well, maybe it would be classed as “Felony Littering”, although I don’t recall one of those Ten Commandments saying, “Thou shalt not litter.”  It follows Point #1 above:  You’re on your own.
  4. Divorce attorneys might be upset when the divorce laws become inoperable.  That whole “Thou shalt not covet they neighbor’s wife” business would be a thing of the past, wouldn’t it?  And while you might not have to worry about alimony anymore, you might want to review Point #3 about murder not being a crime either.  Just sayin’.
  5. And changes need not be limited to domestic affairs.  Think how different foreign relations would be if we could ignore the Judeo-Christian tradition.  For instance we could eliminate all that nonsense about the Geneva Convention, and torturing enemy combatants.  The concept of innocent civilians would be gone, so the rules of engagement for our military would be soooo much simpler.  If it moves, kill it!

I feel sure that all the atheists and other anti-Christian, anti-Jewish rabble rousers would just love those kinds of changes, right?  And if they don’t, what rationalization could they offer to replace laws based on the Ten Commandments?  No matter how they twist and turn, the simple truth is that the Ten Commandments offer the same thing that our Constitution offers – a simple, understandable guide for how to conduct the affairs of human beings to inflict the least suffering on one’s self or on others. 

So if these individuals who object to the observance of these simple rules want them eradicated because, to use the words of Karl Marx, “religion is the opiate of the masses”, and want to lead all of us away from the basis for all law that controls our behavior, how should Christians and Jews respond?  When one of these rabid atheists claim that they are “Offended by (fill in the blank however you prefer)”, there can be only one rational answer:

So what? Who cares if you’re offended?

No matter what a person or group is offended by, I see nothing in the Constitution that equates having hurt feelings with, say, unreasonable search and seizure.  Even the Bible doesn’t say “Thou shalt not hurt anyone’s feelings”. So long as whatever is used to “fill in the blank” does not actually cause physical harm to an individual or restrict in any way their constitutionally enumerated and protected rights, the fact that they are offended is utterly irrelevant.  Saying that they’re offended is just one of those passive-aggressive ploys that the left uses to get everyone else to change their behavior to avoid “friction” or “bad feelings” and to enhance “cooperation” (meaning, simply, do it my way).  How about we simply ignore the fact that their feelings are hurt?  If they can’t handle that, well, ObamaCare offers psychiatric care, doesn’t it? 

There, that should make them happy.

DoD seeks plan to shut all U.S. commissaries


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!

 

Reblogged from:http://www.airforcetimes.com

 

Posted by:Karen Jowers

Defense officials have reportedly asked the Defense Commissary Agency to develop a plan to close all U.S. commissaries. (Staff Sgt. John D. Strong II / Air Force)

Defense officials have reportedly asked the Defense Commissary Agency to develop a plan to close all U.S. commissaries — about three-fourths of its stores, according to a resale community source familiar with details of a meeting with representatives of the Joint Staff and Pentagon comptroller’s office.

The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the meeting was held within the last few weeks and was part of preparations for the fiscal 2015 DoD budget request that is due out on February.

That DeCA has been asked to prepare such a draft plan does not mean commissaries would close anytime soon. Even if such a plan was included in the defense budget request for fiscal 2015 — almost a year away — it would have to be approved by Congress, where many lawmakers would oppose it.

The Military Coalition, comprised of more than 30 military and veterans advocacy groups sharing a common agenda, also would fiercely oppose such a plan.

Still, the fact that defense officials want DeCA to draft a plan for how it potentially would carry out such a move is another sign of the heavy budget pressures weighing on the Pentagon as a result of sequestration.

The Defense Department had no direct comment on the commissary initiative. But Pentagon spokeswoman Joy Crabaugh said Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel “has made it clear on numerous occasions that all cost-cutting efforts need to be on the table” in order for DoD to meet the sequestration caps mandated under the 2011 Budget Control Act.”

“At this time, no final decisions have been made on the … fiscal 2015 budget submission. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to discuss any specific budget decisions,” Crabaugh said.

DeCA has 178 commissaries in the U.S., including Alaska and Hawaii. Almost 70 stores operate overseas. Operating costs for the overseas stores account for 35 percent of DeCA’s budget and 16 percent of total worldwide sales.

Commissary officials negotiate lower prices for products based on volume. Closing all or most U.S. commissaries would lead to higher prices and a degraded benefit in remaining stores, Tom Gordy, Armed Forces Marketing Council president, said in written testimony to a panel of the House Armed Services Committee on Nov. 20.

The council represents over 330 manufacturers of products sold in commissaries, exchanges and other military venues.

The proposal to close U.S. stores was not discussed at the hearing, but in his written testimony Gordy said closing U.S. stores “would eliminate the benefit for millions of families, breaking a commitment that has been made to every service member.”

That such a proposal would come from within DoD is “very concerning,” said Steve Rossetti, director of government affairs for the American Logistics Association.

Commissaries are “one of the most valued benefits,” he said. “For what this costs the department, they get a huge return,” not only in terms of the benefit itself but in other factors such as jobs for military spouses. About 30 percent of DeCA employees are spouses.

DeCA receives nearly $1.4 billion in annual taxpayer subsidies. It has reduced its annual funding requirement by $700 million over the last 20 years, said DeCA Director Joseph Jeu.

Jeu said DeCA is constantly looking for ways to save money, but added that the agency has no more “low-hanging fruit” to cut.

But Rep. Joe Heck, R-Nev., an Army reservist, said other proposals under consideration include raising the commissary surcharge to 10 percent from the current 5 percent; raising prices by 2 percent to 3 percent to pay for shipping products to overseas stores; and creating an “enhanced” commissary that would sell other products at higher markups.

Any such changes would have a “great impact” on troops and families, Jeu told lawmakers.

Heck said that if such steps are necessary to maintain the benefit, DoD officials must consider them. “I encourage you to take that kind of perspective,” he told Jeu.■

 

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: