Saturday, September 20, 2014

Sheriff Joe Arpaio: "Our Country is Under Attack & Barack Obama is the Aggressor"

Birther"? YUP~~!! (Don't let us down, Sheriff Joe~~! Sheriff Joe ...
[Birther"? YUP~~!! Don't let us down, Sheriff Joe...indeed the facts are there for those who care]

Known as America's Sheriff, Joe Arpaio took a shot at Barack Obama at the end of August over his criminal negligence when it comes to the immigration invasion taking place on America's southern border. In an email, the Arizona sheriff declared, "Our country is under attack. And Barack Obama is the aggressor."

And Barack Obama is the aggressor. That's right. Our own President has overseen the release of thousands of illegal immigrants…hundreds of whom are convicted criminalseven felons, which are flooding into America.

Every day you read the newspaper or turn on the news, there is something tragic happening, something Obama says is beyond our control.

But I must tell you: the state of the U.S. – Mexican border IS NOT BEYOND OUR CONTROL. In fact, it's one of the key places where the safety of our nation starts. AND I am working around the clock to take criminals off the streets. Will you support my reelection campaign with a $15 or more donation right now?

Every action Obama has taken since the border crisis began has led to an increase in the flood of men, women, children, AND CRIMINALS! The icing on the cake…Obama's solution is holding events at the White House "honoring young adults who came to this country illegally."

HE IS REWARDING CRIMINALS! We are arresting them just to have the Obama administration release them the next day! 

Over the past seven months, I have compiled the statistics of over 3,000 inmates in my jail for various crimes that are here illegally. Over 36% of these illegals come back many times after they are turned over to the federal government for deportation.

But if they're coming back at such an alarming rate, either our border is so porous or the federal government is releasing them out the back door. Either way is unacceptable! I have written every month to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security about this and just last week I sent a letter to the Inspector General's office asking for an investigation. You know what I got back? Nothing. Nada. Zilch. 

Even the mainstream media is completely ignoring this problem.

If we lose control over our own borders and the rule of law no longer matters in the courts, then I fear our great American experiment will draw to a close. In Arizona alone, more than 1,000 illegal immigrants are being dropped off at bus stations in Phoenix and Tucson alone. We now have U.S. Border Patrol agents moving illegal immigrants from one city to another in our United States.

It's a bad situation, but I refuse to sit back and watch it get worse. That is why I urgently need your most generous support. We must stand together in unison against Obama's pro-amnesty regime. 

**Obama golfs on vacation while the borders flood** just like **Nero fiddled while Rome burned.** 

This isn't the first time that Arpaio has said some straightforward things about Obama. In 2012, Sheriff Arpaio said that Obama's birth certificate was a "national security issue."
Arpaio has been one who has sought to enforce the law with regards to illegal aliens for years. When Arizona's SB1070 came up, Arpaio supported it, but declared, ""I will continue to arrest illegal aliens that violate the state laws of this state. So nothing will change." SB1070 was only partially upheld by the Supreme Court, but that hasn't stopped Arpaio from doing his job.
Obama has done all of what Arpaio has said. He has flagrantly disregarded his oath, ignored the law and in the process mocked the law and has committed treason against the American people. But it isn't just Obama's fault. A Republican-led House and a Democrat-led Senate have stood by and let him do it without one article of impeachment being filed. They are just as complicit in the matter as Barack Obama is. What is it going to take to rattle the cages of the Washington establishment?

Military Leaders Increasingly at Odds With Obama Over ISIS Strategy

by: Katie Pavlich 

Obama's strategy on how to combat ISIS is confusing at best, but one thing is clear: the battle brewing between Obama and America's top generals about how to move forward against the terror army.
Earlier this week during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dempsey said there is potential he will recommend ground troops should the coalition with Arab countries against ISIS fail. 

“My view at this point is that this coalition is the appropriate way forward. I believe that will prove true but if it fails to be true and if there are threats to the United States then I of course would go back to the President and make a recommendation that we include the use of U.S. military ground forces. To be clear, if we reach the point where I believe our advisers should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific ISIL targets, I will recommend that to the president," Dempsey said.
The next day, President Obama gave a speech in Florida at U.S. Central Command and stressed, "I will not commit you, and the rest of our armed forces, to fighting another ground war in Iraq." Obama has repeatedly insisted ground troops will not be used against ISIS.
Regardless, the line of generals and other high ranking military officials expressing skepticism over President Obama's plan and strategy is quickly getting longer. 

Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis:
"Half‐hearted or tentative efforts, or air strikes alone, can backfire on us and actually strengthen our foe’s credibility, reinforcing his recruiting efforts which are already strong. I do not necessarily advocate American ground forces at this point, but we should never reassure our enemy that our commander‐in‐chief would not commit them at the time and place of his choosing. When we act it should be unequivocal, designed to end the fight as swiftly as possible. While no one is more reluctant to see us again in combat than those of us who have signed letters to the next of kin of our fallen, if something is worth fighting for we must bring full strength to bear."
General Loyd Austin:President Obama had been given advice on how to handle the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant but did not act on it, according to a new report from Real Clear Defense.Obama was preparing his strategy when he rejected the “best military advice” of Gen. Lloyd Austin, commander of U.S. Central Command.

General Ray Odierno:
Airstrikes have halted the advance of the Islamic State, also known by the acronyms ISIS or ISIL, General Odierno, now the Army chief of staff, told journalists from four news organizations, including The New York Times, in what aides said were his first public comments on the current situation in Iraq. Ultimately, though, “you’ve got to have ground forces that are capable of going in and rooting them out,” he said, referring to the Islamic extremists.

The airstrikes “will not be the end all and be all solution in Iraq,” he said. Similarly, he added, the jihadis cannot be allowed to have a safe haven across the border in Syria.

Lt. Col. Oliver North:
"In my military mind what you have is Operation Enduring Confusion. You have a President who cannot make up his mind about what he wants."
"I've spent my whole life hanging around the U.S. military. I've been on plenty of times with you from Iraq and other places. I've spent my life with these young guys. I'm waiting for the general or admiral who will stand up on his hind feet and say this is mission impossible. Given the constraints that you've [Obama] given we cannot accomplish the objective you have set. It is impossible to do."

"Somebody has to tell the truth...Some general or admiral at the Pentagon or somewhere else in Central Command has got to stand up and say, 'The mission we've been given we can do but we can't with the constraints you've places upon us.'"

Last night on The Kelly File, General Jack Keane gave his analysis:

And then there's this:
Megyn Kelly         @megynkelly
Gen. McInerney: “The president is fighting a political campaign… the generals are fighting an enemy overseas.”

Doctors: ‘Irresponsible’ to send troops to ‘combat’ Ebola
oped: Please #Congress #Pentagon remove this psychopath from the office of the President before he gets us all killed and our country destroyed beyond repair!

Obama has zero clue what troops are for.
Check it out:
A real-life horror story is playing out in Africa as Ebola spreads, and President Obama’s decision to send 3,000 troops to Liberia to combat the virus could very well put Americans at risk of contracting the deadly illness at home, some health experts say.
According to the World Health Organization, at least 4,985 people have contracted Ebola and at least 2,461 have died. Several doctors have fallen ill with Ebola, and two of them have died. New reports indicate a Doctors Without Borders staff member has contracted the virus in Liberia and will be evacuated to France for treatment.

“You can see that these doctors, who are highly trained people, got themselves infected,” said Dr. Lee Hieb, former president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. “So sending troops into an area, if they’re dealing one-on-one with a patient, they’re not going to be able to protect themselves very well. It’s not easy to [prevent transmission], because you get tired and you get careless and you make some simple mistakes. All it takes is one virus particle.”
Dr. Hieb said quarantine measures should be taken to control the outbreak and prevent Ebola from coming to America.
Continue Reading on ...

ISIS Gives Their American Members An Order: Slaughter U.S. Military Personnel In Their Homes

via: The Inquisitr
The threat of ISIS in America is being reported more as news reports show what the terrorist organization is planning to do to the American people. However, as the threats increase on social media, the Homeland Security continue to deny any real threat to the nation.
According to an article by Fox News, a law enforcement bulletin warned that Islamic State fighters have increased calls for “lone wolves” to attack U.S. soldiers in recent months. This includes the subject of this article which was given out through a tweet. The call to slaughter military personnel will be continued until future orders state otherwise.
Fox News takes question to this claim with the following statement from Peter Boogaard, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, telling that

“there is no credible intelligence at this time to suggest that there is an active plot by (ISIS) to carry out an attack in the United States.”
On another occasion the Department of Homeland Security made a statement that such “lone wolf” killings might increase if the U.S. strikes in the Middle East.
“These threats will most likely increase should the U.S. or its allies attack the Islamic State of Iraq and Sham (ISIS) in Syria or Iraq.”
It has also been reported that it isn’t hard to find someone’s address or personal information as explained in a tweet by a British jihadist encouraging radicals still living in the West.
“You could literally search for soldiers, find their town, photos of them, look for address in Yellowbook or something. Then show up and slaughter them.”

Breitbart also reported on this in which they utilized the recent news of a Rochester, New York man accused of recruiting people to join ISIS, which was reported by The Inquisitr earlier this week. They also reported that the Obama Administration continues to claim the Islamic State poses no threat to the homeland, but the threats against our soldiers on our soil, not just serving abroad, may appear immediate.
As HuffPost reports, Americans are panicking whilst the experts are disagreeing.
What do you think about this threat to U.S. military personnel on the homeland, in the cross hairs of ISIS?
Evil is all you can say about them….
Check it out:
My visceral reaction to reading this story was intense anger. And yet, why am I bewildered that a terrorist organization that kills innocents has reportedly stepped up its efforts in urging rogue extremists in the U.S. to target American soldiers? 

On second thought, I’m not surprised at all. But that doesn’t mean I don’t find their their latest tactic to kill Americans somewhat strange. Is this not the same army of barbarians whose chief spokesman (since killed in a drone strike) arrogantly prodded the president to “send [us] your soldiers, the ones we humiliated in Iraq?” If ISIS is so confident and proud of their own military capabilities, why must they resort to such cowardly and desperate acts?   

The Smoking Gun in the Obama Eligibility Case: Stanley Ann Dunham’s Passport
While Barack Obama has taken numerous and expensive steps to keep his past secret (and yes, other presidents have did the same), one thing that cannot be missed is what may be the smoking gun in the eligibility case: The passport information of Stanley Ann Dunham, Barack Obama's mother. It has been said that young Barry went to Indonesia with his mother to live with Lolo Soetoro and in doing so, because of his age, he was placed on his mother's passport. According to the documents obtained from the US State Department, under the Freedom of Information Act, Barack Hussein Obama's name was stricken from the original application. According to the State Department, they "could not locate a 1965 passport application referenced in an application for amendment of passport that is included in the released documents."   

Why are these documents so important? Under US Passport laws, in order to add a child to one's passport, they would simply have to have the child's birth certificate and a photo of one's self and the child so that they could be matched when boarding a plane for their destination.
Upon the release of Dunham's passport files, they were examined and in her renewal application, dated August 13, 1968, she lists Barack Hussein Obama (Soebarkah). Obama would have been eight years old at the time, just about to nine.

However, if you take a look at the application, young Barry's name is scratched out on page two of the application, which means he was not in the application for his mother's passport renewal in 1967.   

obama passport 2 
So what does this mean? Well, consider a brief timeline.
  • Stanley Ann Dunham allegedly married Barack Obama, Sr. in 1961.
  • Barack Obama, Jr. was allegedly born on August 4, 1961 to Stanley Ann Dunham
  • Later in August of the same year, Dunham moved to Washington to attend University of Washington
  • Obama, Sr. continued studies in Hawaii until June 1962 and then went to Harvard.
  • Dunham met Lolo Soetoro in 1963
  • Obama and Dunham divorced in March 1964
  • Soetoro and Dunham married in 1965 in Hawaii (according to P3 in the files obtained, but 1964 in P5)
  • Soetoro leaves Hawaii for Indonesia in 1966, leaving behind Dunham and little Barry
  • Dunham and Barry would travel to Indonesia in 1967
  • From ages 6-10 Obama was in school in Indonesia; first at a Catholic School where he was registered as a Muslim and then at Besuki School, one of the three best public schools in Indonesia. (Consider that Obama was labeled a citizen of Indonesia at the time and that it is extremely rare for non-Indonesians to go to Indonesian public school.) 
  •  Obama returned to Hawaii to live with grandparents in 1971
So, first let's be honest here. Dunham had a passport that was valid at the time Obama took his first trip to Indonesia (1967). However, when she chose to renew the application (August 1968), she listed Obama and then scratched him out. Since records are not available for her initial passport application due to them being destroyed, one wonders if Obama was listed on the passport. For the sake of argument, I'll assume he was. He's in Indonesia for four years.
He then returned to Hawaii and attended Punahou School and meets his alleged father Barack Obama, Sr. for the only time in his life (by the way, they look nothing alike). Here's where it seems there is a problem. Who did Obama travel with when he came back to the states? If it was his mother, consider that she had not properly listed him in her 1968 renewal application. She would have had to do this in order for Barry to travel with her to Indonesia.
The real kicker comes in her application dated June 1971. There is no listing for Barack Obama as her son on her passport. How is Barry getting from Indonesia to Hawaii now?

According to the man I was named after, who was a Christian missionary for decades to various parts of Indonesia beginning in 1967, he told me that he always had to list his children on his passport until they were 18. Then they could get their own passports. So why is Barack Obama, the son of Stanley Ann Dunham not listed on any of her passport applications? How was he able to travel to and from Indonesia?
The convenience of the 1965 passport records being destroyed is curious. For one might make the claim that there is a coverup (albeit circumstantial) regarding Obama's presence in his younger days. Age 5-6 is when kids normally began school in the US. I assume it would be similar overseas, such as in Indonesia.

But the question remains that Soetoro never listed him as her son on future applications, even when he was ten years old, which would have been when he came to Hawaii and stayed.
Perhaps there is an explanation, but without previous travel records for Obama, we may never be able to get a definite answer.

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) theorizes:
Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro-Passport Application File-Strunk v Dept of State-FOIA Release-FINAL-7-29-10. This file indicates via the 1967 passport amendment application (document marked P3) that Stanley Ann (Dunham) Obama had a passport for certain issued to her 1965 and she was applying to amend it. Thus, she had one for sure in 1965. Since a passport was good for 5 years, that means if the 1965 issued passport was a renewal that she likely got her first passport possibly as early as late 1960 or early 1961. How does that fit the narrative to explain the information coming out of Kenya that Obama was born there? Why did she need a passport at age 18? She would not need it to have a baby in Hawaii or to go to college in Seattle Washington. What was the real reason this pregnant teenager got a passport in late 1960 or early in 1961? I believe it was likely to be able to travel to Kenya to have the baby over there where it was her intent to leave the baby there to be raised by the paternal family in Kenya. She was to then return to re-start her life as a young teenager going to college in Seattle Washington. And then when Stanley Ann did not follow the plan because maternal instincts kicked in and she returned to college in Seattle WITH the new baby, grandma Dunham had to take action and filed the fraudulent action in Hawaii to falsely register the baby as born at home there in Hawaii, with no witnesses, to get her newborn grandson U.S. Citizenship ... because it was very easy to do this in Hawaii in 1961. Listen to the Bill Cunningham Radio Show for how it was likely done [continued below video]: 

I grant that CDR Kerchner's assumption that Dunham's passport was obtained at eighteen is just that, an assumption. However, it is interesting that he links to a story with similar documentation that we have provided documentation in a previous article as it relates to the Kenyan Parliament and the acknowledgment that Barack Obama was born in Kenya.
Too many things don't add up with Barack Hussein Obama: his selective service form, his social security number, his lack of being able to be verified to hold a job in the US and his birth certificate all point to a man who is a fraud and an illegal president.

So, I ask you, is this passport information the smoking gun in the Obama eligibility case? If so, what are people like Markwayne Mullins and a host of other elected officials doing by not pursuing this to verify the truth? I'll tell you what they are doing. They are being complicit in this and looking out for what they perceive as their political futures, plain and simple. Demand your congressmen pursue this and present the truth to the American people.

Friday, September 19, 2014

As France makes a symbolic air strike US Military #Pentagon asleep at the wheel!

Two French Rafale fighter jets fly on a reconnaissance mission over Iraq. (Jean-Luc Brunet/AFP)
As France makes a symbolic air strike on  a IS  depot north of Mosul on Friday

Islamic State extremists were busy little beavers

Islamic State jihadists have seized 60 Kurdish villages near the Turkish border in a lightning two-day campaign, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said Friday.
"In the past 48 hours, they have taken 60 villages, 40 on Friday alone," said Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman, referring to the operation around Ain al-Arab, known to the Kurds as Kobane.
"The Kurdish fighters are beating a retreat because they are outnumbered."

An image made available on the jihadist website Welayat Salahuddin in June shows an IS militant waving the group's flag after allegedly seizing an Iraqi army checkpoint in the northern Iraqi province of Salahuddin. (AFP Photo/)

OK France and US Military  #Pentagon can y'all get your proverbial s*** together... Like symbolic strikes are cool and all but if'n ya really really want to defeat IS don't ya think it would be wise to go over intelligence reports and strike the targets of opportunity that arise and would do some real damage...just saying y'all blew this one big time!

New York Restaurant gets Attacked for Being Heterosexual

ice cream

Sure, you might think it would be difficult for a restaurant to be gay or straight… but that isn’t stopping the gay mafia from going after Gallo Nero over their latest ad campaign.
Gallo Nero is a popular place to grab ice cream in New York… and one of their competitors happens to be a company called Big Gay Ice Cream. So, someone at Gallo Nero thought it would be fun to play off of their competitor’s shtick and use it to their advantage.

Folks on Twitter and the Internet in general aren’t taking too kindly to Gallo Nero’s play on words. 

Screen Shot 2014-09-16 at 4.01.04 PM 
The website the Gothamist sent a reporter out to inquire about the gutsy ad campaign – to which the manager replied, “What’s the issue? We can call our ice cream whatever we want.” When the reporter asked if the sign was homophobic, the manager simply said, “They have their own way, we have our own way.”
I’m not sure, and perhaps one of our readers can enlighten me… how is the Big Gay Ice Cream a completely reasonable name for ice cream, while the Big Straight Ice Cream is “homophobic”?

Obviously it makes no sense.
But this is what the left does, isn’t it? Make completely unreasonable arguments that have nothing to do with facts and then demand that everyone else agree with you. Because if they don’t… they are hate-mongering bigots!
My only question is… is the ice cream any good?

Thursday, September 18, 2014

Unbelievable: Obama Just Did Something That Could Endanger Over 250 Million Americans

Obama Authorizes Airstrikes

Barack Obama doesn’t want to deploy the military to fight the Islamic State – something they’re actually trained to do.
Instead, he’s ordered 3,000 troops to enter western Africa to fight the deadly Ebola virus, which has an 80% mortality rate.
It’s certainly another blemish on Obama’s report card. And it acts as further proof that Obama always ignores the secondary consequences of his actions.
This time around, though, Obama may have volunteered America for a biological genocide…
Blindly Heading Down a Slippery Slope
Consider this: Right now, the Ebola virus is passed by bodily fluids.
But, according to CNN, many of our nation’s top infectious disease experts are worried that this deadly virus could mutate. Once it mutates, it could be transmitted by a cough or a simple sneeze.
Dr. Michael Osterholm, Director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, told CNN, “It’s the single greatest concern I’ve ever had in my 40-year public health career… I can’t imagine anything in my career – and this includes HIV – that would be more devastating to the world than a respiratory transmissible Ebola virus.”

As you can see, this already-dangerous situation could quickly escalate into a full-blown massacre in our country. And yet, thousands of soldiers are following Obama down a slippery slope into western Africa.
Undoubtedly, the Ebola virus is deadly and needs to be confronted. Nearly 2,500 Africans from five different countries have died during this latest Ebola outbreak. But I have to wonder why we’re sending billions of dollars to the United Nation’s World Health Organization (WHO), especially if they aren’t up for the task.
Presumably, the WHO is made up of doctors and healthcare professionals who might have a better grasp of the assignment than 18- to 20-year-old Army recruits who’ve been training for duty in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama’s move sets us up for potentially dangerous, secondary consequences, and I don’t think the United States is prepared for what those may be. What happens if the infection is somehow spread to the United States? A single exposed soldier could bring the disease here.

Everyone Loses
In his classic book, Economics in One Lesson, Journalist Henry Hazlitt points out the single largest fallacy of government action…
Hazlitt writes: “This is the persistent tendency of men, to see only the immediate effects of a given policy, or its effects only on a special group, and to neglect to inquire what the long-run effects of that policy will be not only on that special group, but on all groups. It’s the fallacy of overlooking secondary consequences.”
That’s exactly what Obama is doing right now, and he’s created a lose-lose situation for everyone. The military is kept from doing its job (which is to annihilate the Islamic State’s leaders and soldiers), and soldiers are being sent on a mission for which they’re woefully unprepared.
Meanwhile, as Obama turns a blind eye to the Islamic State, the group keeps killing more innocents. Only in Obama’s White House would such foolishness be contemplated, much less ordered.

This commentary originally appeared at and is reprinted here with permission.

HE’S NOT ASHAMED: Another Hollywood Celeb Came Out of the Closet; Not ‘That’ Closet

Frankie Muniz is no longer in the Hollywood political closet. Let’s see if more of the silent ones will come forth. Check it out…
Malcolm is no longer in the middle. This Malcolm in the Middle star did something that is the quintessential faux pas in Hollywood. He spoke out against Obama.
Frankie Muniz played the well-known character Malcolm from 2000 – 2006. Americans watched him grow up before their eyes. In recent years, Muniz has continued his career in roles in different series and movies and is in a band called Kings Foil. But, he will always be known to many as ‘Malcolm.’

He took to Twitter in 2013 and came out of the political closet with a few tweets that no doubt had liberal heads exploding, especially his Hollywood buddies.


Read more: TPNN

Former Navy SEAL Says More Than 90 Percent Don’t Support Obama


It’s no mystery that Democrat Barack Obama’s poll numbers have been crashing, with his approval numbers dropping below the dreaded 40% level in some polls. However, those numbers are lofty compared to the approval that Obama is receiving from our military, according to one former Navy SEAL.

Appearing on FOX News’ “On the Record” with Greta Van Susteren on Wednesday, former U.S. Navy SEAL Carl Higbie claimed that “over 90% don’t support the president.”

Higbie, who authored the book, “Battle on the Home Front,” said that Obama’s appearance with the troops was nothing more that a photo-op and called his foreign policy a “global failure.”  

“This is indicative of a global failure of his foreign policy. He has touted that he is behind the troops before, and he stands in front of these guys [military] and gets a photo-op and everything like that, while saying, ‘I’m going to send 3,000 of you to combat Ebola, but I’m not going to send any to combat an actual enemy that’s really threatening America.” 

Higbie was highly doubtful of Obama’s ISIS strategy to defeat them by training more Iraqis, explaining that the U.S. spent years training the best Iraq had to offer and “they still weren’t an effective fighting force.”

Higbie said that Obama needed to do away with the rules of engagement and uncuff our military so that they can win wars against real enemies and threats to America. 

“It’s going to take a massive message. I would say to these people [ISIS], especially for the president. ‘You chop two Americans heads off, I’m coming to get you,’” former SEAL Higbie recommended. “It’s going to take a surge of troops, unfortunately, and really send the message home.  They need to be in fear of us.” 

Read More Watch Video:

Please share this article on Facebook and Twitter if you think Obama is the worse Commander-in-Chief in U.S. history.
h/t:  Daily Caller

Secretary of State John Kerry : "Nothing in the Qur'an about raping,pillaging..."

Kerry Campaign Headquarters

Really now John do you just make S*** up as you go...or just adhere to the old KGB dis-information tactics...or just go out of your way to enable/ justify your POTUS bud Barry Barack Hussein Soetoro Davis Obama or whatever his real name is on his quest to establish a Caliphate of Muslim Brotherhood goons within the borders of the USA? 

John Kerry, King Of The Monotone

I'll try to help you out John... your homework assignment is to educate yourself on Who and What Islam is all about...the teachings of the Qur'an and it's mission to establish a world wide Caliphate...Please educate yourself before you make any more assinine statements about Islam and the Qur'an! 

Funny Political Blog | Conservative Blog | USA Political Website

Start here on your quest for the truth:

SICK: Muslim Asks 3 Crying Kids Who Wants to Get Beheaded First


This is truly sickening. You don’t have to speak their language to hear the terror in these kids’ voices. These are the types of atrocities that are ‘normal’ for ISIS. See the translation of the video via Bare Naked Islam
The video shows the three children sobbing as a man standing behind a camera waves a knife and asks: “Whom do we behead first?” “Put your hand here or else I will sever your head,” he tells one of the terrified boys, who are crying throughout the video.
“You, come here … Do you belong to Daesh?” the man says, using an acronym for the full Arabic name of the ISIS Islamic State group, which has recently beheaded two Lebanese soldiers. Adding to the pathos of the incident, the crying children respond by pointing at each other. 

Watch Video:    Read more: Bare Naked Islam

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Obama vs. the generals

Gen. Lloyd Austin to Lead U.S. Central Command
Pity poor Gen. Lloyd Austin, top commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East.
Rarely has a U.S. general given his commander in chief better military advice, only to see it repeatedly rejected.
In 2010, Gen. Austin advised President Obama against withdrawing all U.S. forces from Iraq, recommending that the president instead leave 24,000 U.S. troops (down from 45,000) to secure the military gains made in the surge and prevent a terrorist resurgence. Had Obama listened to Austin’s counsel, the rise of the Islamic State could have been stopped.

But Obama rejected Austin’s advice and enthusiastically withdrew all U.S. all forces from the country, boasting that he was finally bringing an end to “the long war in Iraq.”
Now the “long war in Iraq” is back. And because Obama has not learned from his past mistakes, it is likely to get even longer.
Last week, Obama announced a strategy to re-defeat the terrorists in Iraq. But instead of listening to his commanders this time around, Obama once again rejected the advice of . . . you guessed it . . . Gen. Lloyd Austin.
The Post reports that, when asked for his recommendation for the best way to defeat the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, Austin told the president that “his best military advice was to send a modest contingent of American troops, principally Special Operations forces, to advise and assist Iraqi army units in fighting the militants.” Obama was having none of it. Austin’s recommendation, The Post reports, “was cast aside in favor of options that did not involve U.S. ground forces in a front-line role.”

Indeed, in his address to the nation, Obama insisted that “American forces will not have a combat mission — we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq.” He declared the effort against the Islamic State “different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan” and modeled instead on the air campaigns he has waged against al-Qaeda affiliates such as the one in Yemen.
There’s one problem with that: The air campaign in Yemen is not working. Just this weekend al-Qaeda infiltrated forces into Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, and Yemeni officials say that al-Qaeda’s strength in Yemen is growing. And as American Enterprise Institute counterterrorism expert Katherine Zimmerman points out, al-Qaeda’s Yemeni affiliate was behind a “terror threat that closed more than 20 U.S. diplomatic posts in North Africa and the Middle East in August 2013.” If, four years from now, the Islamic State is still strong enough to force the closure of 20 U.S. embassies and consulates, then Obama’s strategy to “degrade and destroy” the group will have failed.

The Islamic State cannot be defeated from the air alone. This does not mean a re-invasion of Iraq. But as Fred and Kimberly Kagan — two key thinkers behind the successful 2007 surge in Iraq — point out in a new paper, defeating the Islamic State “will require as many as 25,000 ground troops in Iraq and Syria.” The vast majority of those troops would play a supporting role for several thousand U.S. Special Forces troops and special mission units — who would be deployed in small groups embedded with Sunni tribes (like the Sons of Iraq, who fought alongside us during the surge) as well as Kurdish pesh merga forces and Iraqi military units.

An air-only counterterrorism effort will fail because the Islamic State is not, as Obama claimed in his address, “a terrorist organization, pure and simple.” The group governs a swath of territory the size of the United Kingdom. It rules cities. It collects taxes. It controls natural resources and is bringing in $3 million a day in oil revenue. It has a conventional army — one that has won battles against other conventional armies. As Obama’s own defense secretary, Chuck Hagel, has put it, “They’re beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology, sophistication of strategic and tactical military prowess, they are tremendously well-funded. This is beyond anything that we’ve seen. So we must prepare for everything.”

Everything, apparently, except ground combat.
Obama seems more concerned with distinguishing what he is doing in Iraq from what the George W. Bush administration did than he is with following a war strategy that will defeat the enemy. Until a few days ago, both Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry publicly denied that we were even at war with the Islamic State — as if calling this something other than war would make it any less of a war.
Yes, we are at war with the Islamic State. And if we are to “destroy” it (as Obama promised), then the president needs to start listening to his military commanders.
If he keeps ignoring their advice, he may be in for a long, hard slog — or something far worse.

Harry Reid: I’m Running For Leader Again

oped: Good luck with that Harry...hate to be the bearer of bad news but Nevada has had enough of are a self centered liar,thief,cheat and fraud..enjoy your mini gavel as does your Ho' Nancy Pelosi ~leaders of the minority this time around! You are a work of art Harry and the artist was a lousy painter! #ScrewYou 

“I’m not doing hypotheticals if we lose, because I don’t think we are [going to lose the Senate],” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said before he affirmed to reporters on Tuesday he would be running for leader of his caucus again.
Reid was peppered with questions on Tuesday about the future of the Democratic Party’s agenda if the Democrats lost the upper chamber. When asked if he felt his party’s majority was “slipping away” he simply responded, “no.”
The Nevada Democrat later explained, “No. If the election were today, we would be just fine. The election’s not today. It’s 48 days away.”
Should the GOP get the majority, could Obamacare be repealed by a reconciliation vote? Reid responded, “I’m not speculating on a Republican majority. Everyone, the press has been very favorable in the last week or so. It’s getting better every day. As you see in the political story yesterday, the Koch brothers are — decided not to spend more money in Colorado, I think Michigan and one other state. We’re doing fine. And I just think any talk about the Republicans taking control of the Senate is really premature and not faced upon fact.”
Read More:

Holder’s Travels Rekindle Rumors He’ll Quit at Year’s End

oped: Ha that does not mean he will not be impeached...he is the worst USAG in the history of the USA...totally a racist! Liar, cheat and fraud! At any rate good riddance!

The speculation that Attorney General Eric Holder will resign by year’s end has picked up steam again, after his itinerary showed he was about to fulfill a major goal since joining the Justice Department, reports The Washington Post.
The rumors about his early departure began in February, when the 63-year-old was taken to MedStar Washington Hospital Center feeling faint and with an elevated heart rate.
Although he was quickly released, Holder told friends it was “spooky” and possibly a warning “sign” he should spend more time with his family.
But a Justice Department official said in April that Holder does not plan to leave before the midterms elections in November, and had no timeline for an exit after that.

But there’s now been renewed conjecture that he will be gone by the end of December, the Post said.
The speculation, however, surfaced again last month after Holder visited Ferguson, Missouri, following the unrest over the killing of an unarmed black teenager, Michael Brown, by white police officer Darren Wilson.

Obama Administration Forcing New Gun Buyers to Declare Race, Ethnicity

oped: A little reverse racism here...shame on the Obama administration and the ATF for profiling! Tiring of the do as I say not as I do mentality of the Obama administration...anyone else agree?

The Obama administration quietly has been forcing new gun buyers to declare their race and ethnicity, a policy change that critics say provides little law enforcement value while creating the risk of privacy intrusions and racial profiling.
With little fanfare, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in 2012 amended its Form 4473 — the transactional record the government requires gun purchasers and sellers to fill out when buying a firearm — to identify buyers as either Hispanic, Latino or not. Then a buyer must check his or her race: Indian, Asian, black, Pacific Islander or white.

The amendment is causing a headache for gun retailers, as each box needs to be checked off or else it’s an ATF violation — severe enough for the government to shut a business down. Many times people skip over the Hispanic/Latino box and only check their race, or vice versa — both of which are federal errors that can be held against the dealer.
Requiring the race and ethnic information of gun buyers is not required by federal law and provides little law enforcement value, legal experts say. And gun industry officials worry about how the information is being used and whether it constitutes an unnecessary intrusion on privacy.

BAD-ASS GENERAL V. POLITICAL CORRECTNESS: “Unless we’re harsh we’re going to lose this nation”

Screen Shot 2014-09-17 at 8.45.10 AM
I suggest we listen to this retired three-star general instead of the mainstream media and this insidious administration before it’s too late. Check it out…
PINEHURST — A retired three-star general railed against the Obama administration, political correctness, the media and rules of engagement during a speech Monday night at Sandhills Community College.
Thomas G. McInerney, who retired from the Air Force in 1994 as a lieutenant general, currently serves as a Fox News military analyst and was invited to speak by the Moore County Republican Party.

“Unless we’re harsh we’re going to lose this nation,” he said. “We’re losing it fast.”
McInerney said U.S. leaders failed to attack during the Benghazi attack. He said leaders were derelict of duty and have since covered up their actions.
Benghazi is bigger than Watergate, McInerney said, but the media is complacent in covering up the Benghazi attacks.
“I can tell you, even from Fox, the information isn’t getting out here,” he said. “Our nation has never seen such duplicity, such dereliction of duty, such lying … and the media is covering it up.”
McInerney said the U.S. response was one of several miscues by leaders that have contributed to growing threats.
McInerney said the economy, shrinking military and more than a decade’s worth of U.S. policies in the Middle East have only increased the dangers facing the nation.
“These are very dangerous times for America,” McInerney said. “We are leading from behind, and that’s why these things are happening. You cannot lead from behind. Someone has to lead.”

The biggest threat, McInerney said, is radical Islam, and the general said the onus for “cleaning house” has to be on the Muslim community.
McInerney said American leaders are afraid of offending Muslims, and said radicals have hidden behind their religion.
Earning applause from the audience, he compared Islam to Nazis, Fascism and Communism.
“Political correctness is killing us,” he said. “It is a global war against radical Islam. Let’s call it what it is … Islam is not a religion of peace.”
Read more: Stripes

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

John Travolta Addresses Gay Rumors, Pending Lawsuit By an Alleged Former Lover

John Travolta Addresses Gay Rumors, Pending Lawsuit By an Alleged Former Lover

oped: Just *SMH*  give it a rest John are you Gay,Bi Sexual or just talking smack to sell your product... John the  Macho Man or not so macho? If ya have a gay fetish or are Gay just admit it...enough of this HollyWood a man pull up your Big Boy pants and say what ya mean and mean what ya say...either ya be gay or not...who cares what y'all consenting adults  do in private...there is no gay is a choice get over yourself already ya can't have your cake and it eat too! But ya sure do your best to burn the candle at both ends ...HollyWood BS as usual...keep it in the closet...thats all we the people want..I don't brag about being hetrosexual and demand parades etc...why do y'all brag about being homosexual LGBTQA whateva and demand we treat you so special for a sexual fetish? Get a clue already you brought this upon yourself  EOS!
ET Online

"This is every celebrity's Achilles heel."
In a new interview with The Daily Beast, John Travolta, 60, opens up about rumors that he's gay -- specifically a lawsuit from a man who alleged he was Travolta's former pilot, and that the two were engaged in a relationship that was more than professional.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, Douglas Gotterba -- who worked for John Travolta's aircraft company Alto in the '80s -- will get the opportunity to argue in a lawsuit that he holds no confidentiality duties to the Grease actor, and is therefore free to write a book he’s allegedly been planning.
"This is every celebrity's Achilles heel. It's just about people wanting money," Travolta says about the lawsuit. "That’s all. It happens on many levels."

As to why these types of rumors seem to target him more than other celebrities, Travolta surprisingly says he actually doesn't "care that much about it."
"Other people may attack it back more than I do, but I let all the media stuff go a long time ago because I can’t control it," he explains. "I think that's why it persists, to some degree."
But he does draw the line at reports targeting his family.
"I found it most offensive with the loss of my son. I felt like that was the lowest I'd ever felt," he shares. "Sex stuff is always going to be interesting to somebody, but you stay away from family. You really should. With that, I always felt like the media -- not all of the media, but parts of it -- went too low there. .... The rest of the stuff I can deal with, but that one really made me question the whole thing."
In 2009, Travolta's son, Jett, died while on a Christmas vacation in the Bahamas due to a seizure. 

Travolta currently has a few upcoming films to promote, including the drama The Forger and the crime drama Criminal Activities, in which he raps! 

Islam will Lie to,abuse,use, then kill infidels....!

James Foley ISIS beheading video.
Just a fact is so written in the Qur'an... people need to wake up to the fact there is no such thing as Moderate Muslims...they all adhere to the Qur'an...and now they are using psychological terror tactics to take the weak off guard and to accept their fate if captured! What do y'all really expect from a perverted 7th Century Theocracy? May I help you? Convert or die a horrible death no ands, if's or butts...Wake the hell up people! Another #Crusade is in order...some things never change...Islam being one!  

Please do your own homework on Islam start here and begin your journey to find the truth:


Journalist Once Held by Islamic State Militants Reveals Why He Believes Beheading Victims Appeared So Calm Before Their Deaths

One of the many elements surrounding the Islamic State’s horrific beheadings has been questions surrounding why — and how — the victims appear so calm just seconds before dying.
A French journalist who was once held by the terror group believes that the captives likely didn’t realize what was about to happen.
Europe 1 radio reporter Didier Francois, 53, who was released earlier this year after 10 months of confinement with the Islamic State, said that militants put captives through a number of mock executions and, as a result, they were worn down and didn’t know what was to come, according to the Daily Mail.
“They did not realize that this time it was the real thing,” he said.

Francois claimed last month that he saw James Foley, an American journalist with whom he was detained, being forced to stand against a wall and pose as though “he had been crucified” before his death.
Observers have also pondered how the three victims — British aid worker David Haines and American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff — remained composed in light of their horrific circumstances, which were recorded by the terror group.
“All three men have appeared to display a quiet acceptance of their fate, leading to speculation that they either did not realize what awaited them or, that after a long and desperate confinement, any release was preferable to remaining in the hands of their tormentors,” the Guardian’s Martin Chulov wrote Sunday.
One diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Chulov that the victims appeared to be used to being tortured and threatened with death.

“It seems to me that each of those poor men had been used to mock executions,” he said. “They had been forced to do this sort of thing before. This is how depraved this group is.”
As for Francois, who was held for 10 months and released in April, he initially remained silent upon returning, keeping quiet for the sake of his former fellow prisoners.
“I never spoke about it publicly because the kidnappers had threatened reprisals on the remaining hostages if we spoke,” Francois said in a recent interview. “We contacted the families of the kidnapped and the American authorities, but publicly we decided to keep quiet.”
(H/T: Daily Mail

Let's get real here folks sorry but graphic is needed to see what these sick perverted followers of Muhammad really do...if one can behead the innocent what is a journalist or humanitarian worker but sound bite fodder? 

... Islamic Terrorist Group ISIS Beheading Young Children, Women And Men

New Bombshell Report Proves Hillary Clinton Hid Important Benghazi Information!


Liberals, Democrats and their defenders in the media have long pointed to the Accountability Review Board’s (ARB) “investigation” of the Benghazi scandal when dismissing conservative and Republican questions about what really happened in Benghazi. From the start the ARB’s investigation has seemed highly flawed, to say the least, but now we have new information that proves the ARB never had a chance to produce a “real” investigation.
Former CBS investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson had an exclusive interview with Deputy Assistant Secretary Raymond Maxwell who told her that before the ARB ever saw any of the Benghazi related evidence, Hillary Clinton’s closest advisors went through and removed the most damning evidence!

Hillary Clinton confidants were part of an operation to “separate” damaging documents before they were turned over to the Accountability Review Board investigating security lapses surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.
According to former Deputy Assistant Secretary Raymond Maxwell, the after-hours session took place over a weekend in a basement operations-type center at State Department headquarters in Washington, D.C. This is the first time Maxwell has publicly come forward with the story.
At the time, Maxwell was a leader in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, which was charged with collecting emails and documents relevant to the Benghazi probe. 

When he arrived, Maxwell says he observed boxes and stacks of documents. He says a State Department office director, whom Maxwell described as close to Clinton’s top advisers, was there. Though the office director technically worked for him, Maxwell says he wasn’t consulted about her weekend assignment.
“She told me, ‘Ray, we are to go through these stacks and pull out anything that might put anybody in the [Near Eastern Affairs] front office or the seventh floor in a bad light,’” says Maxwell. He says “seventh floor” was State Department shorthand for then-Secretary of State Clinton and her principal advisers.
“I asked her, ‘But isn’t that unethical?’ She responded, ‘Ray, those are our orders.’ ” 

So if the ARB did not have complete access to all of the available information – how reliable can their investigation really be? There were already many questions about their investigation that led observers to believe the entire process was greatly flawed, this latest information should be the final nail in the ARB investigation’s coffin.
The ARB investigation  was a complete farce. The conclusions reached by their research, flawed from the beginning, should now be completely discarded. The ARB not only failed  not only to question the most important players in the Benghazi incident they didn’t even have access to the most important information!
If Hillary Clinton hadn’t already proven herself to be unsuitable for the Presidency… this latest incident should end any hope she holds to ever be our nation’s leader.


The Myth of “Moderate” Islam


The brilliant and funny Steven Crowder has a question for you – and it’s one we’ve often asked here at Eagle Rising… where are these so-called “moderate Muslims?
The first thing President Obama had to say about the evil terrorists at ISIS in his recent speech? “ISIS isn’t Islamic!” Sure, the first letter in their name – ISIS – actually stands for the word “Islamic,” but perhaps he’s right and they don’t represent all of Islam?
The problem with that is that we see the values that ISIS propagates played out in Islamic countries all over the world.
Here’s Steven Crowder with a reality check for our distinguished President.

The only “moderate” Muslims in the world are mostly found in western nations… and even here they are outnumbered by extremists. There are hundreds of western Muslims – Muslims from nations like the UK, France, Germany and even the USA – fighting right now for ISIS in Syria and Iraq! 

It’s time we came to grips with the fact that all of our enemies in the War on Terror… happen to be Muslim.
By the way – just more evidence that there is no such thing as “moderate” Islam. Several news agencies are now reporting that ISIS has reached a truce with several “moderate” rebel groups in Syria. I wonder if people will still think they’re “moderate” when they stand idly by as ISIS murders more people in Syria? “Moderate” is code for “not as crazy as ISIS/al Qaeda.”
There is no such thing as "moderate" Islam.

Federal Judge Envisions ‘Rape License’ for ‘Right to Rape’

Liberals like this need to be forbidden from holding any position of power.
Check it out:
Judge Richard Posner, a federal judge with the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, recently become a hero to the pro-”gay marriage” left when, by way of a “legal analysis” free from the troublesome constraints of logic, case precedent, biology, tradition and reality in general, he managed to somehow divine a long-hidden constitutional “right” for two dudes to get “married.” “How can tradition be a reason for anything?” an incredulous Posner demanded last month of attorneys defending marriage protection amendments in both Wisconsin and Indiana. 

It would seem that Posner’s contempt for tradition extends to all things sexual, up to and including the puritanical presupposition that it’s always wrong for a man to rape a woman. This idea, according to Posner in his 2011 book “Economic Analysis of the Law” (8th edition), is evidently an equally archaic tradition that, like the institution of natural marriage, needs a significant overhaul.
Posner’s suggestion? Perhaps it’s time the government begin issuing “rape licenses” (I kid you not) since, and based upon an exclusively utilitarian and morally relative cost-benefit analysis, the “right to rape,” for some men at least, “exceeds the victim’s physical and emotional pain.”

Continue Reading on ...

Monday, September 15, 2014

Muslim killed N.J. teen 'for being an American'

Confessed domestic terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins
[Confessed domestic terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins]

by: Bob Unruh 

A confessed domestic terrorist sits in prison after using information obtained from the Southern Poverty Law Center to target workers at a Christian organization in Washington, a case that drew little attention from the Obama administration.
A “gay”-rights advocate, he attacked Christians identified by SPLC as members of a “hate” organization for their opposition to homosexual behavior.
Now, an alleged Muslim terrorist has described his brutal killing of a New Jersey teen “for being American” as a “just kill,” and a radio talk-show host says he’s not going to let it slide this time.
“It was, in fact, an act of jihad, perpetrated by a fellow American who sympathized more with those who want to annihilate us than with his own country and its people,” said radio host Todd Pettengill of “The Todd Show” on WPLJ in New York City.

Murdered teen, Brendan Tevlin
Murdered teen, Brendan Tevlin
He discussed for eight minutes on air the death of 19-year-old Brendan Tevlin, recounting the declaration by the suspect, Ali Muhammad Brown, 29, that the June 25 attack was a “just kill.”
“Domestic terrorism, no matter what the president says, is already here,” he warns.
CBS News reported prosecutors allege Brown was on a “bloody crusade,” executing four innocent men to punish the U.S. government for its “foreign policies.”
Brown used “the same murder weapon, over the course of approximately two months, and all under the common and single scheme of exacting ‘vengeance’ against the United States government,” prosecutors in King County, Washington, said in court documents, CBS reported.

Both of the underreported cases center on politically correct issues. Corkins worked at a “gay” community center and targeted Christians, while Brown allegedly went after Americans because U.S. forces have fought in Muslim nations.
                            [Ali Muhammad Brown]

Pettengill said Americans should be outraged.
“What I’m suggesting should happen is that this should be talked about and written about, and the American people should know,” he said in a report.
“Why is Eric Holder not visiting the Tevlin family?” he asked.
He said the homicide victim was “killed for being an American.”
“Authorities should have let people know there was a terrorist on the loose,” he said. “Domestic terrorism already is here, and we need to talk about it.”

Listen to Pettengill’s comments:
WND has reported extensively on Corkins’ domestic terror case.
Ken Blackwell, a senior fellow for family empowerment at the Family Research Council, which was targeted by Corkins, said terror is terror, regardless of the motivation, and America needs to focus on national security and put political issues aside.
“We must not allow the important work of national security to become diluted by political concerns or motivations secondary to seeking the truth about those who act in violence toward American interests,” he said earlier, when President Obama was renewing alarm about domestic terror.
Corkins said he chose to attack FRC because the organization was listed as an “anti-gay” hate group by SPLC on its website.
FRC promotes traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs about the family and homosexuality, but SPLC claims the organization’s “real specialty is defaming gays and lesbians.”
Corkins, a former volunteer at an LGBT community center, pleaded guilty to domestic terrorism.
It was on Aug. 15, 2012, when the heavily armed Corkins walked into FRC headquarters and began shooting with the intent of killing “as many people as I could.” He managed to shoot and injure just one person, facilities manager Leo Johnson, who is credited with heroically stopping the attack.

In a speech at the Values Voter Summit 2013, Alveda King, a niece of Martin Luther King Jr., condemned the practice of labeling Christian organizations “hate” groups.
She said Corkins “came to FRC as a gunman, fueled by hate mongering from the Southern Poverty Law Center.”
“The shooter admitted he was directed to FRC’s location by the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website. While SPLC claims to fight against hate, they have been saying hateful things about the Family Research Council and perhaps other groups who are represented here today,” King said.
“Today the shooter is behind bars as the result of being convicted for domestic terrorism. But the SPLC and many others, who couch hate and anger in false claims of civil rights activism, still roam free to confuse the masses with their deceptions,” said King.
Reuters, reporting on Obama’s latest domestic anti-terror effort, said he was setting up a new panel to focus on cases “that involve Americans who may be spurred to violence for political or prejudicial reasons.”

It was a continuation of efforts by the Obama administration to address domestic terror, which began in its first weeks, when the president spotlighted what he saw as a serious “right-wing” threat.
At that time, an unclassified Department of Homeland Security report warned of the possibility of violence by unnamed “right-wing extremists,” including opponents of abortion. The DHS report was followed days later by a report from the Missouri Information Analysis Center that warned law enforcement officials to watch out for individuals with “radical” ideologies based on Christianity.
Constitutional expert Herb Titus of William J. Olson, P.C. told WND that Americans should be wary by attempts by the Obama administration to crack down on “terrorism.”
“What do they mean by domestic terrorism?” he asked. “The problem, whether it’s called international or domestic terrorism, is the word ‘terrorism.’ There’s no legal or historic meaning.”
Titus said the definition will provide a foundation for government attempts at “electronic eavesdropping and all kinds of activities uncontrolled by any Constitution.”
The worry, then, is the “highly discretionary power that’s given to the government [and] the notion of preventing terrorism.”

“In order to prevent a particular activity that you consider to be terrorism, it requires you to go to extraordinary measures to keep track of people’s movements, thoughts and relationships and so forth,” he said at the time.
The reality, Titus said, is that civil government is set up to punish wrongdoers but not “prevent something from happening.”
“That’s beyond the capacity” of civil government, he said, emphasizing that only church and community work can change behavior.
The Reuters report said the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombing would not be considered “domestic terrorism,” because it was thought to have been influenced by forces outside the U.S.
The issue of framing conservatives and Christians as a terror threat is a recurring theme in the Obama administration.
The chief of the U.S. Army at one point ordered that training for the military on “extremists” be halted until the program could be corrected and standardized to eliminate reported Christian-bashing.

In one such training course, the material labeled the pro-family American Family Association as a hate group.
According to Fox News Radio’s Todd Starnes, Army Secretary John McHugh has given military leaders a memo with the orders.
“On several occasions over the past few months, media accounts have highlighted instances of Army instructors supplementing programs of instruction and including information or material that is inaccurate, objectionable and otherwise inconsistent with current Army policy,” the memo said.
A study at the West Point Military Academy asserted people who are part of the ideological right wing of American society constitute a danger to the nation. And the Department of Defense was caught teaching that those who oppose abortion are “low-level terrorists.”
DHS also was caught monitoring a blog posted by a Christian who was forced to flee Brazil because of the conflict between the nation’s pro-homosexual “hate crimes” agenda and his advocacy for traditional marriage.
A West Point study from the U.S. Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center linked opposition to abortion and other “fundamental” positions to terrorism.