What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on Coach Is Right-By Kevin “Coach” Collins-On July 19, 2011:

“When Barack Hussein Obama suggested a suicidal return to pre- 1967 borders as the way to lasting peace for Israel the politically uninitiated assumed America’s Jews would turn on him and withdraw their support for his re-election.  This silliness lasted for a few weeks until prominent elected Jewish Democrats visited Jewish old age homes and other meeting places to reassure them they had not really heard what they heard and saw.

Rahm Emanuel,one of Obama’s favorite “Jewish policemen”, was called in to do damage control and actually said, “That statement [Obama’s 1967 border remark] does not mean a return to 1967 borders.”  The great Groucho Marx line, “Who are you going to believe; me or your lyin’ eyes?” comes to mind.

Gallup certifies what we knew was coming.

Now that several months have passed since Obama told Bibi Netanyahu that Israel’s suicide would be his best course of action, the few American Jews (overwhelmingly registered Democrats) who expressed some measurable disapproval of Obama have wiped the spittle from their eyes and returned to the Democrat plantation.

Gallup’s most recent poll tells us the “great escape” of Jews from Obama’s trance is over. The survey found the level of support versus disapproval of Obama among American Jews is statistically the same today as it was in March.

Just before Obama’s “suggestion”, American Jews supported Obama 61/34.  After some sagging in Jews’ support for his re-election all is forgiven.  Today that same measure is 60/32 in favor of Barack Obama’s re-election despite of the fact that he has expressed more unabashed hostility toward Israel than any other president in American history.  

Religious Jews versus secular Jews on Obama.  

The good news here is at least religious Jews approve of Obama far less than secular Jews do. Just 51% of Jews who attend services weekly approve of Obama with 39% disapprove of him.

The bad news in these numbers is that religious Jews are only about 1/3 of all Jewish voters so the bottom line is still:  being Jewish still means voting Democrat without regard for anything but the furtherance of Marxism.  

The day may come when America’s Jews turn away from the Democrats, but there is nothing on the horizon that is likely to make that happen anytime soon. If telling Israel to drop dead didn’t turn America’s Jews against Obama who knows what, if anything, ever will?

To contact your Congressional Representative use this link:http://www.contactingthecongress.org/ 

To read more about this subject use these links:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/8078313/barack_obama_suggests_israel_reduces_pg2.html?cat=9

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?ID=223475&R=R1

http://www.digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/quotes/grouchomarx.html

www.gallup.com/poll/148373/Solid-Majority-Jewish-Americans-Approve-Obama.aspx “

Source:

http://www.coachisright.com/“he-really-didn’t-mean-it”-america’s-jews-back-obama’s-marxism-over-israel’s-survival/

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Stop Obama’s Attack on Christianity!-Posted on The Patriot Update-By Michael Reagan-On July 16, 2011:

http://patriotupdate.com/articles/stop-obamas-attack-on-christianity

II. Obama's Middle East Plan Weakens Israel!-Posted on NewsMax.com-By Michael Reagan-On July 15, 2011:

http://www.newsmax.com/Reagan/Obama-Christianity-Israel-PalestinianAuthority/2011/07/15/id/403688

III. What Does Obama Gain by Snubbing Israel?-Posted on NewsMax.com-By Lowell Ponte-On May 20, 2011:

http://www.newsmax.com/LowellPonte/israel-hillaryclinton-IranianAmericanPoliticalActionCommittee/2011/05/20/id/397097?s=al&promo_code=C512-1

IV. No Evidence That Israeli Backpackers in New Zealand Were Spies, PM Says!-Posted on CNSNews.com-By Patrick Goodenough-On July 20, 2011:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/no-evidence-israeli-backpackers-new-zeal

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Is Obama The Greatest Strategic Disaster For Israel?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/03/28/is-obama-the-greatest-strategic-disaster-for-israel/

Is Obama Administration "Abandoning" Israel?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/01/14/is-obama-administration-abandoning-israel/

Jewish Donors Outraged by 'Sociopath' Obama!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/jewish-donors-outraged-by-sociopath-obama/

Is Israel the next Arab Facebook Campaign?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/03/30/is-israel-the-next-arab-facebook-campaign/

Godfather of The Islamic Revolution!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/godfather-of-the-islamic-revolution/

Faith of Our Forefathers!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/faith-of-our-forefathers/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Posted on NewsMax.com-By Ronald Kessler-On July 20, 2011:

“Delise Williams, the wife of Fox News contributor Juan Williams, tells Newsmax that “so-called liberals” at NPR treated her — a light-skinned African-American — as if she didn’t exist.

“The NPR people were hypocrites because they are supposed to be the liberals who are accepting of all kinds of people and inclusive, and they were the most exclusive group in my experience of going to events related to work that I have ever seen,” says Delise, a former social worker who is the daughter of a doctor.

Juan Williams’ book “Muzzled: The Assault on Honest Debate” hits bookstores next week. It reveals that for years before NPR fired him, NPR executives harassed him over what he did or did not say on the air.

NewsmaxTV interviewed Juan about the book, including how Fox News President Roger Ailes expanded Juan’s role at Fox and made sure he would not suffer a pay cut because NPR had fired him over what he had said on Fox.

In the meantime, Delise says that she and Juan were the only blacks at NPR parties, a point confirmed by Juan. In general, both say, African-Americans were found only in low-level jobs such as security guards.

Asked for comment, Anna Christopher, NPR’s director of media relations, said, “We aren’t sure which parties Juan and his wife are referring to, but all events we have sponsored in recent memory have included a mix of guests. Diversity of opinions, ideas, sources, voices, and staff is very important to NPR.”

A former Washington Post reporter, Juan is one of Washington’s most respected journalists. He and Delise are invited to top parties at the White House and elsewhere. But because she felt NPR personnel treated her like a second-class citizen, she says she stopped going to NPR social gatherings.

In contrast to NPR, “Even though politically I’m on the other side, the Fox people, included me much more in the interactions and in the gatherings, and I never felt like I was on the outside,” Delise says.

“The Fox gatherings are much diverse,” she says. “They have both African-American and whites. It’s great because when I sometimes go down to Fox and wait for Juan in the green room, they all speak to me as if they know me and are very friendly. I feel very comfortable there. With the NPR people, I did not feel comfortable.”

In fact, she says, “I would never drop into NPR, or if I was going over to meet Juan, I sat in the car and waited for him.”

Fox News has never told Juan what he could or could not say, she says. In contrast, NPR constantly criticized him when he expressed views that diverged from what they thought a black man should think, Delise says.

“My friends would often argue with me before this whole thing came up and say, ‘Oh, how could you watch Fox?’ and I would say, ‘No, you need to listen to the news and other shows, and you will see that it’s not biased,’” she says.

At Fox, “They encourage debate, and I’ve even gotten my friends to watch Fox,” Delise says. “It gives you information about what is happening in both political parties, information on both sides.”

“It’s as if at Fox they feel they certainly have their bias, but they believe so strongly in what they feel that they are open to having the other argument there because they believe their audience is intelligent enough to decide for themselves.”

In my Newsmax TV interview with Juan, he tells for the first time how he had to tell his wife that he had been fired for saying on Bill O’Reilly’s “The Factor” what most Americans, including many Muslims, feel: that when getting on an airplane and seeing passengers dressed in Muslim garb, he feels apprehension.

Juan went on to say on the Fox show that we must distinguish between moderate Muslims and Muslim terrorists and protect the rights of the vast majority of Muslims who are peace-loving.

NPR consists of “pseudo-liberals,” Delise says. “I think liberal means being tolerant. You may have a certain set of beliefs, but you do not reject someone who may have a different set of beliefs or who looks different.”

As noted in my story “The Juan Williams I Know,” Juan is a rarity these days — a fair-minded journalist whose views run the political gamut. Because he is an independent thinker, he is respected by both liberals and conservatives. His book includes blurbs from the likes of Karl Rove and Roger Ailes as well as from David Axelrod, former senior adviser to President Obama.

At Juan’s book party given by Fox News anchors Bret Baier and Shannon Bream and others, Fox News contributors Charles Krauthammer, Stephen Hayes, and Baier all expressed their esteem for Juan despite their often differing views.

But NPR has said it won’t be inviting Williams to discuss his book on any of its shows.

“I guess I thought there was an opportunity for us to move past what happened and that they understood that some things had been done improperly to me and that there was no reason to fire me,” Juan tells me. “It was unjust, and their own investigation by their group of lawyers led to people leaving the organization. I thought this was an opportunity to have some healing, some reconciliation. But they are still suppressing the other side.”

• Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com. He is a New York Times best-selling author of books on the Secret Service, FBI, and CIA. His latest, “The Secrets of the FBI,” is to be released on Aug. 2. View his previous reports and get his dispatches sent to you free via email. Go Here Now.”

Source:

http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/juanwilliams-delise-npr-fox/2011/07/20/id/404258

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Soros CAIR and the Firing of Juan Williams!

What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on Truth on Target-On October 21, 2011:

“At the behest of a group known as apologists for radical Islam and terrorists, the taxpayer-funded National Public Radio fired a well-respected NPR newsman and host over alleged derogatory comments he made regarding Muslims and terrorism on the Fox News Channel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T45_GIuENbM

NPR canned longtime “Talk of the Nation” host Juan Williams after the Council of Islamic Relations (CAIR) complained about remarks Williams made while appearing on The O’Reilly Factor Monday. Here’s how this writer’s friends and colleagues described the shocking story:

NPR has fired news analyst Juan Williams for comments he made on Fox News Channel earlier this week. Williams, who has been a Fox News contributor for 13 years, was on “The O’Reilly Factor” Monday night talking about the comments O’Reilly made last week on “The View” about Muslims and 9/11. On “The Factor”, Williams said, “[W]hen I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

According to a statement obtained by Accuracy in Media, NPR wrote: “Tonight we gave Juan Williams notice that we are terminating his contract as a Senior News Analyst for NPR News. Juan has been a valuable contributor to NPR and public radio for many years and we did not make this decision lightly or without regret. However, his remarks on The O’Reilly Factor this past Monday were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”

“We regret these circumstances and thank Juan Williams for his many years of service to NPR and public radio.”

“In other words NPR’s editorial standards require employees to be politically correct at all times and making any statement that might cast Muslims in a negative light is strictly taboo even if it may be true,” said Don Irvine of Accuracy in Media.

“NPR might have ignored Williams’ remarks except for the fact that CAIR, which spends its time looking for what it perceives as anti-Muslim bias, called on the network to address the situation. Their mission isn’t really to prevent anti-Muslim bias as much as it is to prevent anyone from offering an opinion of Muslims that is less than favorable, regardless of the truth,” said Irvine.

CAIR, America’s largest Islamic civil liberties group, has 32 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

While CAIR continues to portray itself as a moderate organization, its history is filled with red flags that are ignored by the mainstream news media. According to a report from the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security:

“The Council on American-Islamic Relations and its employees have combined, conspired, and agreed with third parties, including, but not limited to, the Islamic Association for Palestine , the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, the Global Relief Foundation, and foreign nationals hostile to the interests of the United States, to provide material support to known terrorist organizations, to advance the Hamas agenda, and to propagate radical Islam.”

“The Council on American-Islamic Relations, and certain of its officers, directors, and employees, have acted in support of, and in furtherance of, this conspiracy,” said the Senate report.

Dr. Daniel Pipes, a foremost expert on radical Islam and terrorism cites several criminal cases involving CAIR officials:

A senior staff member, Randall Royer a/k/a “Ismail” Royer, pled guilty and was sentenced to twenty years in prison for participating in a network of militant jihadists centered in Northern Virginia. He admitted to aiding and abetting three persons who sought training in a terrorist camp in Pakistan for the purpose of waging jihad against American troops in Afghanistan. Royer’s illegal actions occurred while he was employed by CAIR.

Their Director of Public Affairs, Bassem Kafagi was arrested by the US due to his ties with a terror-financing front group. Khafagi pled guilty to charges of visa and bank fraud, and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Khafagi’s illegal actions occurred while he was employed by CAIR.

Ghassan Elashi, a founder of CAIR Texas chapter and founder of the Holy Land Foundation was arrested by the United States and charged with, making false statements on export declarations, dealing in the property of a designated terrorist organization, conspiracy and money laundering. Ghassan Elashi committed his crimes while working at CAIR, and was found guilty.

CAIR Board Member Imam Siraj Wahaj, an un-indicted co-conspirator in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, has called for replacing the American government with an Islamic caliphate, and warned that America will crumble unless it accepts Islam.

Whenever CAIR is accused of wrongdoing, their spokesmen are quick to tell Americans that its leadership have been guests at President Bush’s White House and that they are regularly consulted by US officials on matters involving homeland security.

This year, CAIR and other groups had called for an independent investigation of the shooting. On January 13, 2010, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder to request that the civil rights division investigate both the shooting death of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah, a Detroit Muslim cleric, who was shot during an October 28, 2009, arrest by FBI agents in Dearborn, Michigan. and whether the FBI violated the Constitution by using informants in mosques.

House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Conyers (D-MI) announced the Justice Department review at a news conference in Detroit sponsored by CAIR’s Michigan chapter (CAIR-MI) and attended by a coalition of civil rights groups.

According to a Jim Kouri report for The Examiner, agents working on a counterterrorism task force in Detroit, Michigan reported that during a gun battle they shot and killed the Imam of a radical Islamic group. Agents say the gunfight began after Luqman Ameen Abdullah refused to surrender and face various criminal charges.

Abdullah is the spiritual leader of a group that is alleged to have engaged in violent activity over a period of many years, and known to be armed. According to the report obtained by the National Association of Chiefs of Police, the FBI was in the midst of arresting Abdullah and 10 of his followers on charges that included conspiracy to sell stolen goods and illegal possession and sale of firearms.

According to a preliminary report obtained by NACOP, Abdullah was killed while exchanging gunfire with Federal Bureau of Investigation agents on Wednesday at a warehouse in Dearborn, a suburb of Detroit.”

Source:

http://truthontarget.blogspot.com/2010/10/soros-cair-and-firing-of-juan-williams.html

II. A Soros Connection to Juan Williams Firing?-Posted on NewsMax.com-B Jim Meyers-On October 21, 2010:

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/soros-william-npr-firing/2010/10/21/id/374461?s=al&promo_code=B02A-1

III. The PC Blanket Over Any Debate Relating to Islam-Posted on Real Clear Politics-By Rich Lowry-On October 22, 2010:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/10/22/the_pc_blanket_over_any_debate_relating_to_islam_107688.html

IV. What Happened to Free Speech? ‘Juan Williams firing from NPR sparks censorship debate’-Posted on FoxNews.com-On October 22, 2010:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4382876/what-happened-to-free-speech

V. NPR's Rush to Judgment: ‘Muslim-American defends Juan Williams’-Posted on FoxNews.com-On October 23, 2010:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4384229/nprs-rush-to-judgment/?playlist_id=86858

VI. Juan Williams Responds to His Firing From NPR-Posted on Human Events-By FoxNews.com-On October, 21, 2010:

http://townhall.com/video/juan-williams-responds-to-his-firing-from-npr

VII. NPR has been wanting to fire Juan Williams for some time-Posted on The Washington Examiner-ByJ.P. Freire,
Associate Commentary Editor-On October 21, 2010:


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/npr-has-been-wanting-to-fire-juan-williams-for-some-time-105440113.html

VIII. Firing offense: NPR axes Juan Williams for opinions on Muslims & post-9/11 travel-Posted by Michelle Malkin-On October 20, 2010:

http://michellemalkin.com/2010/10/20/firing-offense-npr-axes-juan-williams-for-opinions-on-muslims-post-911-travel/?utm_source=co2hog

Note:  The following articles and/or blog posts and reports reveal how George Soros, along with other liberal backers use their money to fund and/or manipulate media outlets, to include Hollywood because they see that as a powerful way to influence the American public.

It’s a strategy that Soros has been deploying extensively in media both in the United States and abroad. Since 2003, Soros has spent more than $48 million funding media properties, including the infrastructure of news - journalism schools, investigative journalism and even industry organizations-You Decide:

Nearly 30 Soros-funded Media Operations Part of 'War on Fox'!- Posted on Business & Media Institute-By Dan Gainor-On June 1, 2011:

http://www.mrc.org/bmi/commentary/2011/Nearly__Sorosfunded_Media_Operations_Part_of_War_on_Fox_.html

Soros-Funded Lefty Media Reach More Than 300 Million Every Month!-Posted on Business & Media Institute-By Dan Gainor-On May 25, 2011:

http://www.mrc.org/bmi/commentary/2011/Soros_Lefty_Media_Reach_More_Than__Million_Every_Month.html

Soros Spends Over $48 Million Funding Media Organizations!-Posted on Business & Media Institute-By Dan Gainor-On May 18, 2011:

http://www.mrc.org/bmi/commentary/2011/Soros_Spends_Over__Million_Funding_Media_Organizations_.html

Over 30 Major News Organizations Linked to George Soros!-Posted on Business & Media Institute-By Dan Gainor-On May 11, 2011:

http://www.mrc.org/bmi/commentary/2011/Over__Major_News_Organizations_Linked_to_George_Soros.html

Citizen Soros Manipulating the Media!-Posted on Capital Research Center-By Matthew Vadum-On January 2011:

http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1293869054.pdf

George Soros, Movie Mogul: ‘Social Justice’ Cinema and the Sundance Institute!-Posted on Capital Research Center-By Rondi Adamson-On March 20o8:

http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1204311857.pdf

The Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power!-Posted on AIM-By Cliff Kincaid-On October 27, 2004:

http://www.aim.org/special-report/the-hidden-soros-agenda-drugs-money-the-media-and-political-power/

Note: The following eye opening article and/or blog post reveals a George Soros funded unincorporated association by the name of “Peace and Security Funders Group (PSFG)”, which was established in 1999 and consists of more than 50 private and public foundations that give a portion of their $27 billion in combined assets to leftist organizations that undermine the war on terror in several interrelated ways, to include one that strives to eradicate America's national borders and institute a system of mass, unregulated migration into and out of the United States -- thereby rendering all distinctions between legal and illegal immigrants anachronistic, and making it much easier for aspiring terrorists to enter our country-You Decide: 

Funding the War Against the War on Terror!-Posted on FrontPageMagazine.com-By: John Perazzo –On October 6, 2006:

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=2309

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

President and DOJ have contributed to the racial mess in our country!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/president-and-doj-have-contributed-to-the-racial-mess-in-our-country/

'Game Change':  New Book Reveals 2008 Campaigns' Messy Moments-To Include Racism!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/01/11/game-change-new-book-reveals-2008-campaigns-messy-moments-to-include-racism/

Who owns our supposedly fair and balanced airwaves and news outlets?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/who-owns-our-supposedly-fair-and-balanced-airwaves-and-news-outlets/

What are CAIRs obstructionist goals?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/03/06/6951/

What Happened to Free Speech?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/what-happened-to-free-speech/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

TEA PARTY THEME SONG

Please enjoy the tune and be inspired by the pictures from the event that launched the conservative movement.

A rewrite of the words will make the song the battle tune for today’s Tea Party.

Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin would be honored to stand in the shadow of Alice Moore.  Today’s’ preachers should try to follow the footsteps of preachers Hill, Graley, Quigley, and Horan.  Those Tea Party patriots put it all on the line for God, country, and (most of all) their children. 

May God grant that this video will be the turning point leading to the redemption of America.

In God’s perfect timing the video was posted on July 11, 2011.

Evil had 911. May Grace have 711.

Most importantly, let's pray that God will use the video to open hearts and minds to the ministry of the Holy Spirit.

Please pass it on.

Here are tentative partial lyrics for the Tea Party Theme Song to lead us into 2012 and beyond.

Tea Party patriots are looking for reform--what are they doing in this country stirring up a storm?

Don’t they know they’re rousing people ‘round the USA, telling folks right from left and God fearing ways?

…

Well, the first to stand were at Boston in seventeen seventy-three...

…

Next to stand were West Virginians in nineteen seventy-four…

…

One nasty election in twenty-oh-eight liberals were everywhere…

What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On July 21, 2011:

“The Department of Homeland Security apparently has blocked employee access to a WND report of a scandal in the agency’s new Cyber Security Command.

The story by WND, the nation’s largest independent Internet news site, described how a former Clinton administration official who “lost” thousands of archived emails that were under subpoena—and more recently left the Department of Homeland Security under a cloud related to her qualifications—was hired for the Obama administration’s new elite team of computer technicians.

The report described how the administration in May quietly hired Laura Callahan for a sensitive post at the U.S. Cyber Command, a newly created agency set up to harden military networks as part of an effort to prevent a “cyberspace version of Pearl Harbor.”

The move raises doubts about the administration’s vetting process for sensitive security positions. In 2004, Callahan was forced to resign from Homeland Security after a congressional investigation revealed she committed résumé fraud and lied about her computer credentials.

Investigators found that Callahan paid a diploma mill thousands of dollars for her bachelors, masters and doctorate degrees in computer science. She back-dated the degrees, all obtained between 2000 and 2001, to appear as if she earned them in 1993, 1995 and 2000, respectively. She landed the job of deputy DHS chief information officer in 2003.

Previously, as a White House computer supervisor, Callahan threatened computer workers to keep quiet about an embarrassing server glitch that led to the loss of thousands of archived emails covered by federal subpoenas pertaining to multiple Clinton scandals.

A government computer specialist was alarmed, saying, “She’s a security risk. I don’t know how she got clearance.”

A CyberCom spokesman told WND Callahan could not be interviewed and did not want her “name in public.” Asked for Callahan’s title, he claimed such information was “personal.”

CyberCom, which began operations last year, is part of the U.S. Strategic Command located in Fort Meade, Md.

But a worker at the federal Department of Homeland Security, who contacted WND through a personal email, reported that on the very day the report appeared, the WND.com site was blocked from computers in the department.

“I am very certain that I can’t access it, and [blocking] has never happened before,” the worker told WND. “I generally take a look at WND every morning to begin the day.

“The guy I work with has been blocked as well,” the worker said.

Another DHS employee hours later contacted WND to provide confirmation.

“Just thought you might like to know that DHS has blocked WND. Can no longer access from work computer. CNN, Fox and CBN no problems,” he wrote.

Staff at the Department of Homeland Security media office, contacted by telephone for a comment, told WND to make the request by email, which was done. There was no response.

WND’s report described how the Defense Department revealed it recently suffered a massive cyberattack. It was in March when hackers working for a foreign government broke into a Pentagon contractor’s computer system and stole 24,000 files. Previous cyberattacks have been blamed on China or Russia.

A new Pentagon study stressed the need to fortify network firewalls against enemy hackers. Callahan will be part of that effort at CyberCom, which will lead day-to-day defense and protection of all Defense Department networks.

“She’s a dubious hire, to put it charitably,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a government watchdog in Washington that sued the Clinton White House to retrieve missing emails.

As WND was first to report, several Northrop Grumman contractors working on the White House computer system testified in early 2000 that Callahan (née Laura Crabtree) threatened to jail them if they talked about the “Project X” email scandal even to their spouses.

One technician, Robert Haas, said she warned him “there will be a jail cell with your name on it” if he breathed a word about the glitch to anybody outside their office.

Chip Sparks, a White House programmer, recounted a run-in he had with Callahan in 1997. After questioning a technical decision she made, he said she wrote him a threatening note.

“Please be advised I will not tolerate any further derogatory comments from you about my knowledge, qualifications and/or professional competence,” Callahan blasted Sparks in a March 3, 1997, email, a copy of which was obtained by WND.

WND has reported numerous times its site has been blocked, including some instances that were inadvertent.

The McAfee Internet security corporation promised a fix after it placed WND in the categories of “Blogs/Wiki” and “Controversial Opinion” in a database of websites, triggering a number of systems to deny users access.

The denial messages specifically mentioned the “blogs/wiki” and “controversial opinion” classifications McAfee had applied to WND in its “sites” office that reviews and categorizes Web operations for customers.

The description later was restored to that of a general news and opinion website.

The warning had said, “Your request to URL ‘http://www.wnd.com/’ has been blocked by the Webwasher URL Filter Database. The URL is listed under categories (Blogs/Wiki, Controversial Opinions), which are not allowed by your administrator at this time.”

A teacher who found WND.com blocked write to WND.

“I am an avid reader of your site,” he said. “I frequent it at least 2-3 times a day and read many of your commentaries on the site. I love Molotov Mitchell! He is my favorite.”

He said he then checked Moveon.org and found it was not blocked.

“Another fine example of shutting down any information resource that doesn’t agree with our current political administration,” he said.

Among the institutions in which access to WND was affected were Raytheon and Veterans Affairs hospitals.

A “Web Guard” option offered by T-Mobile on its cellular telephone service disconnected access for some readers to WND.com by mistakenly classifying it as “adult” material.

Another case arose in Minnesota when a reader told of getting a response of “inappropriate” when he tried to access WND through the Wi-Fi services at a Dunn Bros. coffee shop.

The coffee shop was using software from DansGuardian.org. Other questions were raised by WND readers over the work of one of the larger filtering companies, ContentWatch.com, which has a product called Net Nanny that has been cited by readers several times for blocking WND for having “hate and violence.”

That company has told WND it now “has made the necessary changes.”

Early in 2007, WND finally resolved a blocking situation involving the military provider that makes Internet services available to U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine bases worldwide.

The U.S. Navy launched an investigation into blocking of WND at WND’s request after the news site received a flood of emails from readers.

An undefined “security” issue between the Web-hosting location WND uses and the Navy computer later was resolved. A block by American Airlines also was lifted, as were blocks by several other filtering companies.”

Continue Reading:

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=324081

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Look who Obama's hired for cybersecurity team!

What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on WND.com-On July 18, 2011:

“An elite team of computer technicians assembled by the Obama administration to protect Pentagon networks from cyberattack shockingly includes a former Clinton official who “lost” thousands of archived emails under subpoena and who more recently left the Department of Homeland Security under an ethical cloud related to her qualifications, WND has learned.

The administration in May quietly hired Laura Callahan for a sensitive post at the U.S. Cyber Command, a newly created agency set up to harden military networks as part of an effort to prevent a “cyberspace version of Pearl Harbor.”

The move raises doubts about the administration’s vetting process for sensitive security positions. In 2004, Callahan was forced to resign from Homeland Security after a congressional investigation revealed she committed résumé fraud and lied about her computer credentials.

Investigators found that Callahan paid a diploma mill thousands of dollars for her bachelors, masters and doctorate degrees in computer science. She back-dated the degrees, all obtained between 2000 and 2001, to appear as if she earned them in 1993, 1995 and 2000, respectively. She landed the job of deputy DHS chief information officer in 2003.

Previously, as a White House computer supervisor, Callahan threatened computer workers to keep quiet about an embarrassing server glitch that led to the loss of thousands of archived emails covered by federal subpoenas pertaining to multiple Clinton scandals.

Former co-workers say they’re shocked that Callahan passed a security background check and landed another sensitive post inside the federal government.

“She’s a security risk,” said a government computer specialist. “I don’t know how she got clearance.”

“We’re fuming about it,” said another federal employee. “Knowing her, I don’t see how she could ever be 100-percent honest.”

A CyberCom spokesman said Callahan could not be interviewed and did not want her “name in public.” Asked for Callahan’s title, he claimed such information was “personal.”

CyberCom, which began operations last year, is part of the U.S. Strategic Command located in Fort Meade, Md.

The Defense Department last week revealed it recently suffered a massive cyberattack, even as it announced a new strategy to actively combat online threats to national security.

In March, hackers working for a foreign government broke into a Pentagon contractor’s computer system and stole 24,000 files. Previous cyberattacks have been blamed on China or Russia.

A new Pentagon study stresses the need to fortify network firewalls against enemy hackers. Callahan will be part of that effort at CyberCom, which will lead day-to-day defense and protection of all Defense Department networks.

“She’s a dubious hire, to put it charitably,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a government watchdog in Washington that sued the Clinton White House to retrieve missing emails.

As WND first reported, several Northrop Grumman contractors working on the White House computer system testified in early 2000 that Callahan (née Laura Crabtree) threatened to jail them if they talked about the “Project X” email scandal even to their spouses.

One technician, Robert Haas, said she warned him “there will be a jail cell with your name on it” if he breathed a word about the glitch to anybody outside their office.

Chip Sparks, a White House programmer, recounted a run-in he had with Callahan in 1997. After questioning a technical decision she made, he said she wrote him a threatening note.

“Please be advised I will not tolerate any further derogatory comments from you about my knowledge, qualifications and/or professional competence,” Callahan blasted Sparks in a March 3, 1997, e-mail, a copy of which was obtained by WND.

{…}

Callahan had to do some quick backpedaling after her House testimony. The day after she testified, she sent an affidavit to the House Government Reform Committee, stating: “I wish to clarify that I did discuss e-mail issues with the Department of Justice attorneys in connection with currently pending civil litigation,” referring to a lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch. She had denied such contacts at the hearing.

Callahan left the White House under an ethical cloud, only to land a top position elsewhere in the Clinton administration. Labor Secretary Alexis Herman made her deputy chief information officer at her agency, and director of its information technology center.

While there, she oversaw the development of the Privacy Assessment Model, which agencies were to use to better protect sensitive personal data managed by the government.

“It’s hard for me, having worked with this individual, to believe that she was able to come in there, do what she did, leave the things in the condition that she left them in and then fly right into an SES (senior executive service) position at the Labor Department,” Sparks said.

“I mean, there’s political favors there,” he added. “It’s writ large.”

House Government Reform Committee investigators at the time said Labor knew Callahan got her degree from a diploma mill, yet still employed her. They found that the U.S. Office of Personnel Management tipped Labor off to her questionable credentials.

“We have requested the Homeland Security IG to look at why flags that had been raised about her educational qualifications in her personnel file at the Labor Department were not taken further,” said House Government Reform Committee spokesman Dave Marin at the time.

He told WND that the government certainly cannot risk hiring someone with “fraudulent credentials” to head a senior position in an area as “sensitive as homeland security” computer operations and communications.

Calls to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management seeking comment about Callahan’s latest hiring were not returned.”

Source:

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=323373

II. Does Google spy on you for NSA? Judge says, 'None of your business'!-Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On July 15, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=322113

III. Net Neutrality is the Future of Censorship!-Posted on Big Government-By Seton Motley-On July 11, 2011:

http://biggovernment.com/smotley/2011/07/11/forget-the-fairness-doctrine-net-neutrality-is-the-future-of-censorship-3/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BigGovernment+%28Big+Government%29&utm_content=Twitter

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Could Steps That Team Obama Has Taken Be Emboldening Terrorists?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/could-steps-that-team-obama-has-taken-be-emboldening-terrorists/

The FCC Should Not Interfere With The Internet!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/the-fcc-should-not-interfere-with-the-internet/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Now that the government has painted itself into a corner and cannot find a way out, the idea is being spread that the Tea Party is too rigid.  The response to that idiotic notion is that the Tea Party is firm in its intent to reestablish constitutional law.  The idea is being spread that the Tea Party represents the religious right.  The response to that totally false notion is, again, that the Tea Party adheres to the Constitution.

Giving ourselves credit for being of intelligent design—evolved from ape, most likely, but above ape in consciousness—blessed with reason, logic, ethics, and morals—of a higher order and of “Higher Law”—when “ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.  But be ye not like them for your Father knoweth what things you have need of, before ye ask him (Mt. 6:7,8). 

Who is our “Father?” Jesus wasn’t a Christian.  Jesus wasn’t religious; he wasn’t doctrinaire.  Our “Father” is everyone’s God.  Why should civil law differ from God’s law? God’s law is nothing more nor less than the collective will of those humans who have come before us, and whose archetype we are.  Jungian psychology says we inherit patterns of thought and this pattern is universally present. 

The Greek priest and leading thinker of his day, Plutarch (40-120 A.D.), held that an idea, having no form by itself, but giving figure and form to shapeless matter, becomes reality. This defines human thinking. No other life form on the planet is like us.  We are learning that our reality is nothing at all like we’ve been misdirected to believe.  We are learning that nothing in the universe is supernatural. All has a natural explanation.  You cannot logically separate religion, the law, and science.  The orthodoxy categorizes for the sake of expedience.  For instance, the Constitution clearly implies we are all equal. For expedience’s sake, black skin meant that humans were the same as mules and cows. They had no rights.  And now the government entitled have rights that exceed those of producers.  This is the crux of the problem.

This, the greatest fraud of all times, is bankrupting America morally, spiritually, and fiscally.  And yet nary a thought in Washington, D.C. of a real change.  All the talk is about how to keep the system in place, the work of Washington. D.C.—and how to divide and conquer  those who are stupid enough to walk into the trap.

 We are of intelligent design and of divine origin.  Read the Scriptures in this sense and they harmonize with natural law. Look within for who you are and harmonize with nature’s God, the Higher Law, and the Constitution.

Jesus said, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you” (Mt. 6:33). The kingdom of God is internal. “Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof” (Mt. 6:34). “Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye” (Mt. 7:5).

MR. JOHN BOEHNER IS A U.S.PATRIOT , THIS MONTH OF JULY,

2011 !!

What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on CNSNews.com-By Patrick Goodenough-On July 22, 2011:

“(CNSNews.com) – A new report assessing the security challenges posed by North Korea draws fresh attention to two-way collaboration between the Stalinist state and Iran on developing long-range missiles designed to carry a nuclear payload.

The report by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think tank, due for release in Washington on Monday, evaluates North Korea’s non-conventional and missile programs as well as its conventional forces, internal dynamics including those relating to the leadership succession, and various scenarios for eventual Korean unification.

The report indicates that Iranian missile development is steaming ahead, with the Islamic republic developing ever more sophisticated weapons.

While North Korea is taking advantage of Iranian technology, Iran is benefiting from Pyongyang’s advances in uranium-enrichment equipment, it says. The West suspects Iran is working on a nuclear weapons capability, under the cover of a nuclear energy program that Tehran insists is for solely peaceful purposes.

According to Mark Fitzpatrick, director of the IISS’ non-proliferation and disarmament program, North Korea helped Libya and Syria to take forward nuclear weapons programs and may do the same for Iran and Burma.

(Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2003 negotiated a deal with the U.S. and Britain renouncing his weapons of mass destruction programs and handed over nuclear bombmaking technology including thousands of centrifuges; Syria’s alleged facilities were destroyed in an Israeli bombing in 2007, and the U.N. nuclear watchdog recently referred the Syrian activities to the U.N. Security Council.)

The IISS report says estimates of North Korea’s plutonium stockpile range from 4-12 bombs’ worth

“It cannot be confidently said that North Korea has developed reliable, deliverable nuclear weapons,” it argues. “Nevertheless, it will eventually be able to develop a warhead capable of fitting on a ballistic missile with satisfactory re-entry technology, especially if it conducts further nuclear tests to refine its weapon design.”

The report says that despite having limited indigenous missile production capabilities, North Korea “continues to show considerable interest in developing a satellite-launch capability, as well as longer-range ballistic missiles, possibly including an ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile]. North Korea has the wherewithal to develop these systems if it so decides.”

‘Iran, North Korea already have ICBM technology’
 
With Iran’s own missile development progressing, it would be an obvious source of help for North Korea in this area.

After Iran early this month held a 10-day military exercise called Great Prophet 6, during which it fired a number of missiles with claimed ranges that could threaten Israel as well as U.S. military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, a former head of Israel’s missile defense agency warned that Iran had overtaken North Korea in the development of sophisticated long-range missiles.

“The Iranians’ missile program is running ahead, and the moment they have a nuclear weapon, they will have the means to launch it,” the Jerusalem Post quoted Uzi Rubin as saying on July 14.

Another recent warning about the threat posed by both rogue states came from a top Russian missile technology expert.

In an interview with the Russian daily Kommersant on July 6 Yuri Solomonov, until recently the head of Russia’s leading strategic ballistic missile facility, disputed the official defense ministry position about North Korea and Iran not posing a potential missile threat.

Both countries already possessed the technology to develop functioning ICBMs, he was quoted as telling the paper.

With missile development high on the military agendas of North Korea and Iran, and both regimes subjected to arms-related sanctions, reports of collaboration between them come as little surprise. A missile partnership appears in fact to have been in place since at least the early 1990s.

When North Korea in May 1993 tested its medium-range Nodong missile, Iranian experts attended the launch, according to media reports at the time. Iran subsequently developed the Shahab-3, testing it in 1998 with North Koreans officials this time reportedly observing.

Iran insisted that the Shahab-3 was “entirely” Iranian-made, but experts said it was clearly modeled on the Nodong. (Similarly, Iran’s earlier Shahab-2 was essentially the same as an earlier North Korean Scud missile, the short-range Hwasong-6).

In July 2006, after North Korea fired a long-range Taepodong-2 as well as several Nodongs and Hwasongs, Bush administration officials told U.S. lawmakers that Iranian officials had witnessed the tests. (The Taepodong-2 aborted 40 seconds after launch.)

Hardware observed in a televised military parade in North Korea last October showed that Iranian missile improvements were now starting to show up on North Korean weapons, further reinforcing suspicions about ongoing joint development.

A dangerous time:

The IISS report says the dynastic succession underway in North Korea and uncertainties arising from the process make this a risky time.

North Korea could become “an even more dangerous nation, more inclined to engage in further military provocations, to cling to its weapons of mass destruction and to offer them for sale to any would-be buyer,” it says.

“The Kim family will have to rely heavily on physical power exercised by the military and the state-security apparatus in order to ensure a successful succession. In pursuit of the goal of becoming a ‘strong and prosperous great nation’ by 2012, the centennial of the founding father’s birth, such military capabilities are all that the regime can summon.”

The report offers several scenarios for unification of the Korean peninsula
 
The first two “positive” scenarios are viewed as unlikely – a “soft landing,” with the regime gradually ending aggressive behavior and seeking reconciliation and possibly eventual peaceful integration with the South; or a “German-style reunification by absorption and a voluntary or peaceful collapse of the Kim regime.”

A third scenario envisages “unification through North Korean collapse the hard way,” triggered by an internal challenge or South Korean military retaliation to further provocation from the North.

A fourth, similar, scenario is “reunification through war.”

Finally, the IISS report says a potential outcome that should not be ruled out would see the Pyongyang regime survive, propped up by Beijing and becoming a de facto satellite or client state of China.

“China seems to have made a strategic decision that a unified Korea under Seoul leadership and allied to the U.S. goes fundamentally against its interests,” it says.”

Source:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/report-highlights-iran-north-korea-missi

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Iran Developing Bombs that Can Hit US East!

What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on Israel National News-By Fern Sidman, A7 New York-On July 22, 2011:

“Elliott Chodoff, an American born political and military analyst and an IDF reserve major, spoke at the “Middle East Briefing” session of the sixth CUFI national summit in Washington this week.

Citing Israeli military intelligence, Chodoff was quite forthright in his analysis of a possible attack by Iran. “Israel cannot survive a nuclear attack. You cannot trust a nuclear deterrent. Israel cannot wipe out Iran’s nuclear arsenal but the US can.”  Chodoff added that the Iranian regime has been developing bombs that have the capability of hitting US cities on the East coast.

He delivered an account of the history of radical Islamism, saying, “The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928 and its leader imbibed the Nazi ideology that focused on the extermination of the Jews.” Noting that Iranian cleric Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran who came to power during the Islamic revolution of 1979 was active in disseminating the Muslim Brotherhood ideology to school children, he said that it was Khomeini who was the first to label Americas as “the great Satan” and referred to Christians as the enemies while declaring that America is run by Jews.

American perception of Khomeini was skewed according to Mr. Chodoff, who revealed that at the time, the US representative at the United Nations Andrew Young said that Khomeini was “a great humanitarian” and dismissed his flagrant hostility. He added that Hizbullah (the party of G-d) that was founded in 1980 is currently “the most dangerous organization on earth” and is responsible for developing the terrorist strategy of suicide bombings with most of them directed at American targets. Chodoff said that it was weakness on the part of the US as manifested by their decision to leave Lebanon in the throes of terrorism that emboldened the enemy. “When Hizbullah saw that Americans were taking leave of Lebanon they knew they could push us out,” he said.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu addressed the session via satellite from Jerusalem.  Greeted with over 10 minutes of applause and enthusiastic cheers, Mr. Netanyahu extended his appreciation to those Christian supporters of Israel who have the “courage to stand up and speak the truth.”

Drawing the largest applause was Netanyahu’s reference to the biblical connection of the Jewish people to their ancestral homeland. “The Jewish people are not occupiers in the land of Israel. We have returned to the land of our forebears; of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David and Solomon and we are here to stay.” Speaking of Israel as America’s only reliable ally in the Middle East, Netanyahu underscored Israel’s initiatives at the peace table. “This conflict is not about Israel refusing to accept a Palestinian state. Israel wants peace with the Palestinians, but we can’t build a peace based on lies.”

Colonel Ben Tzion Gruber of the Israel Defense Forces took the audience through a video and slide presentation that described how the IDF takes great pains to avoid civilian casualties during military strikes and during wartime. He said that the nomenclature of the code of ethics can be divided into three categories. “Necessity,” he said, means that force is only employed for accomplishing the mission, and “Distinction” means that every measure is taken so that innocents will not be harmed, and “Proportionality” means that collateral damage is only used in proportion to the threat.

Also addressing the session was Malcolm Hoenlein, the Executive Vice Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations who said, “We have begun a three week period of mourning for the Jewish people as we remember the destruction of our Holy Temple and other calamities that befell us throughout history.” He asked his biblically well-versed audience: “If I would ask you to provide the names of those spies who returned from the land of Israel with a negative report, would you remember their names? The answer is no because those who stand with Israel are remembered for posterity and those who decry Israel are forgotten.”

On the international campaign to abrogate the biblical and religious heritage of the Jewish people in the land of Israel, Mr. Hoenlein said, “Those who would dismiss our past also risk our future. For example, there are those who question Judaism’s undeniable ties with Rachel’s Tomb and thus would like to transform it into a mosque. There are those who say that our Temples never existed. Our bible tells us that Abraham purchased the city of Hevron, in broad daylight, in full view of all, because he knew that in the future its ownership would be challenged. Today there are regular archeological discoveries which serve as concrete proof of the fact that when you open your bibles, the land of Israel comes to life. We must ask ourselves: why did G-d give this generation the privilege of uncovering this Jewish connection. What does it mean for us in the future?”

Mr. Hoenlein concluded by telling the members of CUFI that when they stand for Israel, they stand for America and will be thanked by their grandchildren for doing so.”

Source:

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/145975#replies

II. Hezbollah Gaining Strength in Latin America!-Posted on ShutKing.BlogPost.com-On July 17, 2011:

http://shutking.blogspot.com/2011/07/hezbollah-gaining-strength-in-latin.html

III. Video: Hezbollah Foothold Growing on Mexican Border!-Posted on ExposeObama.com-On July 20, 2011:

http://www.exposeobama.com/2011/07/20/video-hezbollah-foothold-growing-on-mexican-border/?utm_source=Expose+Obama&utm_campaign=04ce6a4c42-EO_07_20_20117_20_2011&utm_medium=email

IV. Video: Hezbollah On the Border!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0VuDfZoMYA

V. Iran’s Tentacles Spread from Syria to Sudan!-Posted on Israel National News-By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu-On July 5, 2011:

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/145439#replies

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

The President Must Stop Voting "Present" on Iran!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/the-president-must-stop-voting-“present”-on-iran/

Nuclear Summit Part of Obama Administration’s ‘Fantasy Foreign Policy’!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/04/14/nuclear-summit-part-of-obama-administration’s-‘fantasy-foreign-policy’/

Is Israel the next Arab Facebook Campaign?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/03/30/is-israel-the-next-arab-facebook-campaign/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

The Socialists/Communists never stop trying to take us all to the Sheering Shed.  They want to lower the morals of this nation so that they can gain control and turn us into a nation of sheep.  They work right along with the morally challenged on Wall Street and Washington, in direct contradiction to their socialist ideas, so that they can turn this country into a nation of sheep who will go along to get along.  They bailed out the big banks, big institutions, and foreign governments but will not bail out the American Homeowner who has lost at least half of their hard earned wealth.  Their motto is to heck with the Public.  If the Public gets demoralized enough they have a better chance of fully implementing socialism.  What those guys on Wall Street don't understand as yet is that they were being used or should I say they were using each other.  If the socialists get  full control of the government and the John Q. Public throws in the towel it will be doomsday for Wall Street and American Corporations.  The Federal Reserve in cooperation with the present and past Congresses have continuously bailed out the Big Money Guys and the Big Corporations.  This is an historical fact.  So why can't they bail our impoverished home owners?  The Socialists, who claim to be the friend of the working class are lieing through their teeth.  Once they get control they will impoverish all, i.e., the working stiffs and the working union members not to mention those in the upper economic brackets.  We are all being taken for a ride to doomsday.  The tricksters are trying once again to pull the wool over the eyes of the public.  Every single bailout in the past has been accomplished by scaring the heck out of everyone but the bottom line is that the taxpayer was fleeced.  The taxpayers work hard to support their own fleecing to the benefit of the Big Money Boys and the Socialists are cheering the process right along knowing or rather believing that they will end up in the cat bird seat once the fleecing has attained its end, i.e., the destruction of America, the destruction of the Capitalist System which has given this nation a terrific standard of living and the destruction of the Public's will to pick themselves up, dust themselves off and keep on trucking.  Their hope and their goal is to achieve the surrender of the Public to Socialism and they could care less with whom they have to cooperate with in order to achieve that goal.  Capitalism for its part has allowed dishonest, morally challenged and corrupt people to steer itself to its ultimate demise.  And they don't care if they and the entire nation is headed down the tubes as long as they can get very, very wealthy along the way.  The Public Be Damned!  Ultimately, this disgusting, corrupt and anti-God behavior can only be solved and resolved by the Public.  When the Public awakens from their long sleep of 100 years and demands that their best interests be attended to since they are the hard working taxpayers who make the real sacrifices that make this nation prosperous, then will most of our debt problems, poverty problems, moral problems and a litany of injustices imposed and burdened on the backs of the Public be resolved.   When will this happen?  It will happen when the Public kneels before our Merciful and Generous Creator and asks for forgiveness and enlightenment in the same order as Soloman did when he prayed for understanding and wisdom.  The more we ignore God, our glorious and wonderful Creator, the more we will be sheered by  Wall Street, the Federal Government and the Federal Reserve.  If we were smart we would adore, honor and praise our God who created us and loves us to no end.  He is always waiting to hear from us if we would be smart and wise enough to knock on His Door in a spirit of humility and obedience. 

WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

WE R OVERDUE TO RATING DESERVING PROVIDERS OF GOODS AND SERVICES FOR TAX CREDITS.  WE SHUD HV A RATING SYSTEM BASED ON THE CONTRIBUTION TO THE GENERAL WELFARE AND LIFE STYLE OF OUR CITIZENRY.  MANUFACTURING CORPORATIONS AND BUSINESS USUALLY PROVIDE A VARIETY OF GOODS THAT ENHANCE OUR LIVING STANDARDS AND SHOULD RECIEVE ANY TAX BREAKS WHICH WILL INCREASE THEIR PRODUCTIVE EFFORTS IN PROVIDING AND  THEIR ABILITY TO CONTINUE TO PRODUCE AND DEVELOPE MORE THINGS WHICH ADD TO OUR EVERY DAY LIVING NEEDS.  OIL COMPANY'S SHOULD RECIEVE ANY TAX BREAKS AND CREDITS WHICH WILL BE AN ADDED INCENTIVE FOR THEM TO EXPLORE AND DEVELOPE OUR NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO EXPLORE BETTER WAYS TO IMPROVE THEIR PRODUCT BECAUSE THEY DEFINITLY AFFECT OUR EVERYDAY LIVING.  SERVICE PROVIDERS SHOULD BE RATED BY THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO DERIVE A DIRECT BENIFIT FROM THOSE SERVICES,STARTING WITH THE LOWER INCOME CITIZENS SHOULD RECIEVE A HIGH RATING WHICH WOULD  DECREASE AS THE NUMBER OF CITIZENS SERVED DECREASES. THIS WOULD INCLUDE ALL OF THE SERVICE PROVIDERS WHO DEAL DIRECTLY WITH THE OVERALL PUBLIC REGARDLESS OF SOCIAL OR FINANCIAL STANDING. 

THOSE SERVICE PROVIDERS WHO CATER ONLY TO THE HIGHER INCOME ELITE CITIZENRY SHOULD BE RATED VERY LOW , THAT WOULD INCLUDE HEDGE FUND MANAGERS, POLITICAL ADVISORS, POLITICAL APPPOINTEES, ETC. 

What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on WND.com-By Aaron Klein-On July 22, 2011:

“A slew of organizations funded by billionaire George Soros have been utilizing the alleged News of the World phone hacking scandal in the U.K. to call for investigations of News Corporation’s U.S. interests, particularly Fox News Channel.

The Center for American Progress, heavily financed by Soros, said it gathered 12,000 signatures demanding to know whether News Corp. reporters violated U.S. law by obtaining phone records in the U.S.

The center is reportedly highly influential in helping to craft White House policy. It is led by John Podesta, who served as co-chairman of Obama’s presidential transition team.

Podesta this week told reporters his group wants the U.S. division of News Corp. probed for other possible offenses, including violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prosecutes for bribery of foreign officials.

“We’ve called attention to the fact that – News Corp. is a U.S.-based corporation; that could implicate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act,” he said.

Already, Podesta’s signature drive was cited in part for Democratic Sens. Jay Rockefeller and Barbara Boxer sending a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder requesting an investigation into claims News Corp. may have hacked the phones of 9/11 victims.

The center’s offshoot, Think Progress, has been leading Twitter and Facebook campaigns calling for investigations into Rupert Murdoch’s U.S. media empire.

Think Progress even alleged News Corp. could have been involved in the November 2009 email hacking of a climate research institute that showed climate scientists conspiring to rig data in the direction of so-called global warming.

“But we still don’t know who hacked the emails!” contended Think Progress in an article entitled “News Corp and the Hacked Climategate Emails: Time for an Independent Investigation.”

Podesta’s center is also going after the Wall Street Journal. ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, this week published an article entitled “Connecting the Dots from News Corp Scandal to the Lies of Fox News and the Wall Street Journal.” Think Progress also published the piece.

“There is a cancer on the U.S. media,” began the article. “That cancer is the disinformation machine aimed at spreading and endlessly repeating the most absurd falsehoods on a host of vital issues to the health and well being of Americans.”

Another outfit that traces to Soros money calls itself iNews. It is a project of the Soros-financed Center for Public Integrity.

In 2009, Soros’ Open Society Institute gave a $100,000 donation earmarked for iNews, which purports to be a “collaborative network of newly established and veteran nonprofit investigative journalism organizations.”

Since the News Corp. scandal broke in the U.K. earlier this month, iNews has released a series of articles heavily critical of News Corp. Many of the pieces were republished by the Huffington Post, which is now owned by AOL. Huffington Post articles are routinely featured on AOL.

Another Soros’ funded group, New American Media, has released a series of pieces focusing on News Corp., one questioning why Fox News Channel allegedly has provided scant coverage of the phone hacking scandal and another entitled “The End of Murdoch? Another Despot Teeters on the Brink.”

Perhaps at the center of the drive against News Corp. sits the Soros-funded Media Matters for America.

When Soros donated $1 million to Media Matters last October, he specifically cited the group’s work against Fox News as the driving force for his financial contribution.

“I am supporting Media Matters in an effort to more widely publicize the challenge Fox News poses to civil and informed discourse in our democracy,” Soros said a statement at the time.

Media Matters in May announced the roll out of a new site, News Corp Watch, dedicated to activism targeting Murdoch’s empire.

Media Matters launched the new site with a full-page advertisement in the International Herald Tribune that highlighted the News of the World phone-hacking scandal as raising concerns about the company’s attempt at taking over the United Kingdom’s pay-TV broadcaster BSkyB.

Ben Smith at POLITICO reported how News Corp Watch calls itself a “vital resource for investors and others interested in the company’s activities.”

Media Matters and its new anti-Murdoch site have given nearly nonstop coverage to the News of the World scandal.

A spokeswoman for Media Matters told Variety.com earlier this week the average weekly web traffic to its News Corp. Watch site has increased tenfold since the hacking story broke.

Roger Aronoff, senior analyst of Accuracy in Media, was quoted by Variety as stating, “The left smells blood, and would love to see Fox News in particular somehow implicated and weakened by this scandal.”

Meanwhile, a sampling of other Soros-funded groups focusing on News Corp. include Free Press and the Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Fox News, Tea Party 'dictatorial'

Soros himself once was invested in News Corp. His Soros Fund Management LLC, managed News Corp. shares worth $4 million in 2004 and $2.3 million when sold in 2009.

Still, Soros has been a vocal opponent of the Fox News Channel. In a conversation with CNN newsman Fareed Zakaria reported by the Huffington Post last December, Soros warned the combination of Fox News, its then-host Glenn Beck and the tea party might lead “this open society to be on the verge of some dictatorial democracy.”

According to the report, “Soros was especially bitter and harshly critical of the role played in our political discourse by the Fox News Channel, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., as a very dangerous precedent for the ‘open society’ that has prevailed in the U.S. for 200 years.”

• With research by Brenda J. Elliott.”

Source:

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=324617

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Liberals Salivate: ‘Could This Be the End of Rupert Murdoch and Fox News?’!

Posted on CNSNews.com-By Susan Jones-On July 22, 2011:

“(CNSNews.com) – The liberal activist group MoveOn.org says it is launching a campaign “to build unavoidable public pressure for full investigations” into Rupert Murdoch’s U.S. news outlets – including Fox News, a favorite target of liberals.

“Could this be the end of Rupert Murdoch and Fox News?” the group asked in a July 21 email message to supporters.

According to MoveOn.org, “the key is to find out how far Fox and rest of Murdoch’s news outlets went here in the U.S.  If they’ve been as corrupt and criminal here as it looks like they’ve been in the U.K., then we might just see Murdoch’s media empire crumble.”

Murdoch and his media empire have come under fire in Britain, following reports that employees at Murdoch’s News Corporation hacked into the phone of a 13-year-old murder victim and bribed police and government officials for information leading to tabloid scoops.

Last week, at the urging of Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) and other lawmakers, the FBI began a preliminary inquiry into a report that News Corp. employees tried to hack into phones belonging to victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

MoveOn.org says it will run a “hard-hitting new ad” that asks if Murdoch is “running a company or a crime syndicate.” It is asking supporters to “chip in $5 to hold Murdoch accountable.”

“Rupert Murdoch has a huge amount of influence in this country. He owns some of the most influential news outlets in America including not only Fox News but The Wall Street Journal, The New York Post, and dozens more,” the email said.

“But his influence shouldn’t mean that his companies can get away with crimes. In the U.K. we’ve seen what a tough investigation spurred by public outrage and pressure can do to expose the truth.

“We deserve the same here in the U.S. We deserve to know whether Fox News or other Murdoch outlets have violated our laws.”

Fox News, with its “fair and balanced” slogan, is pegged as a conservative news outlet because it presents viewpoints overlooked or excluded by the liberal media and it employs conservative (as well as liberal) hosts and pundits.

An Obama White House staffer in 2009 described Fox News as “either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party.”  At that same time, the Obama White House tried to freeze Fox News out of an interview it granted to the other networks.

A liberal media watchdog group recently launched an all-out attack on Fox, hoping to get advertisers to stop running ads on the network. And liberal U.S. newspapers and television networks have given front-page/top story coverage to Murdoch and the British phone hacking scandal.

Murdoch told British lawmakers this week he was “shocked, appalled and ashamed” to learn that his now-defunct News of the World tabloid had hacked the cell phone of a murdered schoolgirl.

He blamed “the people I trusted, but they blame maybe the people that they trusted.”

Source:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/liberals-salivate-could-be-end-rupert-mu

II. U.S. Justice Department launches investigation into the extent of News Corp phone hacking and bribes!-Posted on Mail Online-By MARK DUELL and JENNIFER MADISON-Updated on July 20, 2011:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016529/News-World-phone-hacking-bribes-US-Justice-Department-launches-investigation.html

III. FBI launches investigation into Rupert Murdoch's News Corp!-Posted on Telegraph-By Alex Spillius, in Washington and Richard Blackden in New York-On July 14, 2011:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/8638851/Phone-hacking-FBI-launches-investigation-into-Rupert-Murdochs-News-Corp.html

IV. Video: Is Media Matters Breaking the Law?-Posted on FoxNews.com-On July 6, 2011:

http://nation.foxnews.com/media/2011/07/06/media-matters-breaking-law

V. Video: Media Matters Under Scrutiny!-Posted on The Patriot Udate-On July 6, 2011:

http://patriotupdate.com/videos/media-matters-under-scrutiny

VI. Upcoming Weather Underground Movie To Show ‘Real Americans Who Stood For Their Beliefs’!-Posted on The Blaze-By Buck Sexton-On July 20, 2011:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/not-ready-upcoming-weather-underground-movie-to-show-real-americans-who-stood-for-their-beliefs-not-ready/

VII. RED STATE Persecution!-Posted On Movie Guide-By David Outten-On July 18, 2011:

http://www.movieguide.org/articles/main/red-state-persecution.html

VIII. Hollywood Attacks Capitalism!-Posted on The Patriot Update-On July 16, 2011:

http://patriotupdate.com/videos/larry-crowne-hollywood-attacks-capitalism

IX. The Judas Media-Posted on Floyd Reports-Guest Writer-On April 27, 2011:

http://floydreports.com/the-judas-media/?utm_source=Expose+Obama&utm_campaign=43b350b9f6-EO_04_27_20114_27_2011&utm_medium=email

Note:  The following articles and/or blog posts and reports reveal how George Soros, along with other liberal backers use their money to fund and/or manipulate media outlets, to include Hollywood because they see that as a powerful way to influence the American public.

It’s a strategy that Soros has been deploying extensively in media both in the United States and abroad. Since 2003, Soros has spent more than $48 million funding media properties, including the infrastructure of news - journalism schools, investigative journalism and even industry organizations-You Decide:

Nearly 30 Soros-funded Media Operations Part of 'War on Fox'!- Posted on Business & Media Institute-By Dan Gainor-On June 1, 2011:

http://www.mrc.org/bmi/commentary/2011/Nearly__Sorosfunded_Media_Operations_Part_of_War_on_Fox_.html

Soros-Funded Lefty Media Reach More Than 300 Million Every Month!-Posted on Business & Media Institute-By Dan Gainor-On May 25, 2011:

http://www.mrc.org/bmi/commentary/2011/Soros_Lefty_Media_Reach_More_Than__Million_Every_Month.html

Soros Spends Over $48 Million Funding Media Organizations!-Posted on Business & Media Institute-By Dan Gainor-On May 18, 2011:

http://www.mrc.org/bmi/commentary/2011/Soros_Spends_Over__Million_Funding_Media_Organizations_.html

Over 30 Major News Organizations Linked to George Soros!-Posted on Business & Media Institute-By Dan Gainor-On May 11, 2011:

http://www.mrc.org/bmi/commentary/2011/Over__Major_News_Organizations_Linked_to_George_Soros.html

Citizen Soros Manipulating the Media!-Posted on Capital Research Center-By Matthew Vadum-On January 2011:

http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1293869054.pdf

George Soros, Movie Mogul: ‘Social Justice’ Cinema and the Sundance Institute!-Posted on Capital Research Center-By Rondi Adamson-On March 20o8:

http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1204311857.pdf

The Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power!-Posted on AIM-By Cliff Kincaid-On October 27, 2004:

http://www.aim.org/special-report/the-hidden-soros-agenda-drugs-money-the-media-and-political-power/

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Who owns our supposedly fair and balanced airwaves and news outlets?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/who-owns-our-supposedly-fair-and-balanced-airwaves-and-news-outlets/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on WND.com-On July 23, 2011:

“The United States’ military, which has acted as the world’s security team for decades, is destined to become a “hollow force” with fewer personnel and weapons systems, slowed modernization and reduced readiness under President Obama’s strategy, an analysis is predicting, according to a report from Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.

The analysis by a team of defense experts from the American Enterprise Institute said that the Obama administration is looking at potentially $900 billion in defense cuts over a decade to protect such social entitlement programs as Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and the health care reform law from serious deficit and debt reduction efforts now under consideration.

Ultimately, the defense budget could become the largest bill-payer for addressing the deficit, and that bodes ill, according to the “abstract numbers game” that accountants have reviewed.

The military forecast and the impact on U.S. readiness was outlined by Thomas Donnelly and Gary J. Schmitt in an AEI report entitled, “Warning: Hollow Force Ahead!”

“Those arguing for deep cuts in the defense budget will suggest that the majority of these conflicts were unavoidable,” Schmitt said in separate comments. “Yet, in doing so, they are ignoring the realities of history, statecraft and domestic politics.

“And cutting troops or buying fewer planes or ships is not going to change those dynamics,” he said.“However, what it will do is leave the men and women of the American military in a far more precarious position to carry out what we as a nation will almost surely be asking them to do.”

In their report, Donnelly and Schmitt point out that former Defense Secretary Robert Gates already had identified $400 billion in cuts. However, Obama signaled that “we’re going to do more” and cut another $400 billion.

They referred to Obama’s recent proposals to cut military spending by some $900 billion from defense and quoted the president as saying that this increase in cuts was “broadly consistent” with his intention to get the country’s finances under control. They added that there is a prospect that Congress even could cut defense “well beyond” Obama’s proposal.

“It is clear that there is a willingness within the administration and among some members of Congress to slash defense well beyond the president’s earlier mark of $400 billion,” the report said.

The result, they said, will be a “hollow force” characterized by fewer personnel and weapons systems, slowed military modernization, reduced readiness for operations and continued stress on the all-volunteer force.

“If realized, this modern day ‘hollow force’ will be less capable of securing America’s interests and preserving the international leadership role that rests upon military preeminence,” they said.

The AEI analysts said that it also is a myth that a withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, for example, will help alleviate the military’s manpower problems and control military spending.

In fact, they believe that the demand for military personnel actually rise will as the geopolitical situation changes, given U.S. international commitments.

“President Obama has maintained every foreign policy commitment set by his predecessors and added to the military’s missions,” it said. “The president surged forces twice in Afghanistan, started a new operation in Libya, sent troops to Japan and Haiti for disaster relief operations and kept 1,200 National Guard troops at America’s southwest border.

“The future of American national security is being mortgaged to fight today’s wars and reduce the deficit by an insignificant amount,” the report’s analysts said. “As a result, America’s armed forces, which have been stretched thin for nearly a decade, will likely be asked in the years ahead to do the same or more with even less if defense spending is cut once again.”

Source:

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=324925

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Two never-finished Navy ships head to scrap heap!-Posted on PilotOnline.com-By By Scott Harper, The Virginian-Pilot-On July 15, 2011:

http://hamptonroads.com/2011/07/two-neverfinished-navy-ships-head-scrap-heap

II. The Plot to Destroy the US Military-Posted on Canada Free Press-By Daniel Greenfield-On March 21, 2011:

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/34646

III. Obama’s War Against the U.S. Military-Posted on Human Events-By Buzz Patterson-On September 10, 2010:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38943

IV. Panetta: Obama Can Unilaterally Use Military to Protect ‘National Interests’!-Posted on CNSNews.com-ByMatt Cover-On June 13, 2011:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/panetta-obama-can-use-military-without-c

V. Podesta: Obama Can Use ‘Armed Forces’ To Push Progressive Agenda!-Posted on The Blaze-By Jonathon M. Seidl-On November 18, 2010:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/podesta-obama-can-use-armed-forces-to-push-progressive-agenda/

VI. WH Minimizing Beijing's Military Threat, Denying its Expansionist Intentions!-Posted on WND.com-By Aaron Klein-On July 23, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=324577

VII. Clapper Is (Half-) Right: China Is A Threat-Posted on Floyd Reports-By Guest Writer-On March 14, 2011:

http://floydreports.com/clapper-is-half-right-china-is-a-threat/?utm_source=Expose+Obama&utm_campaign=755b1357c3-EO_03_15_2011_a3_15_2011&utm_medium=email

Note:  Mr. George Soros is one of the most powerful men on earth. Since 1979, Soros' foundation network -- whose flagship is the Open Society Institute (OSI) -- has dispensed more than $5 billion to a multitude of organizations whose objectives are consistent with those of Soros. With assets of $1.93 billion as of 2008, OSI alone donates scores of millions of dollars annually to these various groups. Following are Soros’ agendas relating to our armed forces that are advanced by groups that Soros and OSI support financially:

Organizations that depict virtually all American military actions as unwarranted and immoral:

• Amnesty International: In 2005, this group's then-executive director William Schulz alleged that the United States had become “a leading purveyor and practitioner” of torture. Irene Khan, who charged that the Guantanamo Bay detention center, where the U.S. was housing several hundred captured terror suspects, “has become the gulag of our time.” Schulz’s remarks were echoed by Amnesty's then-secretary general

• Global Exchange was founded by Medea Benjamin, a pro-Castro radical who helped establish a project known as Iraq Occupation Watch for the purpose of encouraging widespread desertion by “conscientious objectors” in the U.S. military. In December 2004, Benjamin announced that Global Exchange would be sending aid to the families of terrorist insurgents who were fighting American troops in Iraq.

Organizations that advocate America’s unilateral disarmament and/or a steep reduction in its military spending:

• The American Friends Service Committee, which views America as the world's chief source of international strife, has long had a friendly relationship with the Communist Party USA. Lamenting that “the United States spends 59% of the discretionary federal budget on military-related expenses,” the Committee seeks to “realig[n] national spending priorities and to increase the portion of the budget that is spent on housing, quality education for all, medical care, and fair wages.” In 2000, George Soros himself was a signatory to a letter titled “Appeal for Responsible Security” that appeared in The New York Times. The letter called upon the U.S. government “to commit itself unequivocally to negotiate the worldwide reduction and elimination of nuclear weapons,” and to participate in “the global de-alerting of nuclear weapons and deep reduction of nuclear stockpiles.”

Source:

Guide To The George Soros Network: A Guide to The Political Left-Posted on DiscoverTheNetWorks.org:

Note: The following eye opening article and/or blog post reveals a George Soros funded unincorporated association by the name of “Peace and Security Funders Group (PSFG)”, which was established in 1999 and consists of more than 50 private and public foundations that give a portion of their $27 billion in combined assets to leftist organizations that undermine the war on terror in several interrelated ways: (a) by characterizing the United States as an evil, militaristic, oppressive nation that exploits vulverable populations all over the globe; (b) by accusing the U.S. of having provoked, through its unjust policies and actions, the terror attacks against it, and consequently casting those attacks as self-defensive measures taken in response to American transgressions; (c) by depicting America's military and legislative actions against terror as unjustified, extreme, and immoral-You Decide: 

Funding the War Against the War on Terror!-Posted on FrontPageMagazine.com-By: John Perazzo –On October 6, 2006:

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=2309

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Veterans and members of our Armed Forces under attack!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/23/veterans-and-members-of-our-armed-forces-under-attack/

The Military Pays the Price for Obama's Agenda!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/08/11/the-military-pays-the-price-for-obama’s-agenda/

Nuclear Summit Part of Obama Administration’s ‘Fantasy Foreign Policy’!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/04/14/nuclear-summit-part-of-obama-administration’s-‘fantasy-foreign-policy’/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on InfoWars.com-By Paul Joseph Watson,
Infowars.com-On July 21, 2011:

“A new promotional video released by the Department of Homeland Security characterizes white middle class Americans as the most likely terrorists, as Big Sis continues its relentless drive to cement the myth that mad bombers are hiding around every corner, when in reality Americans are just as likely to be killed by lightning strikes or peanut allergies.

The video is part of Homeland Security’s $10 million dollar “See Something, Say Something” program that encourages Americans to report “suspicious activity,” which in every case throughout history has been a trait of oppressive, dictatorial regimes.

In the course of the 10 minute clip, a myriad of different behaviors are characterized as terrorism, including opposing surveillance, using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application.

Despite encouraging viewers not to pay attention to a person’s race in determining whether or not they may be a terrorist, almost all of the scenarios in the clip proceed to portray white people as the most likely terrorists. Bizarrely, nearly every single one of the “patriotic” Americans who reports on their fellow citizen is either black, Asian or Arab. Imagine if the video had portrayed every terrorist as an Arab and every patriotic snoop as white, there’d be an outcry and rightly so, but this strange reversal must have been deliberate on the part of the DHS, but why? Is this merely political correctness taken to the extreme or is something deeper at work?

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the DHS’ own internal documents list predominantly white conservative groups as the most likely terrorists, such as Ron Paul supporters, gun owners, gold bullion enthusiasts, and a myriad of other comparatively banal political interests that are largely the domain of white middle class Americans.

This has little to do with the color of a person’s skin, and everything to do with the fact that white, middle class Americans are the biggest roadblock when it comes to Big Sis expanding its control over every facet of American society.

It’s plain to see that very little of the budget for this video went towards paying for decent actors, but perhaps it’s fitting that the participants were about as believable as Santa and his elves, because the notion that terrorists are hovering around every underground parking lot waiting to blow up federal buildings is demonstrably false.

As Ohio University’s John Mueller has documented, the likelihood of actually being a victim of terrorism is infinitesimally small, and only highlights how such threats are hyperbolically exaggerated for political purposes.

Figures collected by Mueller clearly show that Americans are just as likely to be killed by lightning strikes, accident-causing deer, or severe allergic reactions to peanuts.

But the facts don’t matter for a federal agency whose primary function is to manufacture fear to keep Americans under control and submissive to the fact that their economic futures and their constitutional rights are being torn to shreds by their own government while it points to a contrived outside threat as a convenient distraction.

“At its core, the video is filled with scenes of ordinary citizens spying on each other and alerting the authorities to their compatriots’ suspicious deeds,” writes Simon Black. In my favorite scene, a woman calls the police after snooping over the shoulder of a young man typing away on his smartphone.”

Black notes that such videos are solely aimed at reinforcing ignorance, hate and fear for those who still live in darkness and are completely unaware of the real agenda behind Homeland Security’s “see something, say something” charade.

But what is that agenda?

No matter where you look, from East Germany, to Communist Russia, to Nazi Germany, historically governments who encourage their own citizens to report on each other do so not for any genuine safety concerns or presumed benefits to security, but in order to create an authoritarian police state that coerces the people into policing each other’s behavior and thoughts.

As Robert Gellately of Florida State University has highlighted, Germans under Hitler denounced their neighbors and friends not because they genuinely believed them to be a security threat, but because they expected to selfishly benefit from doing so, both financially, socially and psychologically via a pavlovian need to be rewarded by their masters for their obedience.

At the height of its influence around one in seven of the East German population was an informant for the Stasi. As in Nazi Germany, the creation of an informant system was wholly centered around identifying political dissidents and those with grievances against the state, and had little or nothing to do with genuine security concerns.

This is the kind of society the Department of Homeland Security is, whether deliberately or inadvertently, recreating in 21^st century America. It is about as far removed as you can possibly get from the vision the founders of the nation had in mind when they created the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.

Comment by Alex Jones: This DHS video is purposefully designed to transmit fear and hatred of Muslims over to white Americans. Look at the part of the clip where an image of “Jihad Jane” is displayed, the blue eyes are artificially intensified in order to get the message across.

This is about playing minorities off against whites, creating further resentment and suspicion, getting us at each other’s throats just as how different racial groups were set upon each other in Hitler’s Germany to create an environment of fear and distrust, motivating people to inform on each other for the state.

I will be making a special comment on this story during the show today.

• Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.”

Source:

http://www.infowars.com/dhs-video-characterizes-white-americans-as-most-likely-terrorists/

Question:  Isn’t it extremely interesting that CNN and other news outlets here at home and abroad, who have been bought and paid for by George Soros, didn’t waste any time in claiming that the suspect in Friday's deadly terror attacks in Norway was a gun lover and has right-wing extremist views?

The following is a CNN article and/or blog post that claims that the Norway suspect has right-wing extremist views-You Decide:

Suspect In Friday's Deadly Terror Attacks In Norway Has Right-Wing Extremist Views!

Posted on CNN.com-By the CNN Wire Staff-On July 24, 2011:

“Oslo, Norway (CNN) -- A rambling, 1,500-page manifesto purportedly written by the suspect in Friday’s deadly terror attacks in Norway lays out right-wing extremist views and vows that a “European civil war” will lead to the execution of “cultural Marxists” and the banishing of Muslims.

“If you are concerned about the future of Western Europe you will definitely find the information both interesting and highly relevant,” the author writes, adding later that his “European Declaration of Independence” took him nine years to complete.

While the title page of the document says “By Andrew Berwick,” the writer later identifies himself as Anders Behring Breivik, the suspect in the Norwegian terrorist attacks.

The document—part political diatribe, part confessional and part action plan—also contains a link to an online video post with the same title.

CNN could not independently verify that Breivik wrote the document or posted the 12-minute video, and Norwegian authorities would not confirm that the man in their custody wrote the manifesto, saying it was part of their investigation.

Police told the Norwegian newspaper VG that the document is “linked” to Friday’s attacks.

Text in the video rails against the “Islamization” of Europe and “cultural Marxists” and asserts that the majority of Europe’s population will be Muslim by 2050 “unless we manage to defeat the ruling Multiculturalist Alliance.”

“Celebrate us, the martyrs of the conservative revolution, for we will soon dine in the Kingdom of Heaven,” the video says.

Parts of the document use the same wording as the 35,000-word anti-technology manifesto written by “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski and published in the Washington Post in 1995.

In one passage, the document published online last week uses the same wording as the Unabomber’s manifesto, but substitutes the phrase “cultural Marxist” where Kaczynski used the word “leftist,” and uses the word “Muslims” where Kaczynski used the phrase “black people.”

The document contains some of the same anti-Muslim rhetoric that has become a part of mainstream debate in Norway, according to Anders Ravik Jupskaas, a Ph.D. researcher at the University of Oslo who studies right-wing political movements in Scandinavia.

“What you see here is this new European phenomenon of this anti-Islamic rhetoric, where it’s not only the immigrants (who are enemies). In fact, the main enemy is the political elite,” he said. “They argue that this political elite has betrayed their own country. They have imposed multiculturalism.”

But the writer takes such philosophies to another level, he said.

“It’s part of the same stream of ideas, but it’s still very different in terms of extremeness,” Jupskaas said.

Norwegian authorities have said they are still trying to determine the motive behind the terror attacks.

In the manifesto, the author vilifies Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and his Labour Party, which has majority control in Norway’s government, accusing the party of perpetuating “cultural Marxist/multiculturalist ideals” and indoctrinating youth with those ideals. The author accuses the Labour Party of embracing those ideals and therefore allowing the “Islamification of Europe.”

The manifesto speculates about would happen if the author were to survive “a successful mission and live to stand a multiculturalist trial.”

“Not only will all my friends and family detest me and call me a monster; the united global multiculturalist media will have their hands full figuring out multiple ways to character assassinate, vilify and demonize,” it says.

The manifesto and videoinclude photos that appear to match those of the suspect, some of which had been posted on his Facebook page and several never-before-seen images of the same man. The author leaves clues about his family and background, and also indicates that English is his “secondary language.”

The document and video are titled “2083: A European Declaration of Independence,” a date that the author later explains is the year he believes an European civil war will end with the execution of cultural Marxists and the deportation of Muslims.

This “civil war” would come in three phases, he predicts. The first runs through 2030 and includes “open source warfare, military shock attacks by clandestine cell systems (and) further consolidation of conservative forces.”

Between 2030 and 2070, he calls for “more advanced forms of resistance groups (and the) preparation of pan-European coup d’etats.”

The final stage features the deposition of Europe’s leaders and “implementation of a cultural conservative political agenda.”

The author does not specifically explain why he chose the date 2083, though it is the 200^th anniversary of the death of Karl Marx.

The manifesto and video also containphotos of Breivik in what appear to be uniforms, including one in which he is wearing a U.S. Marine dress jacket decorated with an Iron Cross, Knights Templar and Free Mason medals.

Another picture shows Breivik dressed in a wet suit with a patch that reads “Marxist Hunter” and holding a high-powered rifle.

The author states that he was moved to action dating to “my government’s involvement” in NATO’s 1999 strikes during the Kosovo campaign, claiming this wrongly targeted “our Serbian brothers (who) wanted to drive Islam out by deporting the Albanian Muslims back to Albania.”

He also criticizes “my government’s cowardly handling of the Muhammad cartoon issue”—a reference to the Norwegian government’s apology for the nation’s private newspapers having repeatedly published the controversial cartoon. Another reference blasts Norway, home of the Nobel awards, for awarding a peace prize to late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat.

The author details his bomb-making experiments, including a theory that one should purchase a farm so that purchase of large amounts of fertilizer—which can be used to make bombs—is less likely to be noticed.

“Be extra careful when researching for bomb schematics (fertilizer bombs), as many terms will trigger electronic alerts,” he writes, one of several tips that include using an “anonymous laptop and browse free to your local McDonalds” in order to “avoid ending up on any watch list.”

Besides hands-on instructions, the document also functions as a running diary. It also includes references to his relatives’ sexual indiscretions, entries on some of his friends’ personal lives, and his own off-and-on steroid use.

From July 2 on, though, the author becomes more business-like and complains that going off his testosterone supplements had ramped up his “aggressiveness.” He then digs up his guns and prepares the bombs. It all leads up to July 22, the date of the Norway terror attacks.

“The old saying ‘if you want something done, then do it yourself’ is as relevant now as it was then,” he writes. “In many cases; you could do it all yourself, it will just take a little more time. AND, without taking unacceptable risks. The conclusion is undeniable.

“I believe this will be my last entry. It is now Fri July 22^nd, 12.51.”

Less than three hours later, a bomb went off in downtown Oslo.”

Source:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/07/24/norway.terror.manifesto/index.html

Note: The following article and/or blog post relates to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Terrorist proclaimed himself 'Darwinian,' not 'Christian'!-Posted on WND.com-On July 24, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=325765

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

It’s Getting Very Serious Now!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/it’s-getting-very-serious-now/

Shocking New Report! Obama’s Real Terrorists: Targeting Patriots and The Right!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2009/05/05/shocking-new-report-obamas-real-terrorists-targeting-patriots-and-the-right/

What was the true intent of Operation Closed Campus?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/04/03/what-was-the-true-intent-of-operation-closed-campus/

Have Americans Stopped Having Confidence In Their Government?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/have-americans-stopped-having-confidence-in-their-government/

Nearly 80 percent don't trust the government!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/nearly-80-percent-don’t-trust-the-government/

Who owns our supposedly fair and balanced airwaves and news outlets?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/who-owns-our-supposedly-fair-and-balanced-airwaves-and-news-outlets/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

What’s wrong with this picture?

Posted on American Thinker-By Pamela Geller-On July 22, 2011:

“While New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg works in anxious haste to build the cultural obscenity that is the Ground Zero mosque, the iconic St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, which was built in 1916 and destroyed in the attack on the World Trade Center towers by Muslim terrorists, remains vanquished, unable to rebuild.

Bloomberg is lobbying for 9/11 taxpayer funds for the Islamic supremacist grifters behind the Ground Zero mosque, but St. Nicholas Church is in purgatory ten years after the worst day in modern American history.

Perhaps St. Nicholas Church should claim that it is a mosque—then Bloomberg and New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn would probably pour the cement for its foundation.  Remember: the New York Daily News reported last December that “Mayor Bloomberg’s top deputies went to great lengths to help those trying to build a mosque at Ground Zero—even drafting a letter to the community board for them.”

After a Freedom of Information Act request from Judicial Watch, New York City officials released “a flurry of emails between its brass and Feisal Abdul Rauf, the imam pushing to build a mosque near the sensitive site, and his supporters.”  It was worse than we imagined.  The release of these documents, emails, and various exchanges between Mayor Bloomberg’s office and the radical Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his motley crew of Islamic supremacists showed evidence of collusion, inappropriate political support for the Ground Zero mega-mosque, and favoritism given to the project.

Rauf is an open proponent of Islamic law, Sharia, with its oppression of women, stonings, and amputations.  He is a prominent member of the Perdana organization, a leading funder of the jihad flotilla launched against Israel last year by the genocidal Islamic terror group, IHH.  And he’s a slumlord and grifter: Rauf snagged more than $2 million in public financing to renovate low-income apartments.  He took the money, never did the renovations, and forced good people to live with vermin and dilapidation.

So why did the mayor apparently break ethical rules for a slumlord with radical ties, whose buildings were placed in receivership?  And why isn’t he working just as energetically for the rebuilding of St. Nicholas Church?  Technically, he has no jurisdiction over the Port Authority, which is blocking the rebuilding of the church, but he could speak out more energetically for it—and meanwhile, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver could do a great deal to help the church’s cause—but in sharp contrast to Bloomberg’s work for the mosque, they haven’t done a thing for the church.

Cuomo could order Port Authority Executive Director Chris Ward to stop blocking the church’s reconstruction.  He hasn’t.  Silver hasn’t done a thing, either.  Yet if they support the Ground Zero mosque, they should at least extend the same level of support to this church that was on the site for 85 years.

I spoke with Evan C. Lambrou, who is a former editor of the National Herald, the country’s oldest and largest Greek-American newspaper, and a distinguished graduate of Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology in Boston.  He explained that it was “wrong for the Port Authority to take the church’s original property for its purposes, in exchange for another parcel nearby; extract the church’s good faith by promising to actually deliver the promised new parcel; and then not make good on that promise. In short, the Port Authority got the church to do something it didn’t really want to do by promising the church something else instead, and then refused to give what was promised. That’s just not right. It’s morally reprehensible, in fact.”

Yes, it is, and it gets worse.  Lambrou continued: “It’s very disgraceful that the Port Authority has compelled the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese to file a federal lawsuit just to rebuild one of our churches. And it’s simply astounding that people work themselves into such a frenzy about Park 51; that so many elected officials have rushed to defend development of an Islamic community center two blocks away from Ground Zero; and that virtually no one cares about the Port Authority’s plans to exclude a Christian church from Ground Zero altogether.”

Lambrou skewered the double standard: “This country was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics and principles, so if elected officials are going to support religious freedom for Muslims in America, they should do the same for one of this country’s Christian minorities.”

“That’s why I’m disappointed,” Lambrou said, “in Governor Cuomo and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.”  He sent them both letters and emails, but their response “wasn’t even lukewarm.”  He received “one feel-good call from a press officer at the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation assuring me that the “Cuomo Administration cares.”  And as for Silver, one of his aides told Lambrou that he was “concerned” about the church.  That was it.  Lambrou sent them both information from the American Center for Law and Justice that pointed out that in refusing to rebuild the church, the Port Authority had violated three constitutional amendments.  Nonetheless, Lammbrou said, “neither Mr. Cuomo nor Mr. Silver have voiced their support for the church publicly. I have urged them to do so several times, and they still haven’t yet.”

Lambrou told me: “This is both a moral and a Constitutional matter. Is it really that difficult for them to release a substantive public statement of support for rebuilding this church? Is it really so hard for them to tell the Port Authority to do the right thing for the church?”  When I asked him if the lawsuit that the church had filed against various New York officials might be causing the silence, he responded: “This is a no-brainer, and the lawsuit is no excuse. Anyway, the lack of response to my concerns has been deeply disheartening. Orthodox Christian rights are being violated by a powerful public entity under their watch, and the people who should be defending us are doing nothing about it.”

While those of us who oppose the Islamic supremacist mosquestrosity at Ground Zero are routinely called bigots, it is St. Nicholas Church that is encountering actual bigotry. 

Lambrou said, “I never thought I would find myself contending with this kind of bigotry in 21^st Century America, and I feel completely betrayed that those who are in a position to reverse the problem have done nothing about it. That indicates they’re actually willing to relegate this innocent and historic house of worship to oblivion and, in so doing, perpetuate the tragedy of 9/11.”

They are, but we aren’t.  Stop the Islamization of lower Manhattan.  Stand with us against the Ground Zero Mosque and for St. Nicholas Church on September 11 at our Freedom Rally at Ground Zero.

• Pamela Geller is the publisher of AtlasShrugs.com and the author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War On America (Simon & Schuster).”

Source:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/islamic_supremacism_trumps_christianity_at_ground_zero.html

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Stop Obama’s Attack on Christianity!-Posted on The Patriot Update-By Michael Reagan-On July 16, 2011:

http://patriotupdate.com/articles/stop-obamas-attack-on-christianity

II. No Separation of Mosque and State!-Posted on NewAmerican-By BRUCE WALKER-On July 12, 2011:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/8184-no-separation-of-mosque-and-state

III. Herman Cain: Communities have right to ban mosques!-Posted on Yahoo! News-By The Associated Press-On July 17, 2011:

http://news.yahoo.com/herman-cain-communities-ban-mosques-231949077.html

IV. Herman Cain Opposes Tennessee Islamic Center, Says it’s Not ‘An Innocent Mosque’!-Posted on The Blaze-By Billy Hallowell-On July 15, 2011:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/herman-cain-vehemently-opposes-tennessee-islamic-center-says-its-not-an-innocent-mosque/

V. Obama's secret plan to help Democrats by flushing 9/11: ‘You won't believe how president sought to change meaning of catastrophic day’-Posted on WND.com-By Joe Kovacs-On May 11, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=296585

VI. Video: 9/11 Families Say Obama Lied to Them-Posted on Floyd Reports-By Ben Johnson-On March 1, 2011:

http://floydreports.com/video-of-the-day-911-families-say-obama-lied-to-them/?utm_source=Expose+Obama&utm_campaign=6d9fd18741-EO_03_01_20113_1_2011&utm_medium=email

Note:  Mr. George Soros is one of the most powerful men on earth. Since 1979, Soros’ foundation network—whose flagship is the Open Society Institute (OSI) — has dispensed more than $5 billion to a multitude of organizations whose objectives are consistent with those of Soros. With assets of $1.93 billion as of 2008, OSI alone donates scores of millions of dollars annually to these various groups. Following is only one of Soros’ many agendas relating to organizations that oppose all 9/11 national security measures that are advanced by groups that Soros and OSI support financially:

Organizations that oppose virtually all post-9/11 national-security measures enacted by the U.S. government:

• The Center for Constitutional Rights, founded by four longtime supporters of communist causes, has condemnedthe “immigration sweeps, ghost detentions, extraordinary rendition, and every other illegal program the government has devised” in response to “the so-called War on Terror.”
• The National Security Archive Fund collects and publishes declassified documents (obtained through the Freedom of Information Act) to a degree that compromises American national security and the safety of intelligence agents.
• The American Civil Liberties Union has depicted the U.S. government's post-9/11 national-security measures as excessively harsh and invasive generally, and also as discriminatory against Muslims in particular. Moreover, the organization has filed numerous lawsuits seeking to limit the government's ability to locate, monitor, and apprehend terrorist operatives.
• Human Rights Watch has derided the U.S. war on terror as a foolhardy endeavor rooted in blindness to the realization that terrorism stems, in large measure, from America's failure “to promote fundamental rights around the world.”

Source:

Guide To The George Soros Network: A Guide to The Political Left-Posted on DiscoverTheNetWorks.org:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=589

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Faith of Our Forefathers!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/faith-of-our-forefathers/

Is Israel the next Arab Facebook Campaign?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/03/30/is-israel-the-next-arab-facebook-campaign/

Godfather of The Islamic Revolution!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/godfather-of-the-islamic-revolution/

Spitting in the Face of Everyone Murdered on 9/11!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/10/spitting-in-the-face-of-everyone-murdered-on-911/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note:  If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

wise words from Elder Dallin H. Oaks on The Divinely Inspired Constitution:

http://lds.org/ensign/1992/02/the-divin ... patriotism

Not long after I began to teach law, an older professor asked me a challenging question about Latter-day Saints’ belief in the United States Constitution. Earlier in his career he had taught at the University of Utah College of Law. There he met many Latter-day Saint law students. “They all seemed to believe that the Constitution was divinely inspired,” he said, “but none of them could ever tell me what this meant or how it affected their interpretation of the Constitution.” I took that challenge personally, and I have pondered it for many years.
I hope I will not be thought immodest if I claim a special interest in the Constitution. As a lawyer and law professor for more than twenty years, I have studied the United States Constitution. As legal counsel, I helped draft the bill of rights for the Illinois constitutional convention of 1970. And for three and one-half years as a justice of the Utah Supreme Court I had the sworn duty to uphold and interpret the constitutions of the state of Utah and the United States. My conclusions draw upon those experiences and upon a lifetime of studying the scriptures and the teachings of the living prophets. My opinions on this subject are personal and do not represent a statement in behalf of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.Creation and RatificationThe United States Constitution was the first written constitution in the world. It has served Americans well, enhancing freedom and prosperity during the changed conditions of more than two hundred years. Frequently copied, it has become the United States’ most important export. After two centuries, every nation in the world except six have adopted written constitutions, 2 and the U.S. Constitution was a model for all of them. No wonder modern revelation says that God established the U.S. Constitution and that it “should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles.” (D&C 101:77.)
George Washington was perhaps the first to use the word miracle in describing the drafting of the U.S. Constitution. In a 1788 letter to Lafayette, he said:“It appears to me, then, little short of a miracle, that the delegates from so many different states (which states you know are also different from each other in their manners, circumstances, and prejudices) should unite in forming a system of national Government, so little liable to well-founded objections.”It was a miracle. Consider the setting.The thirteen colonies and three and one-half million Americans who had won independence from the British crown a few years earlier were badly divided on many fundamental issues. Some thought the colonies should reaffiliate with the British crown. Among the majority who favored continued independence, the most divisive issue was whether the United States should have a strong central government to replace the weak “league of friendship” established by the Articles of Confederation. Under the Confederation of 1781, there was no executive or judicial authority, and the national Congress had no power to tax or to regulate commerce. The thirteen states retained all their sovereignty, and the national government could do nothing without their approval. The Articles of Confederation could not be amended without the unanimous approval of all the states, and every effort to strengthen this loose confederation had failed.
Congress could not even protect itself. In July 1783, an armed mob of former Revolutionary War soldiers seeking back wages threatened to take Congress hostage at its meeting in Philadelphia. When Pennsylvania declined to provide militia to protect them, the congressmen fled. Thereafter Congress was a laughingstock, wandering from city to city.
Unless America could adopt a central government with sufficient authority to function as a nation, the thirteen states would remain a group of insignificant, feuding little nations united by nothing more than geography and forever vulnerable to the impositions of aggressive foreign powers. No wonder the first purpose stated in the preamble of the new United States Constitution was “to form a more perfect union.”
The Constitution had its origin in a resolution by which the relatively powerless Congress called delegates to a convention to discuss amendments to the Articles of Confederation. This convention was promoted by James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, two farsighted young statesmen still in their thirties, who favored a strong national government. They persuaded a reluctant George Washington to attend and then used his influence in a letter-writing campaign to encourage participation by all the states. The convention was held in Philadelphia, whose population of a little over 40,000 made it the largest city in the thirteen states.
As the delegates assembled, there were ominous signs of disunity. It was not until eleven days after the scheduled beginning of the convention that enough states were represented to form a quorum. New Hampshire’s delegation arrived more than two months late because the state had not provided them travel money. No delegates ever came from Rhode Island.
Economically and politically, the country was alarmingly weak. The states were in a paralyzing depression. Everyone was in debt. The national treasury was empty. Inflation was rampant. The various currencies were nearly worthless. The trade deficit was staggering. Rebelling against their inclusion in New York State, prominent citizens of Vermont had already entered into negotiations to rejoin the British crown. In the western territory, Kentucky leaders were speaking openly about turning from the union and forming alliances with the Old World.
Instead of reacting timidly because of disunity and weakness, the delegates boldly ignored the terms of their invitation to amend the Articles of Confederation and instead set out to write an entirely new constitution. They were conscious of their place in history. For millennia the world’s people had been ruled by kings or tyrants. Now a group of colonies had won independence from a king and their representatives had the unique opportunity of establishing a constitutional government Abraham Lincoln would later describe as “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”
The delegates faced staggering obstacles. The leaders in the thirteen states were deeply divided on the extent to which the states would cede any power to a national government. If there was to be a strong central government, there were seemingly irresolvable differences on how to allocate the ingredients of national power between large and small states. As to the nature of the national executive, some wanted to copy the British parliamentary system. At least one delegate even favored the adoption of a monarchy. Divisions over slavery could well have prevented any agreement on other issues. There were 600,000 black slaves in the thirteen states, and slavery was essential in the view of some delegates and repulsive to many others.
Deeming secrecy essential to the success of their venture, the delegates spent over three months in secret sessions, faithfully observing their agreement that no one would speak outside the meeting room on the progress of their work. They were fearful that if their debates were reported to the people before the entire document was ready for submission, the opposition would unite to kill the effort before it was born. This type of proceeding would obviously be impossible today. There is irony in the fact that a constitution which protects the people’s “right to know” was written under a set of ground rules that its present beneficiaries would not tolerate.
It took the delegates seven weeks of debate to resolve the question of how the large and small states would be represented in the national congress. The Great Compromise provided a senate with equal representation for each state, and a lower house in which representation was apportioned according to the whole population of free persons in the state, plus three-fifths of the slaves. The vote on this pivotal issue was five states in favor and four against; other states did not vote, either because no delegates were present or because their delegation was divided. Upon that fragile base, the delegates went forward to consider other issues, including the nature of the executive and judicial branches, and whether the document should include a bill of rights.
It is remarkable that the delegates were able to put aside their narrow sectional loyalties to agree on a strong central government. Timely events were persuasive of the need: the delegates’ memories of the national humiliation when Congress was chased out of Philadelphia by a mob, the recent challenge of Shay’s rebellion against Massachusetts farm foreclosures, and the frightening prospect that northern and western areas would be drawn back into the orbit of European power.
The success of the convention was attributable in large part to the remarkable intelligence, wisdom, and unselfishness of the delegates. As James Madison wrote in the preface to his notes on the Constitutional Convention:“There never was an assembly of men, charged with a great and arduous trust, who were more pure in their motives, or more exclusively or anxiously devoted to the object committed to them.” 4 Truly, the U.S. Constitution was established “by the hands of wise men whom [the Lord] raised up unto this very purpose.” (D&C 101:80.)
The drafting of the Constitution was only the beginning. By its terms it would not go into effect until ratified by conventions in nine states. But if the nation was to be united and strong, the new Constitution had to be ratified by the key states of Virginia and New York, where the opposition was particularly strong. The extent of opposition coming out of the convention is suggested by the fact that of seventy-four appointed delegates, only fifty-five participated in the convention, and only thirty-nine of these signed the completed document.
It was nine months before nine states had ratified, and the last of the key states was not included until a month later, when the New York convention ratified by a vote of thirty to twenty-seven. To the “miracle of Philadelphia” one must therefore add “the miracle of ratification.”
Ratification probably could not have been secured without a commitment to add a written bill of rights. The first ten amendments, which included the Bill of Rights, were ratified a little over three years after the Constitution itself.
That the Constitution was ratified is largely attributable to the fact that the principal leaders in the states were willing to vote for a document that failed to embody every one of their preferences. For example, influential Thomas Jefferson, who was in Paris negotiating a treaty and therefore did not serve as a delegate, felt strongly that a bill of rights should have been included in the original Constitution. But Jefferson still supported the Constitution because he felt it was the best available. Benjamin Franklin stated that view in these words:
“When you assemble a number of men to have the advantage over their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men, all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect production be expected? It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does. … The opinions I have had of its errors, I sacrifice to the public good.” 5
In other words, one should not expect perfection—one certainly should not expect all of his personal preferences—in a document that must represent a consensus. One should not sulk over a representative body’s failure to attain perfection. Americans are well advised to support the best that can be obtained in the circumstances that prevail. That is sound advice not only for the drafting of a constitution but also for the adoption and administration of laws under it.Inspiration
It was a miracle that the Constitution could be drafted and ratified. But what is there in the text of the Constitution that is divinely inspired?Reverence for the United States Constitution is so great that sometimes individuals speak as if its every word and phrase had the same standing as scripture. Personally, I have never considered it necessary to defend every line of the Constitution as scriptural. For example, I find nothing scriptural in the compromise on slavery or the minimum age or years of citizenship for congressmen, senators, or the president. President J. Reuben Clark, who referred to the Constitution as “part of my religion,” 6 also said that it was not part of his belief or the doctrine of the Church that the Constitution was a “fully grown document.” “On the contrary,” he said, “We believe it must grow and develop to meet the changing needs of an advancing world.”
That was also the attitude of the Prophet Joseph Smith. He faulted the Constitution for not being “broad enough to cover the whole ground.” In an obvious reference to the national government’s lack of power to intervene when the state of Missouri used its militia to expel the Latter-day Saints from their lands, Joseph Smith said,
“Its sentiments are good, but it provides no means of enforcing them. … Under its provision, a man or a people who are able to protect themselves can get along well enough; but those who have the misfortune to be weak or unpopular are left to the merciless rage of popular fury.” 8 This omission of national power to protect citizens against state action to deprive them of constitutional rights was remedied in the Fourteenth Amendment, adopted just after the Civil War.
I see divine inspiration in what President J. Reuben Clark called the “great fundamentals” of the Constitution. In his many talks on the Constitution, he always praised three fundamentals: (a) the separation of powers into three independent branches of government in a federal system; (b) the essential freedoms of speech, press, and religion embodied in the Bill of Rights; and (c) the equality of all men before the law. I concur in these three, but I add two more. On my list there are five great fundamentals.
1. Separation of powers. The idea of separation of powers was at least a century old. The English Parliament achieved an initial separation of legislative and executive authority when they wrested certain powers from the king in the revolution of 1688. The concept of separation of powers became well established in the American colonies. State constitutions adopted during the Revolution distinguished between the executive, legislative, and judicial functions. Thus, a document commenting on the proposed Massachusetts Constitution of 1778, speaks familiarly of the principle “that the legislative, judicial, and executive powers are to be lodged in different hands, that each branch is to be independent, and further, to be so balanced, and be able to exert such checks upon the others, as will preserve it from dependence on, or a union with them.” 
Thus, we see that the inspiration on the idea of separation of powers came long before the U.S. Constitutional Convention. The inspiration in the convention was in its original and remarkably successful adaptation of the idea of separation of powers to the practical needs of a national government. The delegates found just the right combination to assure the integrity of each branch, appropriately checked and balanced with the others. As President Clark said:
“It is this union of independence and dependence of these branches—legislative, executive and judicial—and of the governmental functions possessed by each of them, that constitutes the marvelous genius of this unrivalled document. … As I see it, it was here that the divine inspiration came. It was truly a miracle.”
2. A written bill of rights. This second great fundamental came by amendment, but I think Americans all look upon the Bill of Rights as part of the inspired work of the Founding Fathers. The idea of a bill of rights was not new. Once again, the inspiration was in the brilliant, practical implementation of preexisting principles. Almost six hundred years earlier, King John had subscribed the Magna Charta, which contained a written guarantee of some rights for certain of his subjects. The English Parliament had guaranteed individual rights against royal power in the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Even more recently, some of the charters used in the establishment of the American colonies had written guarantees of liberties and privileges, with which the delegates were familiar.
I have always felt that the United States Constitution’s closest approach to scriptural stature is in the phrasing of our Bill of Rights. Without the free exercise of religion, America could not have served as the host nation for the restoration of the gospel, which began just three decades after the Bill of Rights was ratified. I also see scriptural stature in the concept and wording of the freedoms of speech and press, the right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures, the requirements that there must be probable cause for an arrest and that accused persons must have a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury, and the guarantee that a person will not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. President Ezra Taft Benson has said, “Reason, necessity, tradition, and religious conviction all lead me to accept the divine origin of these rights.”
The Declaration of Independence had posited these truths to be “self-evident,” that all men “are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights,” and that governments are instituted “to secure these Rights.” This inspired Constitution was established to provide a practical guarantee of these God-given rights (see D&C 101:77), and the language implementing that godly objective is scriptural to me.
3. Division of powers. Another inspired fundamental of the U.S. Constitution is its federal system, which divides government powers between the nation and the various states. Unlike the inspired adaptations mentioned earlier, this division of sovereignty was unprecedented in theory or practice. In a day when it is fashionable to assume that the government has the power and means to right every wrong, we should remember that the U.S. Constitution limits the national government to the exercise of powers expressly granted to it. The Tenth Amendment provides:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people.”
This principle of limited national powers, with all residuary powers reserved to the people or to the state and local governments, which are most responsive to the people, is one of the great fundamentals of the U.S. Constitution.
The particular powers that are reserved to the states are part of the inspiration. For example, the power to make laws on personal relationships is reserved to the states. Thus, laws of marriage and family rights and duties are state laws. This would have been changed by the proposed Equal Rights Amendment (E.R.A.). When the First Presidency opposed the E.R.A., they cited the way it would have changed various legal rules having to do with the family, a result they characterized as “a moral rather than a legal issue.” 12 I would add my belief that the most fundamental legal and political objection to the proposed E.R.A. was that it would effect a significant reallocation of law-making power from the states to the federal government.
4. Popular sovereignty. Perhaps the most important of the great fundamentals of the inspired Constitution is the principle of popular sovereignty: The people are the source of government power. Along with many religious people, Latter-day Saints affirm that God gave the power to the people, and the people consented to a constitution that delegated certain powers to the government. Sovereignty is not inherent in a state or nation just because it has the power that comes from force of arms. Sovereignty does not come from the divine right of a king, who grants his subjects such power as he pleases or is forced to concede, as in Magna Charta. The sovereign power is in the people. I believe this is one of the great meanings in the revelation which tells us that God established the Constitution of the United States,“That every man may act … according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.“Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another.“And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land.” (D&C 101:78–80.)
In other words, the most desirable condition for the effective exercise of God-given moral agency is a condition of maximum freedom and responsibility. In this condition men are accountable for their own sins and cannot blame their political conditions on their bondage to a king or a tyrant. This condition is achieved when the people are sovereign, as they are under the Constitution God established in the United States. From this it follows that the most important words in the United States Constitution are the words in the preamble: “We, the people of the United States … do ordain and establish this Constitution.”
President Ezra Taft Benson expressed the fundamental principle of popular sovereignty when he said, “We [the people] are superior to government and should remain master over it, not the other way around.” 13 The Book of Mormon explains that principle in these words:
“An unrighteous king doth pervert the ways of all righteousness. …“Therefore, choose you by the voice of this people, judges, that ye may be judged according to the laws. …“Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people.” (Mosiah 29:23–26.)
Popular sovereignty necessarily implies popular responsibility. Instead of blaming their troubles on a king or other sovereign, all citizens must share the burdens and responsibilities of governing. As the Book of Mormon teaches, “The burden should come upon all the people, that every man might bear his part.” (Mosiah 29:34.)
President Clark’s third great fundamental was the equality of all men before the law. I believe that to be a corollary of popular sovereignty. When power comes from the people, there is no legitimacy in legal castes or classes or in failing to provide all citizens the equal protection of the laws.
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention did not originate the idea of popular sovereignty, since they lived in a century when many philosophers had argued that political power originated in a social contract. But the United States Constitution provided the first implementation of this principle. After two centuries in which Americans may have taken popular sovereignty for granted, it is helpful to be reminded of the difficulties in that pioneering effort.
To begin with, a direct democracy was impractical for a country of four million people and about a half million square miles. As a result, the delegates had to design the structure of a constitutional, representative democracy, what they called “a Republican Form of Government.”The delegates also had to resolve whether a constitution adopted by popular sovereignty could be amended, and if so, how.
Finally, the delegates had to decide how minority rights could be protected when the government was, by definition, controlled by the majority of the sovereign people.A government based on popular sovereignty must be responsive to the people, but it must also be stable or it cannot govern. A constitution must therefore give government the power to withstand the cries of a majority of the people in the short run, though it must obviously be subject to their direction in the long run.
Without some government stability against an outraged majority, government could not protect minority rights. As President Clark declared:“The Constitution was framed in order to protect minorities. That is the purpose of written constitutions. In order that the minorities might be protected in the matter of amendments under our Constitution, the Lord required that the amendments should be made only through the operation of very large majorities—two-thirds for action in the Senate, and three-fourths as among the states. This is the inspired, prescribed order.”
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention achieved the required balance between popular sovereignty and stability through a power of amendment that was ultimately available but deliberately slow. Only in this way could the government have the certainty of stability, the protection of minority rights, and the potential of change, all at the same time.
To summarize, I see divine inspiration in these four great fundamentals of the U.S. Constitution: the separation of powers in the three branches of government; the Bill of Rights; the division of powers between the states and the federal government; and the application of popular sovereignty.
5. The rule of law and not of men. Further, there is divine inspiration in the fundamental underlying premise of this whole constitutional order. All the blessings enjoyed under the United States Constitution are dependent upon the rule of law. That is why President J. Reuben Clark said, “Our allegiance run[s] to the Constitution and to the principles which it embodies, and not to individuals.” 16 The rule of law is the basis of liberty.
As the Lord declared in modern revelation, constitutional laws are justifiable before him, “and the law also maketh you free.” (D&C 98:5–8.) The self-control by which citizens subject themselves to law strengthens the freedom of all citizens and honors the divinely inspired Constitution.Citizen Responsibilities
U.S. citizens have an inspired Constitution, and therefore, what? Does the belief that the U.S. Constitution is divinely inspired affect citizens’ behavior toward law and government? It should and it does.
U.S. citizens should follow the First Presidency’s counsel to study the Constitution. 17 They should be familiar with its great fundamentals: the separation of powers, the individual guarantees in the Bill of Rights, the structure of federalism, the sovereignty of the people, and the principles of the rule of the law. They should oppose any infringement of these inspired fundamentals.
They should be law-abiding citizens, supportive of national, state, and local governments. The twelfth Article of Faith declares:“We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.”
The Church’s official declaration of belief states:
“We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them. …
“We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside.” (D&C 134:1, 5.)
Those who enjoy the blessings of liberty under a divinely inspired constitution should promote morality, and they should practice what the Founding Fathers called “civic virtue.” In his address on the U.S. Constitution, President Ezra Taft Benson quoted this important observation by John Adams, the second president of the United States:“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Similarly, James Madison, who is known as the “Father of the Constitution,” stated his assumption that there had to be “sufficient virtue among men for self-government.” He argued in the Federalist Papers that “republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form.”
It is part of our civic duty to be moral in our conduct toward all people. There is no place in responsible citizenship for dishonesty or deceit or for willful law breaking of any kind. We believe with the author of Proverbs that “righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.” (Prov. 14:34.) The personal righteousness of citizens will strengthen a nation more than the force of its arms.
Citizens should also be practitioners of civic virtue in their conduct toward government. They should be ever willing to fulfill the duties of citizenship. This includes compulsory duties like military service and the numerous voluntary actions they must take if they are to preserve the principle of limited government through citizen self-reliance. For example, since U.S. citizens value the right of trial by jury, they must be willing to serve on juries, even those involving unsavory subject matter. Citizens who favor morality cannot leave the enforcement of moral laws to jurors who oppose them.