An Informative Weblog

Location: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, United States

Eighty-nine year old fledgling Editor of Snake Hunters. Combat Veteran of WWII, 10th Mountain Division, Italy. AAU Swim Coach, 29 Palms, Yucca Valley, Calif. Mobile Park, Retail Furniture, Indian Gaming Casinos in San Diego County,Concessionaire/ CO + State Fair. This Editor is never "too busy" or too old to Defend this nation in a Time of War..Never too busy to confront enemies here at home, , or foreign enemies that hate our 1st Amendment Freedoms. We support our military families, and their combat men & women troopers oveseas. ISRAEL'S P.M. HAS SAID: "We Are The Only Democracy In The Middle East... The Only Defence Israel Has Against Lies Is To Tell The Truth." - P. M. Benjamin Netanyahu. >> THE NEXT GENERATION IS NOW YOURS...TO PROTECT AND DEFEND Aware sponsors may choose to comment here.... Welcome! . ETERNAL VIGILANCE IS THE PRICE AWARE CITIZENS MUST PAY. HelpVets? TRY *** SUPPORT THE D.A.V. *** Thank You! ** We Support AMA --Just Say NO to the Left Wing AARP & ObamaCare ** And Stay Vigilant!

Tuesday, April 01, 2014


By Bill O'Reilly

According to a new poll by The Hill newspaper, 69% of Americans now believe the USA is in "decline." In addition, a whopping 83% indicate they are worried about America's future.

Very sobering. So what's going on?

If you study history, you know that America was built on self-reliance and personal achievement. In the early years of the Republic, the federal and state governments pretty much stayed out of the way as folks built businesses and communities. There were absolutely no public safety nets. If you failed, it was up to you to survive.

Because of that circumstance, the citizens of America became strong. The motto "Don't Tread On Me" was absolutely appropriate. Hardship was accepted as a part of life. Self-sacrifice for the good of others was the order of the day. Cowardice and narcissism were condemned everywhere.

And so, the world's greatest and strongest country was built. Not by pinheaded bureaucrats, but by the blood and sacrifice of hard-working folks. Each generation had strong role models to follow. There were rules of conduct, and a dominant Judeo-Christian signpost. As Superman well knew, it was "truth, justice, and the American way."

But things have changed.

The collapse of tradition began in the late 1960s when the Vietnam War raged. For the first time, Americans could see the horrors of combat in their living rooms. And that war was largely undefined, especially for younger people. What the hell was the USA doing in southeast Asia? Why were young men being drafted into a conflict few understood? In order to win any war, you need dynamic leadership. President Lyndon Johnson failed to provide it.

Out went the baby with the bathwater. In came drugs, free love, and a suspicion of authority. No longer was the United States a noble nation in the eyes of many of its own citizens who began to see their country as an oppressor. America became a divided nation. Traditions eroded quickly as many people began doing their "own thing." No longer was there a widely accepted code of conduct.

Self-reliance remained the key to success in our capitalistic system, but for those who declined to compete, the federal government stepped in to lend support. As the family structure collapsed, entitlements became more common as children and single mothers had to be supported. The vexing issues of racial inequality and persistent poverty brought about ultra-expensive social engineering. Liberal Americans looked to the Western European model of cradle-to-grave support as a panacea for "income inequality." The view that Washington has a moral obligation to provide a decent lifestyle for everyone took root.

That philosophy, currently embraced by President Obama, has led to massive debt, which, in turn, has created chaos in the private marketplace. In this world, a strong economic base is the foundation of power. America has lost that base.

And so, once again, the folks are right. The United States is in decline. And only we the people can reverse that.

We have to depend on ourselves.

Thursday, March 13, 2014


By Tabitha Korol

Sweden is the seventh richest country in the world in terms of GDP per capita and its high standard of living. It is famous for supporting the Norwegian resistance during World War II; for helping to rescue Danish Jews from deportation to concentration camps; and for its native son, Raoul Wallenberg, who rescued up to 100,000 Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust.

We recognize Sweden as the country that gave us the incomparable Ingrid Bergman and Greta Garbo, writers Ingmar Bergman and August Strindberg, IKEA furniture, high-quality steel production, the Volvo, the pop group ABBA, and Pippi Longstocking.

But Sweden's latest source of prominence, its third largest city, Malmo, founded c. 1275, is now known as the City to Leave. Its Jewish population is fleeing, as Malmo has become home to Muslim immigrants, antisemitism and violence, which has earned for Sweden the dubious distinction of Rape Capital of the World. How is it possible for the Muslims to comprise a mere 6% of Sweden's population, yet be responsible for 77% of the rapes committed? According to the Counter Jihad report, one in four Swedish women will be raped, some killed, as sexual assaults increase by 500%.

Now, since President Obama invited 80,000 Muslims into the United States, with a promise of 100,000 per year over the next five years, and studies show that Islamic immigration brings a rise in rates of rape and molestation, there can be no doubt that we will see a corresponding increase in rape crime in America accordingly.

Is rape a fundamental part of Muslim culture? Egyptian-born Nonie Darwish, in her book, And Now They Call Me Infidel, explains the Muslim mentality that is formed by their family dynamics and interaction and by constant dissatisfaction.

Youths may not date, fall in love, or even communicate with the opposite sex. Women are severely oppressed from childhood, and not allowed to form friendships. A woman is the source of a man's pride or shame. She is made to suffer ritual female genital mutilation; her physical appearance must be concealed; she is prohibited from living as freely as men; and she must obey strict Shari'a law – to either suffer in a polygamous marriage that encourages jealousy and diminishes her importance, or to become an Islamic slave in a brief marriage – as brief as a few hours. Divorce is the male's option, as easy as saying "I divorce you." Since there is no common property between husband and wife, and his property does not automatically go to the wife after his death, the "one-night stand" is legal under Shari'a law.

There are also a number of taboos and laws that not only undermine a woman's security and self-respect, but also dominate her relationship to her children and others. The result is an environment that sets women up against each other, poisoned with distrust, grief, isolation, and financial insecurity.

What better way of defining the exploitation of sexual favors, forced labor or services, slavery or similar practices of servitude of one person (an underage female) by her parent to another adult (called a husband), than by human trafficking – the deception and coercion used by the parent when he/she transfers parental custody to the stranger, accompanied by an exchange of payment.

Men are also impacted by Shari'a law. Because his honor is determined by the female's behavior, he becomes despotic, and may even kill his wife and children to endorse his dignity. The men are first raised by their unhappy, demoralized mothers in a sexually oppressive society, where he is also economically unable to keep up with the older men who can buy any number of liaisons and support as many as four wives. The first-born son is also needed as protection of his mother against her husband's unjust treatment. All this leads to interlocking loyalties, fears, and unusual bonding, if any.

Polygamy deprives everyone of the intimacy and security found in a monogamous or faithful marriage. Although the man governs his women, in all other circumstances, he endures indignity, humility, and degradation from all who live within a brutal regime. With abuse in every part of his life, including the workplace, he is disaffected, angry, ripe for fundamentalism – even eager to give up his life for the promise of heaven and the elusive sexual satisfaction.

The populace is taught to stay in the tribe, to never befriend the outsiders, and to fervently focus on hating Israel and the West, even if they know nothing about those countries or people. The hate becomes their identity, blaming the West for their culture's failure. If their military leadership fails, if life is difficult, the economy bad, they feel less victimized if they can place the blame elsewhere. It's a simple fact that no one takes responsibility for anything in Islam and everyone blames everyone else.

A polygamous society lacks cohesion and fellowship and is based on distrust, with hatred being at the surface, boiling and ready to explode against the most vulnerable. This is nihilism** – the man's harming the woman, stealing her humanity and security. It is what the jihadist hopes to do to the civilization that he has invaded.

And this all leads to an article that came to my attention – students in a biology class at the University of Iowa are being taught that rape is "human nature." Regarding criminal sexual assaults as human nature is obviously offensive and dismissive, a way of allowing or even encouraging the behavior to continue. While certain university professors suggested rape "has an evolutionary origin ... genetically developed strategy sustained over generations of human life...a successful reproductive strategy," it is entirely unacceptable in a civilized society, an act for which the perpetrator must be severely punished.

The sanctioning of rape is being insinuated into our culture through our youth as yet another tentacle of Islamization. We will not accept cruelty and criminal behavior as human nature. We have evolved considerably since a code of high morality, ethics, compassion and justice was put into place by the Hebrews during the Bronze/Iron age. We will not sink to the depths of degradation offered by a culture that, centuries later, brought the antithesis of our society to the world.

What the students should be learning is that not all cultures are civilized, that it is important to realize and nurture our own exceptionalism compared to those that are bent on humanity's destruction, and that an ideal civilization controls, contains, and rejects the elements of human nature that harm and devalue others – women, for example. This is one of many of the proverbial slippery slopes, where the liberal thinker accommodates the Islamist, and rejects morality, the American Constitution, and the future designed for us by our Founding Fathers.


1. total rejection of established laws and institutions.

2. anarchy, terrorism, or other revolutionary activity.

3. total and absolute destructiveness, especially toward the world at large and including oneself.

*The Title is derived from Hosea's prophesy, "They have sown the wind and they shall reap the whirlwind."

Thursday, March 06, 2014


By Marshall Frank

Radical Islam Once again, the world standing of the United States has dropped another critical notch on the international front. Only this time, it was a quite coup under the radar. Few people have heard about it. But it is VERY significant.

While the Olympic Games were going on in mid-February, most people were not aware that a significant powwow took place in Moscow between Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Chief of the Egyptian Army, Field Marshal Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. In the meeting, Putin pledged economic assistance to Egypt’s new government and further supported al-Sisi’s projected run to be Egypt’s next president.

And where is the U.S.? We’re out. Our relationship with secular Egypt is history. Egypt is the strongest nation in the Arab world, with whom the U.S. has enjoyed a strong and important allied relationship for the last thirty years. That also strengthened the security situation for Israel who relied on our ties to Egypt, one of only two counties that signed a peace accord with the Jewish state when Carter was president.

How did this all fall apart?
The so-called Arab Spring which started in 2011 was nothing more than a monstrous planned take-over of Islamic countries by the notorious Muslim Brotherhood. It was supported by the U.S. President Barack Obama. Playing to the objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama openly called for the ouster of Egypt President Hosni Mubarak, our ally. He also called for the ouster of Lybia’s Moammar Ghadaffi, even deploying military support of “rebels” (i.e. Muslim Brotherhood terrorists) without gaining approval of congress. We all know the end result in Lybia: al Qaeda, al-Sharia, and a new Islamist government which helped to murder our Ambassador, and three other Americans two years ago.

When the Muslim Brotherhood first gained control of the government under Mohammed Morsi, the few Jewish synagogues were destroyed along with more than 40 Christian churches throughout Egypt. Islamic extremism was in, moderation was out.
The Obama administration supported these pro-Morsi uprisings.

But it backfired. In 2013, the Egyptian people – by the mega-millions – took to the streets in major cities and virtually ousted the Muslim Brotherhood’s Morsi government because they knew it was now or never: They wanted to be free; they wanted to be secular; they wanted nothing to do with the fundamentalism of the Muslim Brotherhood. It was similar to the Nazi takeover of 1932-33, only the German people didn’t see what was coming, the Egyptians did. So the Egyptians took back their country, arrested Morsi and declared the Muslim Brotherhood illegal, as it had been when Mubarak was president.

All of these upheavals and consequent killings would never have occurred, had it not been for the support of the Muslim Brotherhood by the U.S. government.

Feeling betrayed, the Egyptian people turned against the United States government, feeling betrayed. In cities like Cairo and Alexandria, citizens hoisted banners everywhere declaring Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson and President Barack Obama as supporters of terrorism, unwelcomed in Egypt.

The American mainstream media played all this down, including Fox News, but the facts are out there for anyone willing to dig for answers. The American government is now persona non-gratia in Egypt – the most important Arab nation in the middle east.
Fault clearly lies at the doorstep of the White House and the Obama administration, who has been cozying with the Muslim Brotherhood since taking office. When the Egyptian takeover failed, thanks to the free-spirited Egyptian people, the U.S. relationship died. We’re no longer trusted. A new and unwanted foreign relations vacuum has predictably been filled by another nation: Russia.

Putin wins again.
Click here: Putin Backs an al-Sisi Egypt Presidency in Moscow Meeting |

While our attention is directed toward other international venues, our eyes are no longer focused on the colossal failure in Egypt. While the American people might by ignorant of the egregious actions of our administration, the Egyptian people are certainly up-to-date. They have to be. They had the most to lose. When the domestic rebellion against the Muslim Brotherhood hit the streets of major cities there, ubiquitous signs and placards clearly expressed the people’s disdain for the Obama team. (see photos below)
These people are not right-wing nuts. These people are not fans of Fox News. They are not liberal or conservative. They are not racists. They are freedom-loving Egyptian people who refused to live under the yoke of Islamic fascism.
Check out these images from Egypt when the anti-Morsi, anti-Muslim Brotherhood rebellion was going on. (This is just a sampling)

This should be a book, not an article, there is so much to the story. But when it’s all analyzed, ask yourselves: How are we doing on the international stage? Would there have been a so-called Arab Spring (Muslim Brotherhood uprising) if not for the backing of Barack Obama? Considering all the destruction and deaths that followed, whose hands are stained with the blood of those people?
Click here: Egyptian Lawyers Charge Obama With Crimes Against Humanity; Accessory to Muslim Brotherhood Violence | The Gateway

Saturday, March 01, 2014


A one time investment of $2 billion – less than the cost of the 2012 Presidential election - would provide our national electric grid robust EMP protection. Yet, Congress hasn’t passed the SHIELD ACT.
On June 18, the Congressional EMP Caucus held a public event to launch the SHIELD ACT that would protect the national electric grid from natural or man-made Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) It works like a super-energetic radio wave that can damage and destroy all electronic systems across vast regions, potentially across the Entire Continental United States. EMP is harmless to people in its direct effects, but it would create the failure of critical infrastructures that sustain our lives, such as electricity , water, communication and literately everything we depend on today; trains will collide, planes could crash and ships could sink. Anyone with an implanted medical devise could die, banks would shut down as would their ATMs… and on and on. Clearly, the Indirect Effects of EMP would be Genocidal.

EMP is a high-tech means of killing millions of people. The old fashioned way –was through starvation, disease, and societal collapse.

An EMP can be generated by a terrorist or rogue state nuclear missile, perhaps launched off a freighter near our shores to preserve anonymity, and burst at high-altitude over the United States. In this manner, a single crude nuclear weapon, lofted by a primitive short-range missile, could generate an EMP that would destroy electronics and electric power everywhere, stopping the operation of the critical infrastructures–power, transportation, communications, banking and finance, food and water–that are vital to the existence of modern society and the survival of the American people.

Iran, the world’s chief sponsor of international terrorism, openly writes about eliminating the United States with an EMP attack, has conducted live missile launches simulating EMP attacks, and has practiced missile launching from a vessel in the Caspian Sea. North Korea, China and Russia also make no secret of their preparations to Destroy the United States with ELECTRO-MAGNETIC PULSE!

A ship-launched EMP attack by terrorists or rogue states would conceal the identity of the attacker, so we might never know who hit us.

An EMP can also be generated by the Sun. A solar flare or coronal mass ejection can generate a rare geomagnetic super-storm similar to an EMP attack from a high-yield nuclear weapon, with equally catastrophic consequences. The last geomagnetic super-storm was the Carrington Event of 1859, that caused worldwide damage and fires in telegraph stations and other primitive electronics–none of which were then necessary for societal survival.

No geomagnetic super-storm has occurred since 1859 to threaten the existence of our increasingly electronic society. Great geomagnetic storms are estimated to occur every century or so. Many scientists think we are overdue. Many believe there is a heightened risk of a geomagnetic super-storm during the peak of the solar maximum, that is occurring now and will last through 2013. The solar maximum recurs every 11 years.

A Carrington-class geomagnetic super-storm, that could collapse electric grids and critical infrastructures everywhere on Earth, is someday inevitable

The above findings represent the mainstream scientific consensus, first established by the congressionally mandated EMP Commission, which examined the nuclear and natural EMP threat for eight years, delivering its final report to Congress in 2008. The National Academy of Sciences subsequently independently re-examined the EMP Commission’s warnings about the consequences of a geomagnetic super-storm, and arrived at the same conclusion, and endorsed the recommendations of the EMP Commission.

In 2009, the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States re-examined the EMP threat from terrorists and rogue states, and likewise independently concurred with the EMP Commission’s warning and recommendations. Through 2010, several other major U.S. government studies, including by the Department of Energy and an interagency study led by the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, have again re-examined the nuclear and natural EMP threat, concurred with the EMP Commission’s warning, and urged immediate implementation of the EMP Commission’s recommendations.

Most recently, in December 2012, the National Intelligence Council, which speaks for the entire U.S. Intelligence Community, published an unclassified report Global Trends 2030 that warned an EMP is one of only eight “Black Swan” events that could change the course of global civilization by or before 2030. So there is an official consensus on the EMP threat within the U.S. Government studies, with no official study dissenting from the view that EMP is a potentially catastrophic threat that needs to be addressed, Urgently.

The EMP Commission warned that, given our current state of unpreparedness, within 12 months of a catastrophic EMP event, some two-thirds to 90 percent of the total U.S. population, more than 200 million Americans, would perish from starvation, disease and societal collapse.

The good news is that the EMP Commission provided a cost-effective plan, endorsed by all subsequent U.S. government studies, that could within a few years protect U.S. critical infrastructures from the worst effects of EMP. Indeed, protecting the 300 most important high-energy transformers that are indispensable to the national power grid is estimated to cost $100-200 million–about one dollar for every American life that would be saved. This alone is probably not sufficient protection, but it is the absolute minimum necessary to create the possibility of saving millions of American lives.

The SHIELD ACT, introduced by Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) and co-sponsored by Congresswoman Yvette Clarke (D-NY), would implement one of the most important recommendations of the EMP Commission. SHIELD would empower the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to require the electric power industry to protect the national grid from EMP. SHIELD would require industry to protect the grid by selective “hardening” of vital components by using surge arrestors, blocking devices, faraday cages and other proven technologies that the Department of Defense has known for fifty years can reliably protect military systems from EMP.

There is no excuse to risk millions of American lives by failing to protect the grid. The Congressional EMP Commission estimated robust EMP protection of the national electric grid can be accomplished by a one-time investment of $2 billion dollars–which is what the U.S. gives to Pakistan every year in foreign aid. The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission estimates that protecting the national grid could be accomplished at a cost to the average rate payer of merely 20 cents annually.

The electric grid is the “keystone” of the critical infrastructures as everything, all the other critical infrastructures that sustain our economy and our existence as a modern society depend, directly or indirectly, upon electricity. Enactment of the SHIELD ACT and protection of the national electric grid will be a giant step forward toward securing our nation against the effects of an EMP Catastrophe.


*Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, Executive Director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, a Congressional Advisory Board. He served in the Congressional EMP Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA. His books Electric Armageddon and Apocalypse Unknown are available through and

Sunday, February 16, 2014


By John Porter

We Are Getting Closer To The Abyss Than We Think.

What was the purpose of the founding of these United States of America and the creation of our Constitution? Before the migration from Europe to this newly discovered land, all people of the civilized world were ruled by Kings. Even the original thirteen established states of this new land were ruled, as a colony, by the King of England.

Then something very profound and monumental took place, Independence was declared and the American Revolution was underway.  A war for the freedom of man insued. A group of men bent on their desire to be free and rule themselves in a land where the government answered to the people and not the people answering to the King and his court, rose up and risked their lives and fortunes in an attempt to end government dictating to, taxing at will, and over regulating the people. Through the shedding of their blood and fortune the American Constitutional Republic was born, an experiment in self government. As you know the opening shot fired in that revolution was called “the shot heard round the world.” It was so called because it was a rebellion against, not only the King of England, but against mankind being ruled by kings.

Kings, and dictatorial leaders all over the world heard that shot. They heard the shot that proclaimed that men were now in rebellion to being subjects of a government, or king, and willing to challenge it.

We Americans celebrate on July 4th every year, the marking of American Independence from England and its king, a very radical departure from governments which prevailed all over, “round the world,” at that time, and for thousands of years before. Never before in those thousands of years had the rule of kings* ever been challenged. Kings challenged each other, but never had the people challenged the kings and their rule.

  *Addendum: { It was known for many generations as "The Devine Right Of Kings" }

Is The United States An Exceptional Country? Barack Obama has stated publicly that he doesn't think it is. I quote Thomas Sowell, “You couldn’t be more exceptional in the 18th century than to create your fundamental document, the Constitution of the United States, by opening with the momentous words, “We the people…”

Those three words were a slap in the face to those who thought themselves entitled to rule, and regarded the people as if they were simply human livestock, destined to be herded and shepherded by their betters. Indeed, to this very day, the elite who think that way, and that includes many among those who regard themselves as the educated and enlightened class, as well as the Liberal news media and political messiahs, find the Constitution of the United States a real pain because it stands in the way of them imposing their will and their presumptions on the rest of us.

Barack Obama stated in a public interview on T V, "The founders made it very hard to change things as quickly as I want to." He also stated in a public speech, "If congress doesn't do what I think is necessary, I won't wait on them, I'll do it anyway." And again only, two weeks ago, he says in a televised interview, "We're not just going to be waiting for legislation. I've got a pen and I've got a phone. And I can use that pen to sign executive orders." Never before in American history has any president so blatantly and openly shown such disregard and out and out contempt for our Constitution as the rule of law. He just simply ignores it. It is very apparent that his swearing to "uphold and defend" it, upon taking the oath of office, means absolutely nothing to him.

A campaign was started many years ago by President Woodrow Wilson, and continues today, to undermine and discredit the United States Constitution. Those efforts are headed today by the Progressive Liberals (Socialists) both in our news media and our federal government, and they are led, among others, by Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, George Soros, and MSNBC.

The managing editor of Time Magazine, Richard Stengle, in an essay he wrote is a case in point, where he says, “If the Constitution was intended to limit the federal government, it certainly doesn’t say so.” Mr. Stengle, I would like to direct you to the Tenth Amendment of that document, for apparently you have not read it. It reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or the people.”

Our Constitution was designed to create a framework for a Federal Government—and worded to keep the government inside that framework. In other words, the Constitution exists for the purpose of limiting the powers of the Federal Government. “Does the Constitution matter?” “If it doesn’t, then neither does our freedom."

America, we are on a collision course with full-blown Socialism.

On November 4th all 435 seats of the House of Representitives and 36 Senate seats will be constitutionally vacated for us to refill. We are in charge of who will sit in them. Allow me to suggest, if we do not replace the "Progressive Liberals" with men and women who are defenders of our Constitution, we will be giving Barack Obama two more years of full power to complete his burning mission to turn this nation into the Socialist States of America. The Constitutional Republic of These United States of America will no longer exist and our Individual Liberty, to make and be responsible for our own decisions, will be gone from our lives forever.  { End }

Wednesday, February 12, 2014



By Andrew Napolitano

Andrew Napolitano a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written eight books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent are "The Freedom Answer Book" and "Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom." To find out more about Judge Napolitano and to read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit

Fidelity to the rule of law is the centerpiece of a free society. It means that no one is beneath the protection of the law and no one is absolved of the obligation to comply with it. The government may not make a person or a class of persons exempt from constitutional protections, as it did during slavery, nor may it make government officials exempt from complying with the law, as it does today.

Everyone who works for the government in the United States takes an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws written pursuant to it. In our system of government, we expect that Congress will write the laws, the courts will interpret them and the president will enforce them. Indeed, the Constitution states that it is the president’s affirmative duty to enforce the law. That duty is not an abstract formulation. Rather, it means the president cannot decline to enforce laws with which he disagrees or whose enforcement might cause him or his political allies to lose popularity. It also means the president cannot make up his own version of the law as a substitute for what the Constitution commands or Congress has written.

In the modern era, presidents have rejected the value of the rule of law and instead followed their own political interests. President George W. Bush, for example, while signing into law a federal statute prohibiting the government from reading your mail without a search warrant, boasted that he had no intention of enforcing that law – and we know that he famously did not enforce it.

But no modern president has picked and chosen which laws to enforce and which to ignore and which to rewrite to the extremes of President Obama. His radical rejection of the rule of law, which presents a clear and present danger to the freedom of us all, has had fatal consequences.

The law requires that if American tax dollars are being given to the government of another country, and that government is toppled by its military – the common phrase is a coup d’etat – the flow of cash shall stop immediately, lest we support financially those who have betrayed our values.

In Egypt, the military arrested the president, suspended the Constitution and installed a puppet regime. But Obama, embarrassed at the fall of the popularly elected but religiously fanatical government he supported, refuses to consider that military takeover a coup. Instead he has called it a popular uprising supported by the military, and he has continued the flow of your dollars into the hands of a military that has been murdering scores of peaceful demonstrators daily in the streets of Cairo.

The president’s signature domestic legislation – Obamacare – is scheduled to become effective in stages. One of its provisions, requiring employers of more than 50 persons to offer health insurance acceptable to the feds to all of their employees, becomes effective on Jan. 1, 2014. In anticipation of its becoming law, insurance carriers and employers have calculated that instead of costs going down, as the president promised, they will certainly go up, resulting in the loss of jobs. So the president, mindful of the midterm congressional elections in November 2014 and fearful that Democrats who supported this law might suffer at the polls at the hands of deceived and thus angry voters, announced on the Fourth of July weekend that he planned not to enforce that provision until Jan. 1, 2015.

Judge Napolitano’s brand new book explains how the government is taking your constitutional freedoms and how you can fight back: “The Freedom Answer Book”

When he wanted to use military force in Libya and Pakistan – two allies – without congressional approval, out of fear, no doubt, that Congress might turn him down, he dispatched the CIA to do his killing. Why? Because federal law requires that he report all offensive use of the military to Congress and eventually obtain its approval for continued use. Because the CIA largely operates in secrecy, the president needn’t report its behavior publicly or even acknowledge that it took place.

In the same vein, he recently moved all records of the Osama bin Laden killing from the military – which carried it out – to the CIA. Why? Because the military is largely susceptible to the Freedom of Information Act, which commands transparency, and the CIA is largely not. He probably fears that the truthful version of bin Laden’s demise will become known. If so, it would be the fourth version of those events his administration has given.

When he wanted to kill an American and his 16-year-old son in Yemen because the American, though uncharged with any crime and unasked to come home, might be difficult to arrest while advocating war in a foreign country, he wrote his own rules for governing his own killings. He did so in secret and notwithstanding clear language in the Constitution expressly prohibiting the government from taking life, liberty or property without due process of law.

And when he wanted to keep us safe from terrorists but servile to him by spying on all of us, he established an enormous network of domestic spies who have access to all of our phone calls, emails and text messages. And he did this despite unambiguous language in the Constitution requiring a search warrant based on particularized probable cause of crime about the records he wanted to seize or the venues he wanted to search.

What’s going on?

What we have is a runaway government, dismissive of the Constitution it has sworn to uphold, contemptuous of the law it is required to enforce and driven by its own values of maximum control and minimum personal freedom. And we have a Congress supine enough to let this happen, as well as a judiciary so tangled in its own arcane procedures that immeasurable human freedom will be destroyed and Obama out of office before any meaningful judicial review can be had.

Is this the rule of law? What shall we do about it?

Saturday, February 01, 2014


By Tabitha Korol

Vijay Prashad’s propagandist diatribe in the Washington Post (A Caution to Israel, Jan. 26) contained abundant inaccuracies, with the obvious intent to disparage Israel and uphold the jihadist narrative. Under international law, Israel is not an occupier of Judea and Samaria. Jordan was never sovereign over the area after winning its 1948 aggressive war against Israel or after losing its 1967 aggressive war against Israel. However, because Arabs refused the partition, and could not win land militarily, they created a narrative to gain worldwide sympathy. It is well known that Arabs learned that Jews regained Israel and sympathy after WW II, and took on the mantle of victimhood for themselves. We are now all endangered by these pretenders.

Palestinians have the same academic freedoms as Jewish and Christian citizens in Israel, a democracy. It is the Islamic countries that deny basic human rights not only to Jews and Christians, but to their own women and children. If the cowardly world stood up against the Islamic-fascist bigotry, hate, and terrorism today, we might be able to retrieve the freedoms and peace we are all losing for tomorrow.

Saturday, January 25, 2014


Bio: Charles Krauthammer, born March 13, 1950 in NYC. An American… Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist and journalist, and physician. His weekly column is syndicated to over 400 newspapers world wide. Credits: The New Republic (1981-2011), Washington Post, 1985 to present, The Weekly Standard, Inside Washington (1990-2013); also a nightly panelist on Fox News.

Charles Krauthammer: "I love to hear the president whine about FOX News and Talk Radio. I think we aught to be proud of the fact that we annoy him so much. if you look at the line-up on one side, the liberal media, you start with ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, PBS, MSNBC, the elite newspapers, the one remaining news magazine, the universities, Hollywood,-- it doesn't stop anywhere. And, on the other side, talk radio and FOX News.

And, they can't stand the fact that they no longer have a MONOPOLY!

So, I think it aught to be taken as a compliment. What I've always said about Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdock, their genius was understanding and locating a niche in the broadcast cable news, which is half of the American people. The half that have suffered for decades by the fact you get the news presented from a single perspective, over and over again.

Finally, the fact that there is a new perspective, talk radio, and FOX, and they can't stand it. it's a source of pride, I would say."

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Beheadings, Bombings and
New York’s Little Bangladesh

By Daniel Greenfield

Walk along Church Avenue and turn east onto McDonald Avenue and you will see where the old standards of working class Brooklyn, aging homes with faded American flags and loose siding, surly bars tucked into the shadows of street corners and the last video stores hanging on to a dying industry give way to mosques and grocery stores selling goat meat.
Mosques grow like mushrooms in basements, cell phone stores offer easy ways to wire money back to Bangladesh and old men glare at interlopers, especially if they are infidel women.

This is where Mohammed Siddiquee settled a dispute the old-fashioned way by beheading his landlord.

Mohammed wasn’t the first man in Brooklyn to use violence to settle a rental dispute, but beheadings are more traditional in his native Bangladesh than in Brooklyn, though over in neighboring Queens, Ashrafuzzaman Khan, Bangladesh’s most wanted war criminal, heads up the local Islamic Circle of North America, whose Islamist thugs beheaded poets and buried professors in mass graves.
Here in Kensington, where the alphabet streets that march across Brooklyn down to the ocean begin, the bars retreat along with the alphabet from those areas marked by the crescent and the angry glare. And there is another one like it at the other end of the alphabet where the Atlantic Ocean terminates the letters at Avenue Z bookending the Brooklyn alphabet with angry old men and phone cards for Bangladesh.

These spots aren’t no-go zones yet. There aren’t enough young men with too much welfare and time on their hands who have learned that the police will back off when they burn enough things and councilmen will visit to get their side of the story. That generation will grow up being neither one thing nor the other, ricocheting from American pop culture to the Koran, from parties with the infidels to mosque study sessions until they explode from the contradictions the way that the Tsarnaevs, who huffed pot and the Koran in equal proportions, did.

It isn’t the old men who plant bombs near 8-year-olds. It isn’t the young women laughing with their friends outside a pizza parlor, knowing that in a year or two they will have to go back home for an arranged marriage. It is the young men who call themselves Freddy or Mo at the local high school or community college, who drink and do drugs and who all their American friends swear aren’t serious about religion, until they suddenly become fatally serious.

For now the Bangladeshi settlements in Brooklyn are quiet places where the tenements and shops close off the streets into small private worlds with their own justice systems, feuds and secrets.

“I feel like I’m living in my own country,” the editor of one of the Bangladeshi newspapers in New York, said. “You don’t have to learn English to live here. That’s a great thing!”
Overhead may be the same sky, but Little Bangladesh has been cut off from Brooklyn and attached to a country thousands of miles away. Immigrants step off a plane from Bangladesh at JFK airport, get into a taxi driven by a Bangladeshi playing Bengali pop tapes and step out into a small slice of Bangladesh on McDonald Avenue.

And when the infidels of Brooklyn wander into their territory, they are glared at as the foreign intruders that they are.
After Mohammed beheaded his landlord Mahmud, he rushed to JFK to catch a flight. It was natural for him to think that having settled matters in the traditional fashion; he could fly away without considering what lay in the intervening spaces of the American Dar al-Harb between the Dar al-Islam of Avenue C and the Dar al-Islam of Bangladesh.

For the Mohammeds of Brooklyn, the infidels are the empty air between the rungs of a ladder that their foot passes through without noticing. They are little aware of the other Brooklyn that they are pushing aside, the great stretches of the working middle class, the little homes where police officers and firefighters once lived together with teachers and clerks, where plumbers walked to work and bus drivers got on, where the thousands of small businesses from diners to pharmacies turned the grassy stretches of land into neighborhoods.

Bugs Bunny was born here with his Flatbush accent along with a million real workers, soldiers, sailors, inventors, engineers, bums and salesmen who won wars, broke cases, sobbed in bars and brought dinner home to their families. And now, like so much of the urban working class, they are being swept away by time and tide, not from the familiar shores of Coney Island, but by the murkier waters of the Karnaphuli River and the strange world that its tides bring to Brooklyn.

The city has always had its micro communities; Chinatown at the bottom of Manhattan and Little Tokyo near NYU, Little Brazil off Times Square and Koreatown a block up from the Empire State Building. The Russians have their stretch of Brighton Beach with its tea rooms and fur coats and Little Italy’s butcher shops, bakeries and rows of restaurants are still hanging on.
But Islam is not just a culture and the cultures who carry its baggage with them to the old worlds and the new are not toting it along like another ethnic food, a dialect or a national holiday.

In Chinatown, Buddhist temples and protestant churches sit side by side and in Latino neighborhoods, Adventist storefront churches and massive Catholic edifices co-exist; along with them can be found synagogues, Hindu and Zoroastrian temples and the whole dizzying array of religious diversity of a port city defined by its swells and tides of immigrants.

Bangladesh is more than 90 percent Muslim. Hindus are being attacked in the streets of its cities by Islamist mobs because Islam does not co-exist. The other religions of the city do not demand that everyone join them or acknowledge their supremacy and pay them protection money for the right to exist.

Islam does. Its immigration is also a Jihad, a form of supremacist manifest destiny to colonize the Dar al-Harb and subdue it to the will of a dead prophet with sheer numbers or sheer force.

The number of Bangladeshis in New York has increased by 20 percent in only four years to an estimated 74,000. And those numbers don’t take into account the unofficial Mohammeds living in basements while nursing their murderous grudges.

Jamaica, Queens is becoming the center of the Bangladeshi presence in New York. Another Mohammed, Quazi Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis, lived here in a low rise development of indistinguishable buildings crammed together and studded with satellite dishes so the dwellers could watch the television programs of their home countries, and plotted the mass murder of Americans.

“We will not stop until we attain victory or martyrdom,” he said in a video recorded before his planned attack. His modest goal, in his own words, was to “destroy America” and quoted “Sheikh Osama” to justify the killing of American women and children.
Mohammed described the United States as the Dar al-Harb, the realm of war, the territory yet to be conquered by the armies of Islam, and said that the only permissible reason for a Muslim to move to the United States was to conquer it by missionary work or by armed terror.

“I just want something big. Something very big,” Mohammed said, “make one step ahead, for the Muslims . . . that will make us one step closer to run the whole world.”

At this hour no one in Little Korea, Little Italy, Little Brazil, Brighton Beach or Koreatown is plotting to destroy America so that his religion can rule the world. That is what sets the Little Bangladeshes, Little Pakistans, Little Mogadishus and Little Egypts apart from every other immigrant group whose dreams for the future are not overshadowed by the iron dream of Islam.

Monday, January 20, 2014


By Lee Habeeb
How did it happen? How did a couple of Jewish kids from humble origins become two of the wealthiest men in America? They are remarkable tales, the stories of Home Depot cofounder Bernie Marcus and Las Vegas Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson. Stories few Americans know. Stories of how wealth is really created in our country. And by whom. Stories that could have happened only in America.
And so we must start these two stories where it’s best to start stories — in the beginning.

Both men grew up during the Great Depression, the children of first-generation Russian immigrants. Their parents didn’t come here to change America; they came here to have America change them. Change their life prospects, and those of their children.

Marcus was born in 1929, the son of a cabinetmaker, and grew up in a tenement in Newark, N.J. Adelson was born a few years later and a few hundred miles north in the tough Dorchester neighborhood of Boston. His father drove a taxi, and his mother ran a knitting shop.
They had little money growing up, but they were not poor; they were lucky to have families that instilled in them the value of self-reliance, accountability, and charity — “the age-old virtues,” Adelson wrote in a 2012 Wall Street Journal column, “that help make our communities prosperous.” Values that would shape their lives and prepare them for the challenges life would throw their way.

They were also lucky to grow up at a time when the culture reinforced those values. The studio moguls and directors of their youth — names such as Louis B. Mayer and Frank Capra — understood the American Dream because they were themselves products of immigrant families who embraced that very same dream.

So how did these two men get where they got from where they were from? Did they go to Ivy League colleges or get MBAs and work the halls of corporate management or the canyons of Wall Street?
It turns out that neither attended a fancy college, let alone business school. Marcus attended Rutgers and graduated with a pharmacy degree; Adelson attended New York’s City College and dropped out. Their education was real-life business, their graduate school the school of trial and error. But both men possessed the tenacity to overcome obstacles that no college can impart and the capacity to take risks that MBA programs often crush.

They had varying degrees of success during their 20s and 30s, making good money — and in some cases losing even more. Marcus learned soon after graduating from college that he didn’t want to fill prescriptions for the rest of his life and that his real talent was in retail sales. He racked up big sales numbers wherever he went, and after 20-plus years of work found himself the CEO of Handy Dan Home Improvement Center in Los Angeles. Until he wasn’t. A disagreement with his boss left Marcus out of a job and on the street in his late 40s.

He didn’t know it at the time, but getting fired was the best thing that ever happened to him. In 1978, with the help of investment banker Ken Langone and partner Arthur Blank, he launched The Home Depot. The store revolutionized the home-improvement business with its warehouse concept and turned millions of homeowners into do-it-yourself contractors. And it turned Marcus into a billionaire.
Adelson’s is a classic entrepreneur’s story. He started his first business when he was 12, and he never stopped starting them. After a brief stint in the Army and college, he worked as a mortgage broker and investment adviser and made his first small fortune. In the early 1960s he moved back to Boston and invested in various companies, among them a travel-and-tour business, which were profitable. But the stock-market decline of the mid-1960s came, pushing Adelson into new lines of work. He found himself in the condominium-conversion business in the 1970s and did well for a short time. Until he didn’t.

Then came his big “break.” He bought a company that published magazines, one of which was a computer magazine, which soon led to the creation of the Computer Dealers Expo, or COMDEX. In 1995 he sold COMDEX to a Japanese firm for $860 million, with a personal share of over $500 million.

But Adelson didn’t stop there. He did what entrepreneurs are born to do: He took an even bigger risk and built the $1.5 billion Venetian Resort Hotel Casino and the Sands Expo and Convention Center in Las Vegas after a visit to Italy with his wife. Casinos in Macau and Singapore followed.

In 2009, Adelson suffered another blow, losing over 90 percent of his wealth as the stock market — and shares of his casino stock — plummeted. Rumors floated that his businesses were hovering at the edge of bankruptcy. The stock has since rebounded, making him one of the richest men in the world, but his attitude about the decline was consistent with the many economic ups and downs of his life. “So I lost $25 billion,” he told ABC News flippantly. “I started out with zero.”

They are classic underdog stories, the stories of Bernie and Sheldon. They started with nothing and created their wealth not by stealth or chicanery, manipulation or coercion. They did it by building businesses that people flocked to. They didn’t sit on their capital, or cash out early and spend their lives tanning in exotic locales and chasing exotic women. They put their wealth to work and used their God-given talents to create more wealth. They employed hundreds of thousands of people and created great sums of wealth for shareholders, many of whom were working-class Americans with pensions and 401(k)s invested in those businesses.
And yet somehow, men like this have come to be personified as bad guys? As part of the greedy 1 percent who are hurting this country? And making life harder for the middle class?

But it gets even better, this story of two American dreamers. And it reveals the dissonance between the reality of their lives and the caricature of America’s wealth creators and job creators perpetuated by our nation’s media and academic elites.
It turns out that both men weren’t just determined to build wealth; they were equally committed to giving it away. And not because they wanted the tax write-offs, but because charity was — and is — a fundamental part of their upbringing and heritage.
Both men were aware from their earliest days of tzedakah, a Hebrew word commonly used to mean charity. Both were taught from an early age that it was an obligation, not a choice, to give to those less fortunate than themselves.

“Five cents was a major issue in our lives,” Marcus told Philanthropy magazine. Occasionally, as a treat, the nickel would be spent on ice cream, he recalled, but just as often it would be used to help one cause or another. “I grew up knowing that this is what you do. It’s bred into me.”

Marcus and his wife, Billie, have done remarkable work with their wealth, and their wealth has done remarkable things for people with autism, soldiers struggling to make their way back into normal life after serving our country, and countless others. He contributed $250 million of the $300 million that was raised to build the Georgia Aquarium. It revitalized a neighborhood in Atlanta and will thrill kids and adults alike for decades to come. Marcus didn’t name the aquarium after himself, but after the state he calls home.
Adelson, too, has given generously to many causes. He and his wife, Miriam, a physician by training, have given to projects ranging from education to health, with a particular focus on medical research in the area of neural repair and rehabilitation. They have also given generously to Birthright Israel, which finances Jewish youth trips to Israel, and to Yad Vashem, Israel’s official memorial to the Jewish victims of the Holocaust.

Why do we know so little about either of these men? Or the lives of so many of the entrepreneurs who have built great American businesses? And given away so much of the wealth they’ve created? Because their life stories don’t comport with the narrative of those in charge of America’s cultural narrative.

The fact is that the lives of Bernie Marcus and Sheldon Adelson are a rebuttal to much of what passes for conventional wisdom about wealth creation in America’s newsrooms, studios, and media conglomerates, and too many economics departments in our finest colleges.
That’s why most Americans don’t know their stories, or the stories of so many other Americans who’ve turned their small businesses into bigger ones. And it’s why so many Americans know so little about how wealth is actually created — big and small fortunes alike.
It’s become harder to do — grow a business or accumulate savings. Ask any entrepreneur, and he’ll tell you the same thing: One of the biggest obstacles to success is our own government. Ask most hard-working Americans, and they’ll tell you the same thing about getting ahead: The government keeps expanding, and their paychecks keep shrinking.
Americans would love to learn how to build wealth — because we are builders by nature. And we learn best from storytelling. From the stories we hear from our culture.

In what may be the richest of ironies, it turns out that the means of production that matters most in America — the cultural means of production — is dominated by people who either don’t understand how wealth is created or don’t care. Many of them — most, I would bet — actually believe wealth redistribution is a better mechanism to improve the quality of ordinary Americans’ lives than is free enterprise.

What can be done? It’s not that complicated, actually. Our great wealth creators need to help build cultural means of production of our own. And get our stories to the American people. Because if we don’t tell them, no one will.

— Lee Habeeb is the vice president of content at Salem Radio Network and a senior adviser to AmericaStrong. He lives in Oxford, Miss., with his wife, Valerie


In a shocking move that makes counter-terrorism measures worthless, the Obama Administration is working to secure the “resettling” of some 30,000 Syrian Islamists within the United States. Syria’s civil war has displaced thousands of people. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that thousands of Syrians need new countries of residence, and the International Rescue Committee is making sure this happens. With this, the IRC made the audacious statement through Vice President for Public Policy Sharon Waxman, calling on the “US and other countries to open their doors to vulnerable Syrian refugees and notes that resettlement must be an integral part of the humanitarian response.” Forget all counter-terrorism measures that are put into place for the protection of this country. The Muslim Obama Administration will make sure that Syrian Islamists have a new home in America, that no jihadi will be turned away.

The gates of Hell have been opened, thanks to President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder, and radical progressives across the country. In successfully working to end “racial” profiling, albeit Muslim profiling, the next move is to secure the “settlement” of 30,000 Syrian Islamists within the United States. It won’t be done all at once, but if Obama and his minions of Muslim lovers have there way, at least 30,000 Islamists, and many more, will be calling America their home. For a President that has so openly supported Al-Qaeda in Syria recently, this is their open invitation to make a permanent home in the U.S., all under the guise of a “humanitarian outreach.”

The Wall Street Journal article, which was published on January 10, 2014 and written by Miriam Jordan reports:
U.S. plans to resettle thousands of Syrians displaced by their country’s civil war could hinge on those refugees receiving exemptions from laws aimed at preventing terrorists from entering the country.

A U.S. official stated publicly for the first time this week that some of the 30,000 especially vulnerable Syrians the United Nations hopes to resettle by the end of 2014 will be referred to the U.S. for resettlement.

More than two million Syrians have fled their country since the war erupted in 2011, creating the worst refugee crisis since the Rwandan genocide, advocates say. About 20 countries, mostly in Europe, have agreed to take 18,000 Syrians, according to United Nations High Commission for Refugees, or UNHCR, the agency charged with referrals.

The U.S. has not set a specific target for how many refugees it will resettle. But at a Senate hearing Tuesday, State Department Assistant Secretary Anne Richard said, “We expect to accept referrals for several thousand Syrian refugees in 2014.”
Post-9/11 immigration laws designed to keep out terrorists have had the unintended consequence of ensnaring some innocent people. For example, some of the provisions treat providing food or services to rebels—even those supported by the U.S.—as “material support” to terrorism.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), a key proponent of refugee resettlement, said the “overly broad” provisions would prevent a Syrian who gave a cigarette or a sandwich to a Free Syrian Army soldier from coming to the U.S. as a refugee.
al-qaedasyriaIf the idea of an influx of Syrian Islamists doesn’t send the American public into a full scale uproar, nothing will. This is an open Al-Qaeda immigration invitation. The great myth of the Left is that these people are simply “refugees,” and pose no harm. They are Syrian Islamists and they will wage jihad. Interestingly, nothing is ever brought up about the plight of Syrian Christians. All anyone is worried about are the lethal Islamists.

Jordan went on to add:
Molly Groom, acting deputy secretary for the Office of Immigration and Border Security at the Department of Homeland Security, acknowledged that “broad definitions” of terrorist activity under U.S. law were “often a hurdle to resettling otherwise eligible refugees who pose no security threat.” She said agencies were consulting to develop exemptions for the Syrians.
In recent years, DHS and the State and Justice Departments have exercised their authority to offer exemptions to some applicants, such as ethnic Burmese who provided food to guerrillas, and Iraqis who paid ransoms to groups for the release of kidnapped family members.
Anwen Hughes, a lawyer at Human Rights First who has studied the laws’ impact, said that the government has been “reactive, slow,” about giving exemptions up to now, and urged a swifter process, given the magnitude of the Syrian crisis.
The advocacy group has called on the U.S. to work to resettle 15,000 Syrians a year. The International Rescue Committee, another advocacy organization, is pressing the U.S. to set a goal of 12,000 Syrian refugees this year.
The U.S. leads the world in refugee resettlement. In the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, the U.S. received 70,000 refugees from 65 countries, including more than 19,000 from Iraq. In that year, more than 1,340 Syrians already in the U.S. applied for asylum.
The Huffington Post published an op-ed by Sharon Waxman, the Vice President of the International Rescue Committee, entitled “Open The Door To Syrian Refugees.”

Long-term resettlement will require an internationally coordinated strategy. Countries bordering Syria have been opening their doors for nearly three years and providing safe haven. They deserve enormous praise — and assistance — to support their efforts. But they cannot do it alone. Countries outside the region need to help by opening their borders to vulnerable Syrians.
In the short term, the international community must quickly make plans to resettle the 30,000 Syrian refugees proposed by the UN refugee agency. This represents merely 1.27 percent of the refugees who have so far fled Syria. The 20 countries around the world that together have committed to provide refuge to 18,300 vulnerable Syrians should be applauded. But they need to do far more to begin to meet the enormous and growing need. Three years into the civil war, resettlement must be a robust component of a multinational response.

The U.S.has expressed an interest in welcoming Syrian refugees for resettlement in 2014, but unlike other countries, it has not specified how many refugees it will seek to admit. The U.S. must delineate a clear policy. Consistent with its long-standing tradition of providing refuge for those fleeing persecution, the United States should announce its intention to resettle 12,000 Syrian refugees this year to address UNHCR’s call to resettle a total of 30,000 and more in future years.
Surely at some point the “transparent” Obama Administration was going to make Americans aware of the fact that there was going to be a “minor” influx of 30,000 jihadists into the United States. This is an outrage, but with out-of-control progressives calling this a “humanitarian mission” instead of what it really is, mass Syrian Islamic jihadist immigration, the truth gets lost among the lies. The only for sure outcome of this is deadly jihad, enough to cripple this already near capsized nation.


Saturday, January 18, 2014


By Caroline B. Glick

The only parties whose lot is improved by the Obama administration’s Middle East policies are Iran, the PLO and the Muslim Brotherhood.

To hear it from the White House, and from Israel’s leftist media, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon is a major liability. As half the planet now knows, Ya’alon is harshly critical of US Secretary of State John Kerry’s persistent efforts to force Israel to surrender its land and ability to defend itself to the PLO.

In a private conversation that Ya’alon did not expect to be made public, he criticized Kerry’s so-called security plan that offers Israel advanced technology in exchange for PLO control over its eastern border. Ya’alon also rejected the notion that the PLO is interested in making peace. And he stated the inconvenient fact that PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas is only in power because Israel has security control over Judea and Samaria.

Ya’alon also said, again in a private conversation, that Kerry’s razor-sharp focus on Israel and the PLO owes to an “incomprehensible obsession,” and that by neurotically pushing for a deal that has no chance of being concluded or achieving peace, Kerry is exhibiting “messianic” character traits.

Ya’alon’s private statements about Kerry were no harsher than public statements that the Saudis have made regarding the Obama administration’s regional policies. Last November, journalist Jeffrey Goldberg interviewed Saudi Prince Alaweed bin Talal. According to Goldberg, the Saudi royal attacked US President Barack Obama “with a directness that would make Benjamin Netanyahu blush.”

Among other things, Alaweed said, “There’s no confidence in the Obama administration doing the right thing with Iran. We’re really concerned – Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Middle Eastern countries about this.”

Alaweed questioned Obama’s motives in negotiating with Iran, saying the president is “wounded,” and appeasing Iran in order to win back the support of Democratic lawmakers who oppose Obamacare. In his words, “Thirty-nine members of his own party in the House have already moved away from him on Obamacare. That’s scary for him.”

It is hard to think of harsher criticism than Alaweed’s. And yet, the administration had nothing to say about it. Neither he, nor his fellow Saudi prince Bandar Bin Sultan al-Saud, the Saudi intelligence chief who said last month that he is scaling back intelligence cooperation with the US, was personally attacked by the administration.

No umbrage was taken at their statements.

And again, their public statements were no less harsh than what Ya’alon said in a private conversation about Kerry.

Neither the Israeli people, nor the US’s traditional Sunni Arab allies support Obama’s policies in the region. They believe Obama’s policies are dangerous for them, and antithetical to US interests.

Indeed, Ya’alon’s assessments of the administration are not only in line with regional opinion, the vast majority of Israelis share his views.

According to a poll published last week by Makor Rishon, 80 percent of Israelis think that Kerry’s peace plan has no chance of bringing peace. Seventy-three percent oppose his security plan for the Jordan Valley. And 53% object to the entire premise of his talks – that Israel should surrender almost all of Judea and Samaria to the PLO.

Moreover, the average man on the Israeli street sees the destruction wreaked by the Obama administration’s policy throughout the Middle East, and he cannot figure out what Kerry wants with us.

Syria is a humanitarian and geopolitical nightmare with global implications.

Rather than do everything possible to strengthen moderate forces in Syria, like the Kurds, and cultivate, train and arm regime opponents who can fight both the Assad regime and al-Qaida rebels, Kerry has devoted himself to demanding that Israel release more Palestinian terrorist murderers from prison.

Rather than protect Lebanon from the predations of Iran and Syria to ensure its independence, Kerry is holding marathon meetings with Netanyahu to try to coerce him into helping the PLO build another Jew-free terrorist state in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem.

Rather than try to blunt the growing power of Hezbollah – Iran’s terrorist army – in Syria, the US’s policy is inviting Iran, the party most responsible for the war, to join the phony peacemakers club at Geneva.

As for the rest of the region, from Tunisia to Bahrain, from Egypt and Libya to Iraq, and Yemen, Kerry and the Obama administration as a whole are content to watch on the sidelines as al-Qaida reemerges as a significant force, and as Iran undermines stability in country after country.

Then of course, there is Iran itself, and its nuclear weapons program.

After the six-party nuclear deal with Iran was concluded on Monday, Iran’s leaders declared victory over the US. They boasted that the most dangerous components of their nuclear weapons program are unaffected by the deal they just concluded with the Americans. They laid a wreath on the grave of Hezbollah arch-terrorist Imad Mughniyeh, who masterminded the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 243 US servicemen. And they forced Lebanon’s Sunnis to accept a Hezbollah-dominated government.

For its part, the Obama administration continues to insist that the greatest threat to peace is the US Congress, because its members wish to pass an additional sanctions bill against Iran that would only come into force in a year if the Iranians do not abide by the agreement.

The only parties whose lot is improved by the Obama administration’s Middle East policies are Iran, the PLO and the Muslim Brotherhood. But none of them will praise those policies, because they all hold the US in contempt.

This is why the Palestinian leadership continues to incite against Israel and reject the Jewish state even as the US is acting as their surrogate in talks with Israel.

This is why the Iranians mock the US, even though the White House just cleared the way for Iran to develop nuclear weapons, and develop its economy and has allowed it to take over Iraq and Lebanon, and defend its puppet regime in Syria.

This is why the Muslim Brotherhood condemns the US even as the Obama administration upended the US alliance with Egypt in order to support the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Obama administration has responded to these demonstrations of contempt and bad faith with extreme reticence. Either it issues written, general condemnations, or it claims, as in the case of Palestinian incitement, that it doesn’t believe it is productive to publicly criticize the Palestinians.

Given this behavior, the Obama administration’s response to Yediot Aharonot’s publication of Ya’alon’s private statements can be fairly describe as apoplectic. It was also mean-spirited.

Shortly after Yediot published his private remarks, the administration launched a full-bore public attack on Ya’alon, and by implication, the government. As White House spokesman Jay Carney put it, “The remarks of the Israeli defense minister, if accurate, are offensive and inappropriate, especially in light of everything that the United States is doing to support Israel’s security needs.”

In other words, the Obama administration just accused Israel of ingratitude.

But there is nothing ungrateful about Israel’s treatment of the US.

Americans are getting the same message from allies throughout the Middle East. Under Obama, America’s regional policies are so counterproductive that the US has come to be seen as the foreign policy equivalent of a drunk driver.

As the US’s strongest ally, and also as a country that has depended for decades on US support, Israel is a passenger in the back seat of the car. On the one hand, we are happy for the ride. On the other hand, the administration’s driving is endangering our survival.

It is only because our leaders are grateful to the US for its support that the government is going along with Kerry’s ridiculous peace-processing.

More important, what is gratitude, exactly? Is it shutting up and watching your closest friend drive both of you over a cliff? Of course not.

To be a good ally – and a grateful one – requires you to warn your ally when his actions are ill-advised and dangerous. And that is precisely what Israel has done. Israel’s behavior is the definition of proper behavior.

Aside from being dead wrong, the anti-Semitic undertones of the administration’s castigation of the Jewish state as ungrateful are hard to miss.

State Department spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki lashed out at Ya’alon saying, “Secretary Kerry and his team, including General John Allen, have been working day and night to try and promote a secure peace for Israel, because of the secretary’s deep concern for Israel’s future.”

These words, and nearly identical ones intoned by Carney, play into the anti-Jewish stereotype according to which Jews are quarrelsome but hapless wretches.

The flipside of this stereotype is the all-powerful Jewish conspiracy that manipulates non-Jews into doing its dirty work. That slur reverberated strongly in the administration’s condemnations of Netanyahu and US Jewish groups for advocating the passage of additional sanctions against Iran.

In both cases, the White House’s message is the same. Unlike other groups critical of US policies, Israel and supporters of the Jewish state have no right to speak.

Presumably the administration’s resort to these anti-Jewish tropes is inadvertent, but the fact that they have been used repeatedly is deeply disconcerting, and bespeaks, at a minimum, alarming insensitivity.

Under tremendous pressure from the administration, Ya’alon apologized for his leaked remarks and Netanyahu took to the Knesset podium to praise Israel’s ties to the US and thank the US for its support for Israel.

But this was not enough for the Obama administration.

They want Netanyahu disavow Ya’alon’s thoughts and withdraw the defense minister from the negotiations.

According to AFP, a senior State Department official said, “We expect the prime minister to put this right by expressing publicly his disagreement with the statements against Secretary Kerry, the negotiations with the Palestinians and Kerry’s commitment to Israel’s security.”

For his part, Kerry said he will only speak to Israeli leaders who agree with him. In his words, “I will work with the willing participants who are committed to peace and to this process.”

In other words, the Obama administration is using Ya’alon’s private remarks, leaked by an unidentified source to a newspaper with an anti-Netanyahu editorial agenda, as a means to neutralize the most powerful voice opposing Kerry’s obsessive, messianic behavior in the Israeli government. They want to use American umbrage at the tone of Ya’alon’s private statements to upend Israeli policy and force Israel to embrace the substance of the Obama administration’s delusional and destructive actions. And to advance this goal, they are using anti-Semitic signals to castigate Israel and deny it the right to speak on its own behalf.

Israelis love America. And for that reason, it is compelled to do what anyone strapped into the back seat of a car driven by a drunk would do: try to convince him to stop driving. As a grateful ally of the United States, Israel should publicly tell the Obama administration that what Ya’alon said in private is the truth.

And yes, sometimes the truth hurts.

Tuesday, January 14, 2014


by Marshall Frank

Has our society gone nuts?

From lying politicians, to open drug use, to pervasive sexual debauchery on film and tongue-wagging teen idols simulating sex on stage wearing underwear, society has basically given a green light to any form of behavior we once categorized as “unacceptable.” The media and the American people in general no longer care about standards, positive role models and basic morality. If this is where we have come in the last forty years, I dread to think what the next forty will bring.

This isn’t about one or two anomalies; this is an insidious problem throughout America and elsewhere.

A congressman can openly admit to using illegal narcotics and still be allowed to hold office, yet be prosecuted. A mayor of a major city laughingly sloughs off having possessed and using crack cocaine while in office. Our last two presidents have possessed and used illegal drugs and luckily avoided getting caught. We all say “so what,” while loading our prisons with people who did the same thing.

Top officials lie to congress and/or the American people about critical issues and nothing is done. An Attorney General lies about Fast and Furious sales of government arms to Mexican criminals and lies to congress again about signing off on a search warrant against a Fox News reporter, and he skates without consequence. Who will do the prosecuting? The Attorney General?

Top officials lie to congress about the NSA spying on citizens and the IRS targeting citizens based on political persuasion, and nothing is done. The president campaigns his health care agenda like a snake oil salesman, knowing the guarantees he’s feeding Americans about retaining doctors and insurance policies are not true. Nothing is done. Millions are losing what health insurance they already have while the administration cherry-picks a few examples of its success.

An American consulate in Libya is premeditatedly attacked by terrorists in Benghazi after nine months of pleas by the American ambassador and other officials to heighten security because dangers were gravely imminent. They are refused. REFUSED! Over an eight hour-plus assault period, four Americans are killed and no one even attempts to come to the rescue. Following that, a president, a secretary of state and a U.N. Ambassador publicly export lies, trying to wrongly convince everyone it was a spontaneous demonstration about a private video.

It takes two weeks to send FBI agents to investigate the crime scene, and – not surprisingly – they come back with nothing. Two dozen witnesses are held in secret by the government. Meanwhile, no one is held accountable. No one in our government is charged with obstructing justice. NO ONE!

This is unbelievable!

The people most responsible for the lies are not even censured, yet charged. Rather, one is promoted (Susan Rice), another is celebrated as a possible president (Hillary) and the president ignores the investigation calling it one of those “phony scandals.”

The media and the congress pay lip service, but do nothing. No special prosecutor is appointed for any of the scandals because those who would do the appointing would be the prospective defendants.

The country’s major newspaper (New York Times) becomes a political lapdog as it issues a false report about Benghazi that clearly conflicts with known facts, ostensibly to help clear the path for a future Hillary presidency.

More than ever before, motion pictures are replete with moral depravity from beginning to end, and we say, “it’s just art.” Ratings are meaningless. Kids will absolutely see these disgusting movies, if not at theaters, on DVDs or television. And we say nothing. Ho hum. “Well, they heard it before.”

Rocks stars, rappers, druggies and sex mongers who push the moral envelopes are glorified. Filthy song lyrics are admired and played for our youngest of kids to hear, giving tacit approval of negative role models.

Free speech is on the chopping block. If you promote morality, you’re an idiot. If you prefer traditional marriage, you’re “anti-gay.” If you don’t like Obama, you’re a racist. If you support the 2nd Amendment, you’re a gun nut. If you’re for abortion, you’re a killer. If you’re against abortion, you hate women. If you’re a practicing Christian, you’re a right-wing nut. If we are fearful of Muslims, we are intolerant…never mind the intolerance of fundamentalist Muslims around the world who are responsible for 98 percent of international terror.

Where does the blame lie? On all of us, for failing to speak out. For failing to set standards for behavior and morality, for making rapper thugs into millionaires, buying into depraved entertainment and giving passes to politicians who violate the public trust. We turn a blind eye, "too busy" to be bothered. The media feeds off the sensationalism.

It has nothing to do with being a republican, democrat or Independent. It has to do with how we ignore, or even approve, of these behaviors while our kids look on. What kind of parents will our kids be in another twenty or forty years?

It does not bode well.

Wednesday, January 08, 2014


Someone out there
Must be "deadly" atScrabble.
 Wait till you see the last one!
It's going to be  hard to top because
It fits to a "T"  


When you rearrange the letters:


When you rearrange the letters:
A ROPE ENDS IT          

When you rearrange the letters:

When you rearrange the letters:

When you rearrange the letters:

When you rearrange the letters:

When you rearrange the letters:


When you rearrange the letters:



When you rearrange the letters:



When you rearrange the letters:



When you rearrange the letters:



When you rearrange the letters:



When you rearrange the letters:



When you rearrange the letters:
"An Arab Backed