19 January 2013
SC bill would exempt state militia from federal gun rules
by Paul Conner
January 18, 2013
While a handful of states have moved to nullify President Barack Obama’s recent executive orders on guns, a quartet of tea-party state senators in South Carolina introduced a bill Wednesday claiming to offer pro-gun citizens a different way around the federal rules: exempt the state’s unorganized militia from federal gun regulations.
The unorganized militia consists of all able-bodied people over the age of 17 who are U.S. citizens residing in South Carolina and legally allowed to purchase a firearm, according to current state law.
The governor may activate the militia in a case of “imminent danger of war, insurrection, rebellion, invasion, tumult, riot, resistance to law or process or breach of the peace” when the National Guard is insufficient to deal with the unrest.
The bill, sponsored by state Sens. Tom Corbin, Tom Davis, Kevin Bryant and Lee Bright, excludes members of the militia — essentially all state citizens who are at least 18 years old — from any federal gun rules passed after New Year’s Day.
“A militia member, at his own expense, shall have the right to possess and keep all arms that could be legally acquired or possessed by a South Carolina citizen as of December 31, 2012,” the bill reads. “This includes shouldered rifles and shotguns, handguns, clips, magazines, and all components.”
Because of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause and long-established legal doctrine, enforceable federal laws always trump conflicting state laws. States are also not constitutionally permitted to prevent the federal government from passing and enforcing otherwise lawful legislation.
It is highly unlikely, then, that the South Carolina bill — which broadly precludes the federal government from exercising its basic constitutional authority to regulate firearm ownership, without limiting its scope to the enforcement of any specific federal law — would survive a legal challenge by the federal government.
The state bill, which has been referred to committee, applies to any gun law passed by Congress or rule implemented by the president.
17 January 2013
Gun edicts put personal liberty under fire
Where is the liberal outrage? Where is the liberal suspicion about powerful, unchecked governments? Where is the liberal unflinching devotion to individual liberty?
We have a president who has radically reshaped the landscape of American government so that it is more of a behemoth than at any time in history and more involved in every aspect of our lives. It is also more unanswerable than ever before.
Now this president is issuing 23 new edicts aimed at curbing individuals’ gun rights. At the same time, his federal agencies are stockpiling more and more weapons and ammunition.
And for what, exactly? To go hunting? To shoot the Chinese when they come to collect their debts? To shoot Mexicans tumbling over the Southern border? To shoot the Canadians?
What does the Department of “Homeland Security” suddenly need 1.4 billion more rounds of ammunition at the very point the same government is making it harder for citizens to arm themselves?
There are only 300 million of us. How many bullets do you need? That’s more than four bullets for every American man, woman and child. Is your aim really that bad? I mean, have you seen us lately? We are too fat to run very far.
You can say these concerns are some sort of Alex Jones, wack-nut, black helicopter paranoia or you can simply ask, “Why does the government need a billion more rounds of ammo just as it is trying to disarm citizens?”
And the lists. The lists of people who are deemed too mentally unstable to own a gun.
A principled liberal would be horrified at the notion that the government is going to keep giant lists of people who are criminals or who are deemed crazy or dangerous. And even more breathtaking is that these lists will be used to determine the degree of freedom those individuals will be granted by the government.
Do you remember the liberal outrage over the huge government list to keep people deemed dangerous from flying on airplanes? Ted Kennedy is turning over in his grave.
Now, of course, no one rightly objects to finding reasonable ways to keep criminals and wackos from getting their hands on guns. But it is shocking how easily and freely liberals have gone along with the notion of more giant government lists of crazy and bad people.
Then there is the debt-ceiling debate where we have a president who refuses to conduct an open debate over raising it. President Obama orders Congress to simply authorize the government to borrow for him a ton more money. And if they don’t comply with his wishes, then he will seek to take that power away from them.
The power of the purse in the hands of Congress has always been the check that keeps the president in balance. Only a lover of tyranny — not a liberal — would want to see that check removed.
Yet, most shocking of all, we have a Senate right now that is led by a cabal that wants to do just that. Literally, they are begging Mr. Obama to take that authority away from them. And, yet, not a peep from liberals.
And so, Wednesday dawns and Obama will reveal his 23 new gun-control edicts. He will, we are told, surround himself with children for the announcement.
Where is the liberal outrage?
16 January 2013
Saved By The Gun
[ed. The following is an inexhaustive and ongoing list of people who have used their second amendment rights in order to protect their home, themselves and/or their family and lived to tell their story. The perpetrators of these crimes were violent thugs that care nothing about proper "paper work", "registration" or "executive orders" and these people are not going away...]
15 Jan 2013
Tennessee Family Uses Firearms to Stop Late Night Intruder
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/15/Tennessee-Family-Uses-Firearms-To-Stop-Late-Night-Intruder
Oct. 20, 2012
12-Year-Old Girl Home Alone Uses Family Gun to Shoot Intruder
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/10/20/12-year-old-girl-home-alone-uses-family-gun-to-shoot-intruder/
Very good link with plenty of instances to prove our point. (highly recommended)
http://www.akdart.com/gun3.html
Right Of Armed Self-defense Against Tyranny NOT Negotiable, Mr. Obama
By
January 15, 2013
A nationwide appeal has been sent to gun owners and their families asking they go to their state capitol this Saturday, January 19, from noon to 3 p. m. to show support for our 2nd Amendment rights. In Florida, gun owners are asked to meet in the “middle of the state” at noon, at the Hernando County Fairgrounds, 6436 Broad St., Brooksville, FL 334601.
A nationwide appeal has been sent to gun owners and their families asking they go to their state capitol this Saturday, January 19, from noon to 3 p. m. to show support for our 2nd Amendment rights. In Florida, gun owners are asked to meet in the “middle of the state” at noon, at the Hernando County Fairgrounds, 6436 Broad St., Brooksville, FL 334601.
This urgent call to action is in response to the Barack Obama/Joe
Biden/Dianne Feinstein legislative aim of imposing bans on arbitrarily
selected groups of firearms and accessories. One North Carolina police lieutenant
warns internet audiences that ”We’re in huge trouble.” A devout
Christian, the 31 year police veteran tells listeners that “I cry. .
.when guns are gone, you won’t be able to worship the Creator. ..gone. .
.Freedoms gone.”
An officer
who lives near the site of the Sandy Hook killings is concerned that
“We are being set up to confiscate our guns. . .we can’t back away. .
.these people are coming at us head on. . .we must tell our
legislators…we will not tolerate confiscation or ban[s] on our guns.”When asked what he thought about Obama wanting to take our guns, an elderly veteran at a Florida rec hall said “That’s not happening.” Quoting the soldier’s oath, he said. . .”to defend [the Constitution of the United States] against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” He emphasized domestic.
Firearms trainer and consultant Kelly Alwood would agree with the old soldier. “[Without the Second Amendment] there is no way to resist the government voiding all other amendments,” said Alwood during an interview with the Blaze. “Why should [the government] continue to give you your freedom of speech if there is no one to stop them? It [the 2nd Amendment] is the only safeguard we have to protect us from a tyrannical government.”
Naturally, the left is eager to ridicule “worriers” like Alwood, immediately characterizing all who voice such concerns as ‘nuts’ or ‘conspiracy theorists.’ But mistrust of the motives of governments that have disarmed their “subjects” is quite legitimate as the histories of Nazi Germany, the USSR, [Cuba, Venezuela] and China have so clearly illustrated.
To the Founders of this nation, the right to keep and bear arms became nothing more complicated than “…the right of armed self-defense against tyranny.” Indeed, that was the purpose of this right as later expressed in the 2nd Amendment. And in spite of the best efforts of modern hoplophobes and would-be tyrants to confuse the issue, it has not changed to this day.
For as eager as gun-banning politicians have been to change the focus of the gun control discussion to one of hunting or target shooting, the truth of their disarmament agenda never stays hidden for long. New York Governor Cuomo made that clear with his statement that “confiscation might be an option” when placed in conjunction with his plans for an “assault weapons” ban.
Sorry, Mr. Governor. We’ll not negotiate away our means of remaining free from the likes of you.
Vindicated Bachmann Under Attack
By
January 15, 2013
The Leftist advocacy group People for the American Way (PFAW) has launched an all-out war against Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN). On Monday it plans to present House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) with a petition bearing 178,000 signatures, demanding that Bachmann not be reappointed to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Michael Keegan, president of PFAW, explained Bachmann’s crime: “Michele Bachmann has used her position on the Intelligence Committee to spread baseless conspiracy theories and smear the reputations of honorable public servants. Speaker Boehner himself called her actions ‘dangerous.’ It’s mysterious, then, why he has chosen to reward her reckless extremism with continued access to sensitive national security information and a powerful platform for her agenda.”
Since Boehner has indeed previously thrown Bachmann under the bus, he may be susceptible to this appeal; if he is at all fair-minded, however, he will recognize not only that Bachmann deserves her place on the Intelligence committee, but that she may be more deserving than any of her colleagues of such a place.
For while Bachmann was widely criticized and ridiculed for daring to suggest that Muslim Brotherhood elements had infiltrated the U.S. government, corroboration of her allegations has recently come from an unlikely quarter: Egypt’s Rose El-Youssef magazine, which asserted in a December article that six highly-placed Muslim Brotherhood infiltrators within the Obama Administration had transformed the United States “from a position hostile to Islamic groups and organizations in the world to the largest and most important supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood.” (A translation of the article is available from the Investigative Project here.)
According to the Investigative Project, “the six named people include: Arif Alikhan, assistant secretary of Homeland Security for policy development; Mohammed Elibiary, a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council; Rashad Hussain, the U.S. special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference; Salam al-Marayati, co-founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC); Imam Mohamed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA); and Eboo Patel, a member of President Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships.”
These represent many of the individuals and groups about whom Bachmann had raised concerns. For example, Bachmann’s letter last summer to the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security stated that Elibiary had “extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood” and “sympathy for Islamist causes,” and accused him of “gain(ing) access to classified documents.”
And indeed, in 2011 investigative journalist Patrick Poole reported that “Elibiary may have been given access to a sensitive database of state and local intelligence reports, and then allegedly shopped some of those materials to a media outlet.” According to Poole, Elibiary approached “a left-leaning media outlet” with reports marked For Official Use Only that he said demonstrated rampant “Islamophobia” in the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS). The media outlet declined to do a story, but what was Elibiary doing shopping the Official Use Only documents in the first place?
Poole checked with Steve McCraw, director of the Texas DPS, who “confirmed that Elibiary has access to the Homeland Security State and Local Intelligence Community of Interest (HS SLIC) database, which contains hundreds of thousands of intelligence reports and products that are intended for intelligence sharing between law enforcement agencies.” Said McCraw of Elibiary: “We know that he has accessed DPS documents and downloaded them.”
There have been questions about Elibiary’s true allegiances for years. He was one of the speakers at a December 2004 conference in Dallas titled “A Tribute to the Great Islamic Visionary.” The visionary in question was none other than the founding father of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Ayatollah Khomeini.
When I questioned him about his appearance at such a conference, Elibiary claimed that he hadn’t known what kind of conference it was going to be, although he didn’t explain why he went ahead and appeared there anyway once he found out. Among those who found this explanation wanting was journalist Rod Dreher of the Dallas Morning News, whose skepticism angered Elibiary. The great moderate subsequently threatened Dreher, telling him: “Expect someone to put a banana in your exhaust pipe.”
Yet despite all this, Elibiary still got his appointment to the DHS
Advisory Council. Mohamed Elibiary has risen as far as he has without
ever being properly vetted because government and law enforcement
officials, and the media, are so avid to find a moderate Muslim who will
stand against Islamic jihad terrorism that they will accept virtually
anyone’s claim to be just that, no questions asked.
Bachmann had also raised concerns about the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (formerly the Organization of the Islamic Conference), to which Hussain is the ambassador, and about Magid’s Islamic Society of North America. And so the Egyptian article stands as vindication of her concerns, and shows that she her request that an investigation of Muslim Brotherhood infiltration be opened was entirely reasonable, and not a manifestation of “bigotry,” “racism,” or “McCarthyism” at all – contrary to the hysterical (and formulaic) claims of her Leftist detractors.
Of course, the Egyptian article has to be taken with a grain of salt. It could be the product of a Muslim Brotherhood advocate in Egypt, anxious to bolster perceptions of his movement’s clout and credibility. While that is possible, however, it cannot responsibly be assumed to be the case without closer examination; it is equally possible that the article represents a genuine indication that Bachmann’s concerns were entirely justified, and that the Muslim Brotherhood has indeed penetrated to the highest levels of the U.S. Government.
We’ll never know for sure without a careful, unbiased, non-partisan investigation – which is exactly what Michele Bachmann had called for. If they really had any genuine concern for the American way, instead of calling for her removal from the Intelligence committee, the People for the American Way would be calling for Bachmann to be appointed to chair that committee, and to open the investigation into Muslim Brotherhood infiltration that is so desperately needed.
But of course PFAW doesn’t really have any such concern. And the fact that they have been able to get 178,000 signatures calling for the head of a dedicated American patriot in order to punish her for asking for an investigation that obviously needs to be carried out is a sign of just how much the public discourse has degenerated in this dreary age of Obama.
January 15, 2013
The Leftist advocacy group People for the American Way (PFAW) has launched an all-out war against Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN). On Monday it plans to present House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) with a petition bearing 178,000 signatures, demanding that Bachmann not be reappointed to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Michael Keegan, president of PFAW, explained Bachmann’s crime: “Michele Bachmann has used her position on the Intelligence Committee to spread baseless conspiracy theories and smear the reputations of honorable public servants. Speaker Boehner himself called her actions ‘dangerous.’ It’s mysterious, then, why he has chosen to reward her reckless extremism with continued access to sensitive national security information and a powerful platform for her agenda.”
Since Boehner has indeed previously thrown Bachmann under the bus, he may be susceptible to this appeal; if he is at all fair-minded, however, he will recognize not only that Bachmann deserves her place on the Intelligence committee, but that she may be more deserving than any of her colleagues of such a place.
For while Bachmann was widely criticized and ridiculed for daring to suggest that Muslim Brotherhood elements had infiltrated the U.S. government, corroboration of her allegations has recently come from an unlikely quarter: Egypt’s Rose El-Youssef magazine, which asserted in a December article that six highly-placed Muslim Brotherhood infiltrators within the Obama Administration had transformed the United States “from a position hostile to Islamic groups and organizations in the world to the largest and most important supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood.” (A translation of the article is available from the Investigative Project here.)
According to the Investigative Project, “the six named people include: Arif Alikhan, assistant secretary of Homeland Security for policy development; Mohammed Elibiary, a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council; Rashad Hussain, the U.S. special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference; Salam al-Marayati, co-founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC); Imam Mohamed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA); and Eboo Patel, a member of President Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships.”
These represent many of the individuals and groups about whom Bachmann had raised concerns. For example, Bachmann’s letter last summer to the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security stated that Elibiary had “extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood” and “sympathy for Islamist causes,” and accused him of “gain(ing) access to classified documents.”
And indeed, in 2011 investigative journalist Patrick Poole reported that “Elibiary may have been given access to a sensitive database of state and local intelligence reports, and then allegedly shopped some of those materials to a media outlet.” According to Poole, Elibiary approached “a left-leaning media outlet” with reports marked For Official Use Only that he said demonstrated rampant “Islamophobia” in the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS). The media outlet declined to do a story, but what was Elibiary doing shopping the Official Use Only documents in the first place?
Poole checked with Steve McCraw, director of the Texas DPS, who “confirmed that Elibiary has access to the Homeland Security State and Local Intelligence Community of Interest (HS SLIC) database, which contains hundreds of thousands of intelligence reports and products that are intended for intelligence sharing between law enforcement agencies.” Said McCraw of Elibiary: “We know that he has accessed DPS documents and downloaded them.”
There have been questions about Elibiary’s true allegiances for years. He was one of the speakers at a December 2004 conference in Dallas titled “A Tribute to the Great Islamic Visionary.” The visionary in question was none other than the founding father of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Ayatollah Khomeini.
When I questioned him about his appearance at such a conference, Elibiary claimed that he hadn’t known what kind of conference it was going to be, although he didn’t explain why he went ahead and appeared there anyway once he found out. Among those who found this explanation wanting was journalist Rod Dreher of the Dallas Morning News, whose skepticism angered Elibiary. The great moderate subsequently threatened Dreher, telling him: “Expect someone to put a banana in your exhaust pipe.”
Bachmann had also raised concerns about the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (formerly the Organization of the Islamic Conference), to which Hussain is the ambassador, and about Magid’s Islamic Society of North America. And so the Egyptian article stands as vindication of her concerns, and shows that she her request that an investigation of Muslim Brotherhood infiltration be opened was entirely reasonable, and not a manifestation of “bigotry,” “racism,” or “McCarthyism” at all – contrary to the hysterical (and formulaic) claims of her Leftist detractors.
Of course, the Egyptian article has to be taken with a grain of salt. It could be the product of a Muslim Brotherhood advocate in Egypt, anxious to bolster perceptions of his movement’s clout and credibility. While that is possible, however, it cannot responsibly be assumed to be the case without closer examination; it is equally possible that the article represents a genuine indication that Bachmann’s concerns were entirely justified, and that the Muslim Brotherhood has indeed penetrated to the highest levels of the U.S. Government.
We’ll never know for sure without a careful, unbiased, non-partisan investigation – which is exactly what Michele Bachmann had called for. If they really had any genuine concern for the American way, instead of calling for her removal from the Intelligence committee, the People for the American Way would be calling for Bachmann to be appointed to chair that committee, and to open the investigation into Muslim Brotherhood infiltration that is so desperately needed.
But of course PFAW doesn’t really have any such concern. And the fact that they have been able to get 178,000 signatures calling for the head of a dedicated American patriot in order to punish her for asking for an investigation that obviously needs to be carried out is a sign of just how much the public discourse has degenerated in this dreary age of Obama.
15 January 2013
GOP congressman threatens impeachment if Obama uses executive action for gun control
by Caroline May
14th January, 2013
Texas Republican Rep. Steve Stockman threatened Monday afternoon that he would file articles of impeachment against President Barack Obama if he institutes gun control measures with an executive order.
Stockman warned that such executive orders would be “unconstitutional” and “infringe on our constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms.” (RELATED: Levin: If Obama sidesteps Congress on debt ceiling, ‘no choice’ but impeachment)
“I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment,” Stockman said in a statement.
At his press conference Monday, Obama floated the possibility of using executive action to enact policies aimed at reducing gun violence.
The freshman congressman, who served one term in Congress in the mid-1990s, further labeled the possibility “an existential threat to this nation” because, he said, the purpose of the Second Amendment is to allow the people to protect themselves from tyranny. (RELATED VIDEO — Walter Williams: People misunderstand the point of the Second Amendment)
“Any proposal to abuse executive power and infringe upon gun rights must be repelled with the stiffest legislative force possible,” he added. “Under no circumstances whatsoever may the government take any action that disarms any peaceable person — much less without due process through an executive declaration without a vote of Congress or a ruling of a court.”
He concluded by claiming that an executive order would be not just “not just an attack on the Constitution,” but also an “attack on Americans.”
“If the president is allowed to suspend constitutional rights on his own personal whims, our free republic has effectively ceased to exist,” he said.
Unbelievable! - Muslims in Nigeria
Statement by Father Juan Carlos Martos cmf
Secretariat of PV Clarettiani Missionaries
Muslims are determined to impose their 'religion' all over Africa as well as in other continents and countries of the world. Islam has but one goal: rule the world at any cost!"
"And where are the International Human Rights Organizations?
Christians are burnt alive in Nigeria, a horrific Holocaust right in front of International indifference as denounced by Father Juan Carlos Martos on behalf of the Missionari Clarettiani via del Sacro Cuore di Maria, Rome, Italy."
"By publishing this graphic document on Facebook, I have intended to make the world aware of certain terrible events totally ignored or minimized by the mainstream media; an authentic genocide so cruel and inhuman only comparable with the most hateful and vile acts in the nazi extermination camps."
"To my great surprise, Facebook has criticized me for the publication of this graphic document as a proof of the Holocaust that Christians have been suffering in Nigeria in the last ten years. According to Facebook's Security policy of the 'social' Network, this photo has been classified as 'pornographic', 'violent' or 'inappropriate' and hence I was disallowed to publish any picture for a week. And I was threatened drastic measures if I insist publishing any document that prove the terrible violations of Human Rights in Nigeria.
This attitude by the (Spanish) Facebook Management is an attack to the freedom of expression as much as a shameful insult to the 500 victims (only in this horrible episode) slaughtered by islamic terror only for being christian."
"I thought that this social network, originated in the United States, would not bend its knees in front of terror.
Especially, when still healing their wounds suffered in the gruesome 9/11 attack, just as our own 3/11 at Madrid railway station, all innocent victims of the wild fury and insanity of islamic terror."
"This seems even more unacceptable in Spain, a Democratic state, where the rights of opinion, expression and religion are guaranteed by the Constitution (Art. 16 and 20), if there is an attempt to limit such rights, let alone through threats and coercion thus weakening their freedom of expression by condemning as "inappropriate" a graphic document (not a photomontage) which reflects a brutal reality in all its crudeness."
"Contrarily, the Administrators of Facebook Spain should welcome this public protest advocating that such a barbarian act will never be replicated and that its perpetrators will be brought to justice. This is a right and duty of every citizen, a service to society, ultimate goal, I feel, of any network that defines itself as 'social'."
"Regrettably, if the murders continue, this is greatly because truth is always hidden to the sovereign people, so that they may not be aware and 'disdained' by it. Complicit silence by the mainstream media leads to the indifference of the international political community facing this unspeakable Holocaust! Let alone the cowardice already rooted in the western world facing the islamic terror. A consequence of the stupid "Alliance of civilizations": another regrettable incident of our former Prime Minister Rodriguez Zapatero."
"Can you imagine the reaction of the islamic terrorist organization in the (impossible) case of a massacre of muslims in a mosque by the hands of christian terrorists? And how widely would our media cover and condemn the crime and the criminals??"
"Therefore, from this modest blog, I ask a favor from all people who are reading me. Please distribute this photo and its comments using all the media you have if only for commemorating these martyrs since, unfortunately, Facebook seems to be on the side of the executioners by preventing the publication of such tragic events."
13 January 2013
The Scandal That Will Bring Obama Down (+ video)
By
January 11, 2013
It’s even worse than we previously thought. A retired four-star admiral is now claiming that Barack Obama intentionally conspired with America’s enemies to stage a bogus attack and the kidnapping of an American ambassador so he could “negotiate” the release of a “hostage” and bolster his mediocre approval ratings just prior to the election!
The Washington Examiner, quoting retired Four-Star Admiral James
Lyons, writes: “the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi… was
the result of a bungled abduction attempt…. the first stage of an
international prisoner exchange… that would have ensured the release of
Omar Abdel Rahman, the ‘Blind Sheik’…”
But something went horribly wrong with Obama’s “October Surprise.” Although the Obama Administration intentionally gutted security at the consulate prior to the staged kidnapping, former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty disobeyed direct orders to stand down, saved American lives, single-handedly killed scores of attackers…and the attackers, believing that Obama had betrayed them, tortured Ambassador Chris Stevens and dragged his body through the streets.
Some will say that Admiral Lyons’ accusation is not a smoking gun. We agree; that’s exactly why Congress must investigate Benghazi-gate.
Moreover, we firmly believe the problem with Admiral Lyons’ assertion is that he is only scratching the surface; the full and complete truth may be much, much worse.
Benghazi-gate is not about a bogus YouTube video series of lies. It’s not about the Obama Administration’s foreign policy ineptitude. We are dealing with something much more sinister… something potentially treasonous… and the following questions, posed in an article in The New American, go to the heart of the matter:
1. ”What was the Obama administration’s full role in helping
violent Jihadists, self-styled al Qaeda terrorists, and Western-backed
“revolutionaries” take over Libya in the first place?
2. Did that half-baked scheme to arm Jihadist leaders, who… had previously fought U.S. troops in Iraq, contribute to the attack, as countless experts and officials have suggested?
3. What was actually going on at the compound in Benghazi, which, as the report states, was never a “consulate” despite establishment media claims?
4. Was Ambassador Stevens recruiting and arming Jihadists and terrorists to wage war on the Syrian regime after what Obama called the “success” in Libya, as a growing body of credible evidence suggests?
5. Why did the administration claim for so long that the attack was just a “protest” over a YouTube video gone awry, even when it knew definitively that was not the case?
6. Was the lack of security at the compound a political ploy to conceal the extent of the lawlessness and utter chaos left in the wake of Obama’s unconstitutional “regime change” war on Libya, as even members of Congress have alleged?”
It’s clear. Benghazi-Gate is only a small piece of a much larger operation, an attempt to conceal what The New American calls “the Obama administration’s full role in helping violent Jihadists and self-styled al Qaeda terrorists.”
Prior to the election Barack Obama continually told us that “Osama bin-Laden is dead and GM is alive”; but the sad truth is that Osama bin-Laden’s organization is alive and well, and the Obama Regime may be giving aid and comfort to this terrorist network.
And prior to the election, Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera pontificated that Republicans shouldn’t “politicize” Benghazi-gate. Swaggering onto the set of Fox and Friends, Rivera bloviated: “I think we have to stop this politicizing.” And Rivera issued the following veiled warning to Republicans: “Do we want to try and influence the election with a tragedy that happened in North Africa?”
Ironic, isn’t it? Barack Obama played politics with the lives of Americans; like Rivera, the media covered Obama’s rear and threatened to accuse anyone and everyone who mentioned it of “playing politics.”
Weak-willed Republicans apparently took Rivera’s threat to heart as Rivera also said that Republican Senators John Barrasso, James Inhofe, and Bob Corker, who all sit on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “all agree that the supercharged atmosphere around the story — prudence dictates that these hearings be postponed until” after the election.
Well, the election has come and gone. Congress now has no excuse. The American people needed the truth before the election; but now that Obama is back in the White House, real conservatives must demand answers.
The American people deserve to have those questions answered; and moreover, the American people deserve justice.
January 11, 2013
It’s even worse than we previously thought. A retired four-star admiral is now claiming that Barack Obama intentionally conspired with America’s enemies to stage a bogus attack and the kidnapping of an American ambassador so he could “negotiate” the release of a “hostage” and bolster his mediocre approval ratings just prior to the election!
But something went horribly wrong with Obama’s “October Surprise.” Although the Obama Administration intentionally gutted security at the consulate prior to the staged kidnapping, former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty disobeyed direct orders to stand down, saved American lives, single-handedly killed scores of attackers…and the attackers, believing that Obama had betrayed them, tortured Ambassador Chris Stevens and dragged his body through the streets.
Some will say that Admiral Lyons’ accusation is not a smoking gun. We agree; that’s exactly why Congress must investigate Benghazi-gate.
Moreover, we firmly believe the problem with Admiral Lyons’ assertion is that he is only scratching the surface; the full and complete truth may be much, much worse.
Benghazi-gate is not about a bogus YouTube video series of lies. It’s not about the Obama Administration’s foreign policy ineptitude. We are dealing with something much more sinister… something potentially treasonous… and the following questions, posed in an article in The New American, go to the heart of the matter:
2. Did that half-baked scheme to arm Jihadist leaders, who… had previously fought U.S. troops in Iraq, contribute to the attack, as countless experts and officials have suggested?
3. What was actually going on at the compound in Benghazi, which, as the report states, was never a “consulate” despite establishment media claims?
4. Was Ambassador Stevens recruiting and arming Jihadists and terrorists to wage war on the Syrian regime after what Obama called the “success” in Libya, as a growing body of credible evidence suggests?
5. Why did the administration claim for so long that the attack was just a “protest” over a YouTube video gone awry, even when it knew definitively that was not the case?
6. Was the lack of security at the compound a political ploy to conceal the extent of the lawlessness and utter chaos left in the wake of Obama’s unconstitutional “regime change” war on Libya, as even members of Congress have alleged?”
It’s clear. Benghazi-Gate is only a small piece of a much larger operation, an attempt to conceal what The New American calls “the Obama administration’s full role in helping violent Jihadists and self-styled al Qaeda terrorists.”
Prior to the election Barack Obama continually told us that “Osama bin-Laden is dead and GM is alive”; but the sad truth is that Osama bin-Laden’s organization is alive and well, and the Obama Regime may be giving aid and comfort to this terrorist network.
And prior to the election, Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera pontificated that Republicans shouldn’t “politicize” Benghazi-gate. Swaggering onto the set of Fox and Friends, Rivera bloviated: “I think we have to stop this politicizing.” And Rivera issued the following veiled warning to Republicans: “Do we want to try and influence the election with a tragedy that happened in North Africa?”
Ironic, isn’t it? Barack Obama played politics with the lives of Americans; like Rivera, the media covered Obama’s rear and threatened to accuse anyone and everyone who mentioned it of “playing politics.”
Weak-willed Republicans apparently took Rivera’s threat to heart as Rivera also said that Republican Senators John Barrasso, James Inhofe, and Bob Corker, who all sit on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “all agree that the supercharged atmosphere around the story — prudence dictates that these hearings be postponed until” after the election.
Well, the election has come and gone. Congress now has no excuse. The American people needed the truth before the election; but now that Obama is back in the White House, real conservatives must demand answers.
The American people deserve to have those questions answered; and moreover, the American people deserve justice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
