President Obama now attempting to sink U.S. Navy with biofuel

By: Jeffrey Klein
Political Buzz Examiner

Just when you thought the Obama administration could not do any further damage to the military that it already has, now we learn the he is forcing his “green energy” agenda upon the U.S. Navy by forcing all non-nuclear powered vessels to use “bio-fuel.”

This month, a carrier strike group that is headed to the Pacific for a six-week multinational naval exercise off the coast of Hawaii, will have its non-nuclear powered escort vessels, which include a destroyer and a tanker, use a newly formulated 50-50 mixture of standard [diesel] fuel, and a cocktail of seeds, algae and chicken fat, according to a July 2, 2012 FOXNews article.

A Navy official stated that operating the so-called “Great Green Fleet” on this blend of alternative and conventional fuel is part of Navy Secretary Ray Mabus’ plan to have half the Navy fleet on alternative fuel by 2020.


The Navy official answered…

Investments in biofuel will produce a competitively priced — and domestically produced — alternative to conventional fuel. Such investments help the Navy and the nation become less dependent on foreign oil and thus less subject to volatility in oil prices that directly affect our readiness.

Not so fast.

What will really ‘affect the readiness’ of our Navy is it having to file for bankruptcy–because this biofuel mixture was confirmed to cost $26 a gallon–more than seven times the $3.60 a gallon cost for conventional fuel.

First, naval vessels and other such massive ships measure their fuel usage by the ton, probably because the numeric value in gallons would not fit within the quantity field of an invoice.

More importantly, because President Barack Obama has already ordered $478 billion stripped from the Pentagon Budget already (but hasn’t touched a dime of entitlement programs), if the idiotic, automatic Super-Committee “sequester” budget cuts of another half-trillion dollars are allowed to take affect, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta isn’t confident that we can even maintain our fighting forces–particularly the Navy patrolling international waters protecting sea lanes all over the world.

This fact has not gone unnoticed by the GOP on Capitol Hill, as they question not only the enormous cost of the biofuel, but President Obama’s alternative-energy initiatives in total, as either not ready or too expensive for the marketplace–pointing to the series of taxpayer-subsidized solar panel companies that have gone bankrupt faster than his first term in office.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, stated … “I don’t believe it’s the job of the Navy to be involved in building … new technologies. I don’t believe we can afford it.”

And, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA), a Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, slammed the door on the idea by stating that studies show biofuel will always be more expensive, and accusing Navy Secretary Mabus of failing to provide Congress with a full cost analysis.

Although Democrats are famous for not wanting to ‘cloud their issues with the facts,’ under the Obama administration they don’t seem to be hiding their true strategic objectives…

Curtailing our fossil fuel industry.

Crippling our military.

Converting our country into a God-less Socialist nation.


Pentagon Celebrates Gay Pride During Treason Trial

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

The Defense Department hosted a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month event on June 26, 2012, in the Pentagon Auditorium which featured a speech by Defense Department General Counsel Jeh Johnson and a panel discussion entitled, “The Value of Open Service and Diversity.” But the event failed to include any mention, pro or con, of the most celebrated homosexual soldier in American history, Bradley Manning, who is currently on trial for treason.

An examination of the transcript shows that no one at the DoD event saw fit to denounce Manning’s alleged treachery by leaking classified information to Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. The Washington Post story about the Pentagon “pride” event was silent about the scandal, as if the Manning case has nothing to do with the conduct of homosexuals in the military.

It is clearly a subject that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and other administration officials do not want to bring up in the context of the push for “gay rights” in the military. The reason may be that Manning, who had a security clearance while serving as an intelligence analyst in Iraq, is not only an embarrassment to the Armed Forces but has a connection to the Obama White House that most of the media are afraid to investigate.

“I have sources in the White House re: DADT and the disaster that keeps going on with that… Shin Inouye,” Manning wrote in a series of emails that included the name of a top Obama White House official. DADT is a reference to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the policy prohibiting open homosexuality in the military.

Manning had been an out-of-the-closet homosexual before its repeal and had been working with various gay rights and Democratic Party groups. Was he a gay “mole” in the ranks? Who were his “sources” in the Obama White House?

In Manning’s treason trial, the death penalty has inexplicably been ruled out, even though Soviet atom bomb spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were both executed for their crimes.

Inouye, a former associate of the ACLU office in Washington, D.C., is openly homosexual and handles gay rights issues in the executive office of the president. Before going to the White House, where he serves as Director of Specialty Media, Inouye was a spokesperson for the Presidential Inaugural Committee and, prior to that, was the Constituency Communications Coordinator at the Obama for America campaign.

Gawker, a website that has tackled the topic because of the sex angle, has reported that Manning was close to Inouye. Manning reportedly said of Inouye, “He’s a friend of mine,” and that a Manning reference to “White House contact (he’s tried to sleep with me, uggh),” included a link to a Facebook photo of Inouye in a White House press room. “Strangely,” Gawker said about the scandal, “Manning’s connection to the D.C. gay establishment, not to mention the White House, has been glossed over.”

Conservative columnist Ann Coulter has argued that Manning’s homosexuality was critical to understanding the case, and noted that foreign intelligence services have traditionally exploited sexual perverts. She wrote, “The most damaging spies in British history were the Cambridge Five, also called the ‘Magnificent Five:’ Kim Philby, Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, Donald Maclean and John Cairncross. They were highly placed members of British intelligence, all secretly working for the KGB. The only one who wasn’t gay was Philby. Burgess and Blunt were flamboyantly gay. Indeed, the Russians set Burgess up with a boyfriend as soon as he defected to the Soviet Union.”

She added, “The Magnificent Five’s American compatriot Michael Straight was—ironically—bisexual, as was Whittaker Chambers, at least during the period that he was a spy. And of course, there’s David Brock.” The latter is the conservative journalist who turned into a Democratic Party activist and George Soros operative.

“So many Soviet spies were gay that, according to intelligence reporter Phillip Knightley, the Comintern was referred to as ‘the Homintern,’” Coulter said.

Manning’s connection to Assange, who is now in hiding in the embassy of Ecuador in London, has gotten somewhat more attention. Assange had denied any contact with Manning, but evidence in the case contradicts that claim and it is apparent that Assange misrepresented his dealings with the Army soldier in order to protect himself from possible espionage charges in the U.S. Assange is now seeking political asylum from Ecuador in a bid to avoid extradition to Sweden over charges that he sexually assaulted two women. He had been hosting a television program on Moscow-funded Russia Today (RT), where he interviewed such Marxist figures as Noam Chomsky and Tariq Ali, a British Pakistani associated with the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Policy Studies.

Although the Pentagon doesn’t want to address Manning’s homosexuality in the context of his treason trial, the Bradley Manning Support Network has no qualms about it. This group marched in solidarity with Manning in “Gay Pride” parades in New York City, Chicago, and San Francisco, while holding “Free Bradley Manning” signs. These occurred just two days before the carefully orchestrated DoD gay pride event was held to convince the public that everything is fine and good with open homosexuals in the ranks.

The only story in the “mainstream” press that we saw mentioning the gay support for Manning was in the San Francisco Examiner, where Mike McKee, of a group called “Courage to Resist,” said that he regards Manning as “an influential gay soldier.”

A leading British gay rights activist, Peter Tatchell, who was a founder of Outrage!, a group of self-described “angry queers,” says Manning is a “hero” and a “peace hero.”

James Kirchick, a fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a contributing editor for The New Republic, says, “Rather than condemn him as the traitor he is, many gay activists have rushed to his defense, portraying him as a courageous whistleblower who brought American abuses to light. By arguing that Manning is not only a victim of the military but also a hero, these activists unwittingly confirm the claim that gay people are unfit to serve in the armed forces.”

It is believed that Manning, who had a security clearance, leaked classified information to Julian Assange because he was upset with the pace of military acceptance of homosexuality.

The Pentagon gay pride event shows how far the acceptance has come. It opened with President Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta giving “LGBT pride month” video messages. LGBT refers to the sexual categories of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered. The panel featured Sue Fulton, a West Point graduate and a Member of the Board of Visitors at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, Gordon Tanner, principal deputy general counsel for the Air Force, and Marine Corps Capt. Matthew Phelps.

Tanner said that he had a “laundry list of all the civilian benefits that we now are working on getting” for the LGBT “community.”

The open display of DoD pride in the homosexual lifestyle follows the spectacle of invited guests of President Obama at the White House gay pride event making obscene gestures at portraits of conservative President Ronald Reagan. Media were quick to quote White House spokesman Shin Inouye as saying, “Behavior like this doesn’t belong anywhere, least of all in the White House.”

This is the same Inouye who Bradley Manning claimed was his contact in the White House as he was agitating for gay rights from within the Armed Forces. Inouye is quick to defend the White House but has remained silent about his apparent link to Bradley Manning. He did not return our telephone call.

Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was passed by Congress in a lame duck session and three weeks later signed into law by Obama on December 22, 2010. It was all done in a hurry, before the full ramifications of the WikiLeaks treason case and Manning’s role in it were known. At this point, it cannot be said with certainty that Manning did not have other gay collaborators in the ranks of the Obama Administration.

It is a fact, however, that Manning had been arrested before the repeal, at a time when homosexuality was considered a security risk. “It’s interesting to me that this individual (Manning) was able to get his security clearance even while homosexuality was a court-martial offense” said Chaplain (Col.) Ron Crews, USAR retired, the executive director for the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty. “If he was known to have been engaged in homosexual activity, that should have been a red flag for his security clearance in those days.”

Manning was indeed out of the closet, had advertised his gay rights activism on Facebook, and had even marched in gay pride parades. But military officials apparently looked the other way.

Our questions include: “Was Manning a pawn of high-level officials in the Obama White House? Who protected him? And why?”

Crews, one of the few people examining how the new policy is being implemented, is also concerned about media coverage suggesting that homosexuality in the military is being widely accepted.

“As gays serve openly, chaplains report few problems” is the headline over an Associated Press story by David Crary appearing on Thursday in papers across the country.

Crews countered that this is the case because chaplains expressing concern about the new policy “have been ordered by their commanders not to speak to the press.” He says, “As long as you’re in favor of the repeal and the current DoD policy, you can speak to the press.”

“I don’t think we are getting the full story yet,” he added.

That also seems to be the case with the Bradley Manning-Shin Inouye connection. But like so many other Obama scandals, the media are not anxious to get to the bottom of this one.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected].


Google’s July 4th Art

By: Arfin Greebly

Once again, Google sticks its thumb in America’s eye.

In the early days of Google’s “holiday art” shtick, where they would put up something special to celebrate Beethoven’s birthday, or the anniversary of Earth Day, I noticed that they missed one on Washington’s birthday. I wrote them an email advising them of the oversight, and in their reply they mumbled about not being able to cover everything. Something on the order of “we try to cover all the important birthdays and anniversaries, but we occasionally miss one.”

I didn’t think too much of it, but then they did it again, and then again, and then again. Oddly, they covered all manner of artists, historical events, ecologically correct anniversaries, medical heroes, and on and on.

I don’t, however, believe I’ve ever seen a Google art piece for Washington’s birthday, Reagan’s birthday, or celebrations of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, the Marine Corps birthday, or anything else that might be construed as patriotic or conservative . . . except when it really can’t be avoided.

Last year’s “Google Doodle” managed to “celebrate” July 4th . . . without actually indulging in any patriotism (and without a flag):

And the year before…

Yes, that’s a celebration of Rube Goldberg (and July 4th).

The only one that I remember as seeming at all patriotic was from 2003:

This year, however, they went one level deeper into devious. While whipping up a “patriotic” looking doodle, they managed to just happen to settle on a patriotic song title from the past — one by a raving communist — Woody Guthrie.

So, while those who have no background for it will see it as a (*choke* – *gag*) patriotic glyph, those who were there and who remember the icons of the 50s and 60s will smile knowingly. Woody was their patriot.

Would it be inappropriate for me to assign them the appellation “asshats?”

Update: JoshuaPundit – True To Form – Google’s Fourth Of July Logo