03/6/15
Obama's Foreign Policy

The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results – 03/06/15

The Watcher’s Council


Jon McNaughton on Obama’s Foreign Policy…

With thanks to Moonbattery, NoisyRoom would like to add to the Weasel festivities this week:

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match-up.

Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought-crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. – George Orwell’s 1984

Whoever controls the media, controls the mind. – Jim Morrison of The Doors

The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses. – Malcolm X

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--bd_Q_iBJfY/TsYx44QOX9I/AAAAAAAAAm8/QonbRkHSjmw/s400/Noisy%2Broom%2B2.jpg

This week’s winning essay, The Noisy Room’sNet Neutrality: “Young fool … Only now, at the end, do you understand”, takes apart the Obama dominated FCC’s plans to ‘regulate’ the Internet and turn it into something unrecognizable. Here’s a slice:

We keep hearing, from the saviors in Washington, DC, how government regulation is the answer and how “evil monopolies” (created, incidentally, by other government regulations) are responsible for all our trials and tribulations and the “fundamental unfairness” of the Internet as she is currently wrote.

Obligatory movie quote:

“No. No government. I know those people. Absolutely not.” – Col. Ira Kane

Yeah, it’s a movie. It’s also absolutely right.

The founder of Broadcast.com, Mark Cuban, has recently been vociferous in his opposition to so-called “Net Neutrality” with his most recent public appearance on the subject in an interview where he breaks it down. His effort to “plain-language” the argument notwithstanding, and frankly, it’s a subject that should not be oversimplified, he laid out the unintended consequences dominoes and how this “everything is equal” push plays out in terms of common services.

Now, you might want to shrug Mark Cuban off as “some rich guy who owns a sports team” and clearly that’s being done a lot, but don’t forget how he got rich: he pioneered live broadcasting over the Internet. He’s not some political hack, evil cable company exec, or mushy thinking me-too “fairness uber alles” flag waver. He is, for once, someone who knows what the hell he’s talking about.

Net Neutrality, like so many political labels, is a “fair sounding” name that hides the actual motives and consequences of the real world implementations we will experience after the seemingly inevitable adoption of this latest government overreach.

It won’t be fair. It won’t be optimum. And the right answer will never even be mentioned, never mind entertained: deregulate the cable and broadband space to eliminate the protected monopolies.

The broadband space needs more competition, not less; needs less regulation, not more. Companies like Google laying fiber? Cox, AT&T, Verizon and Comcast suddenly no longer have a free pass.

Otherwise? The cynical and dystopian view?

One of the unavoidable dominoes will be broad censorship. Once the deprioritization of broadcast packets leads to the epic traffic jam that will reduce the Web’s US speeds to worse than those found in Europe, the government of the day will, once again, have to “save us” from this “unforseen” outcome and their clever plan will include limiting who can “legitimately” have bandwidth preferences, since clearly “legitimate” news outlets need to bypass the buffering jams that will afflict TV signalling and once dot-gov starts adjudicating who’s a “real” news or other “essential” service, licensing will naturally follow, and then “standards” of what is “acceptable” traffic.

At which point, whichever political party is in power at that time will have the distinct advantage of licensing whomever they deem to be more politically correct in their eyes. “Neutrality” on the ‘Net? Yeah, not so much.

We’re in the hands of fools and corrupt bureaucrats. Last Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission held a faux meeting on open Internet rules and access to broadband Internet. Commissioner Ajit Pai made a statement before the FCC vote to take unprecedented control over the internet with a secret plan. Yes, secret. Secret as in no exposure to the public or Congress prior to its enactment. What follows is the transcript of his comments – in echoes of Obamacare, this had to pass before we could know what was in it. Except, they are still keeping it under wraps. It must be very, very bad indeed.

From Breitbart:

“The Wall Street Journal reports that it was developed through ‘an unusual secretive effort inside the White House.’ Indeed, White House officials, according to the Journal, functioned as a parallel version of the FCC. Their work led to the president’s announcement in November of his plan for internet regulation, a plan which the report says blindsided the FCC and swept aside months of work by Chairman Wheeler toward a compromise. Now, of course, a few insiders were clued in about what was transpiring. Here’s what a leader for the government-funded group Fight for the Future had to say, ‘We’ve been hearing for weeks from our allies in D.C that the only thing that could stop FCC chairman Tom Wheeler from moving ahead with his sham proposal to gut net neutrality was if we could get the president to step in. So we did everything in our power to make that happen. We took the gloves off and played hard, and now we get to celebrate a sweet victory. Congratulations. what the press has called the parallel FCC at the White House opened its door to a plethora of special interest activists. Daily Kos, Demand Progress, Fight for the Future, Free Press, and Public Knowledge, just to name a few. Indeed, even before activists were blocking the chairman’s driveway late last year, some of them had met with executive branch officials.

“But what about the rest of the American people? They certainly couldn’t get White House meetings. They were shut out of the process altogether. They were being played for fools. And the situation didn’t improve once the White House announced President Obama’s plan, and ‘asked’ the FCC to implement it. The document in front of us today differs dramatically from the proposal that the FCC put out for comment last May, and it differs so dramatically that even zealous net neutrality advocates frantically rushed in, in recent days, to make last-minute filings, registering their concerns that the FCC might be going too far. Yet, the American people, to this day, have not been allowed to see President Obama’s plan. It has remained hidden.

“Especially given the unique importance of the internet, Commissioner O’Rielly and I ask for the plan to be released to the public. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune and House of Representatives Chairman did the same. According to a survey last week by a respected democratic polling firm, 79% of the American people favored making the document public. Still, the FCC has insisted on keeping it behind closed doors. We have to pass President Obama’s 317-page plan so the American people can find out what’s in it. This isn’t how the FCC should operate. We should be an independent agency making decisions in a transparent manner based on the law and the facts in the record.

“We shouldn’t be a rubber stamp for political decisions made by the White House. And we should have released this plan to the public, solicited their feedback, incorporated that input into the plan, and then proceeded to a vote. There was no need for us to resolve this matter today. There is no immediate crisis in the internet marketplace that demands immediate action. now. The backers of the president’s plan know this. But they also know that the details of this plan cannot stand up to the light of day. They know that the more the American people learn about it, the less they will like it. That is why this plan was developed behind closed doors at the White House. And that is why the plan has remained hidden from public view.

“These aren’t my only concerns. Even a cursory look at the plan reveals glaring legal plans that are sure to mire the agency in the muck of litigation for a long, long time. but rather than address them today, I will reserve them for my written statement. At the beginning of this proceeding, I quoted Google’s former CEO, who once said, the internet is the first thing that humanity has built, that humanity doesn’t understand. This proceeding makes it abundantly clear that the FCC still doesn’t get it. but the American people clearly do. The proposed government regulation of the internet has awakened a sleeping giant. I’m optimistic we’ll look back on today’s vote as a temporary deviation from the bipartisan consensus that’s served us so well. I don’t know whether this plan will be vacated by a court, reversed by Congress, or overturned by a future commission, But I do believe its days are numbered. For all of those reasons, I dissent.”

More at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Jim DeMint in the Daily Signal with If Not Now … When? Will the GOP Majority Ever Stand for Anything? submitted by Ask Marion. As the man who, along with Sarah Palin, was pretty much responsible for the victory in the 2010 midterms that resurrected the GOP from the grave, De Mint is definitely in a position to look at the Republicans in Congress today and wonder if they stand for anything.

After lying to their supporters again in 2014 about ow they would dismantle President Obama’s radical agenda and being rewarded with majorities in both houses of Congress, they’ve reneged on everything they said they would do at election time. Can they ever be trusted again? Do read it.

Here are this week’s full results:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it… or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?

03/6/15
Barack Obama

Media Cheerleading for Obamacare Victory at Supreme Court

By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media

While the media continue to spin the King v. Burwell case as an existential threat to President Obama’s signature health care legislation, we at Accuracy in Media continue to expose how flawed those supposed “reforms” have been. Yet the media blindly and obstinately defend Obamacare as an administration success. A recent Washington Post editorial even suggests that the Supreme Court, which heard arguments for this case on March 4, should avoid tearing “apart a law that has slowly but surely found its footing.”

The idea that Obamacare—a job-killing law that is unaffordable and unworkable, coupled with more than 20,000 pages of added regulations causing perverse effects on the marketplace—has “surely found its footing” is part of a false narrative created jointly by pro-administration advocates and a media willing to justify the burdensome restrictions this has placed on the American people.

Now, we are being actively sold another false bill of goods: that the dispute over subsidies, and whether state or federal exchanges should be used for subsidies, threatens the many Americans who signed up for coverage under Obamacare. “Don’t be bamboozled by talk of disaster,” writes Betsy McCaughey for the New York Post. “Senate Republican leaders indicated on Monday that they’ll be ready to provide financial assistance to ‘help Americans keep the coverage they picked for a transitional period.’”

Yet Slate’s Eric Posner writes that “If the plaintiffs win, then most low-income people will drop out of the market because they cannot afford insurance without the subsidies.” In addition, Posner continues, “Only the sickest people will stay in, which will cause insurance companies to raise prices for everyone, causing more people to drop out and potentially throwing the insurance market into a spiral of death.”

Also, the media keep repeating that these six words, “an exchange established by the state,” were somehow thrown into the bill by mistake, or that it really meant something else. Except, according to Michael Carvin, attorney for the plaintiffs, the health care law contains “words limiting subsidies to ‘an exchange established by the state’ … 11 times,” reports NPR.

On March 4 Paul Kane devoted an entire Washington Post article to the idea that “Congress can sometimes be sloppy.” “If that’s the case, how did Congress end up writing such an ambiguous provision?” he asks. “And why hasn’t anyone on Capitol Hill fixed it?”

While D.C. politics are currently too fractious to fix this patently flawed law, “Losing in court will force the president to finally negotiate changes to his expensive, unworkable health law,” argues McCaughey. If the plaintiffs succeed, “Suddenly, the politically impossible—compromise on ObamaCare—will become politically inevitable.”

In fact, the law has already been altered on numerous occasions. While the standard line has been that the Republicans in the House have tried to repeal Obamacare more than 40 times, it has actually been altered at least 47 times, according to The Galen Institute. Of those, at least 28 were changes “that President Obama has made unilaterally, 17 that Congress has passed and the president has signed, and 2 by the Supreme Court.”

Currently, the Health and Human Services Secretary has signaled that the administration “does not have a backup plan to help those who could lose their insurance,” according to US News and World Report.

On Wednesday, the same day King v. Burwell was being argued at the Supreme Court, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell introduced the subject, saying, “At issue is whether states that rely on the federal health care exchange can provide subsidies to make it more affordable. If the court rules against the White House, eight million people could lose their coverage and premiums for millions more would skyrocket, making the plan basically unsustainable.”

Mitchell’s “facts” are highly dubious. Eight million people could lose their coverage? This appears to be based on a RAND study which estimates, “that 8 million people would become uninsured, and many others would see their health premiums spike,” according to US News and World Report.

The administration claims that 11.4 million people are signed up for private health care under Obamacare, which they claim proves that Obamacare is “working,” and a success.

But Avik Roy, who has been writing about this for Forbes, pointed out that “once you unravel the spin, what the latest numbers show is that the pace of enrollment in Obamacare’s exchanges has slowed down by more than half. If previous trends hold, Obamacare exchanges have enrolled roughly 5 million previously uninsured individuals: a far cry from 11.4 million.”

And what about the 40 million uninsured we were told about during the dishonest selling of Obamacare? This month marks five years since the so-called Affordable Care Act became law.

While pundits argue over the success of Obamacare, and whether those six words—“an exchange established by the state”—were a mistake, or should be disregarded because they supposedly contradict the overall intent of the law, the decision should come down to this: It’s not just the plain-language meaning of the law, which is very clear. The law wouldn’t have passed without including that language. It was not a mistake, or a drafting error. Then-Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska called it a “deal breaker,” according to Politico in 2010, two months before it became law.

In other words, without that incentive for the states to set up exchanges, he wouldn’t vote for it. The evidence is clear, as laid out in this American Spectator article, no longer available on their website.

And don’t forget Jonathan Gruber. He was one of the architects of Obamacare, and a close adviser to President Obama. He received millions of taxpayer dollars, from various states and the federal government. Gruber is the person who said that passing Obamacare depended “on the stupidity of the American voter,” and that it was “written in a tortured way” in order to deceive the voters about all the taxes they would have to pay. Regarding the subsidies being paid only to state exchanges, Gruber said that was “to squeeze the states to do it [to set up exchanges].”

One must ask also whether a family of four earning more than $90,000 per year should actually be subsidized by the government, or whether this is just a hook to get more and more people receiving government aid, and tie them to the political party most generously doling out these “discounts.” In this case, that would be the Democratic Party.

Mortimer Zuckerman, writing for The Wall Street Journal has also connected employers’ preference for part-time over full-time employees to the perverse effects of this law.

Betsy McCaughey is one of the few members of the media focusing on the positive outcomes that could result from plaintiffs winning this case—instead of claiming that disaster will strike. She argues these include benefits such as “relief for about 250,000 businesses” and “a system that lets people buy the health plans they want and work the hours they want.”

These potential benefits can only be understood in the light of the actual provisions of the law. If states agreed to establish exchanges, receiving in exchange subsidies for those signing up, “with the subsidies come something very important: the taxes and the penalties under the employer mandate penalty. So when 37 states decided not to set up exchanges, the administration tried to fix it with a rule, through the IRS, that subsidies would be issued in all 50 states, plus the employer mandate penalty,” asserted Scott Pruitt, the Oklahoma Attorney General on Fox’s On the Record with Greta Van Susteren. He is one of the attorneys general fighting to limit the damage from Obamacare.

Many pundits read into Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s remarks during oral arguments that a ruling against the White House position would result in states being effectively coerced into setting up exchanges, invoking a federalism argument. This was a hopeful sign to those wanting to see Obamacare survive. But Attorney General Pruitt pointed out in a Wall Street Journal column that states “are not children who must be protected by the federal government from making choices.” He said that when Oklahoma chose not to set up a state exchange, the state “knew the consequences of its decision but was not coerced into cooperating with implementation of the Affordable Care Act,” and still wouldn’t be.

Obamacare, except in a very few cases, has been an unmitigated disaster—no matter how Obama, the Democrats and the media try to sell it otherwise.

03/5/15
Barack Obama and Frank Marshall Davis

How Frank Marshall Davis Transformed America

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

When Rudolph Giuliani mentioned that President Barack Obama, as a young man, was under the influence of Communist Party member and suspected Soviet espionage agent Frank Marshall Davis, Giuliani struck a nerve. In contrast to his claim that Obama didn’t love America, his remarks about the Davis-Obama relationship were not opinion, but fact. That is why a Washington Post fact-checker has been assigned to investigate Giuliani’s claim. We shall see whether the Post, at this late date, covers a story that could have been Pulitzer Prize-winning material more than seven years ago.

As the former New York City mayor noted, Obama’s grandfather turned him over to Davis for mentoring. His black father had taken off and his mother was mostly spending her time elsewhere. But the question remains: what kind of influence are we talking about? Paul Kengor’s book, The Communist: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor, explains Davis’s influence on Obama’s economic views. Rusty Weiss and I quoted Kengor in a piece we did on how Davis’s anti-white racism also influenced Obama.

Less well-known is how Obama adopted Davis’s outlook on sexual matters.

Davis, who died in 1987, was a heavy drinker and marijuana user who wrote a pornographic novel, Sex Rebel, disclosing that he had sex with children, including a 13-year-old girl.

The Davis view, according to his friend, Kathryn Waddell Takara, incorporated a “world of sexual pleasures, multiple partners, and erotica.” Takara writes about the Davis obsession with bizarre sexual practices and pornography in her book, Frank Marshall Davis: The Fire and the Phoenix.

Davis mentored Obama for as many as eight years of his young life, before Obama left Hawaii to attend college. Obama, however, only referred to Davis as “Frank” in his book, Dreams from My Father. Obama refers to “Frank” giving him advice on subjects such as race relations, but not sex.

However, Takara confirms that Davis wrote a pornographic novel, Sex Rebel, which was “largely autobiographical,” and that he became “anti-Christian,” even writing a poem speaking of Christ irreverently as a “nigger.” An atheist, Davis “exposed the irony and hypocrisy of Christianity,” she said.

Davis was a pornographer himself and specialized in photographs of nude women. Some of these are still on display in the Frank Marshall Davis Collection at Washington University in St. Louis.  Takara writes about Davis having “an ample supply of African American women models” for his work. However, the FBI took note of his habits when agents found him taking photographs of the Hawaii coastline, apparently for espionage purposes. This development is mentioned in Davis’s 600-page FBI file. Davis was on the FBI’s “security index” and was considered a potential national security threat.

Much controversy over the years concerned a poem Obama wrote about “Pop.” Sympathetic Obama biographer David Maraniss noted its strange lines about stains and smells on shorts, and confirmed that the subject was Davis. Writer Jack Cashill says the poem has definite “sexual overtones.”

Whatever the ultimate truth about Obama’s own sexual proclivities and inappropriate personal relationship with Davis, it cannot be denied that the President’s “fundamental transformation” of America has also occurred in the sexual realm. And even the Pentagon has not gone unscathed.

Defense Department officials have said that hormone treatment for gender reassignment has been approved for Bradley/Chelsea Manning, the former Army intelligence analyst convicted of espionage for sending classified documents to WikiLeaks.

Almost three years ago, in our May 14, 2012 column, “How Our ‘Gay President’ Learned About Sex,” we noted that the media’s love affair with Obama had been heightened by his embrace of same-sex marriage. Rather than resist, important figures in the media, including the conservative media, have embraced the Obama/Davis revolution.

As traditional conservatives prepare to “March for Marriage” on April 25, within days of the Supreme Court debating cases that will decide the legal status of marriage, the news broke this week that billionaire David Koch, who pours millions of dollars into conservative and libertarian groups, is backing a legal challenge to state laws that protect traditional marriage.

Jennifer Rubin, who writes the Right Turn blog for The Washington Post, has already embraced the Obama position and hopes that the Supreme Court will “put the issue to rest as a legal matter.”

Joining Rubin in the surrender to the Obama/Davis cultural transformation of America is Ana Navarro, a CNN political commentator who says she is joining the brief before the court. Navarro was the National Hispanic Co-Chair for Senator John McCain’s Presidential Campaign in 2008.

Other signatories from the media world on the pro-homosexual brief include:

  • David Frum, a senior editor at The Atlantic
  • Richard Grenell, an openly homosexual Fox News contributor
  • Alex Castellanos, a Republican media advisor and CNN contributor
  • Margaret Hoover, a self-described gay rights activist and CNN contributor
  • Nicolle Wallace, the so-called “conservative” on ABC’s “The View”

he National Organization for Marriage disagrees, saying, “One thing the U.S. Supreme Court won’t be able to do is redefine marriage, because marriage was created by God himself as the union of one man and one woman, and no judge or politician has the power to change it.”

Concerned Women for America continues to affirm that “marriage consists of one man and one woman,” and that “We seek to protect and support the Biblical design of marriage and the gift of children.” The group objects to the “disrespect for family and for the unique contribution of fathers and mothers,” and the “attempt to eliminate natural distinctions between men and women.”

Conservative leader Phyllis Schlafly, the founder of Eagle Forum, told a Huffington Post writer during the recent Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) that the battle for the traditional family will continue. She said, “I’m extremely disappointed that the Republican Party, the conservative movement, even the Democratic Party and the churches, have been saying, ‘Well soon the court will decide, and that will be it.’ But a lot of people thought that about Roe v. Wade, and we’ve seen the whole abortion issue turned around in the last ten years.”

Schlafly’s latest book, Who Killed the American Family?, laments how advocates of traditional marriage “retreated into ominous silence” after the Supreme Court overturned the Defense of Marriage Act in the 2013 case of United States v. Windsor.

One possible factor in a coming backlash to the homosexual rights movement was highlighted in a CPAC speech by Phil Robertson of the “Duck Dynasty” television show. Describing the epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases, which affect homosexual men more than any other group, he said, “You want a godly, biblical, medically safe option? One man, one woman—married for life.”

Robertson was presented at CPAC with the Second Annual Andrew Breitbart Defender of the First Amendment Award by Citizens United and the Breitbart News Network. Homosexual militants and their “progressive” allies tried to force his “Duck Dynasty” show off the air after Robertson made comments affirming traditional values and describing homosexuality as unnatural.

Citizens United President David Bossie said, “Having Phil Robertson and his family as a part of American culture has changed this nation for the better. Week after week, millions of Americans see a family living out their faith and their values boldly and without reservation. Despite the best attempts of the mainstream media and Hollywood liberals, the Robertson patriarch and his family are still on television and they are as popular as ever.”

Matt Schlapp, Chairman of the American Conservative Union, the main sponsor of CPAC, said, “Robertson personifies the importance of holding tight to that which gives our lives meaning. For Phil Robertson, that includes his family, the Lord above, and of course creating havoc in the Louisiana countryside. We are honored to have him at this year’s CPAC.”

It appears that there is resistance to the Frank Marshall Davis “vision” of America. But how long will CPAC and the traditional conservatives be able to resist?

One fact is certain: the major cable channels, including Fox News and CNN, are dominated by “conservatives” who embrace the Obama/Davis sexual revolution.

03/5/15
Hillary Clinton

Most Transparent Administration Ever Suffers Curious Epidemic of Disappearing Email Systems, Crashed Hard Drives and Lost Backup Tapes

Doug Ross @ Journal

Remember when Barack Obama promised his would be the “most open and transparent administration ever“?

Hahahahahahahahahahaha. Good times, good times.

Disappearing email systems:

A week before becoming Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton set up a private e-mail system that gave her a high level of control over communications, including the ability to erase messages completely, according to security experts who have examined Internet records.

Crashed Hard Drives:

In one of the new[ly recovered] emails, Lerner apparently wrote, “No one will ever believe that both your hard drive and mine crashed within a week of each other.”

Lost Backup Tapes:

…hundreds of former IRS official Lois Lerner’s previously “lost” backup tapes have been recovered, which could result in the recovery of a new trove of her emails. IRS Deputy Inspector General Timothy P. Camus told Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) on Thursday that it took investigators just two weeks to recover 424 backup tapes that were previously said to be unretrievable.

And more!

In a Monday ruling, Judge Royce C. Lamberth, senior judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, accused the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of lying to the court and displaying “apathy and carelessness” in carrying out the law… Judge Lamberth described the “absurdity” of the way the EPA handled a Freedom of Information Act request from the Landmark Legal Foundation and then the court case stemming from it — including late last week admitting it lied to the court about how it went about searching for documents.

Oh, wait–there’s more!:

Freedom of Information Act requests have been routinely ignored-from the very start of Obama’s reign . An Associated Press report found the Obama administration has grown more secretive over time.

Gee whillikers, I forgot about this one:

The Justice Department’s internal watchdog offered Congress fresh evidence Tuesday that the Obama administration is failing to meet its promises of transparency, accusing department officials of interfering with his independent investigations into employee wrongdoing.

But it’s not a pattern!. Oh, wait. My bad. It is.

Given the number of IG and investigator vacancies, a suspicious person might think that the Obama administration was trying to hide waste and fraud in the various departments.

I could go on, but I think you get the picture.

That is, unless you’re a progressive, in which case, you’ll shriek the words, “But—Bush!” at the top of your lungs while spittle flies out of your mouth.

03/5/15
Rudy Giuliani

The Lesson in MSM’s Response to Rudy

By: Lloyd Marcus

Rudy Giuliani

A week or so ago, the MSM wanted Rudy Giuliani boiled in oil for daring to question Obama’s love for America. They were shocked and outraged. How dare Rudy be so rude to Obama. They ran to Republicans for comments, hoping they would throw Rudy under the bus. As I watched the MSM go nuts over Rudy’s “rudeness”, I thought, give me a break.

This man (Obama) just unlawfully took over the internet. http://bit.ly/1vFrUEx Obama refuses to acknowledge the radical Islamic Holy War and slaughter of Christians. ISIS publicly raped a three year old girl. Women are forced to divorce their husbands to be sold as sex slaves. http://bit.ly/1arUnEk

And how does Obama suggest is the best way to deal with these evil monsters? Job programs. http://bit.ly/1Dnxewn

His bait and switch lie to pass Obamacare has cost millions healthcare plans they liked. Cancer patients are in fear for their lives because Obamacare caused them to lose their doctors. http://bit.ly/1vEaKH9

Obama’s illegal open border policy is exposing our kids to deadly diseases brought to school by illegals. http://bit.ly/1AymzyQ

Under Obama more folks are going out of business than starting businesses (oppressive regulations, anti-business climate and taxes). http://bit.ly/1FZUbck

Obama ignored the rule of law for his executive action on immigration. In essence, he unilaterally granted amnesty to over 5 million illegals. http://nws.mx/1Gyvhhr And guess what folks, Obama’s illegals will be eligible for Earned Income Tax credit possibly receiving up to $24,000. http://tws.io/1vGqklB Illegals!!!

Determined to cram his will down our throats, King Obama has decreed back door gun control with bans on bullets. http://exm.nr/1zkYkiV

A prolific liar, Obama’s long list of lies to the American people makes him peerless among U.S. presidents. http://bit.ly/1JJOD8Q Shamefully, our president even won PolitiFact’s 2013 “Lie of the Year” award. http://yhoo.it/184Qof4

Clearly over the next two years, Obama intends to unilaterally ram through into law every item on the socialist/progressive dream list via executive order, or should I say King Obama decree. Almost daily Obama usurps more unlawful power, taking illegal actions yielding devastating consequences on our country and the lives of Americans.

And what has the MSM foaming-at-the-mouth mad? Rudy’s rudeness to Obama. Are you freaking kidding me?

Folks, if this does not tell you where the MSM is coming from, nothing will. Any Republican thinking they will receive fair and balanced coverage from the MSM is an idiot. All the MSM cares about is assisting in the furtherance of Obama’s agenda and protecting his presidency/legacy. Period.

So all you guys in the GOP pandering to the MSM, stop it. They are going to trash you no matter what you do. Focus on pleasing your extremely frustrated base who recently gave you the Senate in a landslide victory. There’s an old saying, “Dance with the one who brought you.”

Love of country and my faith in God strengthens and keeps me hopeful and determined to continue fighting the out-of-control tyrannical megalomaniac in the Oval Office. I will not lie to you folks, the lack of “real” push back from the GOP is extremely frustrating. Even with control of the House and Senate, the GOP never seems to have enough power to stop Obama’s hostile revolution. They continue to concede battles while promising to stop Obama next time.

Rudy’s speech in which he boldly and passionately chronicled all the crap Obama has dumped on the American people over the pass six years had patriots across America standing up and cheering. http://bit.ly/1LPiA32 Yes, I chanted, “Rudy!” “Rudy!” “Rudy!”

Finally, someone had the courage to say it out loud without fear of Obama’s MSM. Frankly, I am seeing signs of others in the GOP feeling emboldened following Rudy’s lead; boldly telling the truth about Obama.

As for the power of Obama’s MSM and army of thuggish operatives, Scott Walker’s success proves that they can be beaten. Walker took all of their best punches, defeating them in three highly contested elections. Consistently, Scott Walker ignored media and Obama operative attacks and focused on serving his constituents.

Not saying that Walker is my guy for 2016, but this is the kind of conservative leadership, backbone and commitment to governing according to the best interest of We the People, so desperately needed in Washington.

The MSM’s outrage over Rudy’s “rudeness” has further exposed who they truly are; not reporters. They have laid their journalistic integrity on the alter, offered up in worship; cult followers of Obama – his minions. GOP, seeking praise, fairness or approval from the MSM is a fool’s mission. Stop it and do right by your people.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee

03/4/15
M. Stanton Evans

M. Stanton Evans Dead at 80

By: Jim Simpson
DC Independent Examiner

Stan Evans speaks at Hillsdale College

Stan Evans speaks at Hillsdale College – Youtube Screengrab

M. Stanton Evans, a legend in the conservative movement, has died at the age of 80. Stan was my kind of conservative, a strong anti-communist, a firm constitutionalist and free-market proponent. He founded the National Journalism Center to help develop a bench of young, conservative writers. He has written numerous books. His last, Stalin’s Secret Agents, co-written with veteran anti-communist investigator Herb Romerstein, should be required reading for all students of history. For example, the book exposes the Soviet role in Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor that launched America’s entry into WW II. The Soviets cynically exploited America, helping to lure her into the war to save the USSR’s bacon. He also contributed to one of the best documentaries of the Left ever made: Agenda: Grinding America Down–a documentary I had the privilege to participate in as well, though I never got to meet Stan. Lee Edwards of the Heritage Foundation has written a great tribute to the man today.

In 1960 he penned the Sharon Statement, which remains to this day one of the best articulations of conservatism and is just as relevant as it was in 1960. Perhaps even more so, as we watch a compulsively despotic regime steal power by violating daily the limits placed on it by the Constitution. Here it is in full. Note that a statement need not be strong to be powerful:

The Sharon Statement

Adopted in conference at Sharon, Connecticut, September 11, 1960

In this time of moral and political crises, it is the responsibility of the youth of America to affirm certain eternal truths.

We, as young conservatives, believe:

That foremost among the transcendent values is the individual’s use of his God-given free will, whence derives his right to be free from the restrictions of arbitrary force;

That liberty is indivisible, and that political freedom cannot long exist without economic freedom;

That the purpose of government is to protect those freedoms through the preservation of internal order, the provision of national defense, and the administration of justice;

That when government ventures beyond these rightful functions, it accumulates power, which tends to diminish order and liberty;

That the Constitution of the United States is the best arrangement yet devised for empowering government to fulfill its proper role, while restraining it from the concentration and abuse of power;

That the genius of the Constitution—the division of powers—is summed up in the clause that reserves primacy to the several states, or to the people, in those spheres not specifically delegated to the Federal government;

That the market economy, allocating resources by the free play of supply and demand, is the single economic system compatible with the requirements of personal freedom and constitutional government, and that it is at the same time the most productive supplier of human needs;

That when government interferes with the work of the market economy, it tends to reduce the moral and physical strength of the nation; that when it takes from one man to bestow on another, it diminishes the incentive of the first, the integrity of the second, and the moral autonomy of both;

That we will be free only so long as the national sovereignty of the United States is secure; that history shows periods of freedom are rare, and can exist only when free citizens concertedly defend their rights against all enemies;

That the forces of international Communism are, at present, the greatest single threat to these liberties;

That the United States should stress victory over, rather than coexistence with, this menace; and

That American foreign policy must be judged by this criterion: does it serve the just interests of the United States?

Here’s to a life well-lived. Rest in peace, Stan Evans.

03/4/15
Iran - All Smiles

Netanyahu and Jewish Survival

By: Alan Caruba
Warning Signs

Iran - All Smiles

In 1933, approximately 9.5 million Jews lived in Europe, representing 1.7% of the total European population which, in turn, was about 60% of the Jewish world population, estimated to have been 15.2 million.

By 1945, in the wake of the Holocaust, two out of every three Jews would be dead.

By 2012 the global Jewish population had reached 13.75 million. That is less than 0.2 percent of the world’s population.

The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics reported that 43% of the world’s Jewish community lives in Israel. Sharing Israel as their home were 1,636,600 Arabs and a diverse population of Christians and non-Jews, numbering around 318,000.

If the Iranians make good on their threat to “wipe Israel off the map”, presumably with nuclear weapons they would acquire by stealth and deception, the Jewish world population would be cut nearly in half.

Benjamin NetanyahuAll of this will be on Benjamin Netanyahu’s mind when, as the Prime Minister of Israel, he addresses a joint meeting of Congress. It will be his third such speech. On July 10, 1996, he said the world must act to prevent Iran’s nuclearization, since “the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close.”

In 2011 he returned, saying “When I stood here, I spoke of the consequences of Iran developing nuclear weapons. Now time is running out. The hinge of history may soon turn, for the greatest danger of all could soon be upon us, a militant Islamic regime armed with nuclear weapons.”

So now it is 2015 and the only thing Netanyahu knows for sure is that the Iranians remain intent on being able to produce their own nuclear weapons.

The March 2nd edition of The Times of Israel reported that Yukiya Amano, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said “Iran has yet to provide explanations that enable the agency to clarify two outstanding practical measures”, a diplomatic way of referring to “alleged explosive tests and other issues related to research that may also be useful for military uses of atomic energy.” This is the same problem that the U.N. agency has with North Korea.

Netanyahu was worried about Iran’s nuclear weapons program in 1996, in 2011, and now in 2015; more than enough time for Iran to have made considerable progress toward their goal. At the heart of this third address to Congress is the survival of nearly half of all the Jews in the world because they live in Israel.

It’s no secret there is no love-loss between Bibi Netanyahu and Barack Obama, but this third effort to urge Congress to go on record supporting the survival of Israel is necessary because, for the first time since 1948, there is some cause to wonder whether a war-weary U.S. would come to Israel’s defense.

Obama has said in no uncertain terms that he wants to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. However, the world has learned that the gap between what he says and what he does is often wide or non-existent. It must be said, however, that past Presidents have decried North Korea’s acquisition of nuclear weapons, but that has not translated into any direct action because China entered the Korean conflict in the 1950s to defend it and no one wants a repeat of that.

Netanyahu does not speak for “all Jews.” He speaks for Israel and other than national survival the political divisions there are even more diverse than our own. The fact that he is running for reelection there is not a factor for his speech to Congress—timing is.

One suspects that the best intelligence both Israel and the U.S. have been able to secure suggests that, this time, Iran is very close to its goal of being able to produce its own nuclear weapons despite the sanctions that have been imposed.

Netanyahu is understandably concerned about the negotiations that Obama has relentlessly pursued with Iran, the result of which has alienated not only Israel, but Saudi Arabia and all of the Gulf nations. The P5+1 parties to the negotiations include Russia, China, France, United Kingdom and Germany. The negotiations have deadlocked in the past and may do so again despite the fact that both Russia and China have close ties to Iran.

Even if Iran agrees to terms that would supposedly slow or stop its nuclear weapons program, there is not a scintilla of evidence that they would fulfill their promises. Iran, after all, is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism worldwide.

The odds are that Netanyahu knows that Iran, this time, is very close to becoming militarily nuclear. Addressing Congress calls attention to the danger, not only domestically, but worldwide.

What Netanyahu also knows is that President Obama seems to have blind spot when it comes to the growing anti-Semitism that resembles what existed in the 1930s in Europe. When Jews in a French kosher supermarket were murdered, Obama referred to it as an act of “violent, vicious zealots who behead people or randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris.”

Whoa! It wasn’t “a bunch of folks.” They were Jews buying food for the Sabbath meal. And those “violent, vicious zealots” were Muslims, just like the ISIS Muslims beheading, crucifying, burning, kidnapping, and enslaving those they don’t kill for being Christian, Jewish, Yazidis, or just not Muslim enough!

Netanyahu’s speech will, indeed, be historic. It may not be his last visit to the chambers of Congress.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

03/4/15
Muslim Brotherhood Control of US Govt

The Betrayal Papers, Part III of V: Obama’s Scandals and Assaults on Freedoms Explained

The Obama administration’s scandals and domestic policies are often directly linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and their goals for Islamic conquest.

The Betrayal Papers Part I – Under Obama: U.S. Captured by the Muslim Brotherhood, presented a picture of a conspiracy that is manipulating the American government. Part II – In Plain Sight: A National Security “Smoking Gun” named several people in the Obama administration who have documented associations to Muslim Brotherhood front groups and the State of Qatar. This article will explore the deliberate strategy of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Obama administration to cripple the middle class and to steer the American economy, as well as identify, to the extent possible, their role in many Obama scandals.

Introduction

What do Common Core, “comprehensive” immigration reform, and IRS targeting of conservatives groups have in common? They are just a few examples of Muslim Brotherhood-connected policy initiatives that are affecting the lives of Americans every day. Under Obama, many new domestic policies, as well as many scandals, can be traced back to, in varying degrees, the Muslim Brotherhood.

To understand why America no longer feels like America – why it seems that the government has its favorites and while others are targeted and even persecuted – it is important to understand two strong influences on the Muslim Brotherhood. The first is historical: the Nazi Party of Hitler’s Germany. The second is more contemporary: the strategy developed by Al Qaeda’s strategic mastermind, Abu Musab al-Suri.

“The Vampire Economy” and Economic Repression

In 1939, German economist Guenter Reimann published a study of the German economy under Hitler. The Vampire Economy described a corrupt, backwards economy that was not based on any economic logic, much less profit seeking, but instead on the politics of the Fuehrer (i.e., Leader), Adolf Hitler.

Like Communism, Nazism was a form of socialism. (The term Nazi is a contraction of the German word Nationalsozialismus, or National Socialism.)   Unlike Soviet Communism, which, at least theoretically, depended on shared ownership of capital to direct the economy, in Nazi Germany the shops, farms, and factories remained, nominally, in private hands.[i] Yet the outcome was basically the same in both Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany: total control over the economy by the Leader and the Party.

In Germany, the pseudo-legal rationale used by the Nazis was regulation, which was subject to change on a whim. If you stepped outside the regulations, you were punished with fines, political persecution, imprisonment, and possibly shipped off to a concentration camp. Sound familiar?

Yet pervasive corruption in the Third Reich ensured the rules applied differently to those in favor, and to those who opposed the Nazis. Specifically, in such an economy, there are party members in good standing, and there were dissidents. Party members can break rules with impunity, while dissidents face public character assassinations and blacklisting.

This calls to mind Obamacare’s implementation. Certain companies, approximately 1,200 in fact, received waivers from the law. Other businesses were forced to provide health coverage for abortions against the will and conscience of the business owners (though the Supreme Court later overruled this regulation). A similar comparison can be made for the fines and prosecutions unequally levied on banks for violating a myriad of complex and overlapping regulations.

Abu Musab Al-Suri’s Plan to Cripple the American Economy

Although most Americans know the name Osama bin Laden, very few know the name Abu Musab al-Suri. While bin Laden provided the charisma and wealth to found Al Qaeda, al-Suri, one of his top lieutenants, provided valuable strategic advice to the fledgling jihadi network. A member of the Muslim Brotherhood from the time he was a student, al-Suri rose to become a member of the Brotherhood’s military command in 1982.

Al-Suri was a calculating thinker, who recognized that to bring down America (and the West in general) would require something different than mass murders. He urged the targeting of high value targets, such as infrastructure, which would force the United States to incur significant economic costs. As an example of this strategy in practice, Al-Suri was the architect of the 2004 Madrid train bombings. There is a good case to be made that the World Trade Center was long in Al Qaeda’s sights precisely because it was a bastion of capitalism, an important hub of New York City’s communications network, and the home of many prominent companies.

Of course, there’s little sense in physically targeting an economy which has already been knuckled-down under onerous, impossible to keep-up-with regulations issued by Obama’s bureaucracies. Various sectors of the American economy have already been effectively taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood Obama administration, including: healthcare, banking, energy, agriculture (think EPA and FDA), and transportation. Last week, the Obama administration, without the consent of Congress or the people, seized untold new powers to regulate the internet.

Meanwhile, as the government unapologetically intrudes into every aspect of life and business, a case could be made that the middle class is being systematically bankrupted. Financial columnist Charles Ortel has shown that the economy is fundamentally as weak as it has been in a generation. Following the collapse in 2008, the government pumped in trillions of dollars to supposedly stabilize and jumpstart the economy (recall the misnamed “Stimulus”). But as of January 2015, there were fewer core jobs in the private sector economy than ten years earlier. Compounding this economic morass is national debt: in roughly the same period (2005-2014), debt has increased $16.5 trillion, to $58 trillion. Finally, information from 2012 and 2013 (the most recent data available), shows pre-tax incomes decreasing for high, middle, and low income earning households.

Abu Musab al-Suri had a terrorist superstar with Osama bin Laden. However, when it comes to economically knee-capping the American economy, Barack Hussein Obama has proved far more effective than the cave rat, Sheikh bin Laden.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Doha, Qatar – Bipartisan Influence by Muslim Brotherhood

What would be powerful enough to exert this influence over the American economy? What entity could be that pervasive as to reach into big business across the nation?

In February 2010, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce established their first legal Chamber in Doha, Qatar. Qatar, the reader should be reminded, is a prolific financier of terror. Qatar is also home to the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, now an Interpol fugitive. The Chamber represents American business and also has an explicitly political and diplomatic mission. In the words of the Chamber’s Executive Vice President and COO, David Chavern, AmCham Qatar is “another concrete example of positive U.S. Engagement with the Muslim world.”

Among the companies and organizations which are premier sponsors of AmCham Qatar are ExxonMobil, The Boeing Corporation, Carnegie Mellon Qatar, Northwestern University in Qatar, and Fluor.   Moreover, the following companies have significant involvement with the State of Qatar: Lockheed Martin, Bloomberg, Bank of America, Miramax, among many more.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, with its close ties to Qatar, is by far the largest lobbying spender in Washington ($136.3 million in 2012). Business is a bipartisan pursuit, which means that money from Qatar – which is arguably today’s most prolific financial sponsor of Islamic terror – carries great weight in both Republican and Democrat circles.

Indeed, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham is on the record last year as saying, “I’m going to embrace being a Chamber of Commerce Republican.” He was part of a bipartisan Senate delegation to Qatar this January which also included Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Bob Corker (R-TN), John Barrasso (R-WY), Angus King (I-ME) and Tim Kaine (D-VA).

The Brotherhood’s Connections to Policies and Scandals of the Obama Administration

In June 2012, The Daily Caller reported that the CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, had attended “hundreds” meetings with the Obama administration. CAIR, it will be recalled, is a Muslim Brotherhood front organization very closely tied to Hamas.

Why so many meetings? What incredible portfolio of business does CAIR have to discuss with an American administration? What follows is a snapshot of various policies and scandals that are linked, often directly, to Muslim Brotherhood individuals, organizations, and their goal of “civilization jihad.”

Militarization of the Department of Homeland Security: While running for President, Obama stated several times that America needed a civilian national security force that matched the might of the U.S. military. Candidate Obama stated in 2008, “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

To many, this sounded like a call for a militarized federal police force. Given that DHS has been advised by such people as Mohammed Elibiary, Arif Alikhan, Eboo Patel, and Mohamed Magid, who each have documented ties with the Muslim Brotherhood, is it not possible that DHS has been weaponized as a force against the American by the Islamists?

Domestic Spying and Wiretapping: While journalists at AP and Fox News have been subjects of wiretapping ordered by Eric Holder’s misnamed Department of Justice, the NSA’s dragnet on regular Americans has been revealed to be broader than virtually anyone suspected.

Curiously, the spreadsheets that were leaked detailing the email tracking of Muslim American leaders stop in 2008. CAIR Director Nihad Awad is listed as a target, as is Faisal Gill, a Republican operative who held a top-secret security clearance with the Department of Homeland Security. The spreadsheets were leaked in 2014 by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

Purge of Military Officers and Christianity: Over the past several years, the U.S. military has been purged of hundreds of high ranking officers. Many of these dedicated military officers were dismissed based on trivial offenses. Occurring simultaneously is a purge of Christianity, indeed even Bibles, from the U.S. military.

Anti-Police Protests: In conjunction with the militarization of DHS, state and local law enforcement have been targets of the Obama administration and Eric Holder’s Department of Justice. This anti-police agenda culminated last summer with riots in Ferguson, Missouri and violent protests New York City. Among the most prominent groups involved in these protests was ANSWER, a pro-Palestinian group that had on its original steering committee the Muslim Students Association.

Finally, the NYC cop killer Ismaaiyl Abdullah Brinsley stated on his own Facebook page that he was previously an employee of the (Muslim Brotherhood) Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). At the time of the killing, the president of ISNA was Mohamed Magid, an advisor to Obama, DHS, and the National Security Council.

Immigration and Amnesty: Revealed in a recent editorial, “Between 2010 and 2013, the Obama administration imported almost 300,000 new immigrants from Muslim nations — more immigrants than the U.S. let in from Central America and Mexico combined over that period.” Given the paucity of background and security checks, as well as the high incidence of terrorism from such countries, it is any surprise that the FBI now admits that ISIS is active in all 50 states?

The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), another Muslim Brotherhood front organization operating in the United States, conveniently issued a policy paper in September 2013 calling for “comprehensive immigration reform.”

Moreover, in January the Obama appointed Fatima Noor, a veiled Muslim woman, to the position of “Special Assistant in the Office of the Director for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Security.” Other than her religion, her credentials are very thin.

It is hardly an exaggeration to state that the administration is taking gradual steps to eliminating the very concept of American citizenship. In fact, a recent White House conference call made it explicit that these new immigrants are not supposed to assimilate into American society, but instead establish their own ethnic communities within the United States. Does this remind anyone of Gaza, or the no-go zones in Europe?

Common Core: Even classroom education has not escaped the tentacles of the Muslim Brotherhood. The connection between Common Core and the international terror group is through, once again, Qatar. The Connect All Schools initiative is a program to promote “One World Education.” It is aligned to Common Core State Standards, and is funded by the Qatar Foundation International (QFI). The director of QFI’s Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics is Tariq Ramadan, grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder, Hassan al-Banna.

According to WND, in 2011 QFI “partnered with the Department of State and the U.S. Department of Education to facilitate matchmaking between classrooms in the U.S. and international schools through … the “Connect All Schools” project.” QFI explains on its own website that the initiative was founded in response to Obama’s infamous 2009 Cairo speech, during which Obama had the Muslim Brotherhood seated in the front row.

Participation of the Qatar Foundation International puts in proper context the ever more prevalent cases of Sharia (i.e. Islamic law) incursions into American schools, such as: girls forced to cover up like devout Muslims on school sponsored trips to mosques; Islamic vocabulary lessons in high school; the teaching of Islamic culture; teaching the five pillars of Islam and “A call to jihad;” and Qatar investing $5 million to teach Arabic in schools.

Finally, any treatment of Common Core would not be complete without mentioning the involvement of another one of Obama’s mentors, domestic terrorist Bill Ayers. Ayers received $49.2 million from Vartan Gregorian, a board member of Qatar Foundation who is also part of Obama’s White House Fellowships Commission. Gregorian is an integral part of Connect All Schools.

IRS Targeting of Conservative and Pro-Israel Groups: The targeting of Obama’s political enemies is reminiscent of the politicized bureaucracies of all tyrannies, from Nazism to Communism and everything in between. Among the persecuted by apparatchik Lois Lerner were: hundreds of conservative groups, Constitutional groups, groups that criticized Obama, 5 pro-Israel groups, and an 83 year old Nazi concentration camp survivor.

As usual, the pattern of targeting conservatives, Israel, and Jews in general is the trend of the Obama administration … and the Muslim Brotherhood. The IRS targeting nearly mirrors DHS’s profiling of “right wing sovereign citizens and extremist groups” as the primary terrorist threat facing the country, which was CAIR approved.

In addition to suppressing political enemies, the IRS has actually enabled the Muslim Brotherhood through Obama’s half-brother, Malik. In 2011, the IRS granted a 501(c)(3) statuses to two groups connected to Barack Obama’s half-brother, Malik Obama: the Barack H. Obama Foundation (BHOF), and Mama Sarah Obama Foundation (MSOF).

This would not be of particular concern, but for the fact that Malik Obama has documented associations with the Muslim Brotherhood, wanted terrorists, and terrorist organizations. These include Sudan’s Muslim Brotherhood leader Omar al-Bashir, the organizers of the infamous 2010 Gaza Flotilla, and Hamas. In fact, contravening all standard practices, the IRS granted the tax exempt status to BHOF retroactively, after it was learned that Malik was falsely and criminally representing his organization as a charity (which, at the time, it was not). A full report on these activities was produced by the Shoebat Foundation, and can be read here.

The George Soros Connection

In more than one of these instances, the fingerprints of billionaire investor (and breaker of nations and currencies) George Soros can be found. Soros operates a vast network of various “leftist” front organizations. In reality, these organizations are anything but liberal. They regularly attack capitalism, Israel, and fund the subversion of American society. It is not the intention here to dissect Soros’s network and political machinations, but to place him in context in the above scandals.

Combating “Islamophobia”: Soros has “donated” $10,117,186 to the Center for American Progress since 2000. One of the major initiatives of CAP is to combat “sharia hysteria” by the “religious right.”

Ferguson unrest: Soros’s Open Society Institute donated $33 million in one year to various activist groups in Ferguson who were active in the protests and subsequent destruction.

Immigration: Prominent Muslim American immigration lawyer Rabia Chaudry is employed by another Soros-controlled group, the New America Foundation. Previously Chaudry was Media Relations Director of CAIR-CT.

Common Core: A project of the Soros-funded Center for American Progress (CAP), Common Core was conceived under the direction of John Podesta, while he was President of CAP. Podesta is currently Counselor to Obama, and also a Visiting Professor at Georgetown University Law Center. (Note: Georgetown has a campus of their School of Foreign Service in Doha, Qatar. All campus costs are fully covered by a grant of the Qatar Foundation, which also funds aspects of Common Core.)

Net Neutrality Regulation: According to Washington Examiner, Soros funded “net neutrality” groups to the tune of $196 million. Net neutrality was adopted last week by a committee vote of the FCC, and is widely expected to be used to regulate content on the internet and television.

Conclusion

Tyranny, whatever name it’s given, has one recipe. It starts with a base of fear, it’s spiced with terror, and served with sides of persecution and intimidation. The poorer and more desperate the people become, the more readily they’ll meld into the pottage of political domination by their government.

Taken alone, none of these events would be of much concern in a country of 300+ million people. Even the general feeling of depression and oppression by government could be overlooked as a result of global economic conditions, many which are out of the control of even the President of the United States.

But viewed together through the lens of the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to dominate America and bring her down from within, dismissing them as coincidence would be to ignore a carefully constructed plan. Whether attacks on cops, downright crazy immigration policies, the persecution of American citizens by the IRS, or the takeover of school curricula, there is a rhythm to all of these scandals that jives seamlessly with the song of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Evidence above suggests a bipartisan infection, a betrayal of the American people by the crony establishment in both parties. What will it take before the pundits, politicians, and regular Americans start to demand answers and accountability from the people in their own government who are each day plotting their demise, and will only be content when the American people are destitute and servile?

 

The Betrayal Papers is a collaborative effort by the Coalition of Concerned Citizens, which includes: Andrea Shea King, Dr. Ashraf Ramelah, Benjamin Smith, Bethany Blankley, Brent Parrish, Charles Ortel, Chris Nethery, Denise Simon, Dick Manasseri, Gary Kubiak, Gates of Vienna, IQ al Rassooli, Jeff Bayard, Leslie Burt, Marcus Kohan, Mary Fanning, General Paul E. Vallely, Regina Thomson, Scott Smith, Terresa Monroe-Hamilton, Colonel Thomas Snodgrass, Trevor Loudon, Wallace Bruschweiler, and William Palumbo.

[i] The nominal private ownership which was centrally directed by the Nazis was called Zwangswirtschaft, German for “compulsory economy.” Writes the famous economist Ludwig von Mises in Human Action, “The second pattern [of socialism] (we may call it the Hindenburg or German pattern) nominally and seemingly preserves private ownership of the means of production and keeps the appearance of ordinary market prices, wages, and interest rates. There are, however, no longer entrepreneurs, but only shop managers (Betriebfuehrer in the terminology of Nazi legislation). These shop managers are seemingly instrumental in the conduct of the enterprises entrusted to them; they buy and sell, hire and discharge workers and remunerate their services, contract debts and pay interest and amortization. But in all their activities they are bound to obey unconditionally the order issued by government’s supreme office of production management. This office… tells the shop managers what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. It assigns every worker to his job and fixes his wages. It decrees to whom and on what terms the capitalists must entrust their funds. Market exchange is merely a sham.”