Benador: Americans, The Time Has Come To March For Liberty…!!!

By: Eliana Benador
Right Side News

“Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God.” Thomas Jefferson

“In commenting on the resistance he experienced to his own unorthodox views on health, Yale surgeon Dr. Bernie S. Siegel, author of the best-selling book “Love, Medicine, and Miracles,” asserts that it is because people are addicted to their beliefs. Siegel says this is why when you try to change someone’s belief they act like an addict.

There seems to be a good deal of truth to Siegel’s observation, which perhaps is why so many of civilization’s greatest insights, and advances have at first been greeted with such passionate denial. We are addicted to our beliefs and we *do* act like addicts when someone tries to wrest from us the powerful opium of our dogmas.” Michael Talbot

”If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?” Pirke Avot / Ethics of the Fathers 1:14

“United we stand; divided we fall”

I dedicate this article to my son and to future generations of innocent Americans whose voice cannot be heard but who will inherit the decision this generation of Americans will make. Eliana Benador

Abroad, one can feel the influence America has had and still has in the world. Whether it is the wide array of American hotel chains or Starbucks, Gap, including the decadent rap music; and one can be surprised by the incredible attention a Swiss newspaper gives, of all people, to someone like Kim Kardashian and her choice of her daughter’s name. That is how influential America is, for better or for worse, in the everyday life of billions and billions around the planet.

Meanwhile, in mainland, Americans who have throughout the years gotten used to live a life of comfort, slowly became more inclined to worry about the outer world by sending their sons and daughters in military uniform, resigned to give their lives for causes in faraway countries, whose name sometimes American-English speakers cannot even pronounce them.

In other words, Americans have fought tyrannies, but never lived them. Thus, under such circumstances, they overlook the embryos that are evolving in their midst and are prone to ignore the signs of tyranny that are about to push their doors down.

After a first term, a majority of the American people renewed Mr. Obama’s lease to the White House, but the love affair between the American democrats and their president did not fair well for the conservative minority who were not willing to elect him or his anti-American agenda, but were factually unable to stop the democratic tsunami.


For over a century now, liberals have understood that they must destroy the family nucleus if they want not only to takeover a country, but to control it completely and turn it into a socialist entity at least, or communist at worst.

For that, they knew that the first goal was to promote feminism, in the name of so-called equal rights for women. Abortion followed, as did the legalization of homosexual marriage, and the subsequent total overhaul of sexual values. As follow-up, in Chicago they have programmed a course to teach kindergartners “one can marry anyone,” thus proving how unnatural their policies and positions are.


Obama ran as the “black” candidate thus setting the tone of his behavior throughout his terms. He was quick to run to Florida when a white American Latino killed a black man in self-defense. “Trayvon could have been my son,” was his heavy loaded message. “Trayvon could have been me,” he said, when he failed to manipulate the jurors whose verdict innocent the accused.

As a matter of fact, “A division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) was deployed to Sanford, Florida in 2012 to provide assistance for anti-George Zimmerman protests, including a rally headlined by activist Al Sharpton, according to newly released documents.”

Zimmermann’s parents went in hiding due to threats they received, and when Zimmermann helped take some people out of their accident car, that family instead of being thankful to him, they cancelled a TV appearance out of fear.

Recently, Larry Elder went off on Piers Morgan during an explosive race debate: “You’re making black people feel as if they are under siege… It’s an outrage!” He went on to say: “…that there were 7,000 murders last year of black people, almost all of which were committed by blacks. “

There are real problems within the black community in America. If Barack Obama really cared about them, he could have rather focused on fixing a real problem, such as the murders on black people, of which 93% are perpetrated by blacks.

What Obama wants to promote and advance, is his agenda, he is obviously pushing for unrest to indirectly maybe cause a beginning of a civil war so he and his people can have the excuse they need to impose martial law and takeover America.


From the beginning of his presidency, Obama marked the tone instructing Charles Bolden, the head of NASA, to do Muslim Outreach in order to make Muslims “feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering…” And, Bolden gives parallel cases, so to say, of countries who have made major intellectual and scientific contributions, such as Russia and Japan… As such, the president relegated the advancement of American space science to favor his friends, but that was only the first of his first ‘open house’ to welcome his Muslim partners.

Not enough has been said in the media about this:

“The trial of U.S. Army major Nidal Hassan finally began on July 9th, four years after he carried out an Islamic terror attack that he is actually continuing. That is largely because he is representing himself at his trial, apparently so he can further publicize his belief that he was acting to defend Islam. In response, the U.S. government continues to insist that the Hasan attack had nothing to do with religion but was simply a case of workplace violence. Many of the 32 surviving victims of the 2009 attack in Ft. Hood are complaining, without success, that they are receiving less attention (and money) for their injuries because they did not get a Purple Heart medal because of the incident. The Purple Heart medal is the U.S. military award for combat wounds and it entitles soldiers to higher compensation and more prompt medical attention. The decision not to award Purple Hearts to the Ft. Hood victims is at the center of a controversy between politicians who are trying to play down the presence of Islamic radicalism in the United States and military leaders who want recognition for American troops killed or wounded by Islamic terrorism. While victims of domestic terrorism can receive the Purple Heart, the U.S. government has several times refused to categorize the November 5, 2009 attack in Ft. Hood as a terrorist action. It is expected that this will become even more difficult to defend as the Hasan trial proceeds.”

The Nidal Malik Hassan case is the most infamous among Islam and Muslim-related abuses from the Obama Administration, committed so far, with total impunity, but it is far from being the last one.

It was during president Hosni Mubarak’s time that Obama gave his 2009 Cairo speech and the result was dramatic: Muslim Brotherhood got the green light and in time, removed the dictator who nevertheless had been an American ally for years. Such move initiated a row of dark moves by the Brothers throughout the Muslim Middle East, where the world benevolently has watched the rise of terrorists keen to push their sharia agenda.

There is a litany of examples of the infiltration of Muslim Brotherhood members within the administration, facilitated by Barack Obama, who has legitimized their presence. Muslim Brotherhood is the Egyptian organization for the advancement of Islam and its Jihad for Muslim world domination happens via its tool of choice: terrorism in its various nasty shapes and forms.

We would be remiss if we did not mention the other Muslim style of invasion, one that is even more aggressive than violence. Liberal governments worldwide are intent in facilitating Muslim immigration, which will result in a demographic explosion in America, Europe and the West in general, given that their birth rate is among the highest on the planet.

With so many children per family, Muslims are now receiving government aid of all sorts, in America, but also in Europe, Australia and other countries. It is not surprising that in Michigan, for instance, the city of Detroit has become the first case of a city bankruptcy in 21st century America.

Some consider Michigan the “Islamic capital of the United States,” due to the heavy Muslim presence throughout its cities. The situation in Detroit is dramatic. The city is basically been taken over by Muslims who may well have driven the city to the place where it is now. Dearborn, another predominantly Muslim city, is enclaved in Detroit on three borders. Sharia is being imposed there.

All this is happening silently, while Americans are been asked to abort their children and have no jobs.

To those who will want to accuse me of Islamophobe, I say:

I have been in your countries and know for a fact that you do not even accept a synagogue or a church. So, do not be surprised that we cannot and will not accept that you take over our civilization, our country and our lives.

Continue reading


Fort McMurray Evicts Oil Sands Companies that Helped it Grow

By: James Stafford of Oilprice.com

The Canadian town of Fort McMurray, population 76,000, is the heart of Alberta’s oil sands largesse–but the town is bursting at its seams with nowhere to expand because the land surrounding it is owned by oil companies.

The government’s answer to this is to cancel all the leases on 22,000 hectares of land surrounding Fort McMurray—effective immediately.

In an agreement announced on 26 July, the government promised lease-holders fair reimbursement, with the municipality purchasing the land from the province over the next five to 15 years.

This acreage is more than twice the size of Fort McMurray today, and the idea is to make the town two-thirds the size of Calgary.

For Fort McMurray—whose population is expected to double by 2030 thanks to the very oil sands industry is must now evict—it is a necessity. The town needs more housing and infrastructure, but has nowhere to put it.

“This lack of land has tied our hands when it comes to planning future development, but it’s also led to all sorts of challenges from sparse housing options, limited commercial retail entities and a non-existent space for social profit groups: churches, community halls, store fronts, just to name a few,” Mayor Melissa Blake told reporters on 26 July, when the decision was announced. “Today that all changes.”

Oil sands companies have mixed feelings about the deal. Though the purchase of their leases will be based on fair market prices, some are not convinced they’ll be compensated for all the money they’ve spent developing oil sands here—just to lose their leases.

The most affected will be Value Creation Inc., which holds leases on the largest swathe of territory slated for Fort McMurray’s urban development. According to the Edmonton Journal, the company had planned to develop oil sands reserves here and then return the land to the Fort McMurray authorities—along with newly laid roads—in 10 years. But Fort McMurray can’t wait.

Value Creation says the decision, at least, removes any uncertainty about what is going to happen with these leases. Company advisor Rick Orman noting that the government had been stringing it along for four years while the company continued to spend money on development. Orman also questioned the need to expand Fort McMurray to such an extent, calling it ” excessive“.

Alberta Oilsands Inc. (AOS), however, is less wary. While it’s invested $50 million developing its Clearwater assets here since 2007, it’s getting all its money back, plus interest, and some potentially sweet replacement property thrown into the deal.

AOS CEO Binh Vu told Oilprice.com: “While we are disappointed at not being able to move to production at Clearwater, with the malaise in the junior markets AOS is trading today at a market capitalization of only half of what the government remuneration will be based on our expenses at Clearwater and interest–so it will be a real boon for current shareholders and investors.”

Do companies having their leases cancelled have anything to worry about and should their shareholders be concerned? We don’t think so – we copied the below from the Mines and Mineral Act which clearly states how companies will be compensated:

The Mineral Rights Compensation Regulation (Alberta Regulation 317/2003) establishes the compensation payable by the Crown for cancelled agreements. Compensation includes at least the following:

1. Cost of acquiring the lease including annual license fees and application fees;
2. Wasted exploration and development expenditures;
3. Reclamation costs;
4. Interest of approximately 5 per cent (calculated as Alberta Treasury Branch prime plus 1 per cent).

Source: http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Fort-McMurray-Evicts-Oil-Sands-Companies-that-Helped-it-Grow.html

By: James Stafford of Oilprice.com


Obama Must Have Watched PBS

By: Peter Rollins
Accuracy in Media

President Obama’s recent extemporaneous remarks about Ho Chi Minh being a Jeffersonian Democrat may be the result of his viewing the PBS series entitled Vietnam: A Television History (1983). (This 13-part survey was produced by WGBH of Boston; journalist Stanley Karnow’s book entitled Vietnam: A History was the companion publication.) Anyone who lived through the era of U.S. military involvement will recognize this argument as a standard New Left critique of the war, a view that would make sense to Obama’s Chicago neighbor, Bill Ayers. Daniel Ellsberg, who stole the “Pentagon Papers” from the Rand Corporation, certainly held this view even though the Pentagon Papers contain a variety of conclusions about Chairman Ho. (Few read the Pentagon Papers, so the argument has stuck; years ago, Douglas Pike (deceased 2002) pointed out to me in an interview that one could prove almost any view about the roots of the Vietnam conflict using that loose collection of studies from numerous scholars under contract to Rand—where Ellsberg worked as a trusted consultant until he copied and distributed the secret Vietnam studies.)

When the series was broadcast in 1983, there followed demonstrations by Vietnamese Americans living in Washington, D.C., New Orleans and Los Angeles. The portrayal of Ho Chi Minh as a Jeffersonian—as opposed to a doctrinaire Leninist—was especially painful for the Vietnamese. A number of them called Reed Irvine, the chairman of Accuracy in Media, and asked that something be done to set the historical record straight.

Irvine convened a 1984 conference in Washington, D.C. where diplomats, military leaders, Vietnamese, and scholars of Far East history focused on the Ho Chi Minh theme, as well as other myths of the Vietnam conflict. I was brought in to interview participants, to seek out other experts and to produce two documentaries critiquing Vietnam: A Television History. The resulting programs were premiered in the Reagan White House, a development that inspired many metropolitan film and TV critics to complain that PBS was being bullied into broadcasting the AIM counter-programs. (This argument had been angrily asserted by the WGBH producer at a “fam tour” in Phoenix, Arizona where media writers gathered to hear about PBS offerings for the year. The president of WGBH later told the producer to use more restraint since there was no proof for his snide assertion and it was, in itself, harmful to the PBS image.)

At the same time I was working on the programs—but unknown to me at the time—James Banerian of San Diego was assembling a volume that critiqued the WGBH series episode by episode. The primary sources were former South Vietnamese politicos in Southern California, among whom Banerian lived and worked. At least one of the chapters in Losers are Pirates: A Close Look at the PBS Series… (1985) is devoted to the patently false linkage of Chairman Ho to American democratic ideas and practices. The Vietnamese helping Banerian knew first hand—and impartial scholars knew from Ho’s record—that he was not a wannabe democrat, but a Vietnamese Stalinist whose “reform” programs cost thousands of lives.

Banerian’s methodical critique is still available on Amazon, as are my two programs for Accuracy in Media under the title Television’s Vietnam (two shows on one DVD are available at aim.org).

(Please click on this link to see and hear the analysis provided on Uncle Ho by my documentary Television’s Vietnam: The Real Story.)

Peter Rollins is a former Marine, a Harvard Ph.D., a professor of English and American Studies, the author or co-author of numerous books, and the Producer of “Television’s Vietnam.”


AIM Announces Formation of Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi

By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media

Accuracy in Media (AIM), along with some of the country’s top retired military officers and national security officials, will hold a press conference on Tuesday, July 30, to launch the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi. The press conference is at noon in The Zenger Room at the National Press Club. The newly formed group will focus on resolving some of the many questions surrounding the September 11th attacks last year on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, and the nearby CIA Annex, that remain unanswered to this day.

I am proud to stand with this distinguished group, which at this time includes the following (alphabetical order):

  • Larry Bailey, Capt. (SEAL), USN (Ret.)
  • Charles Jones, B/Gen., USAF (Ret.)
  • Clare Lopez, former CIA operations officer
  • Admiral James Lyons (Ret.)
  • General Thomas McInerney (Ret.)
  • Wayne Morris Col USMC (Ret)
  • Wayne Simmons, former CIA officer
  • General Paul Vallely (Ret.)
  • Former Congressman and Retired Army Colonel Allen West

We anticipate additional members in the coming days and weeks. Accuracy in Media has had a long history of working with and supporting America’s military, often in the face of severe criticism by the media. Reed Irvine founded AIM in 1969 because of media coverage of the Vietnam War, and the related Cold War. Later, in the 1980s, when PBS produced their 13 part series called “Vietnam: A Television History,” AIM answered back with a two-part documentary called “Television’s Vietnam,” which exposed the many inaccuracies and deceptions in the PBS series.

Irvine, who had himself been a Marine Intelligence officer in World War II, was passionate about his patriotism, and the role of the military in preserving our freedoms. AIM was in the forefront of the highly contentious issue of Prisoners of War, Missing in Action (POW/MIA). There were those in Congress and the media who didn’t want to accuse the Soviet Union, or the North Vietnamese, of lying about how many of our POWs they were holding, and how many had died in their captivity.

Today, we continue to honor Reed Irvine’s memory, and the organization he founded, by standing up for our military, and the values they represent. That is why AIM has established the Citizens’ Committee on Benghazi. At the July 30th press conference, members of the newly formed commission will state their intentions to investigate in a public forum, the scandal of the Obama Administration known as Benghazi, or BenghaziGate. And it’s not, by any means, as the Administration talking points describe it, a “phony scandal.”

We will announce plans to hold a conference in September, possibly the first of several, in attempt to ascertain what happened and who was responsible for the failure to provide sufficient security, or to withdraw our ambassador to Libya, who was one of four people killed on September 11, 2012. Also, was the failure to bring military assets to bear in a way that might have saved some of those lives a dereliction of duty? And finally, the cover-up, and the role of the media. You can see the entire press release here. More to follow.

Roger Aronoff is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and can be contacted at [email protected].


How Communists Manipulate Racial Issues – the “National Question”

By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal

Race is one of the communist movement’s most powerful weapons.


Most conservatives understand that the left is always willing to stir up racial animosity. What they don’t understand is how organized and systematic this process is.

Communists all over the world deliberately exploit racial and ethnic differences for revolutionary ends.

In Australia, the communists target the native Aborigines. In Finland, they target the Samic people (Lapps). In Sri Lanka, it is the Tamils. In Argentina, it is the Mapuche Indians. In the United States, it is the Southern Blacks, the Hispanics of the Southwest, the Indian tribes all over and the native peoples of Hawaii. This technique is of course also used with Islamic minority populations all over the planet – the Philippines, Thailand, Britain, France, Scandinavia, Germany and the United States being obvious examples. Even Scottish nationalism, Irish sectarianism and Quebecois separatism are examples of this deliberate strategy.

In my country, New Zealand, it is the native Maori – a people ethnically and racially similar to native Hawaiians, comprising about 15% of our population, who are the main target.

Here, my friend Reuben Chapple, shows how the local communists have long worked to manipulate New Zealand Maoris for revolutionary ends.

Please read his thesis, then compare it to what is happening in your own country. I’m sure you will see parallels.

All Ideas Have a Pedigree

The place of those of Maori descent in New Zealand life is now an immense political, social and economic issue. This has come about in the first instance because, in the words of Dr Elizabeth Rata, “liberals of both the Left and the Right [have] embraced biculturalism with … religious-like commitment.”


All ideas have a pedigree.

The ideological underpinnings of identity politics trace back to the early 20th Century writings of Communist revolutionaries Lenin and Stalin on a topic they called “The National Question.”

Around 1905, Lenin and Stalin noted that Tsarist Russia consisted not just of ethnic Russians, but upwards of 80 formerly tribal subject peoples, conquered by the Tsars over the preceding 500 years and forcibly Russified. To expand the Bolshevik support base, these peoples were promised “the right to manage their own affairs,” “the right to self-determination,” “the right to speak, read, write, use, and be taught in their own language” etc.

After World War I, the multi-ethnic empires of Austro-Hungary and Czarist Russia to which the National Question was first applied to stir up revolution were no more. Lenin and Stalin then directed the National Question towards undermining the hold of European nations over their colonial possessions, so as to deprive them of sources of cheap labour, raw materials, and markets for finished goods.

Starting in the late 1920s and early 1930s, Communists all over the world were instructed to promote the independence aspirations of minority ethnic groups so as to bring them into conflict with the status quo, undermining social cohesion, breaking up nations and dependencies into warring factions, and leading to eventual socialist control.

Locally, the Communist Party of New Zealand (“CPNZ”) soon identified a minority strand of Maori opinion centred on the Tainui, Tuwharetoa and Tuhoe tribes that had always favoured reversion to tribalism, not engagement with the modern world. The CPNZ ran in the 1935 General Election on a platform that included “self-determination for the Maoris [sic] to the point of complete separation.”

You heard it here first.

In the 1930s, the CPNZ had little success with this line. Maori were a predominately rural people and had little contact with Communists, who were mostly found in urban areas with universities and a substantial manufacturing base. This soon changed. Between 1945 – 1975, Maori underwent what University of Waikato demographers Pool and Pole describe as “the most rapid urbanisation of any group of people, anywhere.” This brought Maori flooding into the universities and trade unions, the CPNZ’s main recruiting grounds. The Communists who’d begun colonising the our universities to use them as factories of ideological reproduction had, by the mid-1960s, achieved critical mass in many departments, especially those specialising in the study of society.

Their growing dominance on faculty hiring committees allowed them to systematically exclude anyone holding alternative views. Controlling the universities is based on the writings of Antonio Gramsci, yet another disreputable Communist held up as an intellectual icon by the academic Left. In the 1920s, Gramsci reasoned that the capitalist ruling class controlled the social discourse, meaning the “subordinate classes” [Gramsci widened this from Marx’s “the workers” to include women, ethnic minorities, alternative sexualities] lacked all awareness of their own class oppressions. Revolution must therefore first take place on the level of consciousness. This would occur with the formation of a body of intellectuals who would take over the Academy as a pulpit for mass-scale indoctrination. Ideally, these intellectuals would come from the “subordinate classes,” but would also include those from the “dominant classes” who could be induced to switch sides.

Gramsci’s adherents embedded themselves within our universities with the express agenda of helping their students to understand that the major social sciences, including geography, economics, sociology, history, political science, anthropology, and psychology, were not neutral and impartial. They were instead instruments of race, gender and class oppression. These views are now considered “mainstream” in the Western Academy.

Liberal arts students were told they were learning “progressive” new ideas about race, gender and class, not Communism. They were programmed with all the principles of Communism without the label then flattered for their cleverness in accepting the programming. If you told them they were Marxists or Communists, they’d respond with a pitying smile, roll their eyes, and accuse you of “seeing Reds under the bed.”
Most are not Communists. A small cadre of Communist converts derives a sense of superiority from knowing they are manipulating the situation. The vast majority are the fellow-travelling “Pinks” once referred to by Lenin as “useful idiots..” Having internalised the system of values upon which their membership of “Club Virtue” depends, these people display a strong emotional resistance to having it questioned. If you disagree with them you are racist, sexist, fascist, misogynist, homophobic or just plain stupid.. Rational discourse with such people is impossible.

After graduating, this mass of useful idiots slithered forth from the academy into the media, education system, trade unions, Labour Party, entertainment industry, churches and other institutions that shape society’s governing ideas. Our universities thus served as a transmission belt into wider society for a raft of Communist narratives, including that of Maori as an “oppressed” people. As a result of what Communists refer to as “pressure from below,” the political centre of gravity has moved steadily leftward over several generations.

Then there is what Communists call “pressure from above.” Following the creation of the United Nations in 1945, Communists on its various committees and workgroups began to drip-feed National Question ideology into the fabric of that organisation. By 1960, the UN General Assembly had adopted the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. This stated that all peoples have a “right to self-determination” and proclaimed that “colonialism should be brought to a speedy and unconditional end.”
Over several decades, this position morphed into the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (“the UN Declaration”). New Zealand’s recent adoption of the UN Declaration is not binding and lacks an enforcement mechanism. Nonetheless, this document is far from harmless. The Declaration’s lofty phrases on the rights of indigenous people to self-determination, to maintain their own languages and cultures, to protect their natural and cultural heritage, and manage their own affairs, have further emboldened the Maori Sovereignty movement.

A few decades ago, anyone peddling identity politics would have been regarded as dangerously deluded. Now, through the Communist tactic of “pressure from above” by the UN and “pressure from below” by ethnic nationalists and their moral preening liberal enablers, the topic has been successfully mainstreamed.
The presumptions of the Maori Sovereignty/bicultural movement — that mixed-race New Zealanders with a self-selected monocultural identity are somehow entitled to separate, different, or superior rights because some of their ancestors happened to be here first – now stand revealed for what they are: a long-running Communist subversion strategy designed to substitute group rights for the individual equality in citizenship that provides for a peaceful, free society in which every citizen holds an equal share.