Saturday, October 26, 2013

Self Defense Course...this first lesson FREE!

Allah Akbar The Movie

Obama Preparing For America's Surrender

by Norman E. Hooben
Back in January (2013) Michael E. O'Hanlon from The Brookings Institution wrote a letter to Mr. (President is too dignified for someone who's main goal is to destroy America) Obama, which contained the following:
Your administration is considering cuts to the defense budget beyond the reductions already imposed by the 2011 provisions of the Budget Control Act. Many politicians and the public alike find it difficult to make sense of the huge numbers tossed around like so many chips in a Las Vegas poker game. In the national debate to date, some assume that immediate cuts will yield huge savings with little risk while others say that no more savings can be made without endangering America’s security. You need to frame this debate in a way that relates potential savings to capabilities and advances the nation’s understanding of national security in the coming decade. ... It is time to link possible savings in defense spending to reductions in military capability and associated impact on our national security. Dramatic cuts will necessitate a dramatic change in strategy. Such a change is unwarranted given present conditions in the world today. More modest cuts, while difficult, are justified given the nation’s fiscal challenges. (See Right-Sizing Defense Budget Cuts below)
Here's what I said April 10th, 2008 "Obama plans to disarm America (link)".  A full six months before Obama was elected!  Now look what we got!
Budget cuts leave US Army with only 2 fully-trained brigades
Published October 22, 2013
Biggest US nuclear bomb dismantled in Texas
Tuesday 25 October 2011
Right-Sizing Defense Budget Cuts
January 17, 2013

Potential Cuts Will Lead to a Weaker U.S. Military
August 6, 2013

Obama Inc. Spends $1 Billion on Syrian Aid, Cuts Pay for US Soldiers
September 9, 2013

Lawmakers Concerned About Key Cuts Amid Deficit Resolve
Posted 02.06.2012
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's call to shrink the military, shut bases and cancel weapons to meet the demand for budget cuts tests the resolve...

Obama cuts military spending, blinks at North Korean aggression
04/07/2009  (Note: And this was only 3 months on the job!)

And while America stands down...
Moscow Conducts Large-Scale Nuclear Attack Drill
Four long-range missiles launched in war games
October 30, 2013

Update Nov 5 2013:
Military Purges Another: US Army Col. Eric Tilley Relieved of Command
Posted Nov. 5, 2013
Tilley’s dismissal is only the latest in what retired Navy Capt. Joseph John refers to as a “bigger picture” in which some “135 senior officers have been purged.”   ...continued

Obviously the headlines are TNTC (Too Numerous To Count) and we will list some related headlines affecting the military but first let me quote the author (Sorry, he/she didn't leave a name) over at Wintery Knight
See, the thing you need to understand is that wars start when aggressors believe they can win the war. When you build up your own military, aggressors start to understand that victory may not be so easy. That’s how you prevent wars from even starting. This is called peace through strength.  So, by cutting defense spending, Obama is basically emboldening aggressors. Not just aggression against us, but aggression against our allies. If our enemies do not believe that we have the will or the firepower to defend our interests, and those of our allies, abroad, then they will act against our interests
Related headlines... 

List of US Military Generals And Admirals Fired By Obama
"Fired for Poker chips? Something stinks to high heaven and it's not my feet!"
1.  General Carter Hamm, United States Army...
2.  Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette/United States Navy...
3.  Major General Ralph Baker, United States Army...
4.  Brigadier General Bryan Roberts, United States Army...
5.  Major General Gregg A. Sturdevant, United States Marine Corps...
6.  Major General Charles M.M. Gurganus, United States Marine Corps...
7.  Lieutenant General David Holmes Huntoon Jr, United States Army...
8.  Vice Admiral Tim Giardina, United States Navy - Deputy Commander of the United States Strategic Command. Commander of the Submarine Group Trident, Submarine Group 9 and Submarine Group 10, where every single one of the 18 Nuclear Submarines with Nuclear Trident Missiles of those three groups were in his command. He was removed from service and fired from the military for the charge of using counterfeit poker chips (not making that up).
9.  Major General Michael Carry, United States Air Force - Commander 20th Air Force in charge of 9,600 people and 450 Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) at three operational wings and served in both Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. He was Fired October 11, 2013, for “Personal Misbehavior” is what was told to ABC News. He and Giardina were both the two top Commanders over the United States Nuclear Arsenal before their dismissal within 48 hours of each other. ...continued

Obama Purging Military Commanders

Nine senior commanding generals have been fired by the Obama administration this year, leading to speculation by active and retired members of the military that a purge of its commanders is underway.
Retired generals and current senior commanders that have spoken with TheBlaze say the administration is not only purging the military of commanders they don’t agree with, but is striking fear in the hearts of those still serving.  ...continued
October 23, 2013
Litmus test includes question of whether top brass are comfortable with ordering NCOs to fire on U.S. citizens ...continued

Obama fires McChrystal, names Petraeus
Jun 23, 2010

Obama’s War on American Generals
February 19, 2013
...The parade of musical chair generals began when Obama demanded the resignation of General McKiernan. The Washington Post called the firing of a wartime commander a “rare decision.” It was the first time since the days of General Douglas MacArthur that a four-star commanding general had been purged during a war. ...

And what red-blooded American ever dreamed the day he would read this?:

There's more evidence that Obama hates the military but we don't have to continue that rant here, what we should be doing is uniting of what's left to America before Obama has all his people in place to bring us to his Appomattox only there won't be any courthouse there...the plan is for a mosque... So when does the tar and feather brigade begin to drive this guy out of town?

The following should disturb you...if it doesn't, you probably voted for Obama...and I hope you like speaking Chinese...or Arabic!
Bonus Video...
Allah Akbar The Movie

At least it got off the ground...

Friday, October 25, 2013

A Blessing From God...I hope Obama is listening.

Generous Sean Hannity voluntarily gives fired Obama worker a years salary
...A Blessing From God

The following is not associated with the above video.
Who's Really Running the Show?

have been having a nagging intuition lately that something is not quite right about Barack Obama. I am not suggesting there is something wrong with the man, per se. Nor am I talking about the crazy, even dangerous, policies coming out of the White House. No, lately, I have been wondering if Barack Obama is, in fact, the person who is actually functioning as President of the United States. I mean, there's no doubt that he fills the position of POTUS but is he really the one in command? The man actually seems lost at times. He seems to be reacting to ideas about which he does not really have a clue. He has left the writing of this health care bill to Nancy Pelosi's House of Representatives and she, in turn, has farmed the writing out to several fairly radical community action groups.

When questioned about health care, he seems not to know or understand the details and even with his silver-tongue seems unable to demonstrate any leadership on the issue. With respect to Afghanistan and the rest of our foreign policy, he seems equally lost. Especially when it comes to dealing with other world leaders. He makes beautiful speeches but seems to be unable to cut deals which benefit our nation. He seems to be acting as a pawn of much more clever world leaders.

The more I watch the man, the more I see a person who appears to be the "face" of some other entity or group. He seems like a "front man". And it is becoming clear that his strings are being pulled by someone else. He does not appear to be the man in command of the ship of state. At least, he is not in the driver's seat. You might recall that people said about Bush that he was a front man for the neo-cons and that it was really Dick Cheney that was running the show. It turns out that Dick Cheney was not as influential in Bush's second term as many thought but, perhaps it is true that the neo-cons, whoever they may be, were pulling some of Bush's strings. On the other hand, with Obama, it does not appear that there is anyone who is visible to we the people or the media who is pulling the strings. If they are there, they are not in elected positions as Cheney was. They are better hidden than that. We know that he has been and remains surrounded by life-long radicals, professed communists and anti-capitalists, some of whom he has even appointed as czars in his administration. Thirty six czars, to date. But is it Obama who is picking the czars or is it the czars who are running the show and propping up Obama as their front man?

I know all this may sound crazy but, really, when you look at the man without the idolatry and media worship, does he really look like he knows what he is doing? Does he seem to have a direction? Firm convictions? Something he deeply believes in? The more he talks now, the more his words seems empty of content. Platitudes about America and the American people which, when he says them, simply do not ring true. They are words being mouthed but not believed by him. Okay, so maybe he is really clever, is firmly moving the ship to the left while mouthing the words of a centrist but I don't think so. What I used to think was that he was a really slick conman who was making us watch his left hand while he was manipulating us with his right. But, now I don't think that so much. I think the man is more plastic than real. Now I begin to see him as the "Great and Powerful Oz": a fearsome presence who is being manipulated by men behind the curtain. And while Obama does not have strong convictions, the men behind the curtain do. And they are moving this country down a dangerous path. All the while, we are being distracted by Obama and what he says and does. Okay, maybe I am simply a mildly paranoid conspiracy theorist. Why, you might ask, have Obama up there? Why not have one of the actual people behind the curtain run for President. Well, being a paranoid conspiracy theorist, I can come up with an answer to that question. Those other people behind the curtain have backgrounds that are so radical that they would never have made it past the first few days of a campaign. Additionally, they are life-long community organizers and they know what kind of face can be effective if you wish to radically change the nation. First, you need a black man to gain the support of the vast black minority. Second, you need a pale skinned black man so as not to be too much of a threat to white Americans. For the same reasons, you need a mixed race man who allies himself with the poor and down-trodden. And you need someone who speaks well enough to co-opt the language of the right and appear to be a uniter, not a divider. Someone who sees, or at least can articulate, both sides of an issue.. This is the kind of man you would pick to be your front man so that while you move things drastically and dramatically left, the vast majority of Americans will not believe that was the intention of the moderate appearing front man.
Yes, Obama was a community organizer. Yes, he could be clever enough to have all this be his idea. But he really wasn't a community organizer for that long. And when he was, he didn't do anything truly radical. It was more a time during which he was being trained than a time when he was driven by a personal sense of commitment to anything in particular. There are people who are now in his government who have been community organizers and radical left wing activists for 20-30 years. These people have deeply ingrained commitments to changing the system and have been actively trying to do so for all that time. Obama is not one of them. In my view, Obama has been trained and used as a puppet by others for a long time. His successes seem to have come too easily, as if they have been orchestrated. His life appears to have been pre-planned. I mean, Harvard Law Review without publishing a single paper of note. That is unusual. A community organizer for a short time, a State legislator for a few years, a freshman US Senator, a convention key-note speaker, and then POTUS. How does that happen? A person with zero governmental administrative experience is running the entire government of the United States. How do 1100 page documents get developed and put out in such short order? Who is writing all these proposals? Does it not seem that something is just not quite right here? Forget about the specifics of the policies for the moment. Have you seen this level of activity in the first few months of any other administration in your lifetime? Does Obama seem like the kind of person that could manage this level of activity in so short a time? Too much does not make sense here. So, slowly but surely, I am becoming convinced that it is not Barack Obama who is running the show. The White House has been captured by a group of people who are using Barack Obama as their front man. He is nothing but an articulate but empty suit. We have to start looking behind the curtains to find out who is really controlling the "great and powerful Obama".

Something to think about...


Thursday, October 24, 2013

War In America...The elite are attacking

by Norman E. Hooben

There's a story that follows my answer...its the answer to the question, "Why the Elite Attack Mainstream America"...and the question (although its posed more like a statement) is also the title of the story.  My rationale for putting the answer before the question is that the author, Liz Peek, of the story, never answers her own question...or was she just trying to make a statement.   Her commentary throughout appears to be promoting a documentary about Nebraska...or more importantly, mainstream America.  So with that said, here's my answer to Liz Peek's question...or was it a statement:
Ref:"Why the Elite Attack Mainstream America"
Why do they?
Because it's the politic elite's way of pitting us one against the other. you remember the old saying, "United...blah, blah, blah, Divided We Fall" and it's only the latter of part of that motto that concerns them...their reason has been expressed numerous times by all of 'them', "A New World Order". Although their sick desires is predominantly a Democratic Party malady it has infected those with the big 'R' after their name. Take for example former Pres. George Herbert Walker Bush (Bush 41) when he said, “We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and future generations a new world order. A world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations; when we are successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this new world order…and order which a credible United Nations can use it’s peace keeping role to full fill the promise and vision of the UN’s founders.” (That by the way, was the most arrogant statement to ever come out of the White House, that is, until Mr. Arrogant himself, Barack Obama moved in.) Carter, Clinton, and Obama all have expressed like-mindedness quotes...and it became clearer yet when Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Great Britain announced after a G20 Summit meeting that, "The New World Order 'is' emerging"
By the way, "Have you ever heard of anyone running for office on a G20 platform?" Of course not, for that platform is for the 'Elite' that you referred to in your title. They'll run on any popular platform of the day as long as it holds the attention of the un-informed voter...once elected, its off to their New World Order Meeting commonly referred to as a G8 or G20 Summit.
Why the Elite Attack Mainstream America
by Liz Peek The Fiscal Times

The United States is at war.  No, I don’t mean in Afghanistan or Syria; I mean right here in River City.  Right here where our opinion-makers and political leaders are doing their level best to demean and discredit historical American values.  A new film, Nebraska, that parodies our heartland, provides exhibit A. 
Nebraska played at the Lincoln Center Film Festival in New York recently to an enthusiastic audience. Directed by Alexander Payne, whose body of work includes The Descendants, Nebraska speaks volumes about the country we live in. While one reviewer lauded the picture as a “nuanced portrait of small-town life” that “contemplates the loss of the stout Midwest that once formed America’s backbone,” I found it mean-spirited and insulting. 

Only people who actually believe that Midwesterners are mute and moronic could think this movie portrays accurately or with sympathy the folks who live in between our coasts. Rather, the film paints small-town America as culturally deprived, small-minded and venal – inhabited by folks “clinging to guns or religion,” as Barack Obama so famously put it. It’s hard to picture Johnny Carson or Warren Buffet emerging from such a bleak landscape.This is the great divide in the U.S. today. It is not between blacks and whites – or rich and poor; it is between the elites in California or New York and ordinary people who wouldn’t know a Wagyu beefburger from an heirloom tomato. The pundits who cannot imagine how anyone can live in Nebraska’s farm country also can’t imagine why anyone ever voted for George W. Bush; they do not and cannot understand the Tea Party. And, they are scornful of what they do not understand.The elites do not celebrate the rich history of our plains states, the struggle to tame the frontier and to create the world’s most productive agricultural society. In their hearts, they also deride the assembly line workers who built our industrial base, the hard hats who kick back with Bud at the end of their shift, instead of cozying up to the New Yorker.

Click here for video
It is true that large corporations have bought up much of our farmland, leaving small towns in Nebraska and elsewhere abandoned by young people who need jobs. These forlorn communities are the victims of progress, but they are not villages of the damned. The people are not hateful. Most are older and have chosen to live out their lives in familiar surroundings. They tend to be conservative in their lives and politics; they also harbor a healthy skepticism of Uncle Sam.
It isn’t redistricting that has polarized the country, or our insane primary system – though both are problematic. It is that we are seriously divided on many issues – like religion, gay marriage, gun control, the environment and abortion. Most New Yorkers imagine that every right-minded person in America supports a woman’s right to abortion; they discard dissent on the topic as beyond ignorant. They would be shocked to know that opinion on abortion has barely budged in almost four decades of polling.
As of the last Gallup survey, 52 percent of those asked thought abortion should be legal under “some” circumstances, virtually the same as in 1975. Around 20 percent thought it should be illegal no matter what, roughly the same as 40 years ago, while 26 percent thought it should always be allowed, up slightly from 1975 but down from 34 percent in the early 1990s. When asked earlier this year whether we should overturn Roe v. Wade, only a bare majority of the country – 52 percent - said no. Democrats who push for abortion on demand do not speak for everyone.
Or take gun control. Last month, Gallup found that significantly more Americans (48 percent) blame our mental health system for “mass shootings” than any other factor, including “easy access to guns.” Almost a third of the country pins the blame on violence in movies, video games and music lyrics, but you won’t find Democrats in Hollywood looking to curb those outlets. Only normal folks don’t think their kids should be exposed to f-bombs on the radio or sex scenes in prime time. What do they know?
Campaigning in 2008, Candidate Obama promised he would “put an end to the politics that would divide a nation just to win an election.” He also vowed we were “one day away from change in America.” Unhappily, he could not possibly have kept both those promises. Much of the country isn’t looking for change; lots of people don’t want to move away from our traditions or overhaul our way of life. They believe in the promise of the individual; they believe in hard work and enjoying the fruits of our labor. Instead of envying success, they celebrate it.
Americans recently were asked in a Gallup Poll last May to list their priorities. Creating more jobs and helping the economy grow were top of the list, as they always have been. People want work; they don’t want welfare. Interestingly, “making the government more efficient” tied for third with “improving the quality of education received by American schoolchildren.” “Addressing the financial problems with Social Security and Medicare” was number 5. Does this list sound like the priorities of Democrats? Of President Obama? Some do, but these sound more like the kinds of issues that rally Tea Partiers and the sensible majority that recognizes something has gone totally haywire with our schools – and that our bloated entitlements programs are in jeopardy.
Only when we get way down the list do we find lowering health care costs, at about the same level of focus as reducing the federal deficit. Gun control and immigration reform are at the bottom of the dozen priorities ranked. Cleaning up the environment doesn’t even make the list. Nor does gay marriage, or abortion. But these are the issues that are the top of Obama’s list.
Nebraska is unlikely to hit it big at the box office. People prefer movies that make them feel good about their country, and about their fellow Americans – like Rudy, or The Blind Side. So do I.

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

CNN, The Corrupt News Network being paid not to the people who want to kill us!

CNN is Paid By Islamic Supremacist Regimes Not to Report "Damaging" Stories
From Angela Geller @ Atlas Shrugs

The Muslim world has money, lots of it, made possible by the technology and development of oil by the West. This is not new. In the largest transfer of wealth in human history, the West has underwritten the resurrection of the jihad. The Saudis fund 80% of the mosques built in America. They buy the publishing companies that produce our textbooks K- 12. They buy our universities with enormous grants and endowments.
And they buy our media. The deadliest cut of all.
And what they aren't buying they are selling: CAIR/ISNA Spokeswoman: The "media in the US is very gullible...If you have something to say, especially as a Muslim, they'll come running to you. Take advantage of that!"

Provided by Storm'n Norm'n
We see this daily. The stories covered daily here at Atlas and Jihadwatch, The Religion of are not covered in the big media. The American people are being disarmed in the war against freedom and individual rights.
CNN is Being Paid By Arabs to Keep Stories Off The Air TMI, October 21, 2013 (thanks to Claud)
Three-time Emmy winning journalist and former CNN reporter Amber Lyon is blowing the whistle on CNN. She says the network is paid by the Obama administration and foreign governments to avoid damaging stories and construct attractive narratives.
Lyon called CNN, “fake news.”
Lyon explained she was part of a four-person team send to Bahrain to cover the Arab Spring. The colorful footage illustrated the imminent danger both the team and native activists faced at the hands of radical Muslims.
But CNN never broadcasted the documentary because the U.S. supported the Bahrain regime. The Bahrain government also paid CNN not to broadcast it.
Lyon said, “I saw first-hand that these regime claims were lies, and I couldn’t believe CNN was making me put what I knew to be government lies into my reporting.”
The journalist discovered her reports weren’t the only ones being kept off the air by the U.S. and foreign governments. Lyon challenged the left-wing network when she realized she’d found out such sensitive information.
Now, Lyon is attempting to get her story to the public.
Video added December 21, 2016

The following added February 25, 2017