WE ARE ALL READY IN DANGER...but the general public doesn't know it. STRIKE THAT !!! THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DOESN'T KNOW IT!!!

SPLC indicted!!! Best news we heard all day!

I don't remember how many years ago it was when we openly talked about the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and its Leftist views, but it was indeed brought up on our radio show by our then host, Ron Arnold...and if it makes any difference, I was the co-host.  Jack Mizell monitored the phone calls.  

Then on another occasion (I cannot mention any names) while attending a classroom setting I had to interrupt the speaker who was preaching pro SPLC propaganda and set him straight about who they really are.  

Now I don't need to get into any of the details about what was said at the time but I'm sure all who are mentioned above will be happy to know we are all exonerated for our past beliefs with the recent indictments of the SPLC.  ~ Norman E. Hooben 

Watch the following video. 

"Our most valuable assets are not on the ground."

1

Simulating multiple emitters In operational situations, many emitter signals are present at the same time, and pulse-on-pulse situations can easily occur. Cutting-edge radar signal simulation in the lab Cutting-edge radar signal simulation in the lab The key feature of a radar warning receiver is the ability to identify these signals. The EW computer of the platform compares the intercepted signals with emitter parameters that are loaded into an onboard library before the flight. It is vital to ensure a realistic and representative test environment with multiple emitters in the lab from day one of the engineering phase. The R&S®SMW200A vector signal generator together with the R&S®Pulse Sequencer software package is a powerful off the-shelf radar signal simulator. It can simulate RF emitter signals from single or multiple static or moving emitters in the lab.

A United States Air Force illustration of a hypothetical Soviet Armed Forces space weapon

THE POPE IS SETTING A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT

 General Mike Flynn

The photo below was taken at a prominent Catholic Church in Florida today. This type of information warfare against “MAGA”, against President Trump, is just beginning. It is dangerous, it is very political, it is fifth generational, and most definitely, it is spiritual warfare.

There are approximately 1.4B Catholics worldwide. The largest Christian denomination in the world. Fact is, without the Catholic vote, one cannot be President of The United States of America.

This Pope is consciously choosing political sides. He is emerging as a woke globalist instead of a humble servant of Jesus Christ representing the Church of Peter.

The Pope should represent humility and courage in the face of the evil that walks the earth.

Does he truly see President Donald J. Trump as evil?

I think not.

I believe he is moving at a speed directed by his masters (not God). The Pope, as a man, needs to be reminded that humility in the face of God is courage. Courage without humility in the face of man is dangerous.

It is shocking how many Catholics are upset at Trump currently. It shows the unhealthy allegiance that they hold for any man, including the Pope.

In Revelation 19:10, we are told not to worship even an angel, but only God, so certainly we should not worship a man, even the Pope.

In Acts 10:25, Peter (the first Pope) says that he is just a man and not to worship him but to worship only God.

In Jeremiah 17:5 says that we are cursed if we trust in man or in our strength.

With access to greater knowledge, all of us see a darker underbelly of our international political systems and the depravity of humanity (truly).

So what? Thrust yourselves into the word of God instead of focusing on the word of man. I know that is the challenge of a lifetime, but for some individuals and even for a few nations, it could save lives.

Why? Because all men say dumb things at times. It may be purposeful for a circumstance or it may just be ignorance. If our hope and trust remains in Jesus, that allows us to walk through these uncertain times unphased.

If it isn’t clear enough yet, it will become even more clear in the months ahead.

NATO: It sounds like they're singing the Chief Joseph song, "I will fight no more forever."

A Foolish NATO Was a Big Loser in the Iran War - Victor Davis Hanson

American Greatness

NATO members are not legally required to join any member’s military operations that are not formally sanctioned by the alliance or not aimed at protecting the homelands of the membership.

But they often do just that.

Some NATO members joined the Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq on the theory that, in the post-9/11 environment, the Taliban and Saddam Hussein were dangers to all Western security.

They followed the precedent set by America’s 1999 intervention in the distant Balkans, leading a three-month NATO campaign to dismantle Slobodan Milošević’s often bloody ambitions of a Greater Serbia. The U.S. also joined the 2011 U.N.-approved, and French- and British-inspired, NATO “coalition of the willing” bombing campaign in Libya.

That effort proved a seven-month misadventure—especially since the targeted Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi had given up his nuclear weapons program and was desperately trying to cut a deal with the West.

When NATO members in the past have operated unilaterally to defend their own national interests, they have often called on the U.S., as NATO’s strongest member, for overt help.

For nearly 40 years, the U.S. had offered logistical, intelligence, reconnaissance, refueling, and diplomatic support to the French in their unilateral and postcolonial efforts to protect Chad from Libya and, later, Islamists.

During the 1982 Falklands War, a solitary Britain faced enormous logistical challenges in steaming halfway around the world to eject Argentina from its windswept and sparse islands.

U.S. aid was critical to the effort.

So America stepped up to help with intelligence, reconnaissance, the supply of some two million gallons of much-needed gasoline, and crucial restocking of Britain’s depleted Tomahawk missiles.

The American tilt to Britain prompted anger from most Latin American nations of the shared Western hemisphere, as well as from many Hispanic American citizens at home.

No matter—Ronald Reagan rightly saw the importance of solidarity with a NATO member and a long-time American ally. So he gave Britain a veritable blank check for American aid.

Currently, America has not asked NATO members to help bomb Iran—even though Europe, not the U.S., was in range of Iranian ballistic missiles, and soon perhaps nuclear-tipped ones as well.

Europeans are far more vulnerable to Iranian-inspired Islamic terrorism. They are more reliant on foreign oil from the Middle East, some of it passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

All the U.S. had initially asked for was basing support in disarming a common Western enemy that, for nearly half a century, has slaughtered American diplomats and soldiers and tried to kill a U.S. president and secretary of state.

But most NATO members could not even offer tacit help. Some damned the U.S. effort as either illegal or unnecessary.

The American public watched the British waffle for days over permitting Americans to use their Diego Garcia base.

The Spanish banned American use of their NATO bases and airspace.

The Italians refused a request from American bombers to land and refuel at a Sicilian NATO base.

Many NATO heads of state rebuked the U.S. to their domestic audiences while, in typical two-faced fashion, publicly offering empty verbal support for the U.S. effort.

The NATO response to an Iranian missile aimed at fellow NATO member Turkey was anemic.

Even worse was the pathetic British reaction to another Iranian missile launch at a British base at Akrotiri, Cyprus.

Yet a successful American effort in neutering a theocratic Iran was clearly of benefit to Europe. So is preventing the international waters of the Strait of Hormuz from becoming a toll booth run by the Iranian mullahs.

Such passivity was in sharp contrast to the five-year-long Ukraine War on the borders of Europe.

Ukraine was not in NATO.

Ukrainian politicos and ambassadors had sometimes played an intrusive, partisan role in the 2016, 2020, and 2024 American presidential elections.

Nonetheless, there were urgent European requests for the U.S. to honor the spirit of NATO solidarity and to get across the Atlantic as quickly as possible to protect the territorial integrity of Europe.

Yet continental Europe is not intrinsically weak. The combined population of the European Union and European NATO members is around 450 million—a population more than 100 million greater than that of the U.S.

These same European nations enjoy an aggregate annual GDP of more than $22 trillion, 10 times the size of the Russian economy.

European diffidence comes on top of the perennial American effort to harangue NATO members to honor their 2 percent of GDP defense commitments—especially in the case of deadbeat Spain and Canada, who for years welched on their pledges.

Trump’s harangues were not what was undermining NATO.

Instead, he ripped off a happy-face scab and exposed a festering wound of increasingly anti-American hypocrisy beneath.

If you wanted to wreck the alliance, there would be no better way than to follow the duplicitous examples of Western European NATO members.