Confirmed: U.S. Chief Facilitator of Christian Persecution

Tags

Africa, American Church, call to prayer, Christian Persecution, Christianity, church, conviction, devotion, islam, Jihad, martyrs, middle-east, suffering, Syria, torture

Will YOU pray?

Confirmed:
U.S. Chief Facilitator of Christian Persecution
Special Bulletin

By Raymond Ibrahim

Prominent indicators confirm that the U.S. is the chief facilitator of the persecution of Christians around the world today.

According to the recently released 2014 World Watch List, which ranks the 50 nations where Christians are most persecuted, Syria is the third worst nation in the world in which to be Christian, Iraq is fourth, Afghanistan fifth, and Libya 13th. All four countries receive the strongest designation, “extreme persecution” (other designations are “severe,” “moderate,” and “sparse” persecution).

Aside from being so closely and harshly ranked, these four nations have something else in common: heavy U.S. involvement. Three-Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya-were “liberated” thanks to U.S. forces, while in the fourth, Syria, the U.S. is actively sponsoring “freedom fighters” against the regime, many of whom would be better labeled “terrorists.”

The Syrian situation alone indicts U.S. foreign policy. According to Reuters:

“Open Doors, a non-denominational group supporting persecuted Christians worldwide, said on Wednesday it had documented 2,123 “martyr” killings, compared with 1,201 in 2012. There were 1,213 such deaths in Syria alone last year, it said. “This is a very minimal count based on what has been reported in the media and we can confirm,” said Frans Veerman, head of research for Open Doors. Estimates by other Christian groups put the annual figure as high as 8,000.”

Read More

Will you pray?

Historic Presidency – Historic People

Tags

"In God We Trust", 2016, “2016: Obama’s America”, Benghazi, citizenship, Common Core, deception, Dinesh D'Souza, failure, fema-camps, foreign born, freedom, Hillary Clinton, IRS, Keystone Pipeline, militia, NDAA, NSA, obama, One nation under God, police state, survival, tyranny, US Constitution

Corey James wrote “Quit trashing Obama’s accomplishments. He has done more than any other President before him. He has an impressive list of accomplishments:

• First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.
• First President to have a social security number belonging to another man, from a state he has never lived in.
• First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States.
• First President to violate the War Powers Act.
• First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
• First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
• First President to spend a trillion dollars on “shovel-ready” jobs when there was no such thing as “shovel-ready” jobs.* * * *
• First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
• First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.
• First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S. including those with criminal convictions.
• First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
• First President to tell a CEO of a major corporation (Chrysler) to resign.
• First President to terminate America’s ability to put a man in space.
• First President to cancel the National Day of Prayer and to say that America is no longer a Christian nation.
• First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
• First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.
• First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke out on the reasons for their rate increases.
• First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.
• First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
• First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.
• First President to actively try to bankrupt an American industry (coal).
• First President to fire an inspector general of AmeriCorps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
• First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office.
• First President to surround himself with radical left wing anarchists.
• First President to golf 73 separate times in his first two and a half years in office, 102 to date.
• First President to hide his medical, educational and travel records.
• First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
• First President to go on multiple “global apology tours” and concurrent “insult our friends” tours.
• First President to go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends paid for by the taxpayers.
• First President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.
• First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.* * * *
• First President to fly in a personal trainer from Chicago at least once a week at taxpayer expense.* * * *
• First President to repeat the Holy Quran & tell us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.
• First President to tell the military men and women that they should pay for their own private insurance because they “volunteered to go to war and knew the consequences.”
• Then he was the First President to tell the members of the military that THEY were UNPATRIOTIC for balking at the last suggestion.* * * *
• First President to side with a foreign nation over one of the American 50 states (Mexico vs. Arizona).

How is Obama’s “Hope and Change” working out for you?”

I believe Obama should be arrested and impeached for only a few of his “Great Accomplishments.” For being best President in many of his Democratic followers eyes… I feel this Great Nation in being misled in an immorally direction away from what it was originally founded on. I pray for the safety and promising future for our children. I pray our children do not become as greedy, ungrateful, anti-christian and un-patriotic as I see our current leaders leading their lives.

I commend you for reading all of this. And, I hope it has empowered you with knowledge and opened your eyes more.

Thank you,
Daniel S. Hudson
— feeling patriotic.

Is military fight a supernatural battle?

Tags

“So help me God”, COEXIST, freedom of religion, Jihadists, mainstream faiths, military, Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, Military for Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), Tolerance, U.S. military

By Diane Markins

Does including the phrase, “So help me God” to an oath add value or impact? The United States Air Force Academy believed so in 1984 when it changed the candidate oath to include these words. But now they are removing the same words because of a complaint by the Military for Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF).

Only a year ago, the Latin word for “God” was removed from the logo of an Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office. The word was removed after objections by the Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers.

Is religion in the U.S. military under attack from “friendly fire?” Undermining and demeaning Christian faith in the armed forces is expected to come from Jihadists, but it seems that there is a domestic battle being waged as well.

Read MORE

* ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ *

“Two military chaplains are suing Eric Shinseki, secretary of the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs, or VA, for allegedly being harassed and drummed out of a training and placement program because of their Christian faith.

Chaplains Major Steven Firtko, U.S. Army (Retired) and Lieutenant Commander Dan Klender, U.S. Navy, claim they were mocked, scolded and threatened for their faith while enrolled in the San Diego VA-DOD Clinical Pastoral Education Center program, which trains and distributes chaplains to military and VA medical centers in the San Diego area.



According to their lawsuit, Firtko and Klender allege the Center’s supervisor, Ms. Nancy Dietsch, a VA employee, derided them in classrooms and even had one of them dismissed for failing to renounce his Christian beliefs.

In July, Firtko, Klender and their sponsoring organization, the Conservative Baptist Association of America, filed formal complaint against Dietsch and the VA.

Now the lawsuit, filed with the help of Military-Veterans Advocacy, explains that Firtko and Klender have exhausted all administrative options and that the harassment the chaplains endured violates the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the Administrative Procedures Act and the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“No American choosing to serve in the armed forces should be openly ridiculed for his Christian faith, and that is most obviously true for chaplains participating in a chaplain training program,” said Commander J.B. Wells, U. S. Navy (Ret.), executive director of Military-Veterans Advocacy. “Not only was the treatment these men received inappropriate, it was also a violation of federal law and the religious freedom guarantees of the First Amendment.”

The lawsuit, Conservative Baptist Association of America v. Shinseki, has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.”

DREW ZAHN

How can atheism “COEXIST” with mainstream faiths (Christianity, Judaism, Catholicism, Buddism) when it precludes any existence of God while the others assume a sovereign power of some nature? We managed for 235 years to peacefully live side by side, yet now, in the name of “tolerance” ALL reference to any deity is being erased. Are we so childish that anyone who disagrees must be WRONG? and therefore, denied freedom?

Engaged or Tuned out: Who has personal beliefs anymore!

Tags

Benghazi attack and cover-up, climate change hoax, conservatism, DOJ & illegal wiretaps, fast-furious, IRS scandal, liberalism, liberty, Tea Party, US Constitution

Conservatism Vs. Liberalism

Engaged or Tuned out:
Who has personal beliefs anymore!

There is mass confusion (and apathy) in America today and a desperate lack of clarity. The definitions of some terms we throw about at random have undergone radical changes in many cases, without the population realizing the degree of change. Liberalism has been defined and redefined in the past decades even more than Conservatism.

Many Americans this week are shocked and disturbed by news of several scandals that have converged on the White House. NEWS FLASH: Each of the current scandals represents the very nature and definition of LIBERALISM. Take some time to read through and digest the comparisons below. Maybe write YOUR choices on a separate sheet of paper or print the page to help better define your personal beliefs.

Constitutional Rights
Conservatives: Our Constitution sets the guidelines for our legal structure ad must be supported and defended by the People! The Bill of Rights must be supported even if it offends. If changes need to be made, there is a process to accomplish it legally.

Liberalism: The Constitution is outdated, and the Right to free speech is limited to speech that does not offend. (Political correctness) Liberals support the authority of the President to override Congress as needed, therefore he can secretly authorize wiretapping of journalists or private citizens at random,as he deems necessary.

Size and Scope of Federal Government:
Conservatives: Limited federal government with more power given to state and local governments. Less government is better. Wants only necessary regulation of business, economy, and individual lives, resulting in more freedom.

Liberalism: Powerful centralized federal government with limited state and local control. More government is better. Many regulations are necessary to achieve a more fair & just society which is government’s primary role, resulting in less freedom.

Economic Growth
Conservatives: Free market economy allows open competition to regulate prices, increase demand, and create jobs.

Liberalism: Government regulation of economy. With the magnitude of regulations, there’s an increased need for “enforcement” jobs in government.

Business
Conservatives: Business is good: creates jobs & improves lives. Let free market supply and demand adjust practices and employers and employees determine wages/benefits.

Liberalism: Business is evil: out to exploit employees, environment, and consumers. Needs to be regulated to protect consumers, employees, and the environment. Government regulates employee benefits.

Competition: Winning and Losing
Conservatives: Competition is good. There are winners and losers in life, in business, and in school, as well as in sports. Conservatives support the right of every American to succeed and to fail; that ultimately, failure is just as good a “teacher” as success, maybe better.

Liberalism: Competition is unfair, and that allowing failure may damage an individual forever. According to Liberalism, there are no winners, and there are no losers. Employers should fill job slots by first come, first serve since we are all “equal.”

Social demographics:

Conservatives: Society is composed of individuals to be judged on their individual merit. Values individualism, self-reliance, and independence.

Liberals: Sees society as composed of groups: black vs. white, old vs. young, rich vs. poor, male vs. female, gay vs straight, “religious” vs atheists. These groups are pitted against each other. Stirs up racial and class envy and division under the guise of “civil rights.”

Human Rights and Culture:
Conservatives: Western cultures are more desirous than others because they aspire toward equal rights (Personal Freedom, Parental rights, Property, Religious, Guns, respect for Life) for each individual under the Law.

Liberalism: All cultures are equal. Can’t pass judgment on any even if they don’t value freedom, rights, and life. Muslim Sharia Law, is a current example. While Shariah contradicts our Constitution, Liberals support the “right” of Muslims to disobey our Constitution in favor of Sharia.

Morality and Faith:
Conservatives: God (no specific definition given) is an important part of the moral and cultural heritage of many people groups and bring great richness to any society. Absolute truths, like “The Golden Rule,” guide our American culture. Faith inspires people to strive for self-improvement and character development. Traditional morality, including traditional family, is established by absolute standards of right and wrong.

Liberalism: State is secular (opposed to idea of God and hostile to Christianity). Liberals seek to eliminate references of God through doctrine of separation of church and state. Tolerance of all lifestyles & beliefs except those that hold views liberal leaders consider to be “intolerant.” No absolute standards of right and wrong. Moral relativism is practiced, so breaking International Law by running weapons through the Mexican drug cartels to forward the President’s gun control agenda is fine, and practice for doing the same through the American Consulate in Benghazi via members of Al Qaeda and/or the Muslim Brotherhood through Turkey to Syria is perfectly acceptable. The ENDS justify the MEANS!

Definition of JUSTICE:
CONFUSION exists with the many Americans of faith. “Many Christian organizations strongly support social justice. However, this is a trap promoted by liberal Christianity claiming Jesus was a socialist. We are to help the less fortunate but we are not to become the less fortunate in the process. We are to give according to our abilities but social justice violates “thou shall not steal” and takes what is yours.”

Conservatives: Promotes equal justice as stated in The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies. Equal justice for each American regardless of race, religion, sexual preference, gender or age is the goal of Conservative justice. Rights under the Law are not the same as condoning various lifestyles that are contrary to biology and history. Legal rights – yes! Moral license – NO!

Liberalism: Promotes social justice, which “is a term describing the redistribution of wealth for the common good of all. However, this comes at the expense of wage earners and liberty by demanding a society to conform. Those who work and have must give to those who don’t work and don’t have. This is the fundamental basis of Marxism and championed by liberal progressives.”

On Parents’ Rights:

Conservatives believe: Families know best how to raise their children. They need to be strengthened and have the right to raise their children the way they want. (homeschooling, discipline) The role of government is to make a number of tools available to parents to aid in the development and education of their children.

Liberals believe: It takes a “village,” rather than a family to raise a child. Families are unable to properly educate and raise their children without the aid of the government, nor should they be asked to do so. The government can do a better job. Cradle to grave involvement is optimal. (see Julia)

Personal Freedom:

Conservatives: Individuals are responsible for themselves, their property and their actions. Individuals are accountable to family and community for their behavior and that of their family members. Crime should be determined and punished equally. Evil exists, and good must fight against it on individual and community levels

Liberals: Society is responsible for individuals. Man is inherently good, and something causes him to do wrong. (People raised in poverty must not be held responsible for anti-social behaviors>) They talk about how we need to change society when someone does wrong. Even terrorists need to be understood. Case in point: Gun control debate. Will taking weapons from law-abiding citizens cause criminals to convert to obeying the law?

Social Welfare:
Conservatives: There is a limit to how much can be taken from hard-working people to give to others. Welfare should help people to become independent (not dependent) and given to those truly incapable of taking care of themselves. All able to work ought to be required to do so.

Liberalism: Supports welfare state. Government is morally justified in taking from those that have and giving it to others because people are entitled to basic needs, including housing, food, healthcare, income, etc. even if they are able to work.

Equal opportunity:
Conservatives: Equal opportunity without discrimination or preference. Recognizes people make different choices with what they have and that it isn’t government’s role to make things “fair.” While each individual has equal rights under the law, they are not all the same, therefore their goals and dreams, as well as their skills and talents are fundamentally DIFFERENT. Not seeking equal results!

Liberalism: Equal results through such things as quotas, free college, and equal pay for unequal work. Government has to level the playing field in order to have equal opportunity. Seeks equal outcomes.

Taxation:
Conservatives: Supports lower taxes for all because people have a right to what they earn. More specifically, many Conservatives support some measure of FLAT TAX which would tax every American the same percentage (not the same amount!), like maybe 15%. So whether a citizen makes 15,000 or 150,000,000, they would pay 15%. Period! Conservatives maintain the Constitution defines the scope and extent of legal taxation.

Liberalism: Supports progressive taxation with high taxes, at first, for the rich in an attempt to equalize incomes through redistribution of earnings. In reality, however, this system penalizes success and discourages innovation or creativity. Liberals believe taxes are needed to support government programs.

Environmental Concerns:
Conservatives: People and property rights are more important than environment. Supports conservation and development and use of our natural resources along with the development of green technology by private enterprise and when it is economically feasible and self-sustaining. Opposes cap and trade due to its high cost and negative impact on our businesses and way of life.

Liberalism: Environment more important than people and property rights. Supports rationing and limiting access to natural resources. Focuses on green technology subsidized by the government. Supports cap and trade to redistribute and control energy usage. Also supports the UN Agenda 21 initiative.

The AMERICAN DREAM:
Conservatives: Wealth is a reward for hard work, dedication, and perseverance. All have an opportunity to be wealthy (The American dream). Wealth creates a better life for all through entrepreneurship.

Liberalism: Wealth is bad and unfair innately. Individuals are not entitled to work for material gain, only to meet basic needs. Liberal thoughts on wealth and earning promotes class warfare by disparaging wealth and poverty simultaneously. Interesting side note: Nearly ALL true liberals who adhere to to notion of “fair distribution of wealth” are wealthy. What is stopping them from “donating” more of their wealth than required?

National Healthcare (Obamacare):
Conservatives: Supports healthcare reform that gives consumers choices.

Liberalism: Supports government takeover of healthcare, eliminating consumers’ choices and decisions.

Judicial Participation::
Conservatives: Judicial restraint with strict interpretation of laws according to the Constitution and original intent.

Liberalism: Judicial activism: enacting social policy changes via court rulings. Constitution is seen as outdated and in need of change.

In search of World Peace:
Conservatives: Peace through strength via a strong military. Supports a missile defense system.

Liberalism: Peace through appeasement, cooperation, and understanding others’ views. Dislikes showing and exercising strength. Opposes a missile defense system.

American Sovereignty& Exceptionalism
Conservatives: American sovereignty comes before globalism. Conservatives see America as good, but not perfect: the best hope for the world. Conservatives believe in American “Exceptionalism,” that because of the unique liberties established at America’s inception, the American people have accomplished “exceptional” things. America enjoys remarkable innovation, invention, creativity, research and development opportunities. Sees America as flawed: racist, homophobic, imperialistic, sexist, ageist and no better than other countries.

Liberalism: Globalism supersedes American sovereignty. Liberals in cooperation with the UN, seek the bring about the fabled One World Government, uniting all the peoples of the earth under one government, one monetary system, one economy, and one government religion. Fair distribution will bring about this “Utopia.”

Vision for the Future

Liberalism (progressivism) wants to pull us further towards a welfare state with an ever-expanding web of social entitlements and more federal power and control over every aspect of our lives. Liberalism sees a nation of people incapable of solving their problems without the government’s help. Liberalism also wants to reduce American productivity and wealth to that of many other nations, thus equalizing the balance of power globally.

Conservatism believes a large and powerful federal government limits personal freedom. Conservatism seeks to stop the growing entitlement programs, encourage individual responsibility, and return Constitutionally mandated power to the states. Conservatism sees a nation of people capable of solving their own problems with minimal government help or intrusion, as long as the people are moral and free.

If you are still unclear as to what the differences between the philosophies are consider this:

If either Party or philosophy held all 100 US Senators, all 435 Congressmen and the President for 10 years, what would our nation be like if Conservatives held them compared to what would it be like if the Liberals held them?

I propose to you that we would have two entirely different nations.

It is truly a time for choosing.

Which nation do you want?

Welcome to Upside Down Land

When the moral “cornerstone” was pulled from the structure of the American culture in the early 1960’s (removal of prayer from schools et al.,) our moral free fall began. It took us through the “free love” era and the “Down with authority” moment. Rebellion was encouraged, AND politically correct!

So … what happened to morality? It has disintegrated! The “cornerstone” was removed, and now the building, the USA, is collapsing!

Muslims Attacking and Persecuting Christians in America! Where are the Police?

By Gordon King on May 7, 2013 • ( 2 )

Commentary By Gordon King

What is happening to our society? Where are the morals and values? The video that I have posted below shows the changing values of our government and police force. The intrusion of Muslim and Islamic values into our once great country. The persecution of Christians which is now happening in America. This small group of Christian men are shown peacefully sharing the word of God. Hundreds if not thousands of Muslims surround them, cursing, throwing objects at them (cement, stones, bottles, crates, whatever they can find). Police come by several times to speak to the Christians. More HERE

A Constitutional Battle: Shari’ah’s Uphill Climb

Tags

America's sexual revolution, Muslim family law, Shari'ah law

Shari’ah’s Uphill Climb

by John Witte Jr.

A constitutional battle over Muslim family law has begun. In November 2010, Oklahoma voters approved a state constitutional amendment banning the use of Muslim Shari’ah and other international laws in its state courts. This was a direct rejoinder to other Western nations allowing Muslim citizens to enforce Muslim marriage contracts in state courts and to resolve family law issues before Shari’ah tribunals without state interference. Oklahoma’s citizens wanted none of it, and they voted to ban the use of Shari’ah altogether. Twelve other states are discussing comparable measures.

In January 2012, however, a federal appeals court upheld a lower federal court injunction of Oklahoma’s amendment. Singling out a specific religious law for special prohibition, the court of appeals concluded, violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause and unjustifiably injured Oklahoma’s Muslim citizens. This leaves Oklahoma courts with a stark choice: allow Muslims to use Shari’ah to govern internal religious affairs and the private lives of voluntary members, or equally prohibit all religious groups from exercising comparable authority through organs of internal mediation, ecclesiastical discipline, and canon law.

Oklahoma can likely escape this choice by crafting a more neutrally-phrased constitutional amendment. But deft legal drafting will not end the matter. As American Muslims grow stronger and anti-Muslim sentiment in America goes deeper, constitutional and cultural battles over Muslim laws and tribunals will likely escalate.

Many Shari’ah advocates reject America’s sexual revolution of the past half century, built on cultural and constitutional ideals of sexual privacy, equality, and autonomy. They reject the easy-in/easy-out system of American family law that has brought ruin to so many women and children. They reject America’s legal protections for nonmarital sex, sodomy, abortion, and same-sex marriage. Distrusting the modern liberal state’s capacity to reform its laws of sexuality, marriage, and family life, Shari’ah advocates want out.

They have two main objectives: to give Muslims the right to opt out of the state’s liberal family law into their own religious community’s morally rigorous system; and to give Muslim religious officials the right to operate that system for voluntary members without undue state interference or review.

…. PLEASE CONTINUE

Is Shari’ah “religion” or “politics” …
or BOTH?

What about the US CONSTITUTION?

NEXT STEP, AMERICA … ?

Tags

2013, celebrations, Chanukah, Christmas, family, Looking ahead, Muslim Brotherhood, patriots, unemployment, US Constitution

It’s Christmastime, and life is busy. I find myself unwilling to even think about the sad … disgusting direction our nation has chosen. Our President is on record professing his desire to “improve” the US Constitution that has stood for 236 years. He speaks pleasant sounding words of “fair distribution” and “equality,” but his ideas are far from fair and just as far from equal. Especially in this spiritual season, how empty and pathetic it is to eliminate GOD from every facet of public life and call it … the Constitutional separation of Church and State! HOGWASH!

If only Americans understood the Constitution. If only the TRUTH was taught instead of the radical progressive doctrine of the left or even alongside the left’s interpretation. If only we refused to permit the “sterilization” of American culture and tradition in light of the deterioration of “quality of life” in our culture. Incidents of increased violence, increased drug & alcohol use and abuse, increased promiscuity and unwanted pregnancy fill our tabloids and newspapers, and still GOD is pushed further and further out of the picture.

It is really hard for me to embrace the “new” ideas of this administration when I consider the results:

• Unemployment continues to grow as thousands are laid off because of the staggering costs of “The Affordable Care Act,” – Obamacare; and because of continued Union demands that price American-made goods out of the market with unreasonable benefit packages and pensions subsidized with PUBLIC funds.
• Look at the storm raging in the Middle East, supported and financially subsidized by American funds. The media would have us believe that “Democracy” is the goal of those rioting to overthrow the brutal governments. DEMOCRACY is nothing more than majority rule, and not necessarily an improvement, and certainly not AMERICA. (American government is structured as a Constitutional Republic, NOT a Democracy!) The Muslim Brotherhood is just the political cover arm of al Qaeda/Hamas that has their own agenda – global jihad to impose Islam, via Shariah law, on an unsuspecting, naive West. Look at London!  Look at Dearborn, Michigan, and Detroit, for pete’s sake!

The bottom line, my friends, is that the Obama administration and the liberal leftist agenda offers no hope – NO HOPE – to those MILLIONS of Americans out of work and struggling to make it. No hope of recovery! No hope to help them stand again in the dignity of satisfying work. President Obama only offers more of the same, so it is up to us- neighbors & friends – to reach beyond our own needs & issues to those in need.

Oh fellow Patriots, enjoy your Christmas (or Chanukah,) your family, and faithful friends by helping others as you are able! I encourage you to celebrate the reality of Christ as fully and as thoroughly as you wish. Who knows if by next year, Christmas may be illegal.

Afterwards, as 2013 begins, may we unite in humility &  repentance as we muster to develop a plan to bring about the ReBirth of a stronger, moral AMERICA.

NO HOPE … without men and women of FAITH giving of their faith.
Not religion, but FAITH!
Not tradition or dogma, but HOPE!
Not rules and regulations, but genuine no-strings compassion!
LIVE IT!

Someone will go to JAIL!

Tags

4 dead in Benghazi, Benghazi, gun-running, memo to WH 2 hrs after attack, obama

 

Memo to WH 2 hrs after attack alerting President the “safe house” was being watched!

From Community Organizing to Mass Manipulation

Tags

Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Ambassador Susan Rice, American jobs, Benghazi, Congressional Research Service, Environment and Public Works, EPA, Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Job-Killing Regulations, means-tested, Obama tries to Rewrites History, obama-administration, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, VISION for America, Welfare Spending

Americans are finally coming to realization that much of the rhetoric of the President is just that – rhetoric! Sadly, it is rhetoric designed to herd the masses of the American people in the direction he (and his backers) believe will best enable their agenda to take hold. It is extraordinarily difficult for most of us to comprehend President Obama’s VISION for our future because it is so completely contradictory to our Founding documents (Declaration of Independence & US Constitution) and to the history of our experiment in personal liberty. In fact, the 2016 documentary visualizes President Obama’s vision well, but still, it is so foreign to our way of thinking. We must remind ourselves that President Obama was NOT raised as an American. He was not raised with baseball, apple pie, and freedom. His VISION for America, regardless of what he might say as he panders to the various and dwindling crowds as he campaigns, is to put her people – more and more of us – in shackles. VP Biden may have “gaffed” that comment weeks ago, but it is reality! The more Americans yield to his system-breaking “free stuff,” the fewer PRODUCERS actually work … which will lead to more Americans down & out, and so on. The cycle must be broken, and thoroughly broken! Help the poor become producers and the cycle is done! President Obama, along with any rational person, can understand this, yet it is not his goal! WHY?

In the articles below, it is clearly visible that our former community organizing President is still organizing … pushing his will, often by Executive Order, circumventing the elected Congress whose job it is to legislate, to accomplish his unpopular agenda.

WHERE ARE OUR REPRESENTATIVES??? WE-the-PEOPLE elected individuals to speak for us, to work for our best interest on the state level and in DC. WHERE ARE THEY? Why are they so silent as President Obama usurps Congressional authority and legislates from the Oval Office?

Morning Bell: Welfare Spending Shattering All-Time Highs

It’s been a pretty big year for welfare—and a new report shows welfare is bigger than ever.

The Obama Administration turned a giant spotlight on the welfare system in July when the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proclaimed it had the authority to gut the work requirements from the welfare reform that had helped lift so many people out of poverty after 1996.

This morning, a new report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) shows the staggering reality of the growing welfare state—echoing Heritage’s own research that reveals welfare spending is approaching the $1 trillion mark.

Roughly 100 million people—one-third of the U.S. population—receive aid from at least one means-tested welfare program each month. Average benefits come to around $9,000 per recipient. If converted to cash, means-tested welfare spending is more than five times the amount needed to eliminate all poverty in the United States.

Despite the fact that welfare spending was already at record levels when he took office, President Obama has increased federal means-tested welfare spending by more than a third. Benefits under “means-tested” programs are calculated based on a recipient’s means to support himself; in other words, they are intended to assist low-income Americans. The character of this aid is hand-out more than hand-up. Able-bodied recipients rarely are required to work or prepare for work to receive aid.

Report: EPA Delaying Job-Killing Regulations to Aid Obama Re-Election

President Obama is putting off major environmental regulations until after the November elections in order to avoid the political blowback of the economic damage those regulations will cause, according to a new Senate report.

Environmental regulators in the Obama administration “don’t want this economic pain to hit American families just before the election because it would cost President Obama votes,” states the report, released by Environment and Public Works ranking member Jim Inhofe (R-OK) on Thursday, “so they have simply decided to punt, intending to move full speed ahead if they gain a second term.”

The report lists a number of major environmental regulations that are either in their nascent stages or have yet to be implemented. Collectively, those regulations “will destroy millions of American jobs and cause energy prices to skyrocket even more,” Inhofe said in a news release accompanying the report.

> > > READ MORE

Clinton, Obama Try to Rewrite History on Benghazi

For more than a month, Obama Administration officials have shifted blame for lack of intelligence or diplomatic security in Benghazi, Libya, where terrorist attacks on September 11 killed four Americans. But now, all of a sudden, both Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and—during last night’s presidential debate—President Obama himself have decided to claim ultimate responsibility. These claims seem perfunctory, do not bear any consequences for either Clinton or Obama, and come more than a month too late.

Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith killed along with Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi terrorist attack

Not only that, but the President is also trying to rewrite history, claiming last night that he did say that it was a terrorist attack that cost the lives of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three security personnel. In one of the tensest moments of the debate, the President evaded Mitt Romney’s question of clarification in which he asked, “You said…it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you’re saying?”

For a point of clarification, President Obama in the White House Rose Garden the day after the attack mentioned “acts of terror” in a general statement. Furthermore, the Administration repeatedly blamed the attacks on the now-infamous YouTube video on several occasions—on September 16 with Ambassador Susan Rice on five Sunday morning shows, and on September 25 in Obama’s speech to the U.N. And don’t forget in his appearance on The View the day before.

> > > READ MORE

Please continue to talk to our friends and neighbors about the TRUTH! Please pray that TRUTH will overtake deception in our midst. Thank you!

Briefing by Senior Administration Officials to Update Recent Events in Libya

Tags

barack-obama, Benghazi, Hillary Clinton

Condemnation: President Obama, joined by Hillary Clinton, speaks in reaction to the killing of the US Ambassador to Libya on Wednesday morning
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2201780/Christopher-Stevens-death-US-ambassador-killed-attack-Libya.html#ixzz29QSKI5tY
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Pentagon sending warships to Libya following death of ambassador killed in ‘co-ordinated al Qaeda revenge attack by terrorists who used Libyan Mohammed movie protest as cover’

• USS Laboon and USS McFaul sent to the coast of Libya on the day after the massacre at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi
• Attack came amid protests following film The Innocence of Muslims which ‘insults Prophet Mohammed’
• Attackers could have been staging revenge attack for death of al Qaeda official in June
• Officials noted the staged attack came on 11th anniversary of 9/11
• US ambassador Christopher Stevens died of ‘smoke inhalation’ after grenade attack on consulate in Benghazi
• He had been trying to evacuate staff at US compound as furious mob of extremists attacked
• Obama: ‘Chris was a courageous and exemplary representative of the US who selflessly served his country’
• Marines on their way to Benghazi to provide additional security and drones expected to gather intelligence
• Sean Smith, a foreign service information manager, was also shot dead by armed militants

READ MORE HERE

Killed: Christopher Stevens was a career diplomat who died as he tried to evacuate staff from the US consulate in Benghazi

I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY

I know there’s more.

hawkdriver on October 15, 2012 at 10:13 PM

hawkdriver:

Hawk,here are the State Departments Briefings,after the Debackle:)
===================================================================

Briefing by Senior Administration Officials to Update Recent Events in Libya

Special Briefing
Office of the Spokesperson
Via Teleconference
Washington, DC
September 12, 2012
******************

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Thank you, Operator, and thanks to all of our journalists for joining us on this very, very difficult day. We thought it was important to give you a little bit more information about what we knew when we knew it to help shape your understanding of the tragic events in Benghazi. Here with me I will hereafter be Senior Administration Official Number One. That’s [title withheld]. I also have with me [Senior Administration Official Two], hereafter Senior Administration Official Number Two. And we also have [Senior Administration Official Three], hereafter Senior Administration Official Number Three.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the bucks stops with her when it comes to who is blame for a deadly assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi.
“I take responsibility” for what happened on September 11, Clinton said in an interview with CNN’s Elise Labott soon after arriving in Lima, Peru for a visit. The interview, one of a series given to U.S. television networks Monday night, were the first she has given about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

Let me just give you some framing points. First of all, we want to make clear that we are still here today operating within the confusion of first reports. Many details of what happened in Benghazi are still unknown or unclear. The account we’re going to give you endeavors to reconstruct the events of last night to the best of our ability now. And again, this reflects our current accounting of events. These are first reports, and so the facts could very well change as we get a better understanding.

Let me also give you a little better understanding about our office conditions in Benghazi. The facility that we are working in is an interim one. We originally acquired the property before the fall of Qadhafi. It includes a main building and several ancillary buildings, and then there was also an annex a little bit further away.

So let me give you a little bit of the chronology to the best of our knowledge. Again, the times are likely to change as it becomes a little bit more precise, but this is how we’ve been able to reconstruct what we have from yesterday.

In flames: The U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, is seen on fire during a protest by an armed group protesting a film being produced in the United States

At approximately 4 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time yesterday, which was about 10 p.m. in Libya, the compound where our office is in Benghazi began taking fire from unidentified Libyan extremists. By about 4:15, the attackers gained access to the compound and began firing into the main building, setting it on fire. The Libyan guard force and our mission security personnel responded. At that time, there were three people inside the building: Ambassador Stevens, one of our regional security officers, and Information Management Officer Sean Smith. They became separated from each other due to the heavy, dark smoke while they were trying to evacuate the burning building. The Regional Security Officer made it outside, and then he and other security personnel returned into the burning building in an attempt to rescue Chris and Sean. At that time, they found Sean. He was already dead, and they pulled him from the building. They were unable, however, to locate Chris before they were driven from the building due to the heavy fire and smoke and the continuing small arms fire.

At about 4:45 our time here in Washington, U.S. security personnel assigned to the mission annex tried to regain the main building, but that group also took heavy fire and had to return to the mission annex. At about 5:20, U.S. and Libyan security personnel made another attempt and at that time were able to regain the main building and they were able to secure it. Then, due to continued small arms fire, they evacuated the rest of the personnel and safe havened them in the nearby annex.

The mission annex then came under fire itself at around 6 o’clock in the evening our time, and that continued for about two hours. It was during that time that two additional U.S. personnel were killed and two more were wounded during that ongoing attack.

At about 8:30 p.m. our time here in Washington, so now 2 o’clock in the morning in Libya, Libyan security forces were able to assist us in regaining control of the situation. At some point in all of this – and frankly, we do not know when – we believe that Ambassador Stevens got out of the building and was taken to a hospital in Benghazi. We do not have any information what his condition was at that time. His body was later returned to U.S. personnel at the Benghazi airport.

Later that evening, we were able to bring our chartered aircraft from Tripoli into Benghazi to evacuate all of our Benghazi personnel back to Tripoli. This evacuation, which had to occur in a couple of planeloads, included all of our American Benghazi personnel, including the three wounded, and the remains of our fallen colleagues. They are now in the process – that same staff – of being evacuated to Germany. The staff that is well is going to stay in Europe on standby for a while while we assess the security situation in the coming period. The wounded will be treated in Germany, and the remains will come home, and we’ll advise you of when that will be as soon as we know.

In the meantime, we have taken our Embassy in Tripoli down to emergency staffing levels. We have reduced the staff down to what we call emergency staffing levels. And we have requested increased support from the Libyans while we assess the security situation.

I would also like to advise you that last night, all of our diplomatic posts around the world were ordered to review their security posture and to take all necessary steps to enhance it if those were deemed necessary. I’d like to now turn it over to Senior Administration Official Number Three for some remarks on what his agency has been up to.

OPERATOR: Ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to ask a question, please press * then 1 on your touchtone phone. You will hear a tone indicating you have been placed in queue. You may remove yourself from queue at any time by pressing the # key. If you are using a speakerphone, please pick up the handset before pressing the numbers. Once again, if you would like to ask a question, please press * then 1 at this time.

And the first question is from Elise Labott with CNN. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, I have a couple of questions, if you would. And again, all of our condolences on what happened today. I was wondering if you can talk about now how – I know Secretary Clinton said that this would not affect how the U.S. dealt with the Libyans, and that you would move forward. But certainly, it must make you start to think about any precipitous rush to support groups in any other countries such as Syria or the like because of the uncertainty of who is on the ground.

And then I was wondering if you could talk a little bit more about Chris Stevens’ personal security and how his personal detail could have been separated from him. I mean, his personal detail’s number one responsibility is to protect their package, and so it just seemed – I just would like more clarity on how he got out of the building and then went back to find him. Why didn’t he just keep staying in the building looking for him? Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Let me start with the last question first, Elise. I think you can understand that I’m not going to go into detail about how his security detail was organized. I think in the accounting that I gave, I made clear that security personnel were endeavoring to get him out of the building when they got separated by the incredibly thick smoke and fire – if you’ve seen the pictures from the building you can have some sense of how awful the conditions were – and that they then turned right back around, got more help, and went back in to look for him. So this was really a quite – a heroic effort.

With regard to your larger question, as the Secretary said very clearly today, we are as committed today as we have ever been to a free and stable Libya. That is still in America’s interest. And we are going to continue to work very strongly to help them have the future that they want and they deserve. I would simply note how quickly and how strongly senior members of the Libyan government came forward to condemn this attack, to offer all support to us.

I’d also like to underscore that it was Libyan security forces that stood with ours in defending our buildings. We also had some – one of the local militias who is friendly to the Embassy came to assist as well. And I think that really speaks to the relationship that we’ve built with Libya. Thank you.

OPERATOR: Andrea Mitchell with NBC News is next. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you for doing this and especially at such a terrible time for all of you. Can you expand on the regular security for the Ambassador? I know you don’t usually talk about security, but you can imagine how people want these details now in terms of, was it diplomatic security? Were they all RSOs? How long had he been in Benghazi? Give us a little bit more of his movements that day.

And secondly, there’s a lot of reporting now on this being linked to a terror attack, an organized terror attack – possibly al-Qaida sympathetic or al-Qaida linked. Can you speak to that?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: Operator, is the call ongoing?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: I’m sorry, it looks like I had a – I was on mute there for a while. I was going on and on on mute. I apologize. So Andrea, to your first question: Frankly, we are not in a position to speak any further to the perpetrators of this attack. It was clearly a complex attack. We’re going to have to do a full investigation. We are committed to working with the Libyans both on the investigation and to ensure that we bring the perpetrators to justice. The FBI is already committed to assisting in that, but I just – we’re – it’s just too early to speak to who they were and if they might have been otherwise affiliated beyond Libya.

With regard to Chris’s trip to Benghazi, as you know, he made regular and frequent trips to Benghazi so that he could check up on developments in the east. You know that he had been our representative – the Secretary’s representative and the President’s, to the Transitional National Council before the fall of Qadhafi and had spent a lot of time in Benghazi and built deep contacts there. So this was one of his regular visits that he made periodically.

With regard to the security arrangements, I think you will understand that we never talk in detail about how our security is arranged. And we particularly don’t talk about security arrangements for – personal security arrangements for senior level personnel.

What I can tell you is that security in Benghazi included a local guard force outside of the compound on which we rely, which is similar to the way we are postured all over the world. We had a physical perimeter barrier, obviously. And then we had a robust American security presence inside the compound, including a strong component of regional security officers. But I’m not going to go any further than that on the specifics.

Next question, operator.

(A lot More……)
==================

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/09/197694.htm

Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
September 13, 2012

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/09/197729.htm
=====================================================

Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
September 14, 2012

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/09/197784.htm
=====================================================

canopfor on October 1, 2012 at 10:22 AM

canopfor on October 10, 2012 at 5:59 PM

canopfor on October 15, 2012 at 10:22 PM