Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon
Putin Strategy
September 6, 2014
Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/09/putin-strategy/#O0gyBYX8EldefMth.99
Archive for September, 2014
AMERICA’S PASTORS AND DERELICTION OF DUTY
http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave384.htm
By Coach Dave Daubenmire
August 28, 2014
NewsWithViews.com
Allow me to begin by saying, if the shoe fits…wear it.
Now please don’t email me about how wrong I am for pointing out the obvious; the glaringly obvious even. Please don’t tell me how harsh I am, or how your pastor is a great man of God, or how your church is the best thing since sliced bread. If you attend a church with a real pastor, you are truly one of the lucky ones. But the odds are, your pastor isn’t all that great. He has just convinced you that he is.
I get around. I visit a lot of churches. I know of that which I speak. When I leave a service, it is not unusual for me to look at my wife and ask her how the people can sit in that place week after week and listen to the bilge.
Oh yeah, your pastor is a good one just like your congressman is a good one. Everyone hates congress, but they love their congressman. Nearly 90% of them get re-elected. It’s that Democrat congressman that’s the bad one. Your guy is a good conservative.
Compared to what? Compared to whom?
-
If your congressman is so good, why is our nation in such a mess?
-
If your pastor is so good, why is America in such a mess?
People love to blame the politicians. I blame the pastors. Recent studies show 90% are derelict in their duty.
Politicians ride the wave that culture creates. The church used to be the tide upon which the politicians surfed. Politicians want to get elected. They ride whatever wave is breaking. The pulpits have gone soft. There is no “God wave” to trouble the waters of political correctness.
Churches have become impotent because the pulpits have turned soft. Everyone wants to model Joel Osteen and Rick Warren. Those dudes aren’t pastors, they’re book merchants. Congregations around this country have traded the Bible for the “self-help, purpose-driven, best-life-now” doctrine of demons currently flooding our churches. The people in the pew can no longer recognize the truth for themselves. They need a shepherd to lead them to truth.
Jesus told us that He is the Good Shepherd and that His Word is the guide. Warren and Osteen are blind guides, and America has fallen into the ditch.
Here is Litmus Test 101 for your church. This is merely the first qualifying factor. If you don’t answer yes to this question, then you can bet that yours is a church that I am referring to. Here’s the question:
Is carrying the Bible to church and actually opening it a requirement at the church where you attend? Some of the more progressive churches are kind enough to put the words on the big screen for you, saving you the embarrassment of having to find Malachi on your own.
Politicians get elected by saying what the people want to hear. Pastors build churches by teaching what the people want to hear. There’s no difference. Politicians and pastors both tend to be man-pleasers.
The prophets prophesy falsely and the priests bear rule by their own power; and the people love to have it so…Jeremiah 5:31.
The current administration was placed into power with the vote of 40 million Christians. They conveniently called it “faith based support.” 
Obama is pro-homosexual, pro-abortion, pro-big government, pro-lying and pro-Islam. How could Christians possibly support such anti-Biblical positions? Who is teaching them this crap? Who indeed…
Our pastors are traitorous, both to their Lord and to their nation. There is simply no nice way of saying it. When a football team plays poorly, they fire the coach. When churches start to fail, they change playbooks.
Traitor—one who betrays another’s trust or is false to an obligation or duty.
There are a lot of reasons why pastors act the way they act, but no amount of rationalization can justify their dereliction of duty. In the end, they will answer to the Lord, not to the Government. Their corporate identity and their denominational affiliation will not be much of a defense as they stand before the Lord.
If you haven’t already done so, please take the time to read Pastor Chuck Baldwin’s recent commentary regarding George Barna’s survey that reveals the fact that 90% of America’s pastors are purposefully keeping the people in the dark. (And this one that just came out today). They are concerned with hurting the growth of “their church” by talking about “controversial” issues.
Who was it that classified marriage, abortion, un-holy wars, tyrannical government, government thievery, unrighteous taxation, dishonest courts, drug legalization, deviant sexual behavior, indoctrination of children, and public filth as ”controversial” issues? The church used to be the “wave machine” on all of these issues, but alas: The salt has lost his savor.
Although I’m sure you’re familiar with them, I believe that the words of Charles Finney are worth repeating:
“If there is a decay of conscience, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the public press lacks moral discernment, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the church is degenerate and worldly, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the world loses its interest in Christianity, the pulpit is responsible for it. If Satan rules in our halls of legislation, the pulpit is responsible for it. If our politics become so corrupt that the very foundations of our government are ready to fall away, the pulpit is responsible.”
Martin Luther declared:
“If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christ. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved, and to be steady on all the battlefield besides is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point.”
Flight and disgrace are the fruits of abandonment. Abandonment is treason. Those who commit treason are traitorous. If Barna is correct, can any 
other term be more appropriately applied to America’s churches where 90% of the pulpits are filled by traitorous, cowardly men? It is not the politicians who are to blame. It is the pastors…the pulpits. Stop giving them your money. That is all they understand. Find a mission worth supporting and direct your giving there.
We are a nation adrift…meandering down the river of history…rudderless…devoid of propulsion… drifting wherever the current might take us. There is a waterfall ahead. Who’s steering the ship? Is your family willing to blindly follow the captain over the cliff?
Related Articles:
1 – Pastors And Churches Violating First Commandment
2 – The Government’s Religion
WARNING. NewsWithViews.tv may be change the way you think.
© 2014 Dave Daubenmire – All Rights Reserved
WARNING TO PASTORS: A Greater Level of Responsibility
http://clashdaily.com/2014/09/warning-pastors-greater-level-responsibility/
Posted on September 5, 2014
by Dave Daubenmire
Okay, I have no one to blame but myself. I should have seen it coming.
This is the last time I am going to write about church leadership for a while. At least that is my plan. But I feel an urgency to awaken the shepherds.
God will hold them accountable. I’m sorry if my words hurt their feelings.
Last week I wrote about how the pastors of America are derelict in their duty. If you haven’t had the time to read it, I suggest you take the time to do so. It might make this commentary seem a little more coherent.
My inbox filled up, as I suspected it would. But what was surprising was that many of the comments were “atta boys.” Lots of folks are beginning to see the big picture.
America is in a mess, and even those who listen to Limbaugh are starting to figure it out. I call them “low-information listeners.” They are the ones who actually think Rush is having an impact on America. They don’t realize that he is merely a pressure valve who makes the listeners think everything is going to be fine once we can fill all of Congress and the White House with “conservatives.” Just like the pastors, Rush confuses talking with doing.
How long has he been on the air? I believe that it’s right around 25 years now. Have things gotten better or worse since he has been giving us “advice”? Things get worse, yet his listeners feel better. Give me his time slot for three hours a day and folks would be brandishing pitchforks by now. Just saying…
But, as I forewarned myself before I started typing my former commentary, the pastors don’t take criticism very well. “You wouldn’t write such harsh stuff if you had any idea how hard it was to ‘build a church’”, they tell me. Therein lies part of the problem. God never called anyone to “build a church”. He called us to build a Kingdom. HIS Kingdom! HIS church? He said HE would build that.
“Pastoring is hard”, they tell me. “You’ve never been one”, they tell me. “People won’t listen”, they tell me. “Your criticism of the pastors is only hurting the body”, they tell me.
Good thing Jesus isn’t around, I tell them. He called the church leadership all kinds of unflattering names, I tell them. Jesus said it would be better to be thrown in a river with a rock around one’s neck than to continue to mislead the flock, I tell them. Jesus taught that no one can serve two masters, I tell them. Trying to please men is like having your foot caught in a trap, I tell them. Pastoring would be so much easier if you told the people the truth, I tell them. At least you would sleep better at night, I tell them. I sure do. And I often snore.
“What would you have us do?” one particularly whiny leader wrote me. “Man up!” I wrote back. Start preparing your people for what is coming down the road. You think folks are ticked at you now, just wait until they find out that you have been feeding them Pablum while the wolf was marching towards their door. Do your job!
“Do what job?” he asked. “[T]he perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.” Eph. 4:12. Most Christians have no works to show for all of their faith. No one has shown them what to do.”
Oh, they all can preach up a storm: I am sure of that. As if preaching was actually making a difference. I compare it to pre-game speeches in the locker room. Shakespeare said they were “full of sound and fury signifying nothing.” No pre-game speech ever won a football game and no Sunday morning sermon will do the job either. The pre-game speech and the Sunday sermon both only last until some snot-snorting linebacker smacks you in the face.
The Muslim leadership is actively preparing their men for war. They are currently slaughtering Christians around the globe. Now they are warning us that the “religion of peace” is heading our way. Pastor “What, Me Worry?” has no strategy for how to deal with these monsters. They teach men to love their enemies more than they love their own families.
The world’s economy is teetering on the edge of the abyss. We are but one calamity away from a devastating financial collapse, yet not a word is spoken about “prepping” for the hard times that lie ahead. Instead, they offer Financial Peace University classes with Dave Ramsey. They say peace, peace, when there is no peace…and the people remain clueless. Who will warn them if the pastor won’t?
Our government is lying to us. We recently found out that the CDC has been lying for years about vaccinations and autism. What else have they been lying to us about? Chemtrails and weather manipulation? Abortion and the breast cancer link? 9/11? Common Core and how good it is for education? The public schools are a hell-hole and not one pastor in a hundred dares speak against them. Pastoring is hard alright.
-
Our liberties are being stolen right out from under us in the name of security.
-
Illegal immigrants receive for free what hard-working pew-sitters work hard to provide for them.
-
Food prices are manipulated,
-
inflation is about to go nuclear,
-
our oceans are dying from Fukushima and the Gulf oil spill,
-
California has been in drought for 6 years and is running out of water,
-
Christianity is being criminalized,
-
and 2.5% of the American populace is controlling the sexual agenda.
“Hey have you guys seen the movie Left Behind? It’s awesome!! We’re gonna show it next Sunday night at service!!”
Here is where the buck stops, my friend, and there is no denying it: Christianity has become “good for nothing” (Words of Jesus) because the “salt 
has lost His savor.” There is a total disconnect in most churches between what is being talked about from the pulpit and what is actually going on in the world. The ignoring of “politics” in the name of “religion” is exactly the mind-set the enemy has tried to impress upon church-goers….and he’s succeeding.
As I heard a friend say the other day, the world has become so churchy and the church has become so worldly it is hard to tell the two apart. Or, as I like to put it, the world has become the salt of the church.
But I don’t want to fix the blame on anyone; I want to help turn this ship around. But if the church who is supposed to be the salt of the earth has lost its impact in the world, who’s to blame for that?
When football teams fail, they fire the coach. When churches stop being effective, they try a new program. If a coach trains players, who do pastors train? Do coaches talk to their players about playing the game or do they take them out on the field and train them HOW to play the game?
-
By the hundreds, Christians are being slaughtered around the world.
-
Whole congregations are being lined up and beheaded.
-
When ISIS comes to beat in the door at your church,
-
or the militant homosexual lobby shows up demanding marriage, they know they will have nothing to fear. The congregation will be busy watching the Super Bowl, listening to Dave Ramsey, or studying The Purpose Driven Life.
God will hold leadership to a higher standard. I see it coming. I just felt it was my duty to warn them.
NEW RESEARCH: PASTORS DELIBERATELY KEEPING FLOCK IN THE DARK
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin817.htm
By Chuck Baldwin
August 7, 2014
NewsWithViews.com
George Barna is the foremost researcher of modern Christianity in the country. He recently spoke about a two-year research project studying why 
modern-day pastors and churches are so silent regarding political issues. The result of his research only confirms what I have been trying to tell people for years. But there was one thing his research uncovered that did somewhat surprise me. OneNewsNow.com covered the story:
“On Thursday, George Barna–research expert and founder of The Barna Group–shared with American Family Radio’s ‘Today’s Issues’ about new information he’s compiling at American Culture and Faith Institute over the last two years, gauging where theologically conservative pastors are at politically.
“‘What we’re finding is that when we ask them about all the key issues of the day, [90 percent of them are] telling us, Yes, the Bible speaks to every one of these issues. Then we ask them: Well, are you teaching your people what the Bible says about those issues?–and the numbers drop…to less than 10 percent of pastors who say they will speak to it.’
“When researchers ask those pastors what else they are willing to do to get their people active in the political process, Barna said ‘it’s almost nothing.’
“‘So the thing that struck me has been that when we talk about the separation of church and state, it’s that churches have separated themselves from the activities of the state–and that’s to the detriment of the state and its people,’ stated the researcher.”
That 90% of America’s pastors are not addressing any of the salient issues affecting Christian people’s political or societal lives should surprise no one–especially the readers of this column. It has been decades since even a sizeable minority of pastors have bothered to educate and inform their congregations as to the Biblical principles relating to America’s political, cultural, and societal lives. But the part of the research that did somewhat surprise me was this statement by Barna:
“What we’re finding is that when we ask them about all the key issues of the day, [90 percent of them are] telling us, Yes, the Bible speaks to every one of these issues. Then we ask them: Well, are you teaching your people what the Bible says about those issues?–and the numbers drop…to less than 10 percent of pastors who say they will speak to it.”
Did you get that? Ninety-percent of America’s pastors say they KNOW that the Bible speaks to all of these issues, but they are deliberately determined to NOT teach these Biblical principles. That is an amazing admission!
It would have been one thing if the pastors had said that these political issues were not relevant to scripture, and, therefore, they didn’t feel called to address them. But the pastors are admitting that, yes, they KNOW that the scriptures DO relate to our current political issues, but they are deliberately choosing to NOT teach those scriptural principles. Holy heads-in-the-sand, Batman!
I confess: this statistic caught me off-guard. So, we can forever dismiss ignorance as justification for pastors remaining silent.
Now, all of the church members out there who have been forgiving of their ministers for not speaking out on the issues by saying things like, “He 
really doesn’t understand what’s going on,” need to reevaluate their leniency–if they are intellectually honest, that is–and if they truly care about the future of their country.
Church member, admit it: that pastor of yours who refuses to speak out on the issues KNOWS the Bible speaks to these issues, and he is DELIBERATELY refusing to teach those Biblical principles to you and your family.
So, we are not dealing with IGNORANT pastors; we are dealing with DELIBERATELY DISOBEDIENT pastors. They are PURPOSELY CHOOSING to remain silent. Will that make any difference to the Christians in the pews who say they want their pastor to take a stand but are willing to overlook his “ignorance?” Probably not. But, at least, we now know what the real issue is, don’t we?
The report goes on: “Why the disconnect? According to Barna, the answer is simple. He suggests asking pastors how someone would know if their church is ‘successful’–which he did.”
“‘There are five factors that the vast majority of pastors turn to [when asked that question],’ he explained. ‘Attendance, giving, number of programs, number of staff, and square footage.’”
There you have it: pastors are more concerned about being “successful” than they are being truthful. They believe if they tell their congregations the truth, their churches will not be “successful.” And it is so refreshing to see Barna directly ask pastors what “success” means to them. So, now we know (as if we didn’t know before; but, at least now there is definitive research to back it up). The vast majority of pastors believe church success lies in:
• Attendance
• Giving (money)
• Number of programs
• Number of staff
• Square footage (of facilities)
Shazam! Where did pastors come up with this definition of “success?” You know where: from men such as Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, 
et al.
The megachurch phenomenon of the last several decades transformed how pastors think and behave. Pastors read the “successful church” books and publications; they attend the “successful church” conferences; they watch the “successful church” videos, etc. They, then, try to mimic the tactics and strategies they have been taught. And if there is one constant theme promulgated by the likes of Osteen, Warren, and Hybels, it is pastors must avoid controversy like the plague. Again, one must realize that the goal is NOT being faithful to Biblical principles; the goal is building a “successful” church as noted above.
It is time for Christians to acknowledge that these ministers are not pastors; they are CEOs. They are not Bible teachers; they are performers. They are not shepherds; they are hirelings. It is also time for Christians to be honest with themselves: do they want a pastor who desires to be faithful to the scriptures, or do they want a pastor who is simply trying to be “successful?” BE HONEST WITH YOURSELF, CHRISTIAN FRIEND.
Barna’s research blows the “ignorance” excuse out of the water. Again, it is not ignorance; it is deliberate disobedience.
Barna goes on to say, “Now all of those things [the five points of success listed above] are good measures, except for one tiny fact: Jesus didn’t die for any of them.” Wow! You nailed it, George!
See the report: Barna: Many Pastors Wary Of Raising ‘Controversy’
Where do you find anything in the New Testament that measures a pastor’s success;
-
by the number of people attending his church?
-
Or by how large his offerings are?
-
Or by how many programs his church has?
-
Or by how many staff members he has?
-
Or by how large his facilities are?
In fact, the early New Testament church didn’t even own property or buildings.
When the Apostle Paul listed his ministerial pedigree, here is what it looked like (II Cor. 11):
• Stripes above measure
• In prisons frequently
• In deaths often
• Beaten with rods
• Stoned
• Perils
• Weariness
*Painfulness
• Hunger and thirst
• Cold and nakedness
I don’t see attendance, offerings, programs, staff, or square footage in that list at all, do you?
When Paul wrote his own epitaph, it read, “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith.” (II Timothy 4:7). He didn’t say, “I had a large congregation, we had big offerings, we had a lot of programs, I had a large staff, and we had large facilities.”
In the world of Osteen, Warren, and Hybels (and 90% of America’s pastors), the Apostle Paul’s ministry must have been a dismal failure. And how many church pulpit committees would even consider the pastoral résumé such as the Apostle Paul wrote above?
Please understand this: America’s malaise is directly due to the deliberate disobedience of America’s pastors–and the willingness of the Christians in the pews to tolerate the disobedience of their pastor. Nothing more! Nothing less!
Oh, and get this: according to the survey conducted by Barna, guess what the number one reason is why pastors choose to be “successful” and not “controversial?” You guessed it: fear of the IRS 501c3 tax-exempt status. Who would have thought it? (Yes, that question is deliberately facetious.)
The release of this research by George Barna could not have come at a more opportune time. I announced just last week that we have officially launched the Liberty Church Project, whereby we will be helping people around the country to establish non-501c3 churches. I invite folks (pastors or laymen) who are serious about starting new non-501c3 churches–or helping to resurrect patriot pulpits within existing churches–to fill out our online application. We already have several groups that we intend to help and are looking for others. If you are someone who is serious about such an endeavor, and seeks our assistance, please fill out the online application here on: Liberty Church Project
And, in case you missed it, here is my column announcing the launch of the Liberty Church Project: We Are Launching
I want to commend George Barna for his research. I suspect that the vast majority of pastors and churches will ignore it, but, at least 
now we know the painful truth of the matter: by in large, pastors are deliberately choosing to not teach Biblical truth to their congregations for the selfish goal of being “successful.” But as we come to grips with this reality, we must also acknowledge that pastors are simply (and shamelessly) putting their fingers to the wind and finding that the people in the pews are more interested in their churches being “successful” than faithful to the teaching of Holy Scripture. As Barna noted, it is the churches, themselves, that have chosen to separate from the political affairs of their country.
In the end, it always comes down to We the People, doesn’t it? If you want a church where the pastor is willing to teach the Biblical principles that relate to our everyday lives–including our political lives–you might have to vote with your feet and go find one. That is, if that kind of thing is truly important to you.
© 2014 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved
Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He and his wife, Connie, have 3 children and 8 grandchildren. Chuck and his family reside in the Flathead Valley of Montana. See Chuck’s complete bio here.
E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com
Website: ChuckBaldwinLive.com
A Must See Message from a Former Muslim to President Obama
Read more at http://lastresistance.com/7157/must-see-message-former-muslim-president-obama/#7losjZrbYd0pOrkg.99
Posted on September 5, 2014 by Onan Coca
President Obama recently said that ISIS did not speak for world Islam.
That statement may seem true at first blush, but a man named Brother Rachid is here to educate you on the truth.
While President Obama and many others may buy into the idea that extremists are not “properly” following Islamic teachings… nothing could be further from the truth.
Brother Rachid is a former Muslim from Morocco who converted to Christianity. He now tries to educate anyone who will listen about the dangers of Islam and the truth of what even “moderates” teach their children.
Incredible Video of the Day from JoeForAmerica.com
Diving Into an Active Volcano
Posted by Rottdawg on Sep 5, 2014 in VOTD
Read more at http://joeforamerica.com/2014/09/votd-9-5-14/
IRS had ‘secret research project’ on conservatives
URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/2014/09/irs-had-secret-research-project-on-conservatives/
Posted By 
Garth Kant On 09/04/2014 @ 5:52 pm
WASHINGTON – The government watchdog group Judicial Watch has unearthed more bombshells in the IRS scandal, using the federal court system to get information Congress has been unable to obtain directly from the tax agency or the Justice Department.
Tom Fitton, the group’s president, told WND the scandal has now become so massive, “President Nixon resigned over lesser abuses of the IRS.”
The just-released emails reveal the IRS had a “secret research project” using lists of donors to mostly conservative organizations that an agency attorney appeared to admit it never should have had 
in its possession.
The documents do not describe the project or show how the IRS used the names on the lists, but they do show they were in the possession of Lois Lerner, the former agency employee and central figure in the scandal.
Referring to all the emails released Thursday by Judicial Watch, Fitton told WND, “These documents show how justice has been abused by this administration. That Eric Holder’s Justice Department has done no serious criminal investigation of the IRS abuses is no surprise since that agency is implicated in the scandal and obstructed investigations.”
One of the email exchanges revealed Lerner warned a colleague that Congress was asking “dangerous” questions about their targeting of conservative nonprofit organizations.
Congress has been stymied in its attempts to get much of the information from the IRS and the Justice Department that Judicial Watch has been able to obtain through the legal system.
The documents are the latest emails Judicial Watch has obtained as part of a lawsuit it filed in October 2013 after the IRS refused to comply with Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, requests dating back to May 2013.
Attorney General Eric Holder has ignored a contempt of Congress citation against Lerner and a recommendation by a congressional committee to file criminal charges in the IRS scandal.
But Judicial Watch has been able to use FOIAs to obtain a series of documents with explosive revelations that have helped House committees keep their investigations into the IRS scandal alive.
“We are doing the work of the Department of Justice, the media and Congress. We are thankful that the court process still works and our lawsuit is, right now, the last best hope for accountability and truth in this massive scandal,” Fitton told WND.
- These latest documents show Lerner had obtained the donor lists and that 75 percent of the groups were apparently conservative and only 5 percent were liberal.
- When Lerner used a planted question on May 10, 2013 to disclose the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups, as a congressional investigation began to bear down upon her, she conceded the requests for donor names was “not appropriate.”
- An email just revealed by Judicial Watch from Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Margo L. Stevens to Lerner had instructed her on May 21, 2012, that “such information was not needed across-the-board and not used in making the agency’s determination on exempt status,” implying the information should never have been in Lerner’s possession, in her capacity as head of the IRS’ tax-exempt division.
- Judicial Watch said key parts of that email and other emails had been blacked out. In fact, many of the documents were completely blacked out.
- Judicial Watch said the Obama administration was not required by law to withhold any of that information, and it may have been using a FOIA exemption when material is deemed “pre-decisional” or deliberative.”
- An email thread a month later, on June 27, 2012, showed the donor lists were being used for a “secret research project.”
Judicial Watch said the emails, with the subject line “donor names,” included this exchange:
June 27, 2012: 8:59 a.m. – David L. Fish, IRS acting director of Exempt Organizations Rulings and Agreements, to Holly Paz:
Joseph Urban [IRS Technical Advisor, Tax Exempt and Government Entities] had actually started a secret research project on whether we could, consistent with 6104, argue that [REDACTED] Joe was quite agitated yesterday when I told him what we were doing. (He was involved when the initial question was raised, but we didn’t continue reading him in). At one point he started saying that this was a decision for Steve Miller – I told him we were already doing it, and that I didn’t know whether Lois had already talked to Nikole [former IRS Chief of Staff to IRS Commissioner Steve Miller] about this. Would not be surprised if he already started working on Lois.
June 27, 2012 9:02 a.m. – Holly Paz to David L. Fish:
Thanks for the heads up. The decision was made by Steve, based on advice from P and A. [Procedure and Administration]
It was on the very next day, June 28, 2012, that Lerner warned Paz that congressional and TIGTA (Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration) inquiries into their IRS procedures were becoming “dangerous.”
- June 28, 2012 8:57 a.m. – Paz to Lerner: “Now TIGTA wants to talk to me. I am guessing they read this morning’s paper. [Apparent reference to Wall Street Journal article concerning IRS scrutiny of Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS tax exempt status] Will keep you posted.”
- June 28, 2012 9:13 a.m. – Lerner to Paz: “Not alone. Wait til I am there.”
- June 28, 2012 09:17 a.m. – Paz to Lerner: “Sorry. Too late. He already called me. It was not about WSJ. Just him trying to get better understanding of the scope of the [House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave] Camp [R-MI] request.”
- June 28, 2012 8:22 a.m. – Lerner to Paz: “Just as dangerous. I’ll talk to you soon. Be there in half hour.”
- Judicial Watch believes the “dangerous” request was apparently a letter sent by Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., to the head of the IRS requesting copies of all 501(c)(4) (tax-exempt status) applications from 2010 and 2011.
The concern by Lerner and other IRS officials apparently began just after they were informed, in late March 2012, their process for reviewing tax-exempt applications was under investigation in the form of an audit conducted by the , or TIGTA.
On May 17, 2013, then-IRS Commissioner Steve Miller testified before Congress that “instructions had been given to destroy any donor lists,” but, four months later, donor lists were actually turned over to the House Ways and Means Committee.
The committee then announced, a year later, on May 7, 2014, that, of the scores of conservative groups that provided donor information to the IRS, “nearly one in ten donors were subject to audit.”
During an interview on Super Bowl Sunday in February, President Obama claimed there was “not even a smidgen” of corruption in the IRS scandal.
But, in a statement released by Judicial Watch, Fitton said, “[I]t is well past time that President Obama should be held to account about his repeated and recent falsehoods about his IRS scandal.”
© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.
Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon
No Hard Choices
September 5, 2014
Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/09/hard-choices/#hosZmOzyjYiESxZ1.99
Speed kills racial profiling study
http://humanevents.com/2014/09/03/speed-kills-racial-profiling-study/
By: Ann Coulter
9/3/2014 04:24 PM
In an article about police shootings in last Sunday’s New York Times (8/31), Michael Wines disputes the conventional wisdom about a disproportionate number of African-Americans being shot by police, saying there are no data one way or another. But Wines revives the canard about blacks being disproportionately targeted in traffic stops.
There actually is a study for that.
Throughout the 1990s, the nation was fixated on tales of jack-booted New Jersey state troopers who were stopping speeders on the turnpike just because they were black! In a 2000 primary debate, Vice President Al Gore sneered at then-New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley, saying, “Racial profiling practically began in New Jersey, Senator Bradley.”
Attorney General Eric Holder recently paid tribute to the myth, claiming that when he was in college, he had been stopped “driving from New York to Washington.” He didn’t mention how fast he was going.
The story never made sense. How could the troopers tell the race of drivers in speeding cars? Did they wait until the driver rolled down his window and, if he was white, say, “Oh, sorry — have a nice day!”
But the Clinton administration was slapping consent decrees for racial profiling on police departments across the country, and the N.J. highway patrol was its prime evidence, based on a study that a child wouldn’t believe.
As is usually the case with bogus race studies, the pivotal 1993 survey compared speed stops on the New Jersey turnpike to the population of all drivers on the turnpike – not with the population of all speeders on the turnpike.
Such meaningless studies are popular on the left, where it is assumed that people of different races, genders, and ethnicities will always behave identically in all respects.
If fewer women pass the physical test to become firefighters, that can only be because of sexism. If fewer blacks pass the written test — that’s racism. If fewer whites play professional basketball — no, forget that one. Sports are important. (Unlike arson or vehicular homicide.)
Nonetheless, based on the assumption that blacks speed just as much as whites — because to believe otherwise would be racist! — Temple University’s John Lamberth announced that while only 13.5 percent of drivers along a particular stretch of the New Jersey Turnpike were black, 46 percent of those stopped for speeding were black.
Racial profiling, Q.E.D.
The New York Times ran a dozen articles trumpeting the nonsense study, proclaiming it “the most thorough documentation of the contention that the police regularly pulled over black drivers.” Lamberth himself praised his research for ruling out the possibility of coincidence — and if you can’t trust Lamberth on his own study, who can you trust?
Largely on the basis of that investigation, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Robert E. Francis threw out the contraband evidence seized from 19 African-American men in traffic stops on the turnpike. New Jersey’s ninny governor, Christie Todd Whitman, pronounced her state’s troopers guilty of racial profiling and agreed to a consent decree with the Department of Justice (DOJ) that basically prohibited the troopers from doing their jobs.
Statisticians, and other people with common sense, tried to explain to liberals that human beings are not identical. Any study purporting to show that too many blacks are stopped for speeding must first determine how many speeders are black.
Being denounced as virtual Klansmen, the state troopers demanded a real study.
Confident that any new study would merely serve to confirm the troopers’ racism, the DOJ and the New Jersey attorney general commissioned a statistical investigation from the Public Services Research Institute in Maryland.
The institute’s study was a spectacular thing. Using expensive monitors with high-speed cameras and radar detectors, they clocked the speeds of nearly 40,000 drivers on the relevant section of the turnpike. Three researchers then examined the photos to determine the race of the driver — without knowing whether the driver was speeding, which was defined as going more than 80 mph in 65 mph zones.
The result: No racial profiling.
-
Blacks constituted 25 percent of all speeders
-
they were 23 percent of drivers stopped for speeding.
-
Controlling for age and gender, blacks sped at about twice the rate of whites.
-
The disparity was even greater for drivers exceeding 90 mph.
Inasmuch as the study was irrefutable, Mark Posner, a lefty Clinton holdover in the Bush Justice Department, tried to block it from being released, continuously demanding more information.
But no matter how statisticians fiddled with the data, the results were identical:
-
Blacks were twice as likely to speed as whites — and at much higher speeds.
-
The troopers were completely vindicated.
When the study finally leaked — over Posner’s objections — he informed the press it wasn’t “valid” without articulating any actual problems with it. The attorney general of New Jersey, David Samson, nonsensically said the results didn’t matter because New Jersey had already admitted its troopers were engaging in racial profiling.
Perhaps the Times is right and there is no comprehensive study of police shootings by race. But it’s also possible that there is one, it didn’t come out as planned, so it has never seen the light of day.
‘Frustration and confusion’ among US troops over mixed message on ISIS
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/04/frustration-and-confusion-among-us-troops-over-mixed-message-on-isis/
‘Frustration and confusion’ among US troops over mixed message on ISISAmerican boots on the ground in Iraq are so frustrated with the White House message about their mission against the Isla…http://fxn.ws/WgWGmf
Biden on Wednesday delivered what was probably the toughest statement to date from the administration, declaring, after another U.S. journalist was beheaded by the Islamic State, “we will follow them to the gates of Hell until they are brought to justice.” 
But his tough talk was at odds with a message delivered earlier in the day by President Obama, who said that while his administration’s goal is to “destroy” ISIS — it also is to “shrink” it to a “manageable problem.”
Amid the mixed messages, a source in contact with special operators in Iraq told Fox News that “frustration and confusion reign” among Americans on the ground there.
The source relayed the complaint of an unnamed special operator: “Chase them to the Gates of Hell? How the [f—] are we going to do that when we can’t even leave the front gate of our base!?”
Ostensibly, U.S. personnel on the ground in Iraq are there to defend U.S. facilities. The president earlier this week deployed an additional 350 personnel to Baghdad to provide security at the U.S. Embassy and related facilities.
The decision brings the additional U.S. diplomatic security contingent to 820.
Defense officials say that when the additional Marines arrive, they will bring the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq to 1,213.
U.S. military personnel also are engaged in airstrikes against the Islamic State in northern Iraq and helping with humanitarian missions to aid ethnic minorities who have been besieged by the militant group.
But it remains an open question how aggressively the U.S. would expand the fight against ISIS, and whether military in Baghdad would be pulled into that effort.
In a statement earlier this week announcing the additional diplomatic security contingent, the Defense Department said: “The Department of Defense will continue to plan and prepare further military options should they become necessary, and we will remain ready to protect our diplomats, our citizens, and our interests in Iraq, while we continue to work with the Iraqi government to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.”
A strategy for addressing the Islamic State in Iraq, and perhaps Syria, could become clearer in the coming days as Obama meets with British Prime Minister David Cameron and other European allies at a NATO summit in Wales. Secretary of State John Kerry is also heading to the Middle East to meet with allies there. All efforts are aimed at building a coalition to battle the Islamic State.
But the mixed messages about how far the U.S. is willing to go have sowed confusion on Capitol Hill, as well as in the field.
“It’s very confusing,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told Fox News. “The president seems to be a definite maybe.”
Reacting to Obama’s comment about making ISIS “manageable,” he said: “That’s when you are closing a lane on the freeway and you have got to go down the freeway with three lanes instead of four, then you manage it. But this is ISIS. They want death and destruction to the United States of America.”
Former CIA and NSA director Michael Hayden also told Fox News Radio’s “Kilmeade and Friends” on Thursday that “Iraq is not coming back” after this.
He called Iraq a divided country, claiming that a “Shiastan” and “Sunnistan” have effectively been created alongside Kurdistan. Hayden said more U.S. support should go toward the Kurds at this point.
Higher Fast-Food Wages: Higher Fast-Food Prices
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/09/higher-fast-food-wages-higher-fast-food-prices
By James Sherk
The Heritage Foundation
Union activists want to raise the minimum wage in the fast-food industry to $15 an hour. However, fast-food restaurants operate on very small profit margins; they could only afford such wages by raising prices—significantly. Higher prices would, in turn, drive customers away, forcing even larger price increases to cover costs. Ultimately, the average fast-food restaurant would have to raise prices by nearly two-fifths. This would cause sales to drop by more than one-third, and profits to fall by more than three-quarters. Absent the widespread adoption of labor-saving technology, the union-led “Fight for 15” would make fast food much more expensive for Americans.
Fight for 15
The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has launched an expensive PR campaign calling for wages of at least $15 an hour in the fast-food industry. This Fight for 15 is part of a larger SEIU pressure campaign to unionize fast-food restaurants.[1] Hundreds of union activists have staged “walkouts” and protests across the country demanding the higher pay rate. These protests have attracted considerable media attention. However, if the SEIU achieved its stated goal, it would hurt the budgets of millions of moderate-income Americans.
No, Fast-Food Joints Cannot Absorb Cost Increases
Artificially inflating wages would substantially increase fast-food restaurants’ total costs—labor makes up a considerable portion of their budget. Chart 1 shows the financial statements of the average fast-food restaurant in 2013. Labor costs (26 percent) and food and material costs (31 percent) make up the majority of the typical restaurant budget.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the average cook in a fast-food restaurant earned $9.04 an hour in 2013.[2] The SEIU’s push for $15 an hour would consequently raise fast-food wages by at least 66 percent. Paying $15 an hour would raise fast-food restaurants’ total costs by approximately 15 percent.[3]
Fast-food restaurants could not pay this additional amount out of their profits. The typical restaurant has a profit margin of just 3 percent before taxes.[4] That works out to approximately $27,000 a year[5]—less than the annual cost of hiring one full-time employee at $15 an hour.[6] In order to raise wages, fast-food restaurants must raise prices.
Fast-Food Customers Are Price Sensitive
Most Americans eat fast food because they want a quick and inexpensive meal. If fast-food restaurants raised their prices, many of their customers would either eat at home or go to more expensive restaurants.
Academic studies consistently confirm the price sensitivity of fast-food customers. Table 1 shows the results of all studies of U.S. fast-food demand published since 1990.[7] The figures in the table show the estimated drop in sales when prices rise by 1 percent.
Most studies find that a 1 percent increase in prices causes sales to fall by almost 1 percent. Larger price increases cause sales to fall by proportionally larger amounts. For example, Abigail Okrent’s and Aylin Kumcu’s estimate implies that a 10 percent increase in fast-food prices would cause fast-food sales to fall by 9 percent.[8]
And More Price Increases
The loss of sales would force fast-food establishments to raise prices even more to cover fixed costs like rent, insurance, and marketing. These price increases would, in turn, further reduce sales, necessitating further price increases.
Many economists analyzing the fast-food industry overlook this dynamic.[9] They assume that fast-food restaurants would only have to raise prices enough to cover the cost of wage increases—ignoring the sales and revenue that fast-food restaurants lose because of these price increases. Consumers’ price sensitivity means that fast-food prices must rise by more than the initial increase in labor costs.
Total Economic Effects
The Heritage Foundation constructed a simulation model using the data on the average fast-food restaurant’s income and expenses. (See Chart 1.) This model accounts for the sales that fast-food restaurants lose when they raise prices. (See the appendix for details of this model.) Chart 2 shows the effects of a $15-an-hour minimum wage on the fast-food industry.
The higher labor costs would initially force fast-food restaurants to raise their prices by 15 percent, which would drive down sales by 14 percent. This would force restaurants to raise prices again, pushing sales down further. In equilibrium the average fast-food restaurant would have to raise prices 38 percent.[10] Prices would rise roughly twice as much as the initial increase in labor costs.[11] Total sales and hours worked would both fall by 36 percent. Fast-food restaurant owners would also have to accept a 77 percent reduction in profits in order to stay in business—leaving them with an average profit of just $6,100 a year per store. Otherwise they would have to raise prices to an extent that would drive away their customer base.
These changes would hurt consumers. Americans would face higher fast-food prices, putting a dent into the budgets of everyone who frequently eats fast food—primarily moderate-income consumers, not the wealthy, who do not regularly eat fast food.
Labor Substitution
Such an increase in prices and decrease in profits would devastate fast-food restaurants. Many owners would find that taking on the risk of operating a restaurant—and potentially losing money—is not worth profit margins of less than 1 percent. Many fast-food restaurants would respond by restructuring dramatically in order to use less labor.
Fast-food restaurants could reduce labor costs by (a) substituting entry-level workers for more skilled and more productive workers and (b) replacing human workers with machines. Fast-food jobs involve many routine tasks that are particularly susceptible to automation. For example, McDonald’s recently announced plans to adopt iPhone ordering and paying—making the jobs of many cashiers redundant.[12] Inventors in California have created an automatic hamburger-cooking machine that cooks 360 hamburgers in an hour without human intervention.[13] Artificially increasing fast-food wages would significantly hasten the adoption of such technology—flat out eliminating many positions in the fast-food industry.
Fewer Entry-Level Jobs
These reduced job opportunities would badly hurt less-skilled workers. Fast-food restaurants generally employ younger and less-experienced workers. In the limited time they work in the fast-food industry, they gain basic employment skills—such as how to work reliably, follow instructions from a supervisor, and work constructively with co-workers. Once they gain these skills, they quickly move on to higher-level jobs. McDonald’s estimates that its franchisees see average annual turnover of 150 percent—the average employee stays for just 8 months.[14] When employees leave, they quickly find higher-paying jobs. Two-thirds of minimum-wage workers earn a raise within a year—with a median raise of 24 percent.[15] Eliminating entry-level jobs makes it harder for workers to advance into higher-paying positions.
Conclusion
Raising the minimum wage in the fast-food industry to $15 an hour would hurt consumers and workers. Without major operational changes, fast-food restaurants would have to raise prices by 38 percent while seeing their profits fall by 77 percent. This would cause many restaurants to close and many others to make extensive use of labor-saving technology—eliminating many of the entry-level jobs that inexperienced workers need to get ahead. Congress should not facilitate the SEIU’s attempt to inflate fast-food wages.
—James Sherk is Senior Policy Analyst in Labor Economics in the Center for Data Analysis, of the Institute for Economic Freedom and Opportunity, at The Heritage Foundation.
Appendix
The Heritage Foundation estimated the full effects of raising the minimum wage in the fast-food industry using an iterative model. Heritage used data on the average labor and food costs of limited-service (fast-food) restaurants from IBISWorld, as shown in Chart 1. The data were modified to include the employer share of payroll taxes in the “wages” category instead of “other.” Heritage also estimated that 81 percent of payroll costs are paid to line employees, while 19 percent are paid to salaried managers. Heritage used this data to estimate the labor costs of hourly employees as a share of total revenues at the average fast-food restaurant.
Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that the typical fast food-cook in a restaurant earns $9.04 an hour.[16] Heritage estimated that if the SEIU raised minimum wages in the fast-food industry to $15 an hour, average wages would rise to $15.50 an hour—allowing limited ripple effects to maintain wage differentials for more experienced workers. The SEIU proposal would thus raise hourly fast food labor costs by 71 percent.
The Heritage Foundation surveyed all studies that estimated the price elasticity of demand for fast food in the U.S. published over the last 25 years. Heritage found five studies with six elasticities[17] (Jekanowski et al. calculated estimates for two time periods). The Heritage Foundation used the average of these six elasticities to estimate how fast-food demand responds to price changes. As Table 1 shows, the average elasticity was almost identical to the median elasticity.
Heritage used an iterative model in which fast-food restaurants first raise their prices to cover the labor cost increase, and then experience falling sales in response to the price increase. The reduced sales cut the food and labor expenses of the restaurant but not its fixed costs. Heritage assumed that food and labor costs fall proportionally to the change in sales. In the model, restaurants then raise their prices by an amount necessary to restore a portion of their previous profits. The model iteratively estimates the sales decreases and subsequent price increases more than 200 times until equilibrium sales and price levels are reached.
The initial estimate with unchanged profits concluded that the average restaurant would go bankrupt, so the Heritage Foundation re-ran the model with successively lower profits. Heritage assumed that restaurants would maximize their profits, subject to the condition they remain in business. This estimate showed that restaurants would have to accept a 77 percent reduction in profits for the labor cost and price increases not to put them out of business.
REFERENCES:
[1] Arun Gupta, “Fight For 15 Confidential,” In These Times, November 11, 2013, http://inthesetimes.com/article/15826/fight_for_15 (accessed September 3, 2014).
[2] Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Occupational Employment Statistics: Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2013: 35-2011 Cooks, Fast Food,” April 1, 2014, http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes352011.htm (accessed September 3, 2014).
[3] Heritage Foundation calculations based on data from IBISWorld, “Industry Report 72221a: Fast Food Restaurants in the US,” May 2013. These calculations assume that 81 percent of total labor costs shown in Chart 1 are paid to hourly workers, with the rest paid to salaried managers unaffected by any proposed changes. These calculations also assume a small “ripple effect” from the pay increase, such that the average hourly wage would rise from $9.04 an hour to $15.50 an hour.
[4] Ibid. The employer share of payroll taxes has been added to the “Wages” category and subtracted from the “Other” category.
[5] Ibid., p. 31. In 2013, there were 232,611 fast-food establishments that collectively made $191 billion, which works out to $821,000 in revenues per establishment, with average profit margins of 3.3 percent.
[6] $15/hour multiplied by 40 hours/week by 50 weeks/year works out to $30,000 a year. Employers would have to add the 7.6 percent employer-share payroll tax, another $2,300.
[7] These were studies on the elasticity of demand for fast food specifically, not the larger category of “Food Away from Home,” which includes all restaurants. Researchers have conducted far fewer studies on the demand for fast food than they have on the demand for all food away from home.
[8] Abigail Okrent and Aylin Kumcu, “What’s Cooking? Demand for Convenience Foods in the United States,” paper for presentation at the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association’s 2014 annual meeting, Minneapolis, July 27–29, 2014, http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/handle/170541 (accessed September 3, 2014). These figures are for industry-wide price increases. If an individual fast-food restaurant unilaterally hiked its prices, it would probably lose much more business to less expensive competitors.
[9] See, for example Jeannette Wicks-Lim and Robert Pollin, “The Costs to Fast-Food Restaurants of a Minimum Wage Increase to $10.50 per Hour,” Political Economy Research Institute Research Brief, September 2013.
[10] These price increases would have to be for the average check, not each individual item. Consumers would probably respond to the price increases by substituting cheaper items, for instance, McDonald’s dollar menu. Such substitution means that prices of less expensive items would have to rise by more than the average amount in order for the price of the average check to rise by 38 percent.
[11] This explains the observation by Emek Basker and Muhammad Khan that fast-food prices respond to minimum-wage increases as though labor costs accounted for 50 percent of total expenditures. Economic survey data consistently show that fast-food restaurants spend roughly one-quarter of their budget on labor costs. However, prices rise by more than this in response to minimum-wage increases to recoup revenues from reduced sales. Emek Basker and Muhammad Khan, “Does the Minimum Wage Bite into Fast-Food Prices?” University of Missouri Working Paper No. 1317, September 2013.
[12] Maria Vultaggio, “McDonald’s to Launch NFC-Enabled Mobile Payment and Ordering App: Report,” International Business Times, September 2, 2014, http://www.ibtimes.com/mcdonalds-launch-nfc-enabled-mobile-payment-ordering-app-report-1676634 (accessed September 3, 2014).
[13] Momentum Machines, “The Next Generation of Fast Food,” http://www.momentummachines.com (accessed September 3, 2014).
[14] Michael Harris, “An Employee Retention Strategy Designed to Increase Tenure and Profitability in the Fast Food Industry,” dissertation, University of Phoenix, December 2010, http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/pqdtopen/doc/860122562.html?FMT=ABS (accessed September 3, 2014).
[15] Jonathan Meer and Jeremy West, “Effects of the Minimum Wage on Employment Dynamics,” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 19262, revised December 2013, p. 8.
[16] Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Occupational Employment Statistics: Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2013—35-2011 Cooks, Fast Food.”
[17] Mark D. Jekanowski, James K. Binkley and James S. Eales, “Convenience, Accessibility, and the Demand for Fast Food,” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol. 26, No. 1 (2001).
California city mandates free medical marijuana for low-income residents
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/04/california-city-ok-free-marijuana-for-charity/
Published September 04, 2014
FoxNews.com
California city mandates free medical marijuana for low-income residentsFree pot for the poor?http://fxn.ws/1vSwEVL
Weed welfare?
That’s what the Berkeley City Council in California has unanimously approved, ordering medical marijuana dispensaries to donate 2 percent of their stash to patients making less than $32,000 a year.
The new welfare program in the liberal-leaning city is set to launch in August 2015.
The ordinance, which passed in August and is the first of its kind in the country, comes at a time when several states are debating how to handle a growing movement to legalize marijuana for both medical and recreational use.
But Berkeley’s decision to effectively order weed redistribution is prompting a vocal backlash.
Bishop Ron Allen, a former addict and head of the International Faith Based Coalition, told Fox News he doesn’t understand why the California city would want to dump pot on the impoverished.
“It’s ludicrous, over-the-top madness,” Allen said. “Why would Berkeley City Council want to keep their poverty-stricken under-served high, in poverty and lethargic?”
John Lovell, a lobbyist for the California Narcotic Officers’ Association, agrees.
“Instead of taking steps to help the most economically vulnerable residents get out of that state, the city has said, ‘Let’s just get everybody high,’” Lovell told The New York Times.
But others, like Mason Tvert, director of communications at the Marijuana Policy Project, say it’s a community program.
Tvert told Fox News that the decision to provide the drug to some of its low-income residents is up to the community.
“So it’s a matter of the democratic process, people following the state’s laws, and this law appears to accommodate both of those,” he said.
California was the first state to legalize medical marijuana nearly 20 years ago.
California dispensaries are prohibited by law from turning a profit. But some places have been giving pot away to patients who couldn’t pay for years.
One of Berkeley’s largest dispensaries, Berkeley Patients Group, has been doing it for a decade, The New York Times reports. One recipient, Arnie Passman, a poet and activist, said he’s couldn’t remember exactly how long he had been given medical marijuana or why.
“It could be for my allergies, or my arthritis — you know what happens to us folks: We forget,” Passman, 78, told the newspaper.
Obama “Enraged” at Israel
3 September 2014
The Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens reports that President Obama is “enraged” at the Israeli government:
Barack Obama “has become ‘enraged’ at the Israeli government, both for its actions and for its treatment of his chief diplomat, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. ”
So reports the Jerusalem Post, based on the testimony of Martin Indyk, until recently a special Middle East envoy for the president. The war in Gaza, Mr. Indyk adds, has had “a very negative impact” on Jerusalem’s relations with Washington.
Think about this. Enraged. Not “alarmed” or “concerned” or “irritated” or even “angered.” Anger is a feeling. Rage is a frenzy. Anger passes. Rage feeds on itself. Anger is specific. Rage is obsessional, neurotic.
And Mr. Obama—No Drama Obama, the president who prides himself on his cool, a man whose emotional detachment is said to explain his intellectual strength—is enraged.
With Israel. Which has just been hit by several thousand unguided rockets and 30-odd terror tunnels, a 50-day war, the forced closure of its one major airport, accusations of “genocide” by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, anti-Semitic protests throughout Europe, general condemnation across the world. This is the country that is the object of the president’s rage.
Conflicting Signals? Obama vows to ‘destroy’ ISIS, make it ‘manageable’
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/03/conflicting-signals-obama-vows-to-destroy-isis-make-it-manageable/
Published September 03, 2014
Conflicting Signals? Obama vows to ‘destroy’ ISIS, make it ‘manageable’ President Obama sent seemingly conflicting signals Wednesday about his ultimate goal in the fight against the Islamic St…http://fxn.ws/1vMPHRj
President Obama sent seemingly conflicting signals Wednesday about his ultimate goal in the fight against the Islamic State, saying at a press conference in Europe that the aim is to “degrade and destroy” the terror group — but moments later, claiming he wants to make it a “manageable problem.” 
The president spoke as lawmakers on Capitol Hill and others urge the White House and Pentagon to pursue a tough approach against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL.
Those calls mounted after the group released another video showing the execution of an American journalist; the White House on Wednesday confirmed that video as authentic.
Speaking in Estonia during a visit to Europe, Obama at first took a hard line. He condemned the execution as “horrific” and “barbaric” and vowed “justice will be served.”
After taking some heat for admitting last week that “we don’t have a strategy yet” to address the militant group in Syria, Obama said they do have a regional strategy. Ultimately, he said, “our objective is clear, and that is to degrade and destroy ISIL so it is no longer a threat not just to Iraq but also the region and to the United States.”
But later in the press conference, Obama returned to the topic and noticeably softened his tone.
He clarified that if the U.S. is joined by an international coalition, they can “continue to shrink ISIL’s sphere of influence, its effectiveness, its financing, its military capabilities to the point where it is a manageable problem.”
The remarks are likely to sow confusion on Capitol Hill, and possibly among allies.
“Are we going to contain ISIS or are we going to crush ISIS? And the president has not answered that,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., told Fox News, reacting to the president’s remarks.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., in a written statement, criticized the president’s “mixed messages” on the Islamic State. “The time to stop and destroy ISIL is now,” he said.
Speaking Tuesday night on Fox News, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the Islamic State has “got to be destroyed” and claimed the president does not yet have a strategy to implement that.
The president is in Europe this week for meetings with allies, where everything from ISIS to the crisis in Ukraine will be on the table. Meanwhile, Secretary of State John Kerry is heading to the Middle East to try and build a stronger coalition to go after the Islamic State while boosting the Iraqi and Kurdish governments.
The Obama administration, in the face of calls for swift action, has stressed that the problems in Iraq must be addressed in large part by a new and inclusive government in Baghdad. But he continues to weigh whether to expand the current airstrike campaign in northern Iraq into Syria.
On Wednesday, Obama still did not give a timeline for deciding on a strategy to go after the extremist group’s operations in Syria. “It’ll take time to roll them back,” the president said.
As for the execution of freelance reporter Steven Sotloff, two weeks after journalist James Foley was similarly killed, Obama vowed the U.S. would not forget the “terrible crime against these two fine young men.”
“Our reach is long and justice will be served,” Obama said.
Sotloff reportedly held dual American-Israeli citizenship. In the Sotloff video, a masked militant warns Obama that as long as U.S. airstrikes against the militant group continue, “our knife will continue to strike the necks of your people.”
Obama responded that he will continue to fight the militant threat and the “barbaric and ultimately empty vision” it represents.
“Our objective is to make sure that ISIL is not an ongoing threat to the region,” he said. “And we can accomplish that. It’s going to take some time and it’s going to take some effort.”
Sotloff, a 31-year-old Miami-area native who freelanced for Time and Foreign Policy magazines, vanished a year ago in Syria and was not seen again until he appeared in the video that showed Foley’s beheading. Dressed in an orange jumpsuit against an arid Syrian landscape, Sotloff was threatened in that video with death unless the U.S. stopped airstrikes on the Islamic State.
In the video distributed Tuesday and titled “A Second Message to America,” Sotloff appears in a similar jumpsuit before he is apparently beheaded by a fighter with the Islamic State, the extremist group that has conquered wide swaths of territory across Syria and Iraq and declared itself a caliphate.
British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond told the BBC Wednesday that the masked, British-accented jihadist appears to be the same person shown in the Foley footage.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Pictured: Libyan Islamist rebels pose with planes seized from Tripoli airport as U.S. officials warn they could be used to carry out terrorist attack on 9/11 anniversary
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2741428/Officials-warn-ELEVEN-missing-airplanes-Libya-used-carry-terrorist-attack-9-11-anniversary.html#ixzz3CHIdVNIa
-
Eleven planes missing from Tripoli Airport after it was taken by Islamic rebels
-
Fighters from group Libyan Dawn have posed for pictures with aircraft
-
U.S. officials warn planes could be used to carry out terror attacks on 9/11
-
September 11 also marks anniversary of attack on US embassy in Libya
By Chris Pleasance for MailOnline and Ashley Collman for MailOnline
Published: 21:55 EST, 2 September 2014 | Updated: 11:37 EST, 3 September 2014
Libyan terrorists have posted pictures of themselves online posing with some of the aeroplanes taken from Tripoli airport after fighters seized it last month.
Soldiers from the group Libyan Dawn can be seen climbing on to the wings of commercial jets while smiling and waving for the camera.
U.S. officials fear that these aeroplanes could now be used to carry out 9/11-style attacks in the region on the anniversary of the tragedy this month.
A total of 11 commercial jets from state-owned carriers Libyan Airlines and Afriqiyah Airways went missing in August after militants from the so-called ‘masked men brigade’ overran the airport. 
Islamists from the rebel group Libyan Dawn have posed with aeroplanes seized from Tripoli Airport last month
Authorities say 11 aircraft taken from Tripoli airport could now be used in terror attacks in the region
In pictures posted online Jihadi soldiers can be seen clambering over aircraft at Tripoli airport. At least 11 planes went missing after the airport fell at the end of last month
Tripoli airport was left as little more than a smoldering ruin after rebels seized control of it in August
‘There are a number of commercial airliners in Libya that are missing,’ one official told the Washington Free-Beacon. ‘We found out on September 11 what can happen with hijacked planes.’
September 11 not only marks the anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center but it will also be the second anniversary of the raid of the U.S. Ambassador’s compound in Benghazi, Libya.
Four Americans were killed in the attack, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
Ansar al-Shariah, the group Washington holds responsible for the attack, have also seized parts of the Libyan capital and are known to work with terrorists from ISIS.
However they are not thought to be working with fighters from Libyan Dawn, as they are an Al-Qaeda affiliated group.
The inside of the main building at Tripoli airport gutted by fire following an attack by Islamist militants
Images posted on Twitter show a fire raging inside one of the terminal buildings as militants attacked
Militias which once fought to oust Muammar Gaddaffi from power in 2011 are now warring between themselves for control of the volatile country
Libyan Dawn, an Al-Qaeda affiliated group, are now in control of part of Tripoli, as are Ansar al-Shariah, the group held responsible for the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Libya
Pictures show the aftermath of the firefight, with planes completely or partially blasted and several littered with bullet holes.
Tripoli is witnessing one of its worst spasms of violence since Gaddaffi left power. The militias, many of which originate from rebel forces that fought Gaddaffi, became powerful players in post-war Libya, filling a void left by weak police and a shattered army.
Successive governments have put militias on their payroll in return for maintaining order, but rivalries over control and resources have led to fierce fighting among them and posed a constant challenge to the central government and a hoped-for transition to democracy.
On Sunday, the Libyan government announced that they had lost control of the capital.
Ansar al-Sharia has ties to the Islamic State (also known as ISIS), the Syrian group which today released the filmed beheading of American journalist Steven Sotloff – the second recorded execution of a U.S. hostage by the group.
Fighters from Al-Qaeda affiliated group Libyan Dawn pose on top of a heavily armoured truck as Tripoli Airport burns in the background following fighting there last month
Fears: Nearly a dozen commercial planes are missing in Libya after a radical Islamic group overtook the international airport in the capital of Tripoli late last month.
Aftermath: Tripoli International Airport was overtaken by the group Libyan Dawn last month and now 11 aircraft for Libyan Airlines and Afriqiyah Airways are missing
Mekkaoui said there is ‘credible intelligence’ that the Masked Men Brigade ‘is plotting to use the planes in attacks on the Maghreb state’ on the 9/11 anniversary.
Sebastian Gorka, a counterterrorism expert, told the Free-Beacon that the planes could be used in two ways to strike North Africa or even as far as the oil fields of Saudi Arabia.
‘The first would be how commercial airliners were used on Sept 11, 2001, literally turning an innocent mode of mass transit into a super-high precision guided missile of immense potency,’ Gorka, the Maj Gen Charles Horner chair at the Marine Corps University, said.
Strike again? A Moroccan military expert believes Islamic group The Masked Men Brigade are in control of the 11 missing airplanes
U.S. officials have not publicly confirmed the eleven planes’ disappearance, but are reportedly working to track them down.
Since the overthrow of previous dictator Muammar Gaddafi, Libya has descended into turmoil and officials fear it may become another safe haven for terrorists, like Syria.
Egypt’s military government is currently looking into intervening in the country to restore order.
The U.S. is taking a more conservative role in the country, but Secretary of State John Kerry said last week that he would be delivering Apache attack helicopters to Egypt
Obama’s use of ISIL reveals his true allegiance, and animus towards Israel
Written by Allen West on August 26, 2014
I know I’ve mentioned this before but one of my favorite songs from the 80’s is “Words” by Missing Persons. The refrain goes:
What are words for when no one listens anymore
What are words for when no one listens
What are words for when no one listens it’s no use talkin’ at all
This week I listened to two Obama administration spokesmen, Josh “Not So” Earnest from the White House, and Rear Admiral Kirby from the Pentagon in relation to the Islamic terrorist army freely operating in Iraq and Syria. These two individuals and many other voices out of the Obama administration refer to them as ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant). The group has professed the establishment of an Islamic caliphate and refers to itself as IS (Islamic State). The manner in which we should all be referring to this savage and barbaric group is ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria).
Why should that matter? What are words for?
First, if you choose to refer to this group as ISIL, you have basically rewritten the map of the Middle East and fallen into the trap of not recognizing the existence of Israel and also Lebanon. If you use ISIL you are then validating the Islamic totalitarian and jihadist claim that the modern day Jewish State of Israel is an occupation state and does not exist in the eyes of Muslims.
Need I remind you of the faux pas — or perhaps purposeful use — by then-Obama counter-terrorism advisor John Brennan who, at a Ramadan dinner celebration in the White House, referred to the capital of Israel as Al Quds, not as Jerusalem — what are words for indeed? They convey a certain meaning — just like calling the Ft Hood massacre “workplace violence” and not an Islamic jihadist attack.
Second, if you fall into the trap of referring to this group as IS, you have validated the existence of an Islamic caliphate and through your words lend it recognition and credibility. Some may say, so what? Well, here is the so what: remember when the Clinton administration recognized the Taliban as a legitimate government and even welcomed their Foreign Minister to the White House?
Yeah, well the Taliban welcomed someone into their arms as well. And look what happens when you send your Secretary of State to sit and negotiate a cease fire with Qatar and Turkey — two Islamist-supporting countries — on behalf of a terrorist organization, Hamas . And don’t forget, Barack Hussein Obama’s first phone call as president to an international leader was made to Fatah chief Mahmoud Abbas, aka Abu Mazen — not exactly a nation-state or world leader. What are words for? They’re for realizing what is a declared and recognized state as opposed to a terrorist organization that doesn’t deserve validation.
Lastly, we need to address this group as ISIS because it is seeking to establish an Islamic state within the borders of two recognized nation-states; Iraq and Syria. ISIS can attempt to break down any borders and not recognize them, but we must. We cannot allow this group to reestablish some 7th century regional caliphate and therefore must fight to reestablish sovereignty.
Now, I would much rather use this crisis as a means to establish something long since needed — a separate country called Kurdistan — but my focus would be on destroying ISIS. There is an opportunity here to truly promote a country where there can be respect and coexistence of Muslims, Christians, and other religious minorities. A place that would thoroughly reject the idea of Islamic jihadism and would continue to be a reliable ally of the United States.
It was the dream of Kemal Ataturk to have a secular Muslim country, Turkey, but thanks to the Islamist Recip Tayyip Erdogan, that dream has turned into a nightmare.
So what are words for in this case? They are to properly define your enemy and not allow them to define their goal and objective, which we must reject. However, it does concern me that the Obama administration seems to be embracing the ISIL terminology, which reflects their dismissal of our best ally in the Middle East, Israel.
Am I thinking too deeply in this? Nope. Because America has only been around for 238 years and we fail to realize the nuances of history, language and terminology. During the Clinton administration we didn’t understand the nature of the Balkans and took sides against the Serbians. If we’d studied the Battle of Kosovo in 1389 it would have helped in understanding why the Serbs still harbor angst against Muslims.
In any event, I will continue to say ISIS — and I recommend we all do the same — especially the Obama administration.
Read more at http://allenbwest.com/2014/08/obamas-use-isil-reveals-true-allegiance-animus-towards-israel/#W9igcySsuClbdAdE.99
Emails Prove that IRS Head Ignored “Dirty Money” from Liberal Unions While Persecuting Conservatives!
Read more at http://lastresistance.com/7114/emails-prove-irs-head-ignored-dirty-money-liberal-unions-persecuting-conservatives/#zxHU0xdBeJ7FsMc0.99
By Connor D. Wolf from the Daily Caller News Foundation
Posted on September 2, 2014 by Onan Coca
The official at the center of the IRS tea party scandal once dismissed complaints that labor unions were not reporting millions of dollars in political activities on their tax forms, according to an email obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.
In 2007, Lerner responded directly to a complaint that some major 
labor unions reported completely different amounts of political expenditures when filing with the IRS and the Department of Labor.
At the time of the email, Lerner was the Director of Exempt Organizations at the IRS.
Lerner wrote, “We looked at the information you provided regarding organizations that report substantial amounts of political activity and lobbying expenditures on the DOL Form LM-2, but report little to no political expenditures on the Form 990 filed with the IRS.”
“We believe this difference in reporting does not necessarily indicate that the organization has incorrectly reported to either the DOL or the IRS,” Lerner concluded.
Don Todd, the deputy assistant secretary of the Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) at the time the email was sent, confirmed seeing Lerner’s email and remembering similar complaints at the time. OLMS oversees labor union financial disclosures within the Department of Labor.
“The laws never been enforced,” Todd told The DCNF (The Daily Caller News Foundation). “The IRS was telling us it would cost more to enforce the law then they would collect.”
In 2006, the year leading up to Lerner’s email, the national headquarters for the AFL-CIO reported no direct or indirect political expenditures with the IRS on their 990 form, leaving the line 81a blank;
-
That same year, the AFL-CIO reported $29,585,661 in political activities with the Department of Labor.
-
Also in 2006 the Teamsters Union reported no political expenditures with the IRS while at the same time reporting $7,081,965 with the Labor Department.
-
Again in 2006, Unite-Here reported no political activity with the IRS and $1,451,002 with the Labor Department.
-
In 2005, the National Education Association also reported no political expenditures with the IRS while at the same time reporting $24,985,250 with the Labor Department.
Labor union political spending overwhelmingly benefits Democrats. Todd told The DNCF Lerner may have been playing favorites. Lerner has been accused of singling out tea party groups applying for tax-exempt status
Lerner acknowledged in the 2007 email, “The definition of political campaign activity required to be reported on Form LM2 coincides with the definition of political campaign activity expenditures required to be reported on Form 990.”
But she did offer some possible reasons for the discrepancies. “The Form LM-2 does not separate this reporting from the reporting of lobbying expenditures,” she wrote. “Furthermore, even if section 501(c)(5) labor organizations were required to report their lobbying expenditures, the amount required to be reported on Form LM-2 includes activity, such as attempting to influence regulations, that is not required to be reported as lobbying, as the IRS limitations apply to legislative lobbying.”
Lerner conceded, “Having said that, we did see some instances that raised concerns and we referred that information to our Dallas office to determine whether examination is warranted.” It does not appear any further investigation was conducted.
The Bush administration mandated more detailed disclosure requirements for labor unions, but they were relaxed by the Obama administration’s Labor Department.
An IRS spokesman told The DCNF the agency had no “immediate comment” on the matter.
About Onan Coca
Onan is a graduate of Liberty University (2003) and earned his M.Ed. at Western Governors University in 2012. Onan lives in the Atlanta area with his wife, Leah. They have three children and enjoy the hectic pace of life in a young family. Onan and Leah are members of the Journey Church in Hiram, GA. Catch him at http://www.eaglerising.com
Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon
Eye On The Ball
September 3, 2014
Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/09/eye-ball/#zUEk4BPAE8FfTQDP.99
Islamic Terrorist Group ISIS Beheads Another American Journalist
http://libertyalliance.com/2014/09/faith-friday-back-school-equality/
September 2, 2014 By
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) terrorist organization has released a new video showing a brutal and barbaric beheading of American journalist Steven Sotloff, according to the Associated Press:
Sotloff has been in captivity in Syria since last summer. ISIS had threatened to kill him next, following the barbaric beheading of fellow American journalist James Foley, less than two weeks ago.
ABC News reported:
In the video, which appeared online today, Sotloff addresses the camera, saying, “I’m sure you know exactly who I am by now and why I am appearing.”
“Obama, your foreign policy of intervention in Iraq was supposed to be for preservation of American lives and interests, so why is it that I am paying the price of your interference with my life?” the journalist says calmly as the black clad militant holds a knife casually at his side.
Later the video then cuts to the militant who says that as long as U.S. missiles “continue to strike our people, our knife will continue to strike the necks of your people.”
Just last week, the Mother of Steven Sotloff spoke out in a video addressed to ISIS, saying, “Steven is a journalist who traveled to the Middle East to cover the suffering of Muslims at the hands of tyrants.”
WATCH BELOW: The Mother is only at the beginning.
Muslim Threats Against Christian Churches…in AMERICA
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/09/01/muslim-threats-against-christian-churches-in-america/
September 1, 2014 By
Three Christian churches in Columbus, Indiana have been vandalized. But, this isn’t your expected gang tagging or spray paint pictures. Instead, the message send is more dangerous and ominous.
Threatening messages, spray painted on church buildings, included verses from the Qur’an. Police are uncertain whether this was the act of gangs pulling a prank or if they are indeed legitimate threat. One thing is certain, given the increase in open sympathy and support for Muslim terrorist group Hamas by far too many in America, as well as threats by ISIS, this is something that should not be taken lightly.
The Blaze reports that St. Bartholomew Catholic Church found the word ‘Infidels!’ painted on their building. Along with it was “Qur’an 3:151.”
That particular verse in the Koran reads, “We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve for what they have associated with Allah of which He had not sent down [any] authority. And their refuge will be the Fire, and wretched is the residence of the wrongdoers.”
The two other churches targeted with similar messages are Lakeview Church of Christ and East Columbus Christian Church.
Columbus Police spokesman Sgt. Matt Harris said, “We encourage people to let us investigate this before jumping to any conclusions. It’s early on — we just don’t know.” WATCH BELOW:
Columbus Police spokesman Sgt. Matt Harris said, “We encourage people to let us investigate this before jumping to any conclusions. It’s early on — we just don’t know.” WATCH BELOW:
Jimmy Carter at Islamic Conference: Americans Must “Use the Principles Of Allah To Bring Peace And Justice to All”
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/09/01/jimmy-carter-at-islamic-conference-americans-must-use-the-principles-of-allah-to-bring-peace-and-justice-to-all/
September 1, 2014 By
Former President of the United States and unapologetic friend of violent extremists around the globe Jimmy Carter spoke this past weekend at an Islamic conference and hailed the “principles of Allah” as the key to finally seeing peace in the Middle East.
The failed president who was too weak to retrieve our captured U.S. citizens from the hands of Iranian college students has been seen, until recent years, as the worst president with regards to foreign policy. With the numerous failures of President Obama having devastating consequences around the globe, it’s clear that Jimmy Carter has been downgraded to being the second most-cowardly president in history.
During his speech at the annual convention for the Islamic Society of North America on Saturday, Carter called for “justice for the Palestinians,” saying, “You can’t bring peace to the Middle East without justice and human rights for the Palestinians. When my prayers are answered and we have peace in that Holy Land then the Israelis and all their neighbors will be blessed to live in peace and prosperity.”
Of course, proposals of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been routinely rejected by Hamas and other Palestinian thugs.
During a luncheon earlier in the day, Carter hailed his own efforts to bring peace to the world and declared,
“We are all Americans in a system that allows basic human rights: peace, justice and the ability to treat each other as equals. I hope all of you will use the principles of Allah to bring peace and justice to all.”
Here is a group of “Religion of Peace” followers demonstrating the “principles of Allah” by raping Christian women, murdering their children and husbands, forcing other Muslims, who do not follow their particular flavor of Islam, to convert to their flavor or DIE. Yep, another great idea Mr. President Carter.” Jerry Broussard of What Did You Say?
Of course, these “principles of Allah” by which ISIS, Hamas and other terrorist organizations continue to commit horrific acts by citing Allah as the driving force.
Last week, ISIS marched 250 half-naked Syrian soldiers into the desert and slaughtered each and every one of them for supposed affronts to the principles of Allah. The event was celebrated by extremists on Twitter.
Thereligionofpeace.com claims that in the last ten years, 18,000 terror attacks have been carried out by those looking to fulfill the “principles of Allah.”
Youngconservatives.com highlights the supposed “principles of Allah” to which Carter refers. These include a command from the messenger of Allah that Muslims must “fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah.”
While Carter has carved out a place in history as the coddler of despots, it’s curious that he has not approached the pursuit of peace by calling for the Muslim world to adhere to the principles of Christ. It’s equally odd that he has not appealed to the Muslim world to adhere to the principles of Judaism.
Feds Ignore ISIS Border Terror Threat
http://www.infowars.com/feds-ignore-isis-border-terror-threat/
Focus instead on political groups in America
- Imagine a scene like this in any major city in America. How would you responds? How would most of America respond? Imagine the Leftist screaming that they are just exercising their First Amendment freedoms of Free Speech expression. The Leftist Media supporting them. Now image blood running in the streets like water. What will the Leftist say then? Bush’s fault?
- Image Credits: IS social media
by Kurt Nimmo | Infowars.com | September 2, 2014
On Sunday, Judicial Watch tweeted that it was good to see Tom Fitton and the El Paso Times taking the ISIS terror threat seriously:
However, when it comes to the rest of the media, there is nothing but silence.
Beyond Fox News and a handful of alternative news websites, few are mentioning the Judicial Watch report. The organization cited sources within the government that said an ISIS attack on the United States emanating from Ciudad Juarez is “coming soon.”
Government Focuses On Domestic Political Enemies, Not Islamic Terror
The FBI, in addition to tracking down who posted nude photos of celebrities on the internet, is concentrating on non-Muslim would-be terrorists. Its National Threat Assessment for Domestic Extremism doesn’t mention Muslim terrorists or the possibility of an attack launched from the southern border.
“The FBI’s most recent national threat assessment for domestic terrorism makes no reference to Islamist terror threats, despite last year’s Boston Marathon bombing and the 2009 Fort Hood shooting– both carried out by radical Muslim Americans,” writes Bill Gertz for the Washington Free Beacon.
The most prominent threat to America, according to the FBI and the government, comes from “eight types of domestic extremist movements – none motivated by radical Islam.”
“They include anti-government militia groups and white supremacy extremists, along with ‘sovereign citizen’ nationalists, and anarchists. Other domestic threat groups outlined by the FBI assessment include violent animal rights and environmentalist extremists, black separatists, anti- and pro-abortion activists, and Puerto Rican nationalists.”
According to the report, “lone actors” and “small cells” inspired by “anarchist, anti-government militias, white supremacy, and sovereign citizen extremists… will engage in lethal violence, although it is most likely the majority of violent criminal acts will continue to be characterized as serious crimes, such as arson and assault, but which are not, ultimately lethal.”
DHS, FBI, DOJ, State Police: Political Opposition in America Are the Real Terrorists
The absence of Islamic terror in the FBI assessment is hardly surprising given previous reports produced by the agency and the Department of Homeland Security.
In June Infowars.com reported on Attorney General Eric Holder’s “Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee,” a revamped version of Janet Reno’s post Oklahoma City bombing task force. It will include members from the FBI and Justice Department’s National Security Division.
“We face an escalating danger from self-radicalized individuals within our own borders,” Holder said in a video posted on the Department of Justice website. “As the nature of the threat we face evolves to include the possibility of individual radicalization via the Internet, it is critical that we return our focus to potential extremists here at home.”
“Holder pointed to a 2013 Congressional Research Service report that claims domestic terrorism has produced more than two dozen incidents since 9/11 as justification for the task force, specifically noting the Boston Marathon bombing and Fort Hood shooting,” writes Mikael Thalen.
The Department of Homeland Security has produced a number of reports warning patriot groups and others pose a threat to national security.
In 2012, the agency produced Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970-2008 (PDF), a document characterizing Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.
“While largely omitting Islamic terrorism – the report fails completely to mention the 1993 World Trade Center bombing – the study focuses on Americans who hold beliefs shared by the vast majority of conservatives and libertarians and puts them in the context of radical extremism,” writes Paul Joseph Watson.
In 2011, the DHS produced several PSAs, or Public Service Announcements, depicting non-Muslim Americans as terrorists. “Far from representing some superficial nod to political correctness, this is in fact a deliberate effort by the feds to characterize predominantly white, middle class, politically engaged Americans as domestic extremists. It’s all part of the agenda to frame dissent against big government as dangerous radicalism,” Watson wrote in August, 2011.
In 2009, Infowars.com reported on “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” a DHS produced document that characterized patriot groups as potential terrorists.
Prior to the release of the DHS report, Alex Jones and Infowars.com reported on a Missouri
Information Analysis Center (MIAC) document on the “Modern Militia Movement” dated February 20, 2009, that “describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as “militia” influenced terrorists and instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties,” we reported on March 11, 2009.
The documents produced by the government demonstrate the establishment is more concerned about political opposition at home than Islamic terrorism abroad that has the potential of crossing over an unprotected border.
The Judicial Watch report reveals the possibility of a terror attack by a group that has repeatedly demonstrated its desire to attack civilians and military forces alike. The establishment media is now ignoring this threat.
U.S. Army Plans to Battle Anti-Government Dissidents in “Megacities”
http://www.infowars.com/u-s-army-plans-to-battle-anti-government-dissidents-in-megacities/
Future operations will neutralize groups which ‘undermine the authority of the state’
Image Credits: U.S. Air Force
by Paul Joseph Watson | September 2, 2014
The U.S. Army is preparing to fight political dissidents who challenge the power of the state as “megacities” become the battleground of the future, according to a new report in the Army Times.
The article details how the Army’s Capabilities Integration Center (ARCIC) worked with US Army Special Operations Command, the chief of staff’s Strategic Studies Group and the UK’s Ministry of Defence earlier this year to war-game the future of armed combat, which will revolve around the neutralization of groups “who can influence the lives of the population while undermining the authority of the state,” a chillingly vague description which could easily be applied to political dissidents.
The plan foresees an unprecedented realignment of U.S. military strategy focused around putting “boots on the ground” in megacities to deal with “politically dispossessed” populations while relying on “more lethal and more autonomous” methods.
“It is inevitable that at some point the United States Army will be asked to operate in a megacity and currently the Army is ill-prepared to do so,” asserted a report by Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno’s Strategic Studies Group, while Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster warned that the Army will increasingly have to expand its presence to battle an enemy which operates in “other contested spaces like organized crime and politics.”
The report also notes how the Army will utilize directed energy weapons which “would allow U.S. to have direct-fire capabilities with significant logistics reduction, and to counter enemy long-range missile capability.”
The article also cites a recent report by the Australian Army which identifies the fact that “these cities represent the battlefields of the future.”
Confirmation that the U.S. Army is preparing to fight disaffected groups and individuals who attempt to ‘undermine the authority of the state’, which could apply to a whole host of perfectly legal political activities, is particularly concerning given the recent militarized police response to unrest in Ferguson, Missouri.
A 2012 study by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland which was funded by the Department of Homeland Security lists Americans who are “reverent of individual liberty” and “suspicious of centralized federal authority” alongside violent terrorist groups.
Will citizens who ‘undermine the authority of the state’ by espousing these beliefs also be a future target for the U.S. Army under this new doctrine?
Earlier this year we also highlighted how the U.S. Army built a 300 acre ‘fake city’ in Virginia complete with a sports stadium, bank, school, and an underground subway in order to train for unspecified future combat scenarios. The city included a Christian chapel and subway signs in English, suggesting it was intended to double as a domestic town in addition to an overseas location.
The Army Times report is also disconcerting in light of a recently uncovered U.S. Army training document which detailed preparations for “full 
scale riots” within the United States during which troops may be forced to engage in a “lethal response” to deal with crowds of demonstrators.
As with previous examples, the manual made it clear that such operations were being planned not just for foreign occupations but for inside the “continental United States (CONUS)” in the event of “unruly and violent crowds” where it is “necessary to quell riots and restore public order.”
The document also describes the deployment of a “lethal response” directed against “unarmed civilians,” including “sniper response” and “small arms direct fire,” while making reference to domestic political upheavals such as the 1999 demonstrations against the WTO in Seattle.
While the U.S. border remains wide open amidst reports of ISIS insurgents planning attacks, the fact that the security apparatus of the United States is more concerned with taking on political dissidents inside megacities is likely to prompt fresh outrage.
Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71 FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet
*********************
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.
Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon
Obama Projects Weakness
September 1, 2014
Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/09/obama-projects-weakness/#uyjzQUlxFUfaUl04.99
What Did You Say? 
You must be logged in to post a comment.