Wednesday, September 24, 2014

The Problem With Black Folks




A white teacher said he routinely overhears vulgar and racist comments from students at an all black high school, I blame the black youth's negative mindset on blacks in the civil rights exploitation business and white liberals with their stomach-turning bigotry of lowered expectations.

We see snooty arrogant superior intellectual sounding white liberal pundits and hosts all over TV touting their absurd narrative that blacks have a right to be angry in racist America and must be coddled. These liberal celebs followed certain steps and behaviors to achieve success. And yet, they claim expecting blacks to follow the same road map to success is racist. Blacks should be repulsed by this liberal narrative which implies that we are inferior. I want to scream, who me!? I “be” as smart as any white person!” Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I have witnessed the same racist mindset in a white liberal couple who were longtime friends. They have had financial highs and lows in their efforts to run various businesses. They work hard and will take any job to pay their bills. Applying for government welfare is not on their radar. They employed horrible black employees, always making excuses for them; giving them a pass because they were black. I was amazed that they could not see the racism at the root of their low expectations, disguised as compassion.



At every turn liberals send the message that blacks are lesser Americans. Liberals say it is hateful for conservatives/ Republicans to expect blacks to speak English correctly, show an ID to vote, refrain from murdering each other and stop dropping out of school. White liberals say asking blacks to refrain from having babies out of wedlock is culturally insensitive and imposes morality on them. 

Libs ignore the truth that fatherless households contribute to gang membership, black on black violence and poverty. Do you see the pattern? White liberals insinuate that urban blacks are poor uncouth savages. Therefore, a 6'4” 290 pound black thug should be given a pass for robbing a convenience store, assaulting the clerk and attacking a police officer while on his way to grandma's house.
By the way, 54% of black kids grow up in single parent households which was reported as high as 72% in 2010.

It has been observed that black students at a Baltimore middle school Diction was so lazy and poor that they had to ask several students numerous times to pronounce their names before it was understood what they were saying. Why was such lazy speech tolerated?

 


My late Grandfather was a pastor and a brilliant black man with only a eighth  grade formal education; an avid reader and studier. Grand Daddy did not tolerate lazy or inarticulate speaking from me. Etched on my brain is his whipping my ass until the words I was reading came out sounding right. It wasn't abuse, it was preparing me for the hard future of being competitive in white America without the need of affirmative action.

Politically, white liberals pander to blacks to recruit Democrat voters which furthers their socialist/progressives agenda. Their sales pitch is every problem in the black community is caused by racist white America. Therefore, blacks can not achieve without big government intervention; lowered standards and entitlements to make things fair. I suspect secretly, many white liberals do believe they are superior.

White students are taught to feel guilty for their “white privilege”; instructed to be tolerant of black anger and irresponsible behavior. Black students who do not resent white America are called stupid traitors to their race.

I've been asked by a fellow black student "have you ever met a white person you didn't like?” You guessed it, he was a liberal. Imagine the fallout had that same question been asked by a white person to a black person.


Evil Race Hustlers

To all you liberal college professors and intellectuals who say blacks are still suffering the psychological repercussions of slavery, please knock it off. You evil race hustlers are all about exploiting the goodness and fair-mindedness of the American people.
Slavery happened a ga-zillion years ago; get over it.

In the late 1970's, my black college buddies and I were huge Star Trek fans. We loved watching the racially mixed crew of the star-ship Enterprise on which race was not an issue. Further making the point was the episode that white Captain Kirk  kissed black Lieutenant Uhura which was historic being the first time that had ever happened and pretty racy and shocking on TV back then.

Gifting an unworthy black president two terms confirms that Americans long to be united as one nation under God. America's desire for national unity is sabotaged by liberals. Their modus operandi is to divide Americans into feuding angry voting blocs – rich vs poor, black vs white, employers vs employees; Americans convinced they are victims due to their race, gender or economic standing. Liberals consistently rip open“healed” racial civil rights wounds and pour in fresh salt, Now, isn't that fucked up?
Liberals have been feeding black America shit sandwiches for decades. Sadly a majority of my fellow black Americans blinded by decades of liberal indoctrination and Main Stream Media spin keep consuming their shit as if it is filet mignon.

Flavor Flav
For crying out loud, look at what liberals offer us. They did an extreme makeover packaging black thugs Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown; promoting them as heroes to black America. White liberals awarded an immoral black rapper (Flavor Flav) who had 11 babies by 10 women with his own reality TV show titled, “All My Babies' Mamas”.

Meanwhile, liberals reject and even vilify excellent black role models like world renown retired neurosurgeon Dr Ben Carson and businessman extraordinaire Herman Cain. Why would liberals do that if they truly care about empowering blacks? Why do they offer us low rent faux black role models and reject the real deal?

Black America, you have been sleeping with the enemy, Democrats and white liberals, far too long. It is time to politically get out of bed, shower to wash away the stench of liberal racist low expectations and use Conservatism as the vehicle to speed to the fulfillment of your American dreams.

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Out Of Control Welfare Spending




More than one-third of Americans are now receiving means-tested federal benefits a Heritage Foundation analyst says. The Obama administration is planning to vastly increase spending on welfare and now measures the success of public assistance programs by the number of people signed up for benefits.

The U.S. Census Bureau released statistics showing nearly 110 million Americans lived in households receiving benefits from one or more welfare programs at the end of 2012. That amounts to roughly 35.4 percent of the population. The data show the programs with the most beneficiaries include Medicaid (nearly 83 million people), food stamps (more than 51 million) and the Women, Infants and Children program 22.5 million).

While the 2012 numbers do not represent a huge leap from recent reports, they do confirm the sheer size of U.S. public assistance expenditures this is about one-third of the American population that receives some type of means-tested welfare benefit, which is a huge number. We have a welfare system that continues to increase in cost. There are 80 different federally means-tested welfare programs, so it’s a very large welfare system, and I believes the government has a very wrongheaded approach to determining the success of these programs.

Unfortunately, the federal government tends to measure welfare success by the number of people receiving benefits. I think that’s really the key issue here, the mentality that a huge welfare system is a successful welfare system.

If we look at things like the food-stamps program and other programs, they actually try to pull as many people onto the program as possible. They have recruiting procedures. They advertise to get people onto these programs. That certainly shouldn’t be the goal. The goal should be to help individuals become sufficient rather than to be dependent on welfare.

Any lingering doubts about the deficiencies of Obamanomics can be dispelled with one piece of data: The U.S. has spent $3.7 trillion on welfare in the past five years, with virtually nothing to show for it.

That cumulative spending on welfare during the Obama years has been five times greater than what's been spent on transportation, education and NASA — combined.

Maybe that shouldn't be surprising. Obama, after all, promised a "fundamental transformation" of America. He's fulfilled that promise with a vengeance.

Means-tested aid programs now number about 80. Food stamps, with more than 51 million recipients, have gotten the lion's share of recent attention. But that's just one of 15 food-aid programs. No, I'm not against temporary help for truly desperate people. But welfare spending has grown year in and year out regardless of how the economy has performed or whether unemployment is up or down.

And a lot of welfare spending is pure waste. The IRS admitted to the disbursement of $335 billion in bogus payments over the past decade under the earned income tax credit — a kind of direct welfare transfer from taxpayers to low-income workers.

Unfortunately, the welfare state will only grow. A Senate report earlier this year noted that, based on Congressional Budget Office projections, welfare spending will rise 80% over the next 10 years. That's $21 trillion in welfare spending over that time. Just cutting that growth to 60%, the report found, would save taxpayers $1 trillion. But, as we've seen, that won't happen.

Yet, surely all this money must be making a dent in all the poverty. Nope. Today, 56.5 million Americans live in poverty and more than 70% of all federal spending goes to dependency programs, like Social Security and Medicare. At the same time, nearly half of all Americans no longer pay any federal income tax at all.

This nation was once filled with proud workers and businesses eager to hire them. But, as noted now, a record 92.6 million Americans of working age are no longer in the labor force. 
Logic tells us they have to be supported by (1) their own savings, (2) working children or spouses or (3) welfare.

Increasingly, it seems, (3) is the answer. The Census Department reported just that 49% of the population, or 151 million Americans, got federal aid from at least one program in 2011 — up from 94 million in 2000.

The U.S., sadly, has become a nation of dependents, and Obamanomics is accelerating the process. With debt at $17 trillion and rising, more than $63 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and fewer workers to pay for it all we will soon be bankrupt.

A nation of welfare dependents who won't or can't work or pay taxes cannot prosper. Instead, it becomes stagnant and unproductive. We're well on our way to being some other countries bitch, so hats off to president Obama, this is that fundamental change he promised.

Friday, September 12, 2014

The strategy to destroy America




In the mid-sixties at the height of the“social revolution” the line between democratic benevolence and outright communism became rather blurry. The Democratic Party, which controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress was used as the springboard by social engineers to introduce a new era of welfare initiatives enacted in the name of “defending the poor”, also known as the “Great Society Programs” These initiatives, however, were driven by far more subversive and extreme motivations, and have been expanded on by every presidency since Republican and Democrat alike.

Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven
At Columbia University, sociologist professors Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven introduced a political strategy in 1966 in an article entitled ‘The Weight Of The Poor: A Strategy To End Poverty’. This article outlined a plan that they believed would eventually lead to the total transmutation of America into a full- fledged centralized welfare state (in other words, a collectivist enclave). The spearpoint of the Cloward-Piven strategy involved nothing less than economic sabotage against the U.S.


Theoretically, according to the doctrine, a condition of overwhelming tension and strain could be engineered through the overloading of American welfare rolls, thereby smothering the entitlement program structure at the state and local level. The implosion of welfare benefits would facilitate a massive spike in poverty and desperation, creating a financial crisis that would lead to an even greater cycle of demand for a fully socialized system. This desperation would then“force” the federal government to concentrate all welfare programs under one roof, nationalize and enforce a socialist ideology, and ultimately, compact an immense level of power into the hands of a select few.

Cloward and Piven claimed that this could be accomplished at a grassroots level through community activism, and that it would facilitate a more compassionate federal authority however, there are numerous problems with these assertions.

The Cloward-Piven Strategy has nothing to do with grassroots activism and accomplishes nothing tangible for the downtrodden poverty class. In fact I would dare to say that Cloward and Piven as well as most social engineers are well aware that the concept ultimately only serves to give even more dominance to the establishment and pilfer even more freedom from the masses.

Cloward-Piven is not limited to the destabilization of state and local welfare programs. It can easily be used against federal level entitlements, and in reality, is much more effective against an entity with the proven tendency towards exponential debt spending. 

Though the federal government may be able to borrow fiat dollars through the Federal Reserve to prolong welfare rolls while the states cannot, a more volatile threat arises when debt monetization begins to wear down the purchasing power of the currency. 

Weakened purchasing power results in reduced consumer activity less industrial growth, less GDP, and obviously, more poverty. The dollar has lost approximately 98% of its purchasing power since 1972, and after 50 years of the so-called “War on Poverty”,  nearly one third of the American population  now repeatedly slips under the official poverty line.

In the past decade alone, the number of people dependent on food stamps and EBT for their survival in the U.S has more than doubled from 25 million people to over 52 million people. Those who receive some kind of payment from the government, including those on social security, disability, and veterans benefits, are approximately 109 million. Americans on social security do not consider themselves welfare recipients because they paid into the system, however, the point remains that if the federal money tap shuts down due to overwhelming participation, the checks will stop whether you paid into the system or not.

In the end, it is the Federal Government itself that is most vulnerable to the Cloward-Piven Strategy, and I believe the goal is to set fire to all social structures in the U.S. then assimilate them into a new globalist system.

The tactic of overwhelming the welfare structure REQUIRES the complicity of the government itself. A grassroots activist movement cannot and will never compel federal and state governments to expand welfare initiatives if they do not wish to. If welfare programs are not expanded beyond their capacity to be maintained, they cannot be overwhelmed. Therefore, government must cooperate with the Cloward-Piven Strategy by generating more and more welfare programs to be exploited. That is to say, the elitists who control our government, regardless of their claimed political party, must want to arrange circumstances to allow for Cloward-Piven to be successful.

Another key component of Cloward- Piven is the existence of an immense number of poverty stricken people. Without a significant portion of the population under the poverty level there is no mass of people to use as a weapon. Again, grassroots activists would be hard pressed to actually create the kind of poverty levels they would need for exploitation.

Saul Alinsky
But wait! Government, along with the aid or direction of central bankers, is able to create any level of poverty it wishes at any time by simply pretending to bungle everything it does. Once again Cloward-Piven ( much like Saul Alinsky’s repertoire of propaganda scams) is far more useful to the power elite than it is to the common citizen.

As former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel,  famously said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before…”

Barack Obama As Lucifer
In light of the Cloward-Piven Strategy which is at its very core a method to artificially induce crisis, the otherwise insane policy actions of the Obama Administration and preceding puppet presidents now become perfectly logical. Obama, after all, has been a long time proponent of the methods of Saul Alinsky, the left wing gatekeeper equivalent to Neo-Con godfather Leo Strauss. Cloward and Piven were also both avid followers of Alinsky, who promoted lies, misdirection, subversion and abandonment of conscience in order to win social power at any cost(special note – Alinsky also dedicated his book ‘Rules For Radicals’ to Lucifer… yeah, to the fucking’ devil).

Under Obama’s watch alone, our real national debt including unfunded liabilities and entitlements has risen to nearly $200 trillion. Our “official” national debt has gone from $10 trillion to $17 trillion in the short time Obama has been in office. Real unemployment including U-6 measurements stands at around 12% of all Americans. Personal wealth and savings have plummeted. Wages remain in stasis while prices on necessary goods continue to rise.

I examined much evidence suggesting that Obamacare was actually designed to fail, and that the bumbling of the Obama White House when dealing with the program was purely deliberate. When coupled with Obama’s handling of the current illegal immigration conflict, I would say that the Cloward- Piven Strategy is in full force.

Why fight tooth and nail against all common sense and history, why lie openly to millions of registered voters to get the program in place, only to allow it to derail because of a poorly designed website!? Because, Obama and his handlers know full well that it will end up costing the country billions that we cannot afford, and aid in a resulting crash.

Why the sudden surge of illegal immigrants into the U.S.? Why not! The White House has made it clear that it has every intention of keeping them within America by allowing the border patrol to ship the detained across the country where they are then released. Obama’s threat to use executive action to force through his own version of the immigration bill is the icing on the cake.

Amnesty is essentially guaranteed, I believe, in the near term, which is why tens of thousands of Central American parents are willing to send their children on a journey where they could very well be kidnapped by sex traffickers or killed. If the White House really wanted to stop this humanitarian crisis, the President would state publicly and clearly that America is not a drive through welfare center, that there will be no free goodies at the second window, and that there will be no chance of amnesty instead of diverting more agents to the border to ensure more illegals are shipped into the interior.

The president does not wish to stop the flood of immigrants exactly because Cloward-Piven requires their presence Not only would this officially add millions of people to welfare rolls, but I would venture to suggest that Obama will likely include automatic sign-up to universal healthcare as part of his amnesty measures.

If there wasn’t enough strain on the social welfare structure before, there certainly will be now.


I would remind readers, though, that in the final analysis this is NOT about Obama. I have seen other commentators including Glenn Beck discuss Cloward- Piven in the past, but always through the blinders of the false left/right paradigm. Obama could not have attained the levels of destabilization he has without standing on the shoulders of those political errand boys who came before him.

Ronald Reagan for instance, was also responsible for signing the Immigration Reform And Control Act of 1986 into law, which was supposed to trade the amnesty of 3 million illegals for greater border security. This new “more comprehensive” security was never implemented by Reagan. 

Both Republican and Democratic regimes have made our current calamity possible, and the leaderships behind both parties are nothing more than paid mascots for international financiers and globalists who have a very different vision of what America should be.

If we allow ourselves to fall into the trap of making the developing crisis about a singularly unimportant man such as Obama, then the elites get exactly what they want – an angry and desperate citizenry out for the blood of a middleman and out for the blood of each other, while they sit back, relax, and wait to swoop in as our financial saviors with strings attached.

For those naïve enough to assume that Cloward-Piven is just a well intentioned activist method, it is important to understand that even if that were so, the effect of the Cloward- Piven Strategy will never achieve the goal its creators claimed to support. In my view, it is probable that they never really intended for it to produce wealth equality or an increased quality of life.

The tactic can only decrease wealth security by making all citizens equally destitute. As we have seen in numerous socialist and communist experiments over the past century, economic harmonization never creates wealth or prosperity, it only siphons wealth from one area and redistributes it to others evaporating much of it as it is squeezed through the grinding gears of the establishment machine.

Socialism, in its very essence, elevates government to the role of all-pervasive parent, and casts the citizenry down into the role of dependent sniveling infant. Even in its most righteous form, Cloward-Piven seeks to make infants of us all whether we like it or not.

But in regard to the sudden illegal immigrant surge at the U.S.-Mexico border, President Obama is indeed using the Cloward-Piven strategy to overwhelm America.

For a look back on how the Obama Administration brought us to this point enter into evidence two extensive timelines:

But here are just three very basic examples floating around the news lately that get the idea across easily enough.

Not only did DHS put out a  purchase order  for escort services for 65,000 unaccompanied alien children all the way back in January…
And not only does the 2015 Department of Justice appropriations  report, also released earlier this year, ask for funding for “a pilot unaccompanied alien children program”…

But now, in a direct contradiction of what the administration is telling the American public a  recently leaked Homeland Security memo  admits  the fact that “only 0.1 percent of the Central American minors illegally entering the U.S. having been deported in Fiscal Year 2013 down from two percent prior,” and this “plays a significant role in why the current border crisis is occurring.”

So, in essence, our government officials  knew  this wave of illegal immigrants were coming to our borders and they  planned  for it well before it hit, because they’ve  known  for quite some time the Obama Administration’s policies are  causing  it to happen.

This is in addition to the fact that a  2013 ICE document reveals in detail  the fact that over 36,000  criminal  illegal aliens were  released  from our government’s custody  deportation proceedings  in that year alone. These people had a whopping 88,000 convictions between them, including homicide, sexual assault kidnapping, aggravated assault, car theft, and drunk/drugged driving to name just a few.

Sounds a lot like a set up, doesn’t it?

Well, now Rep.  Steve King, R-Iowa and Rep.  Steve Stockman, R-Texas both agree that the Obama Administration’s policies are derived from a Cloward- Piven strategy — a strategy concocted by radical sociologists to crash the system and transform America into a socialist state.

“I do feel this attempt to flood the border with illegals is a playing out of the Cloward-Piven theory,” said Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.

“If you don’t see them bring reinforcements down there to seal the border, that means that, yes, it’s a Cloward-Piven maneuver to flood the country until we get to the point where we are an open-borders country that welcomes everybody, legal and illegal. 

Obama – who studied the chaos strategy at Columbia, according to a classmate – “is trying to do a Cloward-Piven thing with the border".

A political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of ‘a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty.

Border resources are already being overwhelmed. The House Homeland Security Chair is calling it a “crisis like nothing I’ve ever seen”. A potential pandemic is becoming more likely by the day, as people crossing into the country are reportedly infected with everything from drug-resistant tuberculosis to HIV to scabies, rabies and dengue hemorrhagic fever — people who are barely being checked out and definitely not properly quarantined from otherwise healthy people. Border Patrol whistleblowers are coming forward,  despite an Obama Administration gag order, to say that they are not being allowed to do their jobs.

This thing is far from under any semblance of control.
Beyond that, with more Americans on welfare programs now than at any other time in American history, a sudden massive influx of enrollees could easily crash the system, leading inevitably to the kinds of civil disturbances the government has been gearing up to respond to by suspending the Constitution and declaring martial law.

Massive influx
In fact, a massive influx of immigrants across the U.S.-Mexico border was the main pretext under which the Rex 84 program and its FEMA camps were designed in the first place Regardless of the fact that the Obama Administration is trying to frame this as a “humanitarian crisis,” rest assured it’s a created crisis, and the only way to solve it will be with even more big government. 

By framing the flood of children immigrants as a “humanitarian crisis,” President Obama has greater leverage to offer more legal and physical help to illegal immigrant minors. This in turn creates an even more enticing reason for parents in Central and South America to send their children over the border, often unaccompanied.  Parents know that their children will be attended to once they’re over the border. The result is that the entire system is completely overwhelmed and unworkable.

 Gen John Kelly
Perhaps that is why Marine Corps Gen John Kelly, commander of SOUTHCOM, is calling the recent surge in illegal immigration at America’s southern border “a threat to the United States very existence”.

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Who's Side Is He On?




When it comes to the issue of terrorism and Barack Hussein Obama, it's impossible to gather which side of the issue he stands on, just look at how he's handling the actions of the most violent and radical group to have ever came to be, "ISIS", when he says we must contain them when he should be saying that we must eradicate them.

With every Islamic Terrorist attack Obama says that the perpetrators do not represent the true world of real Islam. Obama calls them extremists, radicals, militants who have hi-jacked Islam and twisted it from it's true meaning. Obama even  insists this while claiming that America is no longer a Christian nation and with his every word and deed attacks Christianity, Christians, Israel and Jews, then on the other hand he lauds the many contributions of Islam to America's founding heritage and culture.

I do remember all the churches, Christian schools and seminaries from the Pilgrims onward, but I don't recall one instance of where Islam, Muslims or a Mosque  ever had a positive influence on America. To be true, Islam's (wretched and depraved) influence on America is relatively new, not beginning until after WWII around  1948... Hmmm, and that "influence has not been good nor productive.

So while Obama panders to the most vile, violent, evil, and demonic cult like worldview that passes its self off as a religion, Islam, the truth is much, much  different than he portrays.

The Taliban murder, rape and kill in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Obama says they do not represent true Islam.

Al Qaeda flies jets into the World Trade Center and Pentagon? Obama says they were "radicals" who are not representative of "true Islam".

Boko Haram
Boko Haram kidnaps some 300  Christian  girls from the ages of 6 to 18 and sells them as sex slaves to Muslims and kills hundreds of Christians? "They are not an accurate portrayal of real Islam" says Obama.

Al Qaeda and The Muslim Brotherhood overrun Libya, Egypt and Syria murdering thousands and thousands of Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims? Obama calls them freedom fighters. He arms them to the teeth, funds them, and supplies them with weaponry including hundreds of tanks and fighter jets.

Hamas and Hezbollah fire and average of 170 rockets or missiles a day into Israel? "They are fighting against  oppression of  their   lands" Obama says, blaming Israel for defending itself.

ISIS, "The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria", sweep through Iraq and Syria murdering and raping countless thousands of Christians, Jews and other not radical enough Muslims? Obama says that ISIS "does not speak for Islam".

Well, Barack, you lying ass Muslim buffoon, who does speak for real and true Islam?

Readers, please DO NOT forgive my disdain for political correctness because sometimes the truth must be delivered in a manner in which it is best absorbed.

America has had to fight Islam since it's earliest days-

John Adams
Terrorism and the New American Republic In 1786, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson met with Arab diplomats from Tunis, who were conducting terror raids and piracy against American ships. History records them as the Barbary Pirates. In fact, they were blackmailing terrorists hiding behind a self-serving interpretation of their Islamic faith by embracing select tracts and ignoring others.  Borrowing from the Christian Crusades of centuries past, they used history as a mandate for doing the western world one better. 

The quisling European powers had been buying them off for years.
On March 28, 1786 Jefferson and Adams detailed what they saw as the main issue:“We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the grounds of their pretensions to make war upon a nation who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Muslim man who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.

Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson wanted a military solution, but decades of blackmailing the American Republic and enslaving its citizens would continue until the new American nation realized that the only answer to terrorism was force. There's a temptation to view all of our problems as unprecedented and all of our threats as new and novel, says George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley. Shortly after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, Turley advised some members of Congress who were considering a formal declaration of war against the suspected perpetrators. He invoked the precedent of the Barbary pirates, saying America had every right to attack and destroy the terrorist leadership without declaring war.

"Congress did not actually declare war on the pirates," Turley wrote in a memo, but authorized the use of force against the regencies after our bribes and ransoms were having no effect. This may have been due to an appreciation that a declaration of war on such petty tyrants would have elevated their status. Accordingly, they were treated as pirates and, after a disgraceful period of accommodation, we hunted them down as pirates.

Because of their outlaw conduct, pirates -- and modern-day terrorists -- put themselves outside protection of the law, according to military strategy expert Dave McIntyre, a former dean at the National War College. "On the high seas if you saw a pirate, you sank the bastard," he says. "You assault pirates, you don't arrest pirates."


Osama bin Laden
Shoot first, ask questions later. Wanted: Dead or alive. Such is our official policy regarding Osama bin Laden, the most infamous outlaw of the era.

One of the enduring lessons of the Barbary campaigns was to never give in to outlaws whether you call them pirates or terrorists. In the late 1700's, America paid significant blackmail for peace -- shelling out $990,000 to the Algerians alone at a time when national revenues totaled just $7 million"Too many concessions have been made to Algiers," U.S. consul William Eaton wrote to the Secretary of State in 1799. "There is but one language which can be held to these people and this is terror.

So, are we to believe all of history, reality and the current events of the last 6 decades...or Obama, The Democrat Party and the MSM?
So we've looked at Islam's bloody, vile and violent history...can we depend on our President to protect us? Here is what Obama himself said,  his every word and deed since then bears out that he really means this-"I will stand with Islam should the political winds shift in an ugly direction," (page 261 of his book Audacity Of Hope).

The Quran: 

Quran (2:191-193) And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah  killing..

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful.   And fight them until there is no more Fitnah  worship is for Allah alone.  But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" the  Noble Quran)  The  historical context  of this passage is  not  defensive warfare since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were  not  under attack by their Meccan adversaries.  In fact, the verses urge  offensive  warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city which they later did).  The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution -"idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse).  The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation.  Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah"  - ie unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Quran (2:244) Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Quran (2:216)  - Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time.  From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into  raiding merchant caravans  for loot.

Quran (3:56)- As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

The Color Of The Vote






Common tactic employed by Democrats
We should all be appalled at the Democrat party for using  black and Hispanic Democrat to waging a war on whites as part of their campaign tactics to split the nation. What the Democrats are doing with their dividing America by race is they are waging a war on whites and I find that repugnant.

We should not be dividing anybody based on national heritage or race. Rather, we should be bringing us all together. That's what the melting pot ideal America is all about. A person's skin pigmentation is something acquired at birth that has absolutely nothing to do with the merits of the person of how one should vote."

President Barack Obama implemented this tactic in 2008 and 2012 “where he divides us on race, on sex, greed, envy, class warfare. This is a part of the war on whites that’s being launched by the Democratic Party. And the way in which they’re launching this war is by claiming that whites hate everybody else.” 

Yet other congressional conservatives concur with this theme saying that Democrats openly soliciting votes of people based on color, they are attacking whites based on skin color. And that's wrong. Nobody should be attacked based on skin color. 

The Democrats do it on a regular basis and you can see it in the campaign appeal that they make based on skin color. I don't know of a single Republican who has made an appeal for votes based on skin color. But there has been columns written on how can Republicans gather more votes from blacks, I've written some of them  myself. And no one should have forgotten how Obama stated while speaking to a large group of illegal immigrants how they would be rewarded for they're support of the Democratic party and how they should help punish the Republicans for wanting to secure the border.

The Democrats routinely make appeals based on race and they get away with it. It's repugnant to ever make an appeal based on race. I'm one of those who does not believe in racism, and I believe everyone should be treated equally as American citizens. It's high time folks started calling out the Democrats for their racial appeals. Certainly if you were flip the coin and a white person were to say vote for me because I'm white, it would be an uproar and deservedly so. So why do we allow blacks to say vote f me because I'm black or Hispanics vote for me because I'm Hispanic? Race is immaterial and everybody ought to be treated the same."