Killing the Truth in Academia

General Robert E Lee
rlee@suthenboy.com
 
Preamble: The purpose of this blog is to discuss the principal curricula being taught in academia today as well as its impact on students and consequences to America. 
I was appalled by the disgusting reaction to Trump’s victory throughout academia, particularly by college students and instructors. Their behavior was reprehensible, embarrassing to America, and sadly, expected in today’s once hallowed bastions of higher learning. Something is drastically wrong in academia when instructors and students require coloring books, animals to hug, safe spaces to mourn, crying rooms, psychological help, relief from exams, and time off to assuage their despair, despondency, and anger. Far worse however, is their blatant rejection and defiance of America’s traditional election process because it did not provide the result they sought.
 
In my opinion the root cause of this abhorrent behavior is the culture of academia into which students are being indoctrinated by far left wing instructors propagating Marxism subtly disguised as progressivism. Sound ridiculous, please read on before commenting on my sanity. I also encourage you to read my 8/26/15 blog ‘Academic Shock’ to more fully appreciate the breadth and dangers of what is being instilled in students throughout academia today.
The following statements exemplify modern day fundamental building blocks of education: 
  • There are no facts, only interpretations – Friedrich Nietzsche
  • Morals, values, truths, standards, and human nature itself are products of different historical epochs and socially constructed – Marxism’s Worldview
Academia’s Standard Curricula: The curricula throughout politically correct academia today includes radical left wing self-proclaimed elite professors/instructors teaching students to reject objective truths and replace them with relative truths: i.e., perspectives or points of view to which each person is entitled regardless of how inconsistent with the truth they are. Notwithstanding how outrageous a relative truth may be, e.g., the Holocaust is a myth, at best it is taught to be a more unfortunate perspective on the matter instead of being repudiated as a lie. This self-serving cavalier attitude within the arrogant professorial domain adversely affects students in ways that include the following:
  • Disregards and renders truth meaningless
  • Erodes the legitimacy of serious opinion
  • Deprives students of a much needed solid education founded on traditionally accepted disciplines of study  
Another result of rejecting objective truths is that facts are considered as matters of opinion relative to and dependent upon the interests, prejudices, sexual orientation, or ethnic origin of the speaker rather than the truth or falsity of what the speaker says. The premise being that truth is somehow invented rather than discovered, and ergo, relative to the speaker.
 
Harvard historian Simon Schama perfectly exemplifies this arrogant attitude toward truth in the prologue to his fatuous book “Dead Certainties” (1991). Schama assures his readers “the claims for historical knowledge must always be fatally circumscribed by the character and prejudices of its narrator.” In other words, the historian’s supposed limitations make stating historical truth impossible, which is utter nonsense.
 
The Genesis of Relative Truths: This repugnant affront to traditional education, its truths and inherent values, is rooted in Cultural Marxism. This ideology was conceived, circa 1921, at the Frankfurt School in Frankfurt Germany by a group of radical Marxist intellectuals who rejected traditional Economic Marxism because they realized it was incapable of destroying and dominating the West. Cultural Marxism was based on behavioral psychology to achieve mass compliance with a desired goal(s), and ultimately replaced Economic Marxism. It is modern day Marxism euphemistically referred to as progressivism to hide the true ideology but Marxism nonetheless. The great majority of progressives are ignorant of the ideology they are propagating and just happy following the heard of sheep.
 
Unlike Karl Marx, the founding Cultural Marxists envisioned catalyzing the complete destruction of Western traditions, values, and culture by a lengthy, indefensible, peaceful cultural revolution wherein traditional morals and authority would be rejected. Once achieved Western culture would be supplanted by Cultural Marxist ideology.
 
In 1933 as National Socialism was gaining momentum in Germany the founders fled to America and set up shop at Columbia University in NYC. They began sowing the seeds of their cultural revolution by diffusing Cultural Marxist ideology through key spheres of influence, initially focusing on academia, politics, the MSM and film industry. The founders knew that progress would be slow but remained patient and steadfast while assiduously propagating their ideology.
 
The ’60s Boomer Rebellion: The founders’ fortunes dramatically changed for the better in the middle 1960s with the student “Boomer” rebellion wherein morality and authority were rejected and individual freedom to do as one pleased was exalted. The father and ultimate leader of this rebellion throughout academia was Herbert Marcuse, a founding member of the Frankfurt School and elite, well-respected university professor. Marcuse coined the chant, “make love not war” that became poplar throughout academia.
 
Deconstructing Truth: Marcuse’s methodology for rebellion included deconstructing the language, e.g., he coined the infamous “what does ‘is’ mean?” which fostered the destruction of American culture. Deconstruction destabilizes and reconstructs clear definitions, the content and text of language, traditions, being, institutions, objective knowledge, reason, truth, legitimate hierarchies, authority, nature, and all that is considered universal. 
 
Marcuse was esteemed by the masses rebelling against the establishment. He catalyzed the confusion and obliteration of traditionally accepted culture through deconstruction which was primarily responsible for a major breakdown in the nation’s social conformity, particularly among impressionable young people.
 
The Intent of Deconstruction: Deconstruction is used by Cultural Marxists as the method of analysis that will show the correctness of their ideology in every situation and provide the answers they seek. This is done by taking any text, removing all meaning from it and re-inserting the meaning sought. For instance, Cultural Marxists uniquely use deconstruction to prove that any text illustrates the oppression of minorities, e.g., blacks, women, homosexuals, etc., by reading that meaning into the text’s words regardless of its actual meaning. The overused ‘race card’ routine should come to mind.
Outrageous examples include Shakespeare writing about suppressing women, and the Bible being about race and gender. Furthermore, morals, values, truths, standards, and human nature itself are considered products of different historical epochs and socially constructed. Ergo, the truth is relative, dynamic, and meaningless in the hands of a deconstructionist academician poisoning young minds to suit her or his agenda.
 
The Impact on Academia: The consequences of intentionally obfuscating and skewing the truth to fit a desired end have been particularly devastating in academia. Dissident ‘Boomers’ of the ’60s and their acolytes have dominated academia’s professorial domain for years. They were spoon fed and indoctrinated into Cultural Marxism as students, and as instructors are likewise actively propagating and spoon feeding that same ideology to their students. Among other things, they have intentionally undermined the integrity and very ideas of many academic disciplines in fields of study with generally agreed upon subject matters.
 
Study Groups: Instead of academic emphasis being placed on traditional disciplines, e.g., history, math, science, and literature, it is placed on race, ethnicity, and gender taught through study groups. There is an endless proliferation of such groups throughout academia which are typically comprised of the so-called “historically disadvantaged” minorities considered as ‘sacred cows’ by today’s politically correct progressives. This situation clearly evinces a breakdown of long accepted academic disciplines and is strongly encouraged by the respective educational administrations, also highly concentrated with progressives. 
 
Superficially the common mantra and favorite code words of study groups are inclusion, tolerance, diversity, sensitivity, social justice, sex education, and other such terminology connoting kindness. Notwithstanding the seemingly innocuous terms however, they are critical components of Cultural Marxism being cleverly disguised as progressivism as mentioned aforesaid. Ironically, to force compliance with their position on a matter, these inclusive, tolerant groups spew vile hatred towards and demonize everyone in disagreement with them, particularly straight White males.
 
Radical Left Wing Professors: Ultra-radical radical left wing instructors with personal anti-American agendas teach the pseudo study groups that include the following: women’s studies; gay studies; transgender studies; Asian studies; Afro-American studies; African studies; Indian studies; and the list goes on ad nauseam. While these groups are hyped as being cross- disciplinary they are anti-disciplinary because their sole purpose is to diffuse Cultural Marxist ideology in lieu of America’s culture, values and traditions. Among other Marxist concepts instructors use relative truth and deconstruction to achieve their desired anti-American goals. Carefully note, there are no male, White, or Western European studies. The only reference to Whites in any of these study groups is in demonizing and blaming them for the perceived ‘ills’ of the world’s ‘historically disadvantaged minorities’.
 
Cultural Studies: Cultural studies is the group most repugnant to traditional education because content is entirely discretionary with the instructor and accordingly, characterized by attitudes and agendas instead of empirical facts. There are two mandatory requisites for cultural studies: (1) political animus: (2) hostility to factual truth. Generally, students are strongly encouraged and often mandated to take this ridiculous course that is underpinned by ‘White Guilt’. 
Below are examples of relative truths students are taught by politically correct radical left wing Marxist ideologues with an aversion to empirical evidence and everything American.  
  • Columbus was an evil, bloodthirsty marauder who committed the American Holocaust, while the Indians were peaceful, environmentally sensitive creatures who lived in blissful harmony with each other and the earth. 
  • Cortez, who conquered Mexico on behalf of Spain, was a mass murderer and the Aztec conquest evinced European Imperialism perpetrating the greatest genocide in all human history.
  • Early pilgrims slaughtered their Indian guests at a Thanksgiving feast
It should be abundantly clear that present day curricula taught by Marxist instructors precipitated the behavior of academia that resulted from Trump’s win. More ominous, however, is the poisonous Marxist ideology into which students are being indoctrinated by instructors that loathe and want to destroy traditional American culture and values.

Corruption at America’s Highest Levels of Government

Corruption at America’s Highest Levels of Government
 
Hillary-What-Difference-copyThe purpose of this blog is twofold: 1. Point out Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s complicity and willful, subjective involvement in a corrupt effort to ensure Hillary Clinton is elected president; 2. For you to carefully consider whether her character represents the ethical and moral standards reasonably expected of the U.S. Attorney General or any person serving at the highest level of our government.
 
Never in America’s history has the depth of blatant unbridled corruption in the presidency and judicial system been more clearly exemplified than on July 5, 2016, when FBI Director James Comey announced that he would not bring criminal charges against Hillary Clinton and the matter was closed. There is not a doubt in my mind that this fraud perpetrated on America’s rule of law, judicial system and her citizenry was architected well in advance by corrupt amoral liars Obama, Lynch, Clintons’ long time hack Comey, and the Clintons. For details see my 9/8/16 blog The Clinton – Comey Nexus.
 
Miscarriage of Justice at the Highest Levels of Government: The reason for such a disgraceful miscarriage of justice should be abundantly clear by now: Obama, Lynch and Comey want the candidate whose character is as corrupt, dark and evil as theirs to be president. That stellar individual is Hillary Clinton, a proven evil, amoral pathological liar and rapacious, ruthless career criminal.
 
It is a dark, unprecedented time in America when the President, Attorney General, and FBI Director use the power of their respective offices acting under color of title to illegally facilitate their goal. Equally appalling is America’s President aggressively supporting vile Clinton, who should be under indictment, while she is the target of multiple legitimate, long overdue criminal investigations all involving felonies. However, in addition to other character traits, Obama is a crude, classless boor and such comportment is expected.
 
U. S. Attorney Lynch: Pursuant to President Bill Clinton’s nomination in 1999, Lynch served as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York in Brooklyn until joining the law firm of Hogan & Hartson in March 2002. She remained there through April, 2010 then returned to her old position as U.S. Attorney in Brooklyn when Obama appointed her.
 
Hogan & Hartson began preparing and filing the Clintons’ tax returns in 2004, and were among Hillary’s largest financial supporters in the legal industry during her first presidential campaign. I cannot speak to a relationship between the Clintons and Lynch during her stint at the law firm. However, knowing the depth of the vile Clintons’ corruption and use of key people it is not a stretch to assume that developing a solid relationship with ex U.S. Attorney Lynch was in their cross hairs. Soon thereafter it was accomplished.
 
HSBC Money Laundering Case: HSBC was implicated in the largest international money laundering case in U.S. history. Its executives admitted to laundering billions of dollars from arms dealers, drug traffickers, and power players from around the world from 2006 through 2010. As much as $881M laundered through the bank’s U.S. arms was from Mexican drug cartels and their various middle east terrorist allies in violation of multiple banking laws.
 
For the sake of brevity, criminal charges were never filed against the bank or any of its executives. Instead, in December, 2012, Lynch, acting in her capacity as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York and with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s acquiescence, brokered a ‘Deferred Prosecution Agreement’ wherein HSBC Bank USA agreed to pay a $1.9 billion fine and admitted to the following felonies: 
  • Willful criminal conduct
  • Gross violations of the Bank Secrecy Act, including failure to establish and maintain an effective anti-money laundering program,
  • Failure to establish due diligence in laundering of over $881 million
The U.S. in turn agreed to drop its criminal investigations and prosecutions of HSBC directors and employees. In other words, HSBC committed multiple serious felonies and walked without incurring any criminal consequences, gratis Obama, Holder and Lynch.
 
At a bare minimum this sweetheart deal did not even rise to the dignity of a slap on the wrist because the fine was less than chump change to HSBC. It still reeks from the rancid stanch of corruption emanating from a quid pro quo wherein Obama, Holder, and Lynch were the other beneficiaries. Congress went through the usual feigning of outrage, held meaningless hearings, etc., then swept the farcical performance off to ‘la-la land’ to join its other charades.
 
Coincidence or Quid Pro Quo: I have never believed in coincidences but rather have always felt that things happen for a reason. For instance, consider the following events:
  • Comey was an executive in senior level management and a director of HSBC during the time it was laundering the aforesaid $881M
  • Obama named Comey FBI Director in 2012
  • During the same time HSBC was and likely remains tightly connected to the Clinton Foundation that received up to $81M in ‘pay to play donations’ from a few of its clients
  • On November 11, 2014 Obama named Lynch, still serving as U.S. Attorney in Brooklyn, as Attorney General
  • Lynch and Sleazy Willy Clinton got caught meeting secretly for 30 minutes in her plane parked at a remote corner of the Phoenix airport a few days before Comey announced his egregious decision not to charge Clinton. 
No coincidences here but rather each evinces a quid pro quo underpinned by corruption.
 
A Friend at DOJ: The law and ethics notwithstanding, Lynch is determined to do whatever it takes to facilitate a Clinton presidency, and prevent her from facing criminal prosecution. In connection therewith the following is public information, and one can only speculate what Lynch and Obama are doing privately, but be assured it is most likely not legit.
 

1. On October 28 Comey unexpectedly broke protocol and without Lynch’s knowledge announced that he had reopened the previously closed criminal investigation of Clinton’s email scandal. His reasoning was based on the NYPD and some of his agents discovering some 650,000 emails on a laptop shared by Clinton’s chief aide at State, Huma Abedin, and her husband, Anthony Wiener while investigating a sex case involving Wiener. Abedin is a Muslim with strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and many of the emails were from the State Department. Knowing this explosive information would be leaked sooner than later Comey acted on his own to avoid further embarrassment and prevent Lynch, a staunch supporter, defender, and friend of Clinton from thwarting his efforts.

 

2. According to the MSM and insider accounts Lynch was angry and vehemently resisted assisting Comey in the new investigation. However, since Comey had made the announcement and to save face she appointed assistant AG Peter Kadzik to head the criminal investigation of the laptop’s content. Incredibly, Lynch knew Kadzik was best friends with Clinton’s campaign manager, corrupt liar unctuous John Podesta. Wikileaks produced an email from Kadzik’s private gmail account giving Podesta a ‘heads up’ about filings the DOJ would be making in the first Clinton email matter. In effect this was ‘DOJ insider information’ to which Podesta was not entitled. Sending it was against policy and likely illegal, but inconsequential to Lynch since Kadzik’s act was intended to benefit Clinton.

 

3. Lynch ordered FBI agents investigating the organized criminal enterprise known as the Clinton ‘Pay to Play’ Foundation to stand down, notwithstanding an ‘avalanche’ of inculpatory evidence supporting a multitude of felonies.

 
Connect the Dots: The dots between Lynch and the vile career criminal Clintons are present, very telling, and easy to connect: they evince a crystal clear pattern of criminal corruption at the highest levels of our government that is repugnant to all decency. It should be abundantly clear that Lynch is illegally using her position as Attorney General to facilitate a Clinton presidency. She is intentionally thwarting the legal process involved in criminal investigations by overtly and covertly shielding for Clinton and this corrupt liar will never indict her. Needless to say, Lynch and people of her sordid character will occupy every key position in a Clinton administration as they do in Obama’s lawless one and it will be business as usual in the toxic DC pit where lying and corruption rule supreme.
 
America’s Next President: This will likely be the most important election in America’s history because Clinton and Trump want to place our country on diametrically opposed paths for the foreseeable future. Clinton claims America is already great and not in need of change except for open borders to all and increasing the number of Muslim aliens to support by 550%. Trump knows that America is badly broken and can only be made great again by controlling immigration, and eliminating the accepted culture of corruption and lying that permeates the Washington DC swamp.
 
A Clinton Presidency: I am certain that a Clinton presidency will replicate the culture of rampant corruption and amoral pathological lying Obama has instilled in his administration only on steroids. This is the type of culture in which the Clintons are proven experts; they will also wreak havoc on America to complete the destruction of her traditional culture and values commenced by Obama. Remember, Clinton is a hard core Marxist mentored by and an acolyte of anti-US Marxist Saul Alinsky, as is Obama. Alinsky wrote the radical activist’s bible, ‘Rules for Radicals’, wherein he educated his followers on how to cause chaos and systemic disruption to destroy America.
 
A Trump Presidency: If you are sick of corrupt lying career politicians subordinating America’s interests to their personal greed and want a better, safer, more productive America for yourself and your family’s future, vote for Trump. It is time to change the failed, corrupt amorality of DC with a highly successful outsider who sincerely loves and will put the best interests of America first and foremost … Donald Trump.
View archived blogs at Suthenboy Archives

Betrayal in Benghazi: A Dereliction of Duty

Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi
June 29, 2016

Betrayal in Benghazi: A Dereliction of Duty
Key Findings:


 The Obama administration actively supported the replacement of quasi-secular North African rulers in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt with Muslim Brotherhood rule.

 In Libya, the Obama administration turned against Muammar Qaddafi, who had become an ally in the fight against the Global Jihad Movement, and instead worked with the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood and materially aided known AL-Qa’eda linked militias to topple his regime.

 The Obama administration throughout 2012 deliberately withheld urgently-requested security for the U.S. mission in Benghazi, at least in part to buttress the false narrative that al-Qa’eda had been defeated for the benefit of the president’s re-election campaign in 2012—despite the fact that Benghazi was one of the most vulnerable U.S. posts anywhere in the world in the volatile post-Qaddafi environment.

 For reasons not entirely clear, multiple advance warnings about an impending attack
against the U.S. mission in Benghazi were ignored by the Obama administration as a
whole, the Department of Defense specifically, and also especially Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton, who bore ultimate responsibility for diplomatic mission security.

 Despite an egregious failure by the Pentagon to pre-position forces in advance, various U.S. assets were available to deploy immediately when the Benghazi attack began the night of 11 September 2012, but were held back from even attempting a rescue effort.

 The President, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of Defense
Panetta, and Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, must be required to answer for their dereliction of duty (‘willfully refusing to perform ones duties,’ a criminal offense under the United States Code) in failing to provide appropriate protection in advance and to commit forces immediately to a rescue attempt the night of 11-12 September 2012.

 The Obama White House and Clinton State Department led a concerted two-week coverup regarding the facts of the Benghazi attack for crass political purposes and to
collaborate with the international campaign led by the Organization of Islamic
Cooperation that seeks criminalization of all criticism of Islam.

Executive Summary
The Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi (CCB) released its first Benghazi report, “How America Switched Sides in the War on Terror,” in April 2014. It detailed how the Obama administration rejected Muammar Qaddafi’s efforts to discuss a ceasefire and possible abdication, and facilitated the provision of arms to al-Qaeda linked rebels in Libya. It also covered the administration’s dereliction of duty in not sending military assets to help save the Americans in Benghazi and its shameful cover-up of the truth afterward. Now, two years later, our findings have been confirmed and amplified by additional evidence. We also know much more about the Benghazi terror attack, thanks to courageous individuals who have come forward, brave sources willing to speak up, the work of investigative journalists, and the incredible tenacity of the team at Judicial Watch.
We understand more about the reasoning behind why President Barack Obama involved the United States (U.S.) with Libya’s Islamic uprising (aka, ‘Arab Spring’) in the first place. It is evident that President Obama had an ideological commitment to support the extension of Muslim Brotherhood power across the Middle Eastern and North Africa (MENA) region, even if that meant knowingly supporting identifiable jihadis with the funding, training, and weapons to do it.1 On the other hand, evidence suggests that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, and unscrupulous individuals surrounding them decided to back the ouster of Libya’s leader Muammar Qaddafi at least in part for financial reasons, including an expectation of lucrative deals to follow. Nevertheless, the fact that Secretary of State Clinton knew that the leadership of the Libyan revolt against Muammar Qaddafi was dominated by the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood and militia forces connected to al-Qa’eda is demonstrated by a number of now public Clinton emails.
The Obama administration and Clinton Department of State refusal to provide adequate security measures for the U.S. mission in Benghazi flowed at least in part from political imperatives of 1 See references to Presidential Study Directive 11, the 2010 Obama White House document that solicited proposals and instructed key government agencies to collaborate on formation and execution of a plan for enabling Muslim Brotherhood rule by way of regime change in Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen and likely other Middle East countries. The 18-page report remains classified in spite of all efforts to obtain its release. Landler, Mark, “Secret Report Ordered by Obama Identified Potential Uprisings,” The New York Times, 16 February 2011.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/world/middleeast/17diplomacy.html

the 2012 presidential election year, when campaign slogans pushed the narrative that Usama bin Laden was dead and al-Qa’eda was on the run. It would have seriously challenged that narrative to admit that U.S. policy in Libya had been an unmitigated disaster. Al-Qa’eda militias, which received recognition and assistance from our own officials, were now running amok, armed not only with the weapons the U.S. helped provide to them but with massive quantities of arms looted from Qaddafi’s former stockpiles. Denying repeated requests for additional security in Benghazi was the Obama administration’s way of pretending that nothing was amiss there and hoping the place wouldn’t blow up completely—at least until after the November 2012 elections were behind them. This explanation alone is not entirely satisfactory, however, and other factors (including gross incompetence), should be considered. Bottom line, though, there is no possible excuse for this policy and those responsible for it must be held accountable before the American people.
Thanks in large measure to the willingness of several courageous members of the Benghazi CIA Annex’s Global Response Staff (GRS) to speak out, we also know now that there were multiple advance warnings before the attack of 11 September 2012 that should have alerted the Departments of Defense and State, the Intelligence Community (IC), and the White House to impending disaster. The warnings were all ignored, with catastrophic results. The most egregious dereliction of duty came during the night of 11-12 September 2012, when brave Americans battled alone for hours against overwhelming odds while the government that sent them in harm’s way did not even attempt a rescue mission. We know now that U.S. forces were available in multiple locations, including Aviano Air Base and Naval Air Station Sigonella in Italy, at the Rota Naval Base in Spain, and the Commander’s In-Extremis Force in Croatia, in addition to Foreign Emergency Support Teams (FEST). Someone in the U.S. chain of command decided not to send any of these forces into Libya to help. Further, the interagency task force called the Counterterrorism Security Group (CSG), established by presidential directive precisely for such terror attacks as this one, was not convened.

Secretary of State Clinton must be held responsible for her failure to provide adequate protection to the SMC in Benghazi in the months leading up to the attack, as well as for her failure to immediately request permission from the Libyan government for cross-border authority, and then to convey that authority to available U.S. military forces. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, as well as USCINCEUR Adm. James G. Stavridis and USAFRICOM Commander General Carter F. Ham, all share responsibility for their failure to pre-position U.S. military forces in the face of so much advance warning about the situation in Benghazi. They also failed to insist on the timely dispatch of forces to at least attempt a rescue the night of the attack. But the ultimate responsibility for the Benghazi disaster lies with the commander-in-chief, President Barack Obama. To date, no one has been willing even to say where he was that night or what specific orders he may have issued (if any) before disappearing from the scene. That information needs to be subpoenaed under oath forthwith.

Lastly, the Obama administration cover-up that followed the Benghazi debacle served only to add insult to injury by denying the truth about what happened to the American people and suppressing with a heavy hand those who had been personally involved and who wanted to speak out. Instead, a hastily-concocted false narrative about a YouTube video was fed to the media and public alike in a campaign quickly, but efficiently, coordinated with the administration’s domestic and international Muslim Brotherhood networks. The objective was to conceal the fact that al-Qa’eda-linked jihadis attacked our mission and killed four Americans that night. From their perspective, blaming a video that violated the Islamic Law on slander also bolstered the global campaign to criminalize criticism of Islam led by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), a close working partner of the Clinton State Department.
The following report is not intended to cover every single aspect of the Benghazi debacle, but will add new details to the CCB’s earlier reporting on each of these phases of the Benghazi attack: before, during, and after. The thrust of our investigation has been not merely to document the sequence of events, but, more importantly, to reveal the reasons why the Obama administration and the Clinton State Department so radically changed U.S. policy in the war against the Global Jihad Movement (GJM) in ways that benefited this country’s worst enemies.
In so doing, these leaders also allowed a terror assault against our Benghazi mission that took the lives of four Americans, and then sought mendaciously to cover it all up for weeks afterward.

Our Citizens’ Commission was formed in 2013 with the unsettling sense that neither the Congressional Committees, the State Department’s Accountability Review Board (ARB), the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), nor even Representative Trey Gowdy’s (R-SC) Select Committee on Benghazi would report these events in a way that was fully accurate and complete. It is therefore hoped that this report will provide much-needed information to the American people. The families of the fallen have a right to know and so we join our efforts with theirs to press rightful demands for accountability from our top officials who so badly failed in their Constitutional duties, not only on that fateful night in Benghazi, but before and after the events that unfolded there as well.
To read this report in it’s entirety go to : http://www.aim.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/AIM-Citizens-Commission-on-Benghazi-FINAL-REPORT-June-2016.pdf

Independence Day – Tea Party Nation

We at Tea Party Nation wish you a happy Independence Day.  And we encourage you to take a moment and read the document that gave us a free nation.

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. —

Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

  • For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
  • For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:
  • For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:
  • For imposing taxes on us without our consent:
  • For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:
  • For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:
  • For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:
  • For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:
  • For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.1377023_632027936839875_306360385_n

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. 

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.Image

Gun Control, Terror Watchlist — The NRA and the Rule of Law

By Dave Dolbee published on June 30, 2016 in News

America witnessed a remarkable and telling legislative showdown last week that revolved around a very simple concept underlying American democracy. That concept is due process. Some were willing to discard it for the sake of politics and the illusion of safety. Others were not. Here is what the NRA had to say about it:

Senate Judiciary Committee

Unable to sway the Congress to enact his gun control agenda, the president is trying to upset the Founding Father’s system of checks and balances by going it alone.

A series of untenable gun control proposals – some which would have placed your Second Amendment rights at the mercy of bureaucratic fiat, black lists, and secret “evidence” – were defeated.

But the degree to which some were willing to abandon foundational principles for short-term and self-serving political gain should serve as a sobering reminder to all that American freedom is not free and that we should never think our government will simply default to it. The Founders understood that, which is why we have a written Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Proponents of gun control tried to portray the showdown as being over those who wanted terrorists to have guns and those who don’t. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), a gun control standard-bearer, disgraced the dignity of his office by claiming “Republicans have decided to sell weapons to ISIS.”

Think about how ridiculous that statement is.

And it becomes all the more ridiculous in light of how strenuously President Obama, who embodies the values and agenda of Murphy’s politics, tried to deflect the blame for the Orlando terrorist attack away from radical Islamic jihad, the asserted basis of the attacker himself.

I am a bill cartoon

While the defenders of the Second Amendment have seen significant victories over the past year a couple of recent losses are troubling.

Obama loyalists desperately tried to portray NRA and the Second Amendment as the culprits in the Orlando attacks. During a series of publicity stunts – including Murphy’s “filibuster” on the Senate Floor and a “sit-in” by members of Congress on the House Floor – America heard again and again that gun control is now a matter of national security.

During times of fear and crisis, it’s easy to forget what we’re about as a country. It’s natural for opportunistic and ambitious politicians to grab more power for themselves. It’s natural for entrenched authority to demonize opposition and try to suppress dissent. We saw all of that this past week.

But America has always tried to be better than that, which is why the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It is greater than any individual. It is mightier than any institution. And it states that no person shall be “deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law ….” Whatever else Obama, Murphy, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and their surrogates in the media tried to make this past week’s contentious legislative efforts about, that’s what was at stake.

The government cannot arbitrarily deny or withhold rights. When someone’s life, liberty, or property is at stake, the person has a right to notice and the opportunity to respond, and the government bears the burden of making its case before a neutral decision-maker as to why its actions are justified. Without these simple principles, we are not a country of laws.

But that was too much for Feinstein, Murphy, and their anti-gun Senate colleagues. They would settle for nothing less than giving bureaucrats the authority to deny gun purchases at will, without any proving of their case. They would not stand (literally, in the case of their House counterparts) to require the government, if it were later sued over the deprivation, to have to prove anything other than a basis for its own “reasonable suspicion” against the individual. The want to let the government, in other words, retroactively rationalize its decision to abolish a fundamental right – not by actually proving a person is somehow a public safety risk because of nexus to terrorism – but by demonstrating it was not “unreasonable” in “suspecting” so at the time.

05 itshouldnotbecalledguncontrol

That’s not due process.

Make no mistake, the NRA does not want terrorists to have legal – or illegal – access to firearms.  NRA members have fought and died in the war on terror so we take a backseat to no one when it comes to national security.

Freedom endured this week in the U.S. Senate, but it would not have been possible without the dedication of NRA members who were willing to stand up and contact their elected officials in the face of this latest threat.  NRA members flooded Congressional switchboards in just a few short days, and it worked.  Your continued vigilance has always been what makes the NRA the strongest civil rights organization in the world.

At the same time, our victory would not have been possible without the Second Amendment leadership of Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA).  Both senators introduced legislation to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners and worked tirelessly against passage of the gun control legislation introduced by Feinstein, Murphy, and others.  We could not have been successful without them.

But let’s be careful to not consider the battle over.  The Senate will remain in session this coming week, so your continued pressure is needed.  Gun control proposals could go well beyond the amendments that were voted on last week, so please contact your U.S. Senators and your U.S. Representative immediately and let them know you oppose any new gun control measures. You can call your lawmakers at 202-224-3121 or click here to Take Action.

Did the NRA get it right? What will you do to defeat future gun control measures and support the Second Amendment? Share your plans in the comment section.

Army Ranger at Benghazi: Liberal Media Demonizes Guns After Orlando But Here’s What I’d Do for Them

ORLANDO, FL - JUNE 12: <> on June 12, 2016 in Orlando, Florida. (Photo by Gerardo Mora/Getty Images)

 

Image Credit: Gerardo Mora/Getty

Since the Orlando terror attack, many media outlets have rushed to blame a lack of gun laws for the tragedy. And the calls for increased gun regulation have amplified…

Independent Journal Review chose to get the perspective of someone who had also experienced an American tragedy firsthand.

We talked to Kris Paronto, an ex-Army Ranger, who survived the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Paronto

 

Image Credit: Adam Bettcher/Maxim Defense

The Hollywood film “13 Hours: Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” is based off his and his teammates’ harrowing experiences on the ground.

Paronto didn’t mince words about Orlando or those who rush to blame guns for what is being called the worst mass shooting on American soil ever.

Paronto said:

“It has nothing to do with the weapons that were used. It has to do with the ideology involved with the attacker. Whether he got trained in the states or got his ideology online, the weapons system makes no difference at all.

If I would have been in the nightclub with a M4 or M16 I would have shot the guy before he killed 49 people. The media is trying to demonize the weapon in the name of gun control.

Look, a weapon system is a tool like a hammer. It’s like anything else. In the wrong hands it can be used to hurt people and in the right hands — it’s a hammer.

In every one of these countries where they are terrorists, they have guns. I’ve been to these areas and seen what the jihadis are capable of. And they may be armed with an AK-47, but it’s their belief system and ideology that kills people. The AK-47 doesn’t fire itself.”

Paronto continued:

“Mateen went after a group that he knew was going to be an easy target. I don’t get why liberals keep spinning this into a gun control issue. Maybe it’s because the president can’t say it.

This is terrorists killing innocent people. He would have got that gun in any way. I’ve been around it in Benghazi and elsewhere. I’ve killed terrorists.

It’s always the ideology that drives them to squeeze the trigger or strap a bomb to their chest.

So we need to wake up and figure this out. Or they will be more attacks and we will have more tragedies like Orlando.

We need to have armed security in these places. I’ll stand at a door with a gun. I did it for ten years. It may make people uncomfortable in the club. But guess what, you’re going to go home alive.”

He took a shot at anyone politicizing Orlando:

“The politicizing of Orlando pisses me off. It’s less than human. The reason being is because people died that night and that’s where the focus needs to be. So we need to look at what took place and mourn.

It’s time to heal and making such a tragedy all about blaming the weapon is disgusting. Anyone trying to use it for political gain is worthless.”

A leader doesn’t go on TV and politicize. They take a breath, go in the back room and figure out exactly what happened.”

Then, Paronto told me what he wants the “liberal media” to know more than anything else:

“As the media is demonizing the weapon system in Orlando, they have no idea that if they were under attack, I would pick up a gun.

And I would stand right in front of them and take a bullet. And I’d try to take down as many bad guys as I could even if I was outmatched.”

Paronto concluded, “Because it’s the right thing to do. The American thing to do…”

Paronto

 

Image Credit: Scott Garrett

“And because it’s what I was trained to do as a Ranger — protect the lives of others who are unable to protect themselves.”

WHEN IS ENOUGH, ENOUGH? – Tea Party Nation

Posted by Bruce Davis

In the never ending saga of Liberal stupidity and deliberate and continual lying to the American people our idiot president Obama has just said there is no clear evidence that the shooter in Orlando was directed by ISIS. Guess he missed all those internet calls from ISIS and other Muslim terrorists to target soft targets in the US that were also reported in the media. He must have been on one of his many vacations, out playing golf, campaigning or is still not reading his Presidential Daily Briefing papers because he is so smart, in his own mind, that nobody can tell him anything he does not already know. I thought he got all his news from the TV, so how did he miss this since even the left wing media mentioned these threats? By Obama’s rationale I guess that we can now also believe that, despite the facts, that there is no clear evidence that Obama is a Muslim terror supporter and/or that there is no clear evidence that he has an IQ no higher than a turnip.

Furthermore he is now beating the gun control bandwagon once again despite the fact that the shooter fully complied with gun laws and the primary reason he was able to buy a gun was two separate slipshod investigations of his threats to kill by his own FBI who after the last investigation actually removed him from a list which would have been triggered when he tried to buy any guns.  Additionally his continual threatening behavior on the job which should have resulted in being reported to the authorities and being terminated apparently was not done by his employer due to fear of being labeled racists by both the government and the self appointed PC police. One former employee reported he quit his job with the same company due to being threatened by the shooter when nothing was done by the employer.  His former wife also reported his propensity for violence to the authorities, however apparently nothing was done about this domestic violence.  Normally incidents of domestic violence like that reported should have resulted in him being arrested and then not being able to either purchase any guns or even use a gun in his job as a security person.  BTW as a former Florida police chief I am aware that Florida law does not even require the spouses approval to make an arrest.  In fact, officers are mandated to make an arrest of the aggressor in domestic violence cases so, if the situation is as reported. it seems clear someone in local law enforcement screwed up big time by not doing what the law required.

BTW here we go again with the “gun free” zones that Liberal legislators keep falsely saying make us safe. Hello Mr. and Ms. stupid Liberal. Criminals and terrorists are not impressed by your laws making so many locations gun free zones. They don’t give a damn! Virtually every single mass shooting, including this latest one in Orlando, that has occurred in the US is the past 20-30 years occurred in a so-called “gun free zone” so these deaths can be blamed directly on you. To give you an idea of the idiocy of these laws in my current state of residence any business open to the public can post the business as a “gun free zone” which makes it a crime for a CCW holder to be armed on their premises. In addition to the gun having to be stored in a vehicle where it might be stolen the permit holder is defenseless should a criminal or terrorist decides to target that location. Unbelievably the Federal law, 18 USC 926b (The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act) that permits retired police officers, who annually qualify at the range, to carry concealed weapons also prohibits them from carrying in these “gun free zones”. Since this act was supposedly passed to allow officers to protect themselves from violent criminals they had arrested before retiring the logic of this provision in the law escapes me and makes the title of the law kind of ridiculous. Shows the lack of intelligence and logic of our elected officials, doesn’t it?

Obama is also now stating we must change. Excuse me, but maybe instead the Muslims need to change and stop killing anyone not a Muslin. I am sick and tired of this jerk, other Liberals and even some RINO’s lecturing us on what it is to be a true American. In fact, I am livid at the hubris and arrogance of Obama and these self appointed guardians of our conduct.  Sorry, but anyone who still supports this scumbag with his PC, BS support of Muslims or still thinks he is capable of competently running this country is also either an complete brain dead idiot or a bigger scumbag than Obama.

Obama intends to permit tens of thousands of unscreenable Muslims in to our country in the near future. My bottom line question is just how far are the American people who are victimized by this idiocy going to let this go on? Just how many people need to be killed and maimed before something effective is done or are we going to be like the Jews who let themselves be slaughtered in the WWII concentration camps of Nazi Germany? Furthermore, even more importantly, are we going to continue to stand by and reelect the equally despicable legislators who repeatedly refused to fulfill their Constitutional duty to impeach Obama for his egregious illegal conduct and to change these stupid “gun free zone” laws which have been passed by both the Federal government and most states.

n the never ending saga of Liberal stupidity and deliberate and continual lying to the American people our idiot president Obama has just said there is no clear evidence that the shooter in Orlando was directed by ISIS. Guess he missed all those internet calls from ISIS and other Muslim terrorists to target soft targets in the US that were also reported in the media. He must have been on one of his many vacations, out playing golf, campaigning or is still not reading his Presidential Daily Briefing papers because he is so smart, in his own mind, that nobody can tell him anything he does not already know. I thought he got all his news from the TV, so how did he miss this since even the left wing media mentioned these threats? By Obama’s rationale I guess that we can now also believe that, despite the facts, that there is no clear evidence that Obama is a Muslim terror supporter and/or that there is no clear evidence that he has an IQ no higher than a turnip.

Furthermore he is now beating the gun control bandwagon once again despite the fact that the shooter fully complied with gun laws and the primary reason he was able to buy a gun was two separate slipshod investigations of his threats to kill by his own FBI who after the last investigation actually removed him from a list which would have been triggered when he tried to buy any guns.  Additionally his continual threatening behavior on the job which should have resulted in being reported to the authorities and being terminated apparently was not done by his employer due to fear of being labeled racists by both the government and the self appointed PC police. One former employee reported he quit his job with the same company due to being threatened by the shooter when nothing was done by the employer.  His former wife also reported his propensity for violence to the authorities, however apparently nothing was done about this domestic violence.  Normally incidents of domestic violence like that reported should have resulted in him being arrested and then not being able to either purchase any guns or even use a gun in his job as a security person.  BTW as a former Florida police chief I am aware that Florida law does not even require the spouses approval to make an arrest.  In fact, officers are mandated to make an arrest of the aggressor in domestic violence cases so, if the situation is as reported. it seems clear someone in local law enforcement screwed up big time by not doing what the law required.

BTW here we go again with the “gun free” zones that Liberal legislators keep falsely saying make us safe. Hello Mr. and Ms. stupid Liberal. Criminals and terrorists are not impressed by your laws making so many locations gun free zones. They don’t give a damn! Virtually every single mass shooting, including this latest one in Orlando, that has occurred in the US is the past 20-30 years occurred in a so-called “gun free zone” so these deaths can be blamed directly on you. To give you an idea of the idiocy of these laws in my current state of residence any business open to the public can post the business as a “gun free zone” which makes it a crime for a CCW holder to be armed on their premises. In addition to the gun having to be stored in a vehicle where it might be stolen the permit holder is defenseless should a criminal or terrorist decides to target that location. Unbelievably the Federal law, 18 USC 926b (The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act) that permits retired police officers, who annually qualify at the range, to carry concealed weapons also prohibits them from carrying in these “gun free zones”. Since this act was supposedly passed to allow officers to protect themselves from violent criminals they had arrested before retiring the logic of this provision in the law escapes me and makes the title of the law kind of ridiculous. Shows the lack of intelligence and logic of our elected officials, doesn’t it?

Obama is also now stating we must change. Excuse me, but maybe instead the Muslims need to change and stop killing anyone not a Muslin. I am sick and tired of this jerk, other Liberals and even some RINO’s lecturing us on what it is to be a true American. In fact, I am livid at the hubris and arrogance of Obama and these self appointed guardians of our conduct.  Sorry, but anyone who still supports this scumbag with his PC, BS support of Muslims or still thinks he is capable of competently running this country is also either an complete brain dead idiot or a bigger scumbag than Obama.

Obama intends to permit tens of thousands of unscreenable Muslims in to our country in the near future. My bottom line question is just how far are the American people who are victimized by this idiocy going to let this go on? Just how many people need to be killed and maimed before something effective is done or are we going to be like the Jews who let themselves be slaughtered in the WWII concentration camps of Nazi Germany? Furthermore, even more importantly, are we going to continue to stand by and reelect the equally despicable legislators who repeatedly refused to fulfill their Constitutional duty to impeach Obama for his egregious illegal conduct and to change these stupid “gun free zone” laws which have been passed by both the Federal government and most states.

The Truth Behind “Fast and Furious” is Finally Coming Out

Five times Obama officials pleaded the Fifth rather than testify about the Department of Justice’s Fast and Furious gun-running scam continues to link Obama guns to domestic and international murders and gun violence.

By Constitution.com

Fast and Furious is one of the many scandals that has not gotten the judicial or media attention deserved. Who can Holder F&Fforget the ongoing IRS scandal, billions of taxpayer money wasted on Obama’s cronies’ Solyndra scam, the illegal monitoring of journalists’ phone records, unconstitutionally waging war without Congressional approval, and of course, Benghazi. Not to mention committing treason by sending billions of dollars to America’s sworn enemy, Iran.

Rusty Weiss of Mental Recession writes:

“One can’t be blamed for having a cloudy memory on Fast and Furious, with the administration successfully stonewalling information on the scandal for years, and a disinterested media indirectly helping the cover-up through silence. But that may be about to change.”

“New e-mails have surfaced, exposing the Obama administration’s painstaking efforts to cover up the gun-running scandal, and revealing that the entire operation was an elaborate setup to create a gun crisis in America that would necessitate the president’s need to step in and squash the Second Amendment.”

Via the New York Post:

The deadly-but-forgotten government gun-running scandal known as “Fast and Furious” has lain dormant for years, thanks to White House stonewalling and media compliance. But newly uncovered emails have reopened the case, exposing the anatomy of a coverup by an administration that promised to be the most transparent in history.

A federal judge has forced the release of more than 20,000 pages of emails and memos previously locked up under President Obama’s phony executive-privilege claim. A preliminary review shows top Obama officials deliberately obstructing congressional probes into the border gun-running operation.

Fast and Furious was a Justice Department program that allowed assault weapons — including .50-caliber rifles powerful enough to take down a helicopter — to be sold to Mexican drug cartels allegedly as a way to track them. But internal documents later revealed the real goal was to gin up a crisis requiring a crackdown on guns in America. Fast and Furious was merely a pretext for imposing stricter gun laws.

Only the scheme backfired when Justice agents lost track of the nearly 2,000 guns sold through the program and they started turning up at murder scenes on both sides of the border — including one that claimed the life of US Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

gun-controlWhile then-Attorney General Eric Holder was focused on politics, people were dying. At least 20 other deaths or violent crimes have been linked to Fast and Furious-trafficked guns.

Jeff Dunetz at The Lid writes:

The Fast and Furious weapons ceded to the drug cartels have been used for other crimes in Mexico, used to kill a Border Agent named Brian Terry, and turned up  at the scenes of violent crimes in Phoenix, as well as at least 11 other violent crimes across the country.

In December of 2012, Mexican beauty queen Maria Susana Flores Gamez was murdered by someone using a gun provided by Obama Fast and Furious debacle.

Even Mexican drug kingpin, ‘El Chapo,’ managed to get his hands on a .50-caliber rifle courtesy of the Obama administration.

These and other murders and violent crimes occurred – simply because Barack Obama needed to feed his ego and be the man who crushed Second Amendment rights in America.

How many more people have to die from Obama’s DOJ guns, until the media and the American Justice System realize that Fast and Furious was not a “Phony Scandal”?IMG_1034.JPG

 

Extortion 17 Family Members Claim NSA is Surveilling Them and They Still Can’t get Information from DC – Freedom Outpost

By

Tim Brown

 

Charlie and Mary Strange, parents of fallen Navy SEAL Michael Strange who died aboard Extortion 17 in Afghanistan on August 6, 2011, was recently interviewed with updates on the investigation into the downed chopper.

While Mrs. Strange called Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense and Special Operations & Low Intensity Conflict for the US Department of Defense Garry Reid a liar for his false testimony during the Extortion 17 congressional hearings, Mr. Strange pointed out that Reed never read the documents pertaining to Extortion 17 and, of course, Reed was not even the guy in charge when Extortion 17 went down.

Mr. Strange also showed pictures from an extensive file of pictures and documents, which was the basis for Don Brown’s excellent work Call Sign Extortion 17: The Shoot-Down of SEAL Team Six in which he lays out the documents that the government mistakenly provided to the families.

Strange has always claimed that the men aboard the helicopter were never “burned beyond recognition,” as they were told by the DC government. The excuse for cremating many of the fallen was that they had already been burned so badly. However, Strange has claimed that he obtained a copy of Michael’s autopsy report and photographs of his body that showed no signs of fire damage.

“There’s nothing wrong with the body except for his ankle, but they claimed everybody was burned beyond recognition, yet there he was lying there whole and intact,” Strange said previously. “His hair and arms weren’t burned, and there was no sign of smoke in his lungs. When I called the command up and asked them about this they seem shocked that I had the photo. They told me ‘we’ll get back to you,’ but they never did.”

Strange says this will come out in a future documentary. Though he did not name the documentary, I would suspect that it is Fallen Angel: Cover-up of Shoot-down of SEAL Team Six, which is being produced by Tom Trento of The United West and narrated by author Don Brown. Strange and his wife, along with Billy and Karen Vaughn were interviewed for the documentary last year.

The entire mission was to target a man named Qari Tahir. However, the Stranges made mention of the fact that SEALs they spoke to said that Tahir was not even a high valued target. Yet, the US government sent in 76 Rangers and SEALS on the evening of August 6, 2011 to grab Tahir. Does that make any sense to anyone? It does if you consider there is a traitor in the White House and that this might be a payback for the alleged killing of Osama bin Laden. Keep in mind that SEAL Team Six are the very men outed by this administration by Vice President Joe Biden and former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta as the ones who took out bin Laden.

The Stranges, as well as other family members of the men killed aboard Extortion 17, believe it was an inside job and a complete setup.

Because of the Strange’s pursuit of what took place on August 6, they have lost many friends and family over the issue. However, a bombshell was dropped that the Stranges believe the National Security Agency has been stalking them and monitoring where they go and what they say. I can’t say I’m surprised by that since the release of information by Edward Snowden.

Mr. and Mrs. Strange did not go into detail about the NSA surveillance, but it was clear that both they and their phones have been monitored. Perhaps this will come out in more detail in the upcoming documentary that is set for release on the fifth anniversary of the downing of Extortion 17.

Surrendering to ISIS is the Only Way to Defeat It » Politichicks.com – Daniel Greenfield:

If you’re keeping score, freeing Islamic terrorists from Gitmo does not play into the hands of ISIS. Neither does bringing Syrians, many of whom sympathize with Islamic terrorists, into our country. And aiding the Muslim Brotherhood parent organization of ISIS does not play into the Islamic group’s hands.

However if you use the words “Islamic terrorism” or even milder derivatives such as “radical Islamic terrorism”, you are playing into the hands of ISIS. If you call for closer law enforcement scrutiny of Muslim areas before they turn into Molenbeek style no-go zones or suggest ending the stream of new immigrant recruits to ISIS in San Bernardino, Paris or Brussels, you are also playing into the hands of ISIS.

And if you carpet bomb ISIS, destroy its headquarters and training camps, you’re just playing into its hands. According to Obama and his experts, who have wrecked the Middle East, what ISIS fears most is that we’ll ignore it and let it go about its business. And what it wants most is for us to utterly destroy it. Or as Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau said, “If you kill your enemies, they win.”

But maybe if you surrender to them, then you win.

Tens of thousands of Muslim refugees make us safer. But using the words “Muslim terrorism” endangers us. The more Muslims we bring to America, the faster we’ll beat ISIS. As long as we don’t call it the Islamic State or ISIS or ISIL, but follow Secretary of State John Kerry’s lead in calling it Daesh.

Because terrorism has no religion. Even when it’s shouting, “Allahu Akbar”.

Obama initially tried to defeat ISIS by ignoring it. This cunning approach allowed ISIS to seize large chunks of Iraq and Syria. He tried calling ISIS a J.V. team in line with his claim that, “We defeat them in part by saying you are not strong, you are weak”. Unimpressed, ISIS seized Mosul. It was still attached to the old-fashioned way of proving it was strong by actually winning land and wars.

Europe and the United States decided to prove that we were not at war with Islam by taking in as many Muslims as we could. Instead of leading to less terrorism, taking in more Muslims led to more terrorism.

Every single counterintuitive strategy for defeating Islamic terrorism has been tried. And it has failed. Overthrowing “dictators” turned entire countries into terrorist training camps. Bringing Islamists to power in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia led directly to attacks on American diplomatic facilities. The Muslim Brotherhood showed no gratitude to its State Department allies. Instead its militias and forces either aided the attackers or stood by and watched while taking bets on the outcome.

Islamic terrorism has followed an intuitive pattern of cause and effect. There’s a reason that the counterintuitive strategies for fighting Islamic terrorism by not fighting Islamic terrorism don’t work. They make no sense. Instead they all depend on convincing Muslims, from the local Imam to Jihadist organizations, to aid us instead of attack us by showing what nice people we are. Meanwhile they also insist that we can’t use the words “Islamic terrorism” because Muslims are ticking time bombs who will join Al Qaeda and ISIS the moment we associate terrorism with the I-word.

There are contradictions there that you can drive a tank through.

The counterintuitive strategy assumes that Islamic terrorism will only exist if we use the I-word, that totalitarian Jihadist movements want democracy and that our best allies for fighting Islamic terrorism are people from the same places where Islamic terrorism is a runaway success. And that we should duplicate the demographics of the countries where Islamic terrorism thrives in order to defeat it.

The West’s counterterrorism strategy makes less sense than the ravings of most mental patients. The only thing more insane than the counterintuitive strategy for defeating Islamic terrorism is the insistence that the intuitive strategy of keeping terrorists out and killing them is what terrorists want.

If you believe the experts, then Islamic terrorists want us to stop them from entering Europe, America, Canada and Australia. They crave having their terrorists profiled by law enforcement on the way to their latest attack. And they wish we would just carpet bomb them as hard as we can right now.

When ISIS shoots up Paris or Brussels, it’s not really trying to kill infidels for Allah. Instead it’s setting a cunning trap for us. If we react by ending the flow of migrants and preventing the next attack, ISIS wins. If we police Muslim no-go zones, then ISIS also wins. If we deport potential terrorists, ISIS still wins.

But if we let ISIS carry out another successful attack, then ISIS loses. And we win. What do we win?

It depends. A concert hall full of corpses. Marathon runners with severed limbs. Families fleeing the airport through a haze of smoke. Only by letting ISIS kill us, do we have any hope of beating ISIS.

Politicians and experts claim that ISIS is insane. It’s not insane. It’s evil. Its goals are clear and comprehensible. The objectives of the Islamic State are easy to intuitively grasp. Our leaders and experts are the ones who are out of their minds. They may or may not be evil, but they are utterly insane. And they have projected their madness on Islamic terrorists who are downright rational compared to them.

Unlike our leaders, Islamic terrorists don’t confuse victory and defeat. They aren’t afraid that they’ll win. They don’t want us to kill them or deport them. They don’t care whether we call them ISIS or Daesh. They don’t derive their Islamic legitimacy from John Kerry or a State Department Twitter account. They get it from the Koran and the entire rotting corpus of Islamic law that they seek to impose on the world.

Our leaders are the ones who are afraid of winning. They distrust the morality of armed force and borders. They disguise that distrust behind convoluted arguments and counterintuitive rationales. Entire intellectual systems are constructed to explain why defeating ISIS is exactly what ISIS wants.

After the San Bernardino shootings, Obama insisted that, “Our success won’t depend on tough talk or abandoning our values… That’s what groups like ISIL are hoping for.” But ISIS does not care whether Obama talks tough, even if it’s only his version of tough talk in which he puffs out his chest and says things like, ”You are not strong, you are weak.” It is not interested in Obama’s “right side of history” distortion of American values either.

ISIS is not trying to be counterintuitive. It’s fighting to win. And our leaders are fighting as hard as they can to lose.

The counterintuitive strategy is not meant to fight terror, but to convince the populace that winning is actually losing and losing is actually winning. The worse we lose, the better our plan is working. And when we have completely lost everything then we’ll have the terrorists right where we want them.

Just ask the dead of Brussels, Paris, New York and a hundred other places.

This isn’t a plan to win. It’s a plan to confuse the issue while losing. It’s a plan to convince everyone that what looks like appeasement, defeatism, surrender and collaboration with the enemy is really a brilliant counterintuitive plan that is the only possible path to a lasting victory over Islamic terrorism.

But intuitive beats counterintuitive. Winning intuitively beats losing counterintuitively. Counterintuitively dead terrorists multiply, but intuitively they stay dead. Counterintuitively, not discussing the problem is the best way to solve it. Intuitively, you solve a problem by facing it. Counterintuitively, collaborating with the enemy is patriotism. Intuitively, it’s treason.