Wednesday, May 1, 2013

TheBlaze(As per some people's question, YES the woman spoken about in this article about being banned for 30 days is me, and if you click on the highlighted words it takes you directly to The Blaze's article about my banning.)
Facebook Has Just Decided to Block a Graphic Video of a Woman’s Beheading After Initially Refusing to Do So

An extremely graphic video showing a woman being decapitated with a knife by a masked man has for the last few days been spreading on Facebook. And although according to Facebook’s current policy the video doesn’t violate graphic content restrictions, the social media site has decided to remove all reported instances as it evaluates the situation.

According to one user sharing the video, the woman is being killed for cheating on her husband.
Groups Petition for Removal of Graphic Video of Beheading Spreading on Facebook

This video is being shared by many on Facebook and is sparking petitions for its removal. (Image: Facebook screenshot)

Joe Newby, who writes for the Spokane Conservative Examiner, reported Facebook spokesman Fred Wolens initially saying the graphic content was allowed to remain on the site because it was being shared in order to condemn it.

“Just as TV news programs often show upsetting images of atrocities, people can share upsetting videos on Facebook to raise awareness of actions or causes. While this video is shocking, our approach is designed to preserve people’s rights to describe, depict and comment on the world in which we live,” Wolens said, according to Newby.

Facebook’s policy regarding graphic content states:
People use Facebook to share events through photos and videos. We understand that graphic imagery is a regular component of current events, but must balance the needs of a diverse community. Sharing any graphic content for sadistic pleasure is prohibited.
But in an emailed statement to TheBlaze, a Facebook’s spokeswoman wrote the site has now decided it will “remove instances of this video that are reported to us while we evaluate our policy and approach to this type of content.”

Last year, an allegedly leaked guidebook from a third-party who claimed to review Facebook content for policy violations said content that would violate guidelines included those that showed human bodily fluids, like urine, vomit, feces, semen, pus and ear wax. But the guidebook also showed that the policy allowed “crushed head, limbs, etc …as long as no insides are showing.”

The Facebook post of the video we found had been liked more than 2,500 times and shared nearly 18,000 times. But the Daily Kos pointed out that another version was liked more than 6,000 times and shared more than 40,000 times.

Before Facebook agreed to remove the graphic video, it was being petitioned to do so by many. One on the website GoPetition has nearly 170 signatures. Celia Mellow who started the petition wrote:
The thought of my 13 year old sister being able to watch that video horrifies me! I came across the video after I watched my close friends face turn from a mixture of horror and disgust to uncontrollable sobbing when she had found it on her news feed and started to watch it whilst I was still on webcam to her. I was also able to access this video and only managed to watch half of it before feeling faint, sick and tearful …

My friends and I are all shocked from the graphic horror displayed on our Facebook news feeds. Children as young as 13 are allowed to sign up for Facebook accounts, if Mark Zuckerberg himself saw what was posted on his successful website then I’m sure he’d feel the same way as I do about this situation. This may be a spark of terrorism and there may be more and worse to come on more and more social networking websites.
The BBC also reported organizations calling for Facebook to remove the video:
US’s Family Online Safety Institute told the BBC the graphic nature of the violence involved meant that the material had “crossed a line”.
“Personally and professionally I feel that Facebook has got this call wrong,” said Stephen Balkam, the organisation’s chief executive.
Charities in the UK have also called on the social network to reconsider its stance saying the material could cause long-term psychological damage.
It is unclear if the video is real, but some commenters have said they don’t think it is fake, even watching it multiple times to confirm.

Some might question why Facebook would initially allow such a violent video when it has recently taken measures to do things like shut down some gun pages for violating its policies with posts that allegedly “promote the sale or use of weapons, ammunition, or explosives.” Facebook has also recently been accused of knocking a woman off the site for 30 days for a policy-violating post made by another user on a group page for which she was an administrator. The woman said she believes she and the group were being targeted for conservative beliefs.

TheBlaze has decided not to embed the video due to its graphic nature, however we have included a link. But be warned, the video is extremely graphic. Clicking here will take you to a blog with graphic screenshots from the video and the footage as well.

Obama Losing Power
Published on 


Listen to the air going out of the economy. It sounds like an air mattress deflating.

As ObamaCare comes closer to becoming reality, its drawbacks -- or at the very least, its growing pains -- alienate more and more of his erstwhile supporters. The president's failure to pass a gun control bill was more than a legislative reversal: he lost in the court of public opinion. Despite his histrionics exploiting the Newtown, Conn., tragedy, he failed to move public opinion. In fact, polling suggests that it moved the other way -- from a pro-gun-control consensus in the wake of the shootings to a pro-Second Amendment posture after more reflection. The Boston bombings cast a harsh light on his failure to keep us safe and his weird compromises with Islamic terrorism.

It might be a long, hot summer for the president.

Leading the casualty list is President Obama's economic policy. After 0.4 percent growth in gross domestic product in the last quarter of 2012, experts had expected a sharp rebound in the first quarter of 2013, sparked by year-end bonuses. That didn't happen. The 2.5 rate was anemic at best. The fact that only 88,000 jobs were created in March of 2013 is pathetic. Indeed, the prospects for any kind of real growth this quarter are sharply limited.

And more economic disaster beckons.

The stock market is artificially pumped up by desperate investors who are facing zero interest rates in their safe, normal investment outlets. So these folks, who likely saw their portfolios take a crewcut in 2008 and 2009, are putting their money into CCC-rated securities -- junk. The bubble is going to burst, as they all do, and their investments will come crashing down.

Meanwhile, the Federal Housing Administration has stepped in to offer mortgages to low-income people with all of the shortcomings of those issued or insured by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- a 3 percent downpayment, artificially low teaser interest rates and high mortgage/value ratios. Wait until this crash materializes.

Finally, the banks of the world are invested to the tune of $1.6 quadrillion (1st time you've seen that word in print?) in derivatives. There is not enough money in the Fed, the European Central Bank or China to cover the losses that are in the offing. With the Fed's balance sheet stretched as never before, there is little room for error in this preposterous bank gambling.

And then there's ObamaCare. Set to go into effect in 2014, Americans are in for some sticker shock when they see their health insurance premiums. The pleasant promises of a $2,500 per family savings will be seen as the baloney they were when the president made them. And a great many Americans will find equally disingenuous his promise that we can keep our current health insurance policies if we want to. With our employers weighing whether to pay a $3,000 per employee fine for no coverage of a $15,000 health insurance premium, it will be an easy decision. They will cancel their policies and offer no coverage. Their decision will throw the employees to the mercy of the insurance exchanges Obama has established with their hope of federal premium subsidies. But, as they are about to find out, the subsidies are only available up to about $75,000 in household income, and they presuppose that you pay a minimum of 7 percent of your income on health insurance before they kick in.

Americans will be outraged when they realize how much they are going to have to pay. Young people are going to realize that the hope of coverage is evanescent at best -- and the elderly will learn the grim truth about Medicare rationing.

Boehner Must Impanel Special Committee to Investigate Benghazi

Terry Jeffrey / Townhall Columnist 

When Ambassador Chris Stevens was planning to visit Benghazi last September, the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, which the State Department had hired to help protect Americans there, delivered a message: They were no longer going to support the movement of U.S. personnel in the city -- including the movement of Stevens.

"In addition," said a report released last week by the chairmen of the House committees on Foreign Relations, Oversight, Armed Services, Judiciary, and Intelligence, "on Sept. 8, 2012, just days before Ambassador Stevens arrived in Benghazi, the February 17 Martyrs Brigade told State Department officials that the group would no longer support U.S. movements in the city, including the ambassador's visit."

A footnote in the report attributes this information to an internal State Department email. The footnote says: "Email from Alec Henderson to John B. Martinec, 'RE: Benghazi QRF agreement,' (Sep. 9, 2012, 11:31 p.m.)."

Martinec was then the State Department's regional security officer (RSO) at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli and, thus, the ambassador's top security adviser.

Despite this email, Stevens went ahead with his trip to Benghazi, arriving there on Sept. 10. At the time, there were three State Department diplomatic security officers deployed on temporary duty at the department's Benghazi mission. Stevens brought another two with him from Tripoli -- bringing the total State Department security contingent in Benghazi to five people.

"The Board found that Ambassador Stevens made the decision to travel to Benghazi independently of Washington, per standard practice," said the State Department's Accountability Review Board report released on Dec. 18."

"Plans for the ambassador's trip provided for minimal close protection security support and were not shared thoroughly with the embassy's country team, who were not fully aware of planned movements off compound," said the ARB report.

On Oct. 10, 2012, the House Oversight and Governmental Reform Committee took testimony from Eric Nordstrom, who served as the RSO at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli from Sept. 21, 2011, until July 26, 2012 -- leaving the country six weeks before the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack. The committee did not take testimony from John Martinec, who was RSO at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli on Sept. 11, 2012.

Nor has any congressional committee taken testimony from the five State Department Diplomatic Security officers in Benghazi with Stevens on Sept. 11, 2012.

Why not? These are American heroes. Why can't America hear their stories?

"The board determined that U.S. personnel on the ground in Benghazi performed with courage and readiness to risk their lives to protect their colleagues, in a near impossible situation," said the State Department ARB report.

"While our country spent Sept. 11, 2012, remembering the terrorist attacks that took place 11 years earlier, brave Americans posted at U.S. government facilities in Benghazi, Libya, were fighting for their lives against a terrorist assault," said a report released on Dec. 30 by the Senate Homeland Security Committee.

On Friday, House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa publicly released a letter he sent to Secretary of State John Kerry detailing a number of ways the State Department was interfering with his committee's investigation of Benghazi. These included refusing to give the committee unfettered access to Benghazi-related documents and declining to even advise would-be State Department whistleblowers that they have a legal right to talk to Congress.

Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., has proposed a plan to end State's stonewalling. He is the principal sponsor of legislation to create a House Select Committee on the Terrorist Attack in Benghazi. This committee would be comprised of members of both parties and have full power to subpoena documents and compel testimony from personnel in the State Department and other government agencies.

Already, 134 House Republicans -- a majority of the Republican caucus -- have joined as co-sponsors of Wolf's legislation.

"It is clear that the administration just wants the issue of Benghazi to go away, but I sincerely hope that Congress will not aid this White House cover-up of the mistakes made by high-level members of the administration that cost four brave Americans their lives," Wolf said Tuesday.

The December 2011 issue of State Magazine -- the State Department's in-house publication -- proudly named the diplomatic security agents who traveled with Chris Stevens to Benghazi that year when he established a special mission there during the Libyan revolution. Any American with an Internet hookup can look up the identities of these State Department heroes -- and even see photographs of some of them.

But, as of today, the State Department has only named four of the Americans who were in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012. These are the four the terrorists succeeded in murdering: Stevens, Information Management Officer Sean Smith and former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

The State Department's surviving heroes of Sept. 11, 2012, remain anonymous.

With the majority of House Republicans co-sponsoring Wolf's legislation for a special committee, the only thing standing between the American people and the real story of Benghazi is a leadership decision from House Speaker John Boehner.

Boehner must impanel this special investigative committee so it can compel the administration to tell the full truth about Benghazi.
Do you remember what happened last year on 9/14? Where are the White House phone calls for the families who continue to grieve? What is being done to prevent another fatal attack like the one on 9/14? And why is the full truth being withheld from the American public?

Benghazi isn't the only bloody disaster being covered up by the Obama administration. As I reported in a series of columns and blog posts last fall, three days after the deadly siege on our consulate in Libya, the Taliban waged an intricately coordinated, brutal attack on Camp Bastion in Afghanistan.

Two heroic U.S. Marines -- Lt. Col. Christopher Raible and Sgt. Bradley Atwell -- were killed in the battle. Many surviving Marines have been honored for their brave, quick-thinking actions to save their comrades and civilians caught in the crossfire.

Family members are angry that military brass are still trying to suppress details of the fateful budget and strategic decisions that led to the attack. But they won't stay silent. "This is political," one Camp Bastion relative told me this week. "Just like Benghazi, they don't want people to know."

In case you were sleeping or had forgotten: The meticulously coordinated siege at Camp Bastion by 15 Taliban infiltrators -- dressed in American combat fatigues and armed with assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons -- resulted not only in two deaths and nearly a dozen injuries, but also in the most devastating loss of U.S. airpower since Vietnam. Camp Bastion is Britain's main military base in Afghanistan; it's adjacent to our Marines' Camp Leatherneck.

Eight irreplaceable U.S. aircraft were destroyed or put out of action during the raid. A trio of refueling stations was decimated; a half-dozen hangars were damaged. The attack came exactly six months after a failed jihadi suicide attack targeting former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

Camp Bastion family members are hearing that U.S. and British military leaders left their loved ones vulnerable to attack by outsourcing watchtower security on the base to soldiers from Tonga, who were known to fall asleep on the job. Deborah Hatheway, aunt of Sgt. Atwell and the family's spokesperson, is naming names and mincing no words. She says Major General Charles "Mark" Gurganus, who recently returned to the U.S. after commanding coalition forces in Afghanistan, was ultimately responsible for skimping on security patrols. "He might as well have made it easier for the Taliban by cutting the perimeter fence himself and putting out the welcome mat," Hatheway told me.

This is the same Gurganus who ordered Marines to disarm -- immediately after the failed jihadi attack on Panetta last year -- because he wanted them "to look just like our (unarmed) Afghan partners."

Hatheway says her family has learned that "it took over an hour before any of the other coalition forces arrived to help the Marines, who were already engaged with the terrorists and had it under control." In addition, she says, they've learned that those on the ground did not have "proper protective gear available ... or properly functioning weapons."

Bastion families have raised questions with politicians and Pentagon officials in Washington, but are being forced to jump through Freedom of Information Act hoops to get to the bottom of the story. If ever.

In the meantime, a few officers in the know have begun leaking to the press. A little-noticed article by Washington Post reporter Rajiv Chandrasekaran two weeks ago reported that "several officials with direct knowledge of the assault said in recent interviews that staffing decisions by U.S. and British commanders weakened the base's defenses, making it easier for the insurgents to reconnoiter the compound and enter without resistance."

Cue the stonewalling. According to the Post, "When the House Armed Services Committee asked to see the initial Marine security review earlier this year, senior officers on the Pentagon's Joint Staff deemed it insufficient for release and ordered the Marines to conduct a fuller review, military officials said. But that examination still fell short of an official investigation." Neither the Marine Corps nor NATO plans to release the results of their separate investigations -- in part, the Post reports, "to avoid embarrassing the British for leaving towers unmanned."

There's a whole lotta CYA going on. Sgt. Atwell's family wants America to know: "This must end."

"The breadth of the benefits the family was receiving was stunning": Boston jihadis' family raked in $100,000 in welfare

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

They probably thought that this money was their due. The Infidels should pay the Muslims, as per this verse of the Qur'an: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." -- Qur'an 9:29

We recently saw that a jihad-martyrdom suicide bomber lived off Swedish student aid. And as British jihadist Anjem Choudary just said: "The normal situation is to take money from the kuffar. You work, give us the money, Allahu akbar."

"Tsarnaev family received $100G in benefits," by Chris Cassidy in the Boston Herald, April 29 (thanks to Andrew Bostom):
The Tsarnaev family, including the suspected terrorists and their parents, benefited from more than $100,000 in taxpayer-funded assistance — a bonanza ranging from cash and food stamps to Section 8 housing from 2002 to 2012, the Herald has learned. 
The breadth of the benefits the family was receiving was stunning,” said a person with knowledge of documents handed over to a legislative committee today.

Obama on Russian warnings about Boston jihad bomber: "It's not as if the FBI did nothing"

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

And never fear: Clueless Clapper, who thinks the Muslim Brotherhood is "largely secular," is on the case. "Obama defends FBI amid review of Tsarnaev intelligence in Marathon bombing," by Matt Viser and Bryan Bender for the Boston Globe, April 30:
WASHINGTON -- President Obama said Tuesday that the administration is investigating how counterterrorism authorities handled intelligence about Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his mother to determine if Americans can do a better job of preventing future terrorist attacks by self-radicalized individuals. 
“When an event like this happens, we want to review every step that was taken, we want to leave no stone unturned, we want to see if there is in fact additional protocols and procedures that could be put in place that would further improve and enhance our ability to detect a potential attack,’’ Obama said in a White House press conference.
He was reacting to a reporter’s question about a Globe report Monday night that Obama’s director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper, has ordered the review, which will be conducted by the Intelligence Community Inspector General.
“Part of what Director Clapper is doing is to see if we can determine lessons learned from what happened’’ in Boston on April 15, Obama said.
Two bombs exploded near the Boston Marathon finish line, killing three people and injuring more than 260. Tamerlan Tsarnaev died after a confrontation with police on April 19. His younger brother, Dzhokhar, also a suspect in the bombings, was captured in Watertown on the evening of April 19 and remains in custody.
Obama defended the work of the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and state and local police in Massachusetts in quickly taking steps that led to the killing and capture of the alleged suspects. The president said criticism from South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, who has said the FBI and other authorities apparently dropped the ball by not more closely scrutinizing the older Tsarnaev, is “not right, although I am sure it generated some headlines.’’
“It’s not as if the FBI did nothing,’’ Obama said. “They not only investigated the older brother, they interviewed the older brother, they concluded that there were no signs he was engaging in extremist activity.
“The question then is, is there something that happened that triggered radicalization and an actual decision by the older brother to engage in the tragic attack we actually saw in boston, and are there additional things that could have been done in the interim that might have prevented it?’’
He said Russia has been cooperative in providing information about Tsarnaev’s travels to Russia in 2012 and its warnings in 2011 to the FBI and the CIA about his increasing radicalization. But he alluded to decades of distrust between the countries.
“Obviously old habits die hard,’’ he said. “There there are still suspicions between our intelligence and law enforcement agencies that date back 10, 20, 30 years, back to the Cold War.’’
The trouble, he said, is identifying lone actors who are not part of broader terror networks.
“One of the dangers we now face are self-radicalized individuals, who are are already here in the United States and in some cases may not be in any kind of network, but because of whatever warped and twisted ideas they may have decide to carry out an attack,’’ Obama said....
Self-radicalized into what ideology, Mr. President? And what if the Tsarnaevs were actually part of the global jihad network? Would you then admit that such a network exists?

Paving The Road To Ruin With Islamists

by / Personal Liberty Digest

Paving The Road To Ruin With Islamists
Syria was among the topics President Barack Obama addressed in a press conference Tuesday.
“We will not tolerate the use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people.” Those are the words from President Barack Obama. He also warned that if the regime in Syria is using chemical weapons, it will have “crossed a red line” creating a “game changer” for his Administration. Sorry, but this is no game changer.

A decade before the opening of his new Presidential library, President George W. Bush invaded and then occupied Iraq. It was the neoconservatives’ dream to turn the Mideast into a 16th century Venice, a renaissance for an entire region. The seeds of Western democracy were expected to flower and spread.

Instead, we have been left with an Arab Spring that looks more like the great American Dust Bowl.
Yet American politicians keep pushing for greater intervention in the Mideast.

Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), a man who never met a war he didn’t like (amazing given his experiences as a prisoner of war in Vietnam), is again blowing on the cavalry bugles. Last week, the aging warrior said he believes the Obama Administration is being overly cautious in analyzing intelligence about the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria.

McCain said it was clear in his view that the Syrian regime had crossed the red line and that this required immediate military intervention from the United States.

“In my view it was crossed,” McCain said. “Not only have our intelligence people concluded that, but as importantly, the Israelis, the British and the French have as well. Obviously we know Bashar al-Assad will do whatever is necessary to stay in power, [including] massacres of his own people.”

McCain has support from other Republicans, which may make the next war the only thing the President and Republicans can agree upon.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told CNN: “If [the Syrian civil] war doesn’t end soon, the king of Jordan is going to be a casualty.”

The reasoning goes in Washington that America must stop Islamic religious and tribal factions from killing each other? Yet three thoughts come to mind:
  1. Does America not have bigger national security problems, namely North Korea and its long-range missiles, which may already carry nuclear warheads?
  2. If Muslims are killing each other, the Muslim extremists may be too busy to kill us.
  3. How in the world can military intervention in the Mideast do anything other than make things worse?

The Lost Lessons Of History

It’s amazing to watch America go down the road to ruin just like every great power before it. Rome, Spain, France under Napoleon Bonaparte and Britain during Queen Victoria’s reign all made the same irreversible mistakes caused by imperial overstretch.

It is clear to me that Obama and Congress should read Paul Kennedy’s 1987 classic, The Rise and Fall of The Great Powers. Then, they might understand that with military intervention the cost to America in blood, money and stature will lead to inevitable ruin.

The greatest short-term danger is the immeasurable cost resulting from Mideast intervention, which is driving Islamic hatred against the West and was on bloody display in Boston. Osama bin Laden has long been sleeping with the fishes, but the hatred he preached is growing in every nook and cranny around the globe. Washington is determined to be an occupation force in the Mideast, and you can bet Syria is next. That didn’t work out so well for Rome 2,000 years ago, and we can expect the same devastating results — just much more quickly. Technology has compressed time and space. What took 200 years to collapse an ancient power may happen now in 200 days. Thanks, Facebook!

There is no arguing that there are positions of influence to be had and fat profits to be made — for politicians, commodity and stock speculators, and, of course, America’s bread-and-butter businesses in the defense and national security industries. This is but one reason for Washington to prosecute a relentless decade-long war against Islam, a war which can never be won. (There is also a more sinister reason why our government is so reckless in creating Islam as an enemy, which I will get to.)

During the first Gulf War against Iraq, Saddam Hussein’s forces had been driven out of Kuwait and within Iraq’s own borders. Then-President George H.W. Bush considered the absolute conquest of Iraq as well as the consequences of an American occupation.  Colin Powell, then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Bush: “You break it, you own it.”

Bush became convinced that Iraq was too expensive of a proposition. Yet his son, George W. Bush, did not take such caution. He launched an invasion against one evil Mideast dictator at the cost of 5,000 dead and $1 trillion spent. The dividend so envisioned by the younger Bush’s advisers — Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Vice President Dick Cheney — never materialized. Yet it certainly added to their vision of an emerging New World Order, and it added to their own personal wealth.

In 2006, Thom Hartmann of Common Dreams wrote: “… War was good for business, and good for the political power of its advocates, from Rumsfeld to Wolfowitz to Cheney who have all become rich in part because of the arms industry.”

After more than a decade, Islamic extremists bent on jihad might borrow the line from the hit 1990 movie “Home Alone” when young Kevin asks the burglars: “You guys give up, or are you thirsty for more?”

Sadly, and as we will soon find out, the answer is that indeed Washington is thirsty for more. And that brings about a very interesting question: why?

I won’t even speculate on the religious tribalism that thrives in the Mideast or why those nations refuse to adapt to Western democracy. I am clueless as to what drives martyrs to kill Westerners and their own. I understand that I will never fathom the mind of a religious zealot. Perhaps it is that they have been impoverished for so long or perhaps it is their chance to gain world fame. Maybe it is the promise of 72 virgins. It is a conundrum that Western minds will never solve.


Orwell’s Omen

What is more unsettling is why our government is invoking greater retaliation from Islam in a war against us that most of our elected officials know we cannot win.

Perhaps we have been asking the wrong question all along. Perhaps the goal of our government is not to stabilize the Mideast but to destabilize the United States. Sound crazy? George Orwell didn’t think so. From his book 1984:
On the contrary, war hysteria is continuous and universal in all countries, and such acts as raping, looting, the slaughter of children, the reduction of whole populations to slavery, and reprisals against prisoners which extend even to boiling and burying alive, are looked upon as normal, and, when they are committed by one’s own side and not by the enemy, meritorious.  But in a physical sense war involves very small numbers of people, mostly highly trained specialists, and causes comparatively few casualties.
Orwell’s 1984 reads like a mandate for our elected leaders: an infinite period of upheaval with “comparatively few causalities” (at least when measured against the millions of people slaughtered by warfare through the first half of the 20th century).

It is a disturbing endgame being played out by American officials and one that is not serving the Nation.

Prediction: The United States government will put boots on the ground in Syria and any other Islamic country where the outcome will result in further unrest and greater power in the hands of Washington. That means we will not be safer from Islamic extremists that want to kill us or from our government that wishes to enslave us.

Action to take: Intervention in Syria and our continued military and political involvement in the Mideast is an expenditure America cannot afford. However, it will scare us into paying higher taxes and enable the Federal government to take on even greater debts. The inevitable outcrop will be further weakening in the purchasing power of the dollar. The recent correction in gold and silver prices is pure manipulation. It is imperative you hold these instruments in their physical form and, if possible, buy on the current correction. And guns, whiskey and water are even more essential.

Yours in good times and bad,
The truth the politically correct on both sides of the aisle will NOT say
By: Diane Sori

Seething puts it mildly, so mildly in fact that I must temper my words carefully or I will get that infamous 'knock on my door' for if I hear Barack HUSSEIN Obama, Eric Holder, John 'Swiftboat Kerry, or any in that bunch of liars and traitors who are part of this miserable administration say they fear retaliation against muslims in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombings, I will scream...or better yet...hit something.

And it started this past Monday when Attorney General Eric 'Fast & Furious' Holder said, while speaking before the Anti-Defamation League, that the Justice Department is on the lookout for acts of violence or discrimination that signal a backlash against muslims, because the 'alleged' Boston bombers appear to be muslim.

Appear to be...NO appear to be about it, these bast*rds were indeed muslim and we Americans need NOT fear saying it.

And then Holder had the audacity to issue a warning to we warn 'We the People' who are at the receiving end of these barbaric acts done by these barbarians...that we dare NOT discriminate against those very ones out to kill us.

I absolutely cannot stand it anymore and will now say the very things others fear saying.

While America's issues and problems with muslims goes back over two centuries to the days of the Barbary Pirates,* we need to understand the current 'muslim problem' America has...a 'muslim problem' that really NEVER was a problem here at home until muslims declared war on America on September 11, 2001. Remember, until Barack HUSSEIN Obama opened the immigration flood gates to his brethren there wasn't enough of them living here to cause any major problems.

Now remember that as the buildings fell killing over 3000 people, mostly Americans, muslims danced with joy in the streets of Dearborne Michigan, Los Angeles California, Newark New Jersey, and in other cities across America...and of course around the world, especially in countries where the hijackers were deemed heroes in the war of jihad against we infidels.

Deemed heroes that muslim children were and still are taught in school and at home to honor and emulate...deemed heroes to two muslim brothers from Chechnya.

And so the next generation of jihadists is born, and Obama and crew welcomes them to our shores.

But what of the muslims who were already here when 9/11 happened...well those who were NOT celebrating American deaths remained silent...NO unified loud, clear, and strong condemnation of the hijackers...NO voices joining together saying that is NOT us...that is NOT islam.

Remember how even then our government was afraid to step on muslim we pandered to them, made excuses for them, as the new 'politically correct' words of the day became 'radical islam did it'...NOT muslims did it...NOT islam did it.

And so from those politically correct words today's 'muslim problem' began for the reality is that if you do NOT condemn the actions of the few then you condone those said actions...and you become as guilty as if you did the actions yourself.

Now of course to be honest there were a few who spoke out, but their numbers were so small as to be drowned out by the silence of the majority...and remain so even to this day.

Now lets fast forward to April 15, 2013 as the streets of Boston shook as two explosive devices turned Patriots Day into a nightmare NEVER to be forgotten. A nightmare done by two muslim immigrant brothers hell bent on upholding the tenets of the qur'an, the so-called holy book of the so-called islamic faith.

islam, the political system, or cult if you will, hiding behind the guise of calling itself a religion, and its vile qur'an that has 164 verses COMMANDING its followers to kill we infidels...that qur'an....that call to jihad on that fateful day was done by muslims and muslims alone obeying the words laid down in the qur'an.

These two muslims brothers lived their lives by the words of the qur'an with its call to jihad against all who don't submit to the very political system that entwines its tentacles around you, squeezing the very life out of you with its sharia law, honor killings, stonings, child marriages, burka garbage bag tombs for women, and lifting ones butt in the air five times a day in supposed prayer...even blocking major intersections in New York City as it's liberal turncoat mayor joins our president in appeasing those who caused such pain almost 12 years ago....who caused such pain 2 short weeks ago.

And in yesterday's televised press conference Barack HUSSEIN Obama, our muslim-in-chief, had the unmitigated gall to lump the Boston bombings in with the Virginia Tech Massacre and the Sandy Hook Massacre...trying to take the blame and focus off his muslim brethren by trying to declare the bombings an act of domestic terrorism.

Sorry but this time it just isn't going to work for after 9/11, for after Benghazi, and now for after Boston, we know who the enemy is and it's's's those like Barack HUSSEIN Obama, John Kerry, Eric Holder, Chuck Hagel, John Brennan...and lets NOT forget Hillary Clinton...those very people who worry about a backlash against our enemy instead of worrying about the death and carnage the enemy has visited upon Americans.

And political correctness be damned.

* Click on the link below and read an informative article from The Examiner on America's battle with muslims during the early years of our nation: