Does America need another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor to survive? Will it happen soon?

America is in crisis.
The total incompetence in Washington is in the process of turning this once great nation into a 3rd world country and nobody seems to care.

911-twin-towers-fire

Clinton and Obama have destabilized the middle East, funded and encouraged the rise of ISIS and radical Muslims and seem to encourage the genocide of Christians worldwide.  The United States, once considered a leader and defender of the free world is now considered a joke. Benghazi was just a coverup of illegal arm sales to radicals to overthrow and encourage more war in the middle east.

Domestically Obama has opened our borders and allows the free flow of illegal aliens, terrorists and is in the process of bringing in hundreds of thousands of Muslim refugees from Syria. At the same time he is ripping at the fabric of our society banning GOD wherever he can. He has destroyed a working health system just to massage his ego.
He has neutered the Border Patrol threatening to fire or arrest anyone who actually upholds the law.
Obama has neglected to defend the Constitution, instead he encourages illegal activity including the killing of police officers while ignoring the lawlessness in major urban areas committed by minorities.
Actually I am not sure he has even read the Constitution.

Our once proud military is being dismantled and underfunded. Obama even told the Coast Guard that anyone in their ranks who denies global warming will be put in jail. Justice, IRS, EPA, EEOC and other federal agencies are being used to over regulate and destroy those that do not fit Obamas agenda.

If America does not wake up and soon, our reign as a great nation is over.

I could go on and on.

My question is, what will it take to make America Rally and take back our country?

In 1941 it was Pearl Harbor which woke us to rise as a Sleeping Giant and fight Tyranny and Genocide in Germany and Japan.

pearl-harbor-2001-55-g
In 2001 it was 9/11.

Unfortunately in 2015 / 2016 I fear it will take a major attack on the homeland to wake America up.
We are still a sleeping Giant and we still LOVE America and what it represents.

I fear that President Obama is going to bring on this attack himself.

It could be a dirty bomb in a major metropolitan area, a gas attack in a major subway system, a EMP that will kill all our electric and computer systems or it can be a Nuke smuggled in across our Southern border by ISIS.

It is a question not IF this or something else will happen, but WHEN.

Then we will see what this nation is made of.

I truly believe that we are a nation of Patriots, that when pushed to the limit we will stand and fight to save the nation our fathers died for.

But what will it take to get us there? What price will we need to pay? How many will die for the mistakes we made when we elected Barrack Hussein Obama?

What do you stand for? What will it take to get you off your couch to save our way of life?

unclesam1

The Pirate

Obaba to BiBi “Attack Iran and we will shoot down Israeli planes”

Report: Obama Threatened to Shoot Down IAF Iran Strike

Kuwaiti paper claims unnamed Israeli minister with good ties with the US administration ‘revealed the attack plan to John Kerry.’
iron-dome-israel-630x420
By Mark Langfan

The Bethlehem-based news agency Ma’an has cited a Kuwaiti newspaper report Saturday, that US President Barack Obama thwarted an Israeli military attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2014 by threatening to shoot down Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.

Following Obama’s threat, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was reportedly forced to abort the planned Iran attack.

According to Al-Jarida, the Netanyahu government took the decision to strike Iran some time in 2014 soon after Israel had discovered the United States and Iran had been involved in secret talks over Iran’s nuclear program and were about to sign an agreement in that regard behind Israel’s back.

The report claimed that an unnamed Israeli minister who has good ties with the US administration revealed the attack plan to Secretary of State John Kerry, and that Obama then threatened to shoot down the Israeli jets before they could reach their targets in Iran.

Al-Jarida quoted “well-placed” sources as saying that Netanyahu, along with Minister of Defense Moshe Yaalon, and then-Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, had decided to carry out airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear program after consultations with top security commanders.

According to the report, “Netanyahu and his commanders agreed after four nights of deliberations to task the Israeli army’s chief of staff, Benny Gantz, to prepare a qualitative operation against Iran’s nuclear program. In addition, Netanyahu and his ministers decided to do whatever they could do to thwart a possible agreement between Iran and the White House because such an agreement is, allegedly, a threat to Israel’s security.”

The sources added that Gantz and his commanders prepared the requested plan and that Israeli fighter jets trained for several weeks in order to make sure the plans would work successfully. Israeli fighter jets reportedly even carried out experimental flights in Iran’s airspace after they managed to break through radars.

Brzezinski’s idea

Former US diplomat Zbigniew Brzezinski, who enthusiastically campaigned for Obama in 2008, called on him to shoot down Israeli planes if they attack Iran. “They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?” said the former national security advisor to former President Jimmy Carter in an interview with the Daily Beast.

“We have to be serious about denying them that right,” he said. “If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a ‘Liberty’ in reverse.’”

Israel mistakenly attacked the American Liberty ship during the Six-Day War in 1967.

Brzezinski was a top candidate to become an official advisor to President Obama, but he was downgraded after Republican and pro-Israel Democratic charges during the campaign that Brzezinski’s anti-Israel attitude would damage Obama at the polls.

Confessions of a Public Defender Or The unpolitically correct article on Blacks in America

Confessions of a Public Defender

Michael Smith, American Renaissance, May 9, 2014

Inmate
Still liberal after all these years.

I am a public defender in a large southern metropolitan area. Fewer than ten percent of the people in the area I serve are black but over 90 per cent of my clients are black. The remaining ten percent are mainly Hispanics but there are a few whites.

I have no explanation for why this is, but crime has racial patterns. Hispanics usually commit two kinds of crime: sexual assault on children and driving under the influence. Blacks commit many violent crimes but very few sex crimes. The handful of whites I see commit all kinds of crimes. In my many years as a public defender I have represented only three Asians, and one was half black.

As a young lawyer, I believed the official story that blacks are law abiding, intelligent, family-oriented people, but are so poor they must turn to crime to survive. Actual black behavior was a shock to me.

The media invariably sugarcoat black behavior. Even the news reports of the very crimes I dealt with in court were slanted. Television news intentionally leaves out unflattering facts about the accused, and sometimes omits names that are obviously black. All this rocked my liberal, tolerant beliefs, but it took me years to set aside my illusions and accept the reality of what I see every day. I have now served thousands of blacks and their families, protecting their rights and defending them in court. What follow are my observations.

Although blacks are only a small percentage of our community, the courthouse is filled with them: the halls and gallery benches are overflowing with black defendants, families, and crime victims. Most whites with business in court arrive quietly, dress appropriately, and keep their heads down. They get in and get out–if they can–as fast as they can. For blacks, the courthouse is like a carnival. They all seem to know each other: hundreds and hundreds each day, gossiping, laughing loudly, waving, and crowding the halls.

When I am appointed to represent a client I introduce myself and explain that I am his lawyer. I explain the court process and my role in it, and I ask the client some basic questions about himself. At this stage, I can tell with great accuracy how people will react. Hispanics are extremely polite and deferential. An Hispanic will never call me by my first name and will answer my questions directly and with appropriate respect for my position. Whites are similarly respectful.

A black man will never call me Mr. Smith; I am always “Mike.” It is not unusual for a 19-year-old black to refer to me as “dog.” A black may mumble complaints about everything I say, and roll his eyes when I politely interrupt so I can continue with my explanation. Also, everything I say to blacks must be at about the third-grade level. If I slip and use adult language, they get angry because they think I am flaunting my superiority.

At the early stages of a case, I explain the process to my clients. I often do not yet have the information in the police reports. Blacks are unable to understand that I do not yet have answers to all of their questions, but that I will by a certain date. They live in the here and the now and are unable to wait for anything. Usually, by the second meeting with the client I have most of the police reports and understand their case.

PublicDefender

Unlike people of other races, blacks never see their lawyer as someone who is there to help them. I am a part of the system against which they are waging war. They often explode with anger at me and are quick to blame me for anything that goes wrong in their case.

Black men often try to trip me up and challenge my knowledge of the law or the facts of the case. I appreciate sincere questions about the elements of the offense or the sentencing guidelines, but blacks ask questions to test me. Unfortunately, they are almost always wrong in their reading, or understanding, of the law, and this can cause friction. I may repeatedly explain the law, and provide copies of the statute showing, for example, why my client must serve six years if convicted, but he continues to believe that a hand-written note from his “cellie” is controlling law.

The cellie who knows the law.

The risks of trial

The Constitution allows a defendant to make three crucial decisions in his case. He decides whether to plea guilty or not guilty. He decides whether to have a bench trial or a jury trial. He decides whether he will testify or whether he will remain silent. A client who insists on testifying is almost always making a terrible mistake, but I cannot stop him.

Most blacks are unable to speak English well. They cannot conjugate verbs. They have a poor grasp of verb tenses. They have a limited vocabulary. They cannot speak without swearing. They often become hostile on the stand. Many, when they testify, show a complete lack of empathy and are unable to conceal a morality based on the satisfaction of immediate, base needs. This is a disaster, especially in a jury trial. Most jurors are white, and are appalled by the demeanor of uneducated, criminal blacks.

Prosecutors are delighted when a black defendant takes the stand. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. However, the defense usually gets to cross-examine the black victim, who is likely to make just as bad an impression on the stand as the defendant. This is an invaluable gift to the defense, because jurors may not convict a defendant—even if they think he is guilty—if they dislike the victim even more than they dislike the defendant.

Black witnesses can also sway the jury.

Most criminal cases do not go to trial. Often the evidence against the accused is overwhelming, and the chances of conviction are high. The defendant is better off with a plea bargain: pleading guilty to a lesser charge and getting a lighter sentence.

The decision to plea to a lesser charge turns on the strength of the evidence. When blacks ask the ultimate question—”Will we win at trial?”—I tell them I cannot know, but I then describe the strengths and weaknesses of our case. The weaknesses are usually obvious: There are five eyewitnesses against you. Or, you made a confession to both the detective and your grandmother. They found you in possession of a pink cell phone with a case that has rhinestones spelling the name of the victim of the robbery. There is a video of the murderer wearing the same shirt you were wearing when you were arrested, which has the words “In Da Houz” on the back, not to mention you have the same “RIP Pookie 7/4/12” tattoo on your neck as the man in the video. Etc.

If you tell a black man that the evidence is very harmful to his case, he will blame you. “You ain’t workin’ fo’ me.” “It like you workin’ with da State.” Every public defender hears this. The more you try to explain the evidence to a black man, the angrier he gets. It is my firm belief many black are unable to discuss the evidence against them rationally because they cannot view things from the perspective of others. They simply cannot understand how the facts in the case will appear to a jury.

Upset

This inability to see things from someone else’s perspective helps explain why there are so many black criminals. They do not understand the pain they are inflicting on others. One of my robbery clients is a good example. He and two co-defendants walked into a small store run by two young women. All three men were wearing masks. They drew handguns and ordered the women into a back room. One man beat a girl with his gun. The second man stood over the second girl while the third man emptied the cash register. All of this was on video.

My client was the one who beat the girl. When he asked me, “What are our chances at trial?” I said, “Not so good.” He immediately got angry, raised his voice, and accused me of working with the prosecution. I asked him how he thought a jury would react to the video. “They don’t care,” he said. I told him the jury would probably feel deeply sympathetic towards these two women and would be angry at him because of how he treated them. I asked him whether he felt bad for the women he had beaten and terrorized. He told me what I suspected—what too many blacks say about the suffering of others: “What do I care? She ain’t me. She ain’t kin. Don’t even know her.”

NoRemorse

No fathers

As a public defender, I have learned many things about people. One is that defendants do not have fathers. If a black even knows the name of his father, he knows of him only as a shadowy person with whom he has absolutely no ties. When a client is sentenced, I often beg for mercy on the grounds that the defendant did not have a father and never had a chance in life. I have often tracked down the man’s father–in jail–and have brought him to the sentencing hearing to testify that he never knew his son and never lifted a finger to help him. Often, this is the first time my client has ever met his father. These meetings are utterly unemotional.

WheresDaddy

Many black defendants don’t even have mothers who care about them. Many are raised by grandmothers after the state removes the children from an incompetent teenaged mother. Many of these mothers and grandmothers are mentally unstable, and are completely disconnected from the realities they face in court and in life. A 47-year-old grandmother will deny that her grandson has gang ties even though his forehead is tattooed with a gang sign or slogan. When I point this out in as kind and understanding way as I can, she screams at me. When black women start screaming, they invoke the name of Jesus and shout swear words in the same breath.

Black women have great faith in God, but they have a twisted understanding of His role. They do not pray for strength or courage. They pray for results: the satisfaction of immediate needs. One of my clients was a black woman who prayed in a circle with her accomplices for God’s protection from the police before they would set out to commit a robbery.

The mothers and grandmothers pray in the hallways–not for justice, but for acquittal. When I explain that the evidence that their beloved child murdered the shop keeper is overwhelming, and that he should accept the very fair plea bargain I have negotiated, they will tell me that he is going to trial and will “ride with the Lord.” They tell me they speak to God every day and He assures them that the young man will be acquitted.

Christians

The mothers and grandmothers do not seem to be able to imagine and understand the consequences of going to trial and losing. Some–and this is a shocking reality it took me a long time to grasp–don’t really care what happens to the client, but want to make it look as though they care. This means pounding their chests in righteous indignation, and insisting on going to trial despite terrible evidence. They refuse to listen to the one person–me–who has the knowledge to make the best recommendation. These people soon lose interest in the case, and stop showing up after about the third or fourth court date. It is then easier for me to convince the client to act in his own best interests and accept a plea agreement.

Part of the problem is that underclass black women begin having babies at age 15. They continue to have babies, with different black men, until they have had five or six. These women do not go to school. They do not work. They are not ashamed to live on public money. They plan their entire lives around the expectation that they will always get free money and never have to work. I do not see this among whites, Hispanics, or any other people.

The black men who become my clients also do not work. They get social security disability payments for a mental defect or for a vague and invisible physical ailment. They do not pay for anything: not for housing (Grandma lives on welfare and he lives with her), not for food (Grandma and the baby-momma share with him), and not for child support. When I learn that my 19-year-old defendant does not work or go to school, I ask, “What do you do all day?” He smiles. “You know, just chill.” These men live in a culture with no expectations, no demands, and no shame.

If you tell a black to dress properly for trial, and don’t give specific instructions, he will arrive in wildly inappropriate clothes. I represented a woman who was on trial for drugs; she wore a baseball cap with a marijuana leaf embroidered on it. I represented a man who wore a shirt that read “rules are for suckers” to his probation hearing. Our office provides suits, shirts, ties, and dresses for clients to wear for jury trials. Often, it takes a whole team of lawyers to persuade a black to wear a shirt and tie instead of gang colors.

Marijuana

From time to time the media report that although blacks are 12 percent of the population they are 40 percent of the prison population. This is supposed to be an outrage that results from unfair treatment by the criminal justice system. What the media only hint at is another staggering reality: recidivism. Black men are arrested and convicted over and over. It is typical for a black man to have five felony convictions before the age of 30. This kind of record is rare among whites and Hispanics, and probably even rarer among Asians.

Stats

At one time our office was looking for a motto that defined our philosophy. Someone joked that it should be: “Doesn’t everyone deserve an eleventh chance?”

I am a liberal. I believe that those of us who are able to produce abundance have a moral duty to provide basic food, shelter, and medical care for those who cannot care for themselves. I believe we have this duty even to those who can care for themselves but don’t. This world view requires compassion and a willingness to act on it.

My experience has taught me that we live in a nation in which a jury is more likely to convict a black defendant who has committed a crime against a white. Even the dullest of blacks know this. There would be a lot more black-on-white crime if this were not the case.

However, my experience has also taught me that blacks are different by almost any measure to all other people. They cannot reason as well. They cannot communicate as well. They cannot control their impulses as well. They are a threat to all who cross their paths, black and non-black alike.

I do not know the solution to this problem. I do know that it is wrong to deceive the public. Whatever solutions we seek should be based on the truth rather than what we would prefer was the truth. As for myself, I will continue do my duty to protect the rights of all who need me.

What has Obama done or Why Ferguson went down as it did……

To understand President Obama and his actions we need to start with where he came from. He called himself a community organizer but what if he is a community agitator? What if he thinks that the Government can lift Blacks out of poverty by causing a social revolution as in socialism?

When Obama came into office there were “welfare to work” programs established by President Clinton. For some unexplained reason Obama signed these out of existence.  Now these programs were actually working.

Obama had ran on a platform of helping the blacks, making things equal. He told them that they were “entitled” to things.

Then he was elected and gave out welfare checks, disabilities and free “Obama Phones”.

The poor Black communities thought that they hit the gold mine. The Government spigot was turned on and they were filling their proverbial pot ‘o Gold. But they wanted more. Soon the news was full of stories of flash mobs, where mobs of black youth invaded stores and took whatever they wanted. Stealing everything.
Now Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton wanted their pot of Gold so they waited on an opportunity to take advantage of.

They got it one evening in Florida when Treyvon Martin met a community patrol officer named Zimmermann.

Even though the shooting was deemed legal it was presented to the world by Jesse, Al and Barrack, as a white on black hate crime, when in essence it was a case of an over zealous guard and a aggressive entitled youth who had been taught that all things can be resolved through violence. Even when black on white murder was increasing sharply and black on black crime in Chicago skyrocketed, the media and government focused on the isolated white on black crimes.

How is this related to Ferguson? Michael Brown had watched and listened to the propaganda floated by Obama, Jackson and Sharpton. He felt entitled, that everything was his for the taking and if anyone resisted violence was acceptable. Why not? The flash mobs were never punished, everything else in his life came for free. He was entitled.
So when he and his buddy went to the local store he thought nothing of stealing some cigars. When confronted by the store owner who was just trying to make a living we saw Michael Brown on video using violence, force, threats and intimidation to get his way.

But the store owner believed in the system. He called to Police to report the theft. But the black community have been taught to not trust the police. So even if officer Wilson was correct is using deadly force to protect his life, the liberals in this country will blame him, because they have been taught by Obama that the blacks in the US have been discriminated against so they should always be given the benefit of the doubt.

So what did the community do? First they rioted and used it as an excuse to rob their local businesses.

Ferguson Burns

Then when the verdict was issued (correctly in my mind) they looted and then burned down their community. They got their free beer and tennis shoes, then set fire to the local businesses their community depended on. They even looted the market where Michel Brown started this destruction.

They have been programmed to act this way. They know they will not be prosecuted, they know Obama will send cash to rebuild. They know that Obama will keep them down on the plantation and voting for the Democrats.

After all they live in an Obama socialist community and everything will or should be free because they are entitled to it.

 

Obama Praises Muslim Cleric Who Backed Fatwa on Killing of U.S. Soldiers

 

Obama Praises Muslim Cleric Who Backed Fatwa on Killing of U.S. Soldiers

President Barack Obama addresses the United Nations General Assembly / AP

President Barack Obama addresses the United Nations General Assembly / AP

BY:
September 24, 2014 1:40 pm

President Barack Obama favorably quoted and praised on Wednesday in his speech before the United Nations a controversial Muslim cleric whose organization has reportedly endorsed the terror group Hamas and supported a fatwa condoning the murder of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

Obama in his remarks offered praise to controversial cleric Sheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah and referred to him as a moderate Muslim leader who can help combat the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’s (ISIL or ISIS) radical ideology.

However, Bin Bayyah himself has long been engulfed in controversy for many of his views, including the reported backing of a 2004 fatwa that advocated violent resistance against Americans fighting in Iraq.

This is not the first time that the Obama administration has extoled Bin Bayyah, who also has served as the vice president of a Muslim scholars group founded by a radical Muslim Brotherhood leader who has called “for the death of Jews and Americans,” according to Fox News and other reports.

The State Department’s Counterterrorism Bureau (CT) was forced to issue multiple apologies earlier this year after the Washington Free Beacon reported on its promotion of Bin Bayyah on Twitter.

“This should not have been tweeted and has since been deleted,” the CT Bureau tweeted at the time after many expressed anger over the original endorsement of Bin Bayyah.

However, it appears that Obama and the White House are still supportive of Bin Bayyah, who, despite his past statements, is still hailed by some as a moderate alternative to ISIL and al Qaeda.

“The ideology of ISIL or al Qaeda or Boko Haram will wilt and die if it is consistently exposed, confronted, and refuted in the light of day,” Obama said before the U.N., according to a White House transcript of his remarks.

“Look at the new Forum for Promoting Peace in Muslim Societies—Sheikh bin Bayyah described its purpose: ‘We must declare war on war, so the outcome will be peace upon peace,’” Obama said, quoting the controversial cleric.

Concern over the administration’s relationship with Bin Bayyah started as early as 2013, whenoutrage ensued after he was reported to have met with Obama’s National Security Council staff at the White House.

While Bin Bayyah has condemned the actions of groups such as Boko Haram and ISIL, he also has taken controversial positions against Israel.

He issued in 2009 a fatwa “barring ‘all forms of normalization’ with Israel,” according to a Fox report on the White House meeting.

Additionally, the notorious 2004 fatwa permitting armed resistance against U.S. military personnel in Iraq reportedly stated that “resisting occupation troops” is a “duty” for all Muslims, according to reports about the edict.

Patrick Poole, a reporter and terrorism analyst who has long tracked Bin Bayyah, expressed shock that the Obama administration would endorse the cleric on the world stage.

“It is simply amazing that just a few months ago the State Department had to publicly apologize for tweeting out it’s support for Bin Bayyah, only to have Barack Obama go before the leaders of the entire world and publicly endorse Bin Bayyah’s efforts,” Poole said.

“It seems that nothing can stop this administration’s determination to rehabilitate Bin Bayyah’s image, transforming him from the Islamic cleric who issued the fatwa to kill Americans in Iraq and calling for the death of Jews to the de facto White House Islamic mufti,” he said.

This type of mentality has contributed to the administration’s foreign policy failures in the region,” Poole said.

“This is a snapshot of why this administration’s foreign policy in the Middle East is a complete catastrophe,” he said. “The keystone of their policy has been that so-called ‘moderate Islamists’ were going to be the great counter to al Qaeda. But if you take less than 30 seconds to do a Google search on any of these ‘moderate Islamists,’ you immediately find they are just a degree or two from the most hardcore jihadis and have little to no difference when it comes to condoning violence.”

A White House official said that the president’s remarks speak for themselves and declined to add anything further.

The anatomy of ISIS ***Must read

The anatomy of ISIS: How the ‘Islamic State’ is run, from oil to beheadings

September 18, 2014 — Updated 1201 GMT (2001 HKT)
ISIS is putting in place structures to rule the territories the group conquers. (Source: TRAC)
ISIS is putting in place structures to rule the territories the group conquers. (Source: TRAC)

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • New research reveals ISIS government structure in parts of Syria and Iraq
  • Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, a former U.S. inmate in Iraq, is leader of so-called “Islamic State”
  • TRAC research shows ISIS’ evolution from military force to basic services provider
  • Many ISIS officials, including key deputies, are Saddam Hussein-era military officers

(CNN) — Put yourself in the shoes (and sixth-century black robes) of ISIS’ Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the mysterious boss of the terror group that is striking fear into the hearts of leaders around the world.

In the past couple of years you’ve managed to avoid drone attacks and survive civil wars, unify militant groups in two different countries under your banner, raise an army of jihadis from across the globe, and seize a chunk of land stretching from northern Syria to central Iraq.

Your newly-declared “Islamic State” is the size of Pennsylvania, so how do you govern it? You compartmentalize.

New data from the Terrorism Research and Analysis Consortium(TRAC) has revealed that ISIS is putting governing structures in place to rule the territories the group conquers once the dust settles on the battlefield.

The research shows how ISIS has gone from being a purely military force to building a system that can provide basic services, such as making sure that gas and food are available, to its new citizens.

From the cabinet and the governors to the financial and legislative bodies, ISIS’ bureaucratic hierarchy looks a lot like those of some of the Western countries whose values it rejects — if you take away the democracy and add in a council to consider who should be beheaded.

Peshmerga battle ISIS with aid from above

Sunni youth fight ISIS

Are Sunnis the key to stopping ISIS?

ISIS leader: ‘See you guys in New York’

Baghdadi, his Cabinet advisers and his two key deputies comprise the executive branch of the government, known as “Al Imara.”

The two deputies — Abu Ali al-Anbari and Abu Muslim al-Turkmani, veteran Iraqi military officials who served under Saddam Hussein — oversee Syria and Iraq, respectively.

ISIS has probably split the governance of the “Islamic State” into Syrian and Iraqi branches simply to make it easier to run, according to Jasmine Opperman, TRAC’s Southern Africa Director.

“They see the caliphate as one state, yet there are two different governments,” Opperman told CNN. “I believe this split is purely administrative at this time. They don’t want to be seen as downplaying the caliphate, but to make it easier to govern they were forced to make a separation between Syria and Iraq.”

The two deputies deliver orders to the governors in charge of the various sub-states in Syria and Iraq under ISIS control, who then instruct local councils on how to implement the executive branch’s decrees on everything from media relations and recruiting to policing and financial matters.

The Shura council — which reports directly to the executive branch — is the caliphate’s religious monitor, appointed to make sure that all the local councils and governors are sticking to ISIS’ version of Islamic law.

The recent murders of Western hostages James Foley, Steven Sotloff, and David Haines would have fallen under the Shura council’s purview, according to Opperman.

“Let’s say a significant execution is going to take place, something that will get ISIS on the front page of the newspaper,” Opperman said. “It cannot be done without Shura council approval.”

The Shura council also has the power to censure the leadership for running afoul of its interpretation of Sharia law, according to Opperman.

“The Shura council has the right to tell Baghdadi to go if he’s not adhering to ISIS’ religious standards,” she told CNN. “It would most probably never happen, but the fact that it’s possible indicates the council’s prominence.”

Baghdadi — who was once imprisoned by U.S. forces in Iraq —seems to have incorporated the American military’s own counter-insurgency mantra of “Clear and Hold” to win territory, establish control over the area, then get the locals to help govern it.

As time goes on, ISIS is evolving into a government whose political decision-making cannot be separated from its military capabilities, according to Opperman.

“It’s two sides of the same coin,” she said. “We’ve seen the military side, with the war cabinet that directs brigades. But now on the other side we’re seeing how ISIS wants to govern. The two processes inform one another.”

DOJ coordinating with Media Matters? Anyone else see a problem with this?

Department Of Justice, Media Matters Coordinate To Attack Reporter

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder provides an update on the Justice DepartmentÕs efforts in Ferguson, Missouri, during a news conference with Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Molly Moran and Office of Community Oriented Policing Services Director 
Ronald Davis at the department  

Since when does the Department of Justice coordinate with an obviously liberal media organization to go after a conservative reporter? It’s official: At least since 2011.

In email exchanges obtained by The Daily Caller in two separate FOIA requests, a coordinated effort to slam Breitbart News reporter Matthew Boyleemerged. To be sure, Boyle is not a reporter who is beloved by other reporters and he’s been critiqued on any number of matters that include his youthful chipmunk cheeks, his previously questionable Twitter avatar and his TV skills. But his beat was DOJ and Eric Holder and shouldn’t a reporter be commended for going after an enterprising story or two on his beat?

Even Slate‘s Dave Weigel agreed with that sentiment. “I see Media Matters giving Holder a huzzah for calling the Caller out,” he wrote in November 2011. “But calling it out for what? Are news organizations not allowed to enterprise stories by asking people whether they think someone should resign? News organizations do this all the time. The Caller’s ‘sin’ seems to be doing it with no back-up from the rest of the press.”

And yet, all this media scheming from the Department of Justice.

As revealed in the FOIA docs, Media Matters Deputy Research Director Matt Gertz sent a post concerning the NRA’s growing contributions to Holder’s critics to DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler, Holder’s top press flack who resigned in March, 2013. She replied, “Thanks, you know boyle has been doing robo calls to top members right? This is campaign mounted by daily caller. He has called 60 offices and gotten to 8 last week.” Gertz replied, “Yeah, that was what my original piece on the story was about.”

At the time of the exchange, Boyle worked for The Daily Caller. 

Years later in February, 2013, Boyle wrote a story for Breitbart News about Schmaler’s “colluding” with “far left wing” Media Matters to attack him, lawmakers and other members of the media. Funny enough, Boyle attempted to seek comment from Schmaler on why she resigned. He wrote, “Schmaler has not answered when asked by Breitbart News whether her resignation has anything to do with the coming hearings on DOJ collusion with groups like Media Matters.”

Weirdly, it takes two years (or longer) for DOJ to respond to FOIA requests.

Further perplexing: TheDC FOIA’d the Justice Department for all mentions of Matthew Boyle in agency communications. The specific request was ”All records relating to and about Matthew Boyle.” Carmen Mallon, chief of staff for DOJ, replied in a formal letter saying that no such records existed despite the above exchange between Schmaler and Gertz.

“For your information, neither this Office nor any of these senior leadership offices of the Department typically maintain records on individuals,” she wrote. “As such, this office would not maintain the type of records you are seeking.

“However, in an effort to be of assistance, please be advised that a search has been conducted of the electronic database of the Departmental Executive Secretariat, which is the official records repository for the Offices of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, and Associate Attorney General, and no records subject to FOIA were located. A search has also been conducted in the Office of Information Policy and no records subject to the FOIA were located.”

Gee, thanks Carmen. Except that the records concerning DOJ and Boyle were maintained, located and sent.

Please be advised. If you’re the DOJ and want to get some bad press out there on a reporter who may or may not be a thorn in your side, Media Matters is on speed dial.

DOJ-Media Matters Coordination

http://www.scribd.com/embeds/240179760/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&show_recommendations=true

FOUR Terrorists caught Sept 10, 2014 trying to cross into TEXAS! #Sealourborders

BREAKING: Four Terrorists Were Captured on U.S. Border on Sept. 10 – The Day Before 9/11

Screenshot 2014-09-17 at 11.34.20 PM

Above: ISIS fighters in Mosul, Iraq

by Brian Hayes | Top Right News

Congressman Jason Chaffetz broke this stunning news Wednesday that four known terrorists were apprehended at the US border in Texas on September 10 – the day before the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

Chaffetz questioned Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson on whether he is “aware of any apprehensions of suspected or known terrorists.”
Johnson dodged the question.

Rep. Chaffetz told Megyn Kelly there were four terrorists arrested crossing the US border in Texas on September 10.

There were actually four individuals trying to cross through the Texas border, who were apprehended at two different stations, that do have ties to known terrorist organizations in the Middle East.

WATCH:

At press time, Chaffetz’ staff were unable to confirm to Top Right News what nation from which these terrorists had originated, but noted that DHS had confirmed to Congressional intelligence members last week that ISIS is planning an infiltration of our Southern border.

Liberals practicing fascism and totalitarianism to take over America?

The Piratearian
05/17/214

 

I am alarmed with the direction the liberals and liberal media are taking this once great nation.
It really surfaced with prop 8 in California. Gay Marriage.
Supporters of gay marriage took public documents of who donated against the cause.

These people were then “outed” publicly humiliated, they protested their companies, their jobs, their religion.
The media supported these actions.

These same tactics are now being used against anyone who does not support the “gay” lifestyle or whose views do not fall in line with the “liberal mindset”.

These people seem to ignore the constitution that gives us Free Speech, Freedom OF Religion (Not freedom FROM religion)
This war goes all the way to the White House where President Obama approves of these tactics.

This must stop now.

This is reminiscent of the rise of the Nazi’s in the 1930’s except conservatives are the new Jews.

Yes Conservatives are being treated the same way Hitler treated the Jews in pre World War II Germany.

Can it be stopped short of a civil war? I hope so. But to this Pirate, I do not see the left stopping short of Americans standing up to support their rights and freedoms guaranteed to them (US) over 233 years ago.

Operation American Spring to hit D.C. to oust Obama, Biden, Boehner, Holder – Washington Times

Operation American Spring to hit D.C. to oust Obama, Biden, Boehner, Holder – Washington Times.

 

A group of self-described revolutionary-style patriots with a million mobilized militia members are heading to downtown Washington, D.C., this week to bring a simple message to political leadership, from President Obama to House Speaker John Boehner: Get out.

They’re called the Operation American Spring — and they’re vowing to oust the likes of Mr. Obama, Mr. Boehner, Attorney General Eric Holder, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Sen. Mitch McConnell, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Raw Story reported.


SEE ALSO: Throw the bums out: Poll shows Americans want turnover in Congress


“We are calling for [their] removal … as a start toward constitutional restoration,” said retired Army Col. Harry Riley, the leader of the group, Raw Story reported. “They have all abandoned the U.S. Constitution, are unworthy to be retained in a position that calls for servant status.”

The aim of the group, too, is to influence those politicos who aren’t targeted for ouster to “sponsor and pass very constitutionally crafted state legislation to dissolve the size, powers, scope and spending of the U.S. government by two-thirds,” the media outlet reported.

The group expects between 10 million and 30 million similarly thinking Americans to meet them in the capital on Friday for a rally that’s being billed as a sort of “Arab Spring” for Americans.

Meanwhile, the group is holding another event on the same day in Bunerkville, Nev., near cattle rancher Cliven Bundy’s property and in support of his stand-off with the Bureau of Land Management over grazing fees.

The Friday event was promoted by Tea Party Nation.

Mr. Riley said he hopes the event will go forward peaceably, but that so far, peaceful protests haven’t brought citizens much luck. He also said that more than 1 million militia members have already mobilized for the event — and that projections of 10 million to attend aren’t pie in the sky.


SEE ALSO: CARSON: Truth and honesty still matter in politics


“For more than five years, ‘we the people’ have been writing, calling, faxing Congress, the media, screaming in town halls, marching, rallying, demonstrating, petitioning, all to no avail,” he said, Raw Story reported. “Every branch of government looks at ‘we the people’ whom they have taken an oath to serve, as ‘pests,’ interfering with their political agenda, cramping their self-serving, greedy agendas. We have no faith in the ballot box any longer, as many believe this sacred secret box has been compromised.