Look Who’s in the White House!

If you haven’t been praying, now might be a good time to start.

THERE ARE NO SURPRISES HERE
FOR THOSE OF US WHO SAW IT COMING
 – THE REST OF DESERVE IT !!!
Arif Alikhan –
Assistant Secretary for Policy Development for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Mohammed Elibiary –
 Homeland Security Adviser
Rashad Hussain –
Special Envoy to the (OIC) Organization of the Islamic Conference
Salam al-Marayati –
 Obama Adviser – founder Muslim Public Affairs Council and its current executive director
Imam Mohamed Magid –
Obama’s Sharia Czar – Islamic Society of North America
Eboo Patel –
Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships
This is flat out scary!!!!
mime-attachment1
The foxes are now living in the hen house…Now ask me why I am concerned!!!

 

Questioning faith of same-sex ‘marriage’ fans ‘bulls—‘

Famed pastor Rob Bell says that ‘really, really, really pushes people away’ from Christianity.

The following was posted by Drew Zhan of WND, May 18, 2013.

130513gaymarriagedebate-340x170A former pastor whom Time magazine dubbed among the 100 most influential people in the world said it’s “bulls—” that his faith is brought into question now that he’s publicly backed same-sex marriage.

Best-selling author and teacher Rob Bell told a British radio host it’s time the church catch up with the “modern world” in accepting same-sex marriage and that questioning the orthodoxy of those who do amounts to “the sort of bulls— that really, really, really pushes people away” from Christianity.

Bell has become a superstar of the emergent church movement, and his Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Mich., was once one of the fastest growing in the country, until his controversial book “Love Wins” created fallout in the congregation and pushed him to move out of the pastorate toward a wider ministry.

But Carl Gallups, pastor of Hickory Hammock Baptist Church in Milton, Fla., and author of the Amazon.com science and religion best-seller “The Magic Man in the Sky: Effectively Defending the Christian Faith,” warns that on this issue, Bell has become “nothing more than a wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing.”

“Rob Bell says that the real mission and glory of the church is to ebb and flow with whatever culture it is in,” Gallups said in a radio interview last week. “Well, that is the antithesis, that is the exact opposite of what the Scripture commands the church to do. The Scripture commands that we are the salt and the light, that the church is to change and affect the culture around it and to never never, never, never give in and compromise with the culture.

“[Bell’s] whole view of Scripture, his whole view of the role and mission of the church is perverted,” Gallups said, “and out of his mouth comes what’s in his heart.”

Bell had appeared on the U.K. faith debate program “Unbelievable?” hosted by Justin Brierley on Premier Christian Radio to discuss same-sex marriage.

“I think it’s time for the church to acknowledge that we have brothers and sisters who are gay and want to share their life with someone,” he told Brierley. “This is a part of life in the modern world and that’s how it is. And that cultural consciousness has shifted, and this is how the world is and that what’s happening for a lot of people, is that they want nothing to do with God and Jesus because they can’t see beyond that particular issue.

On the question of whether or not homosexuality, however, is a “sin,” Bell said, “I’m not aware that Jesus mentions it. I think you have about five verses that can be read a number of different ways. And there is a large Christian tradition that sees this as there are Scriptures that speak to this, but I don’t think you make it an overwhelmingly (sic) case against it.”

Here again, Gallups, in an interview on “PPSimmons Radio,” said Bell is wrong.

“Jesus did mention it, one time indirectly and a couple of times very, very directly, and I’m surprised that Rob Bell doesn’t know this,” Gallups said. “Jesus speaks a couple of times of marriage, and one place particularly, he goes all the way back and quotes Genesis and quotes the beginning and quotes God’s idea and ideal of marriage from the beginning. … and it’s very clear it’s between a man and a woman. … The only definition he gives is a man and woman, the traditional, historical, biblical definition.”

“When he defines marriage with such exclusive boundaries, there is an indirect reference to homosexual marriage,” Gallups said. “Rob Bell is just absolutely mistaken.”

Gallups, in fact, wrote a column for WND titled, “Did Jesus Condemn Homosexuality?” which details further Jesus’ words on the issue.

For example, Gallups writes, “Three of the four gospels contain quotes from Jesus about the sinful condition of Sodom and Gomorrah and the destruction that the celebration of the presenting sin of homosexuality wrought upon them. One of those quotes equates the sins of Sodom (homosexuality) to the same type of pervasive perversion of Noah’s day (Luke 17:26-30). So, as it turns out … YES, Jesus did speak rather forthrightly, and often, about the sin of homosexuality and the judgment that it brings upon societies that celebrate it.”

Put to further questioning in the U.K. interview, Bell further questioned New Testament writings, penned by the ancient Paul, on homosexual relationships: “Paul didn’t have that cultural framework or conception [of committed same-sex partnerships] operating around him. I think he had men and boys, I think he had temples, I did not think he was talking about what we’re talking about in 2013, which was two, committed people of a same-sex relationship.”

Yet Gallups again argued that Scripture is clear and plain, such as Romans 1:26-27, which states, “God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”

Gallups speculated there are only three reasons a Bible teacher like Bell would so “twist” the

Scriptures: “Either he flat does not know the Scripture at all, [or] somebody very, very close to him is deeply involved in this sin and it’s such an emotional issue with Rob that he is desperately trying to make it right in his mind [or] he himself is somehow involved in this sin.

“These are not accusations,” Gallups clarified, “I’m speculating, but I’m just telling you, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if in months or years to come we discover that this is a highly, highly emotional issue to Rob Bell because of something like this. … Either he just flat doesn’t know how to interpret Scripture or somebody very dear to him, maybe a brother or a sister or a relative or a best friend is caught up in this and he’s trying to justify it or somehow he slipped into this area of sin himself and desperately wants to be justified before God.

“There’s no other logical explanation for it,” Gallups said. “If this man knows the Scripture at all, then he knows this is not correct.”

See the exxceptional original interview with Bell at  Sound off on ex-Pastor Rob Bell’s call for Christian churches to embrace same-sex marriage. This is well worth your time.

Is this Joe Biden’s biggest blunder of all time?

The families of three fallen Navy SEAL Team Six members say President Obama and Vice President Biden are culpable for the deaths of their sons for publicly identifying the unit that killed Osama bin Laden and pursuing policies that coddle Muslims and put our own troops at a tactical disadvantage.

SEAL Team Six carried out the daring raid in Pakistan in early May 2011. Three months later, three members of the unit were among 38 killed in a Chinook helicopter crash in Afghanistan. Twenty-five of the dead were special operations forces. Larry Klayman is founder of Freedom Watch, a WND columnist and the attorney representing three of the families who lost their sons. He said the Obama administration carelessly and illegally revealed the role of SEAL Team Six shortly after announcing the successful mission to kill bin Laden.

“Shortly after that successful raid on bin Laden, the president – through the vice president for political purposes – released the name of SEAL Team Six. That’s classified information, and even (then) Defense Secretary Robert Gates was critical of that. So that was like putting a target on the backs of the sons of my clients,” said Klayman, who revealed the helicopter may have been infiltrated by the Taliban before the crash because the Afghans on board were last-minute changes from the names on the original flight manifest.

Klayman said Vice President Joe Biden deserves special blame for these deaths.

“Biden did something, which was more than irresponsible. He served on foreign relations committees, intelligence committees. He knew, or should have known, what he was doing. He should be held accountable. Frankly, he should even be held criminally accountable for doing that,” Klayman said.

In addition to the identification of the the team, Klayman said the Obama administration is culpable for these deaths due to a policy of coddling Muslims and putting tremendous restrictions on U.S. forces.

“This president has set a tone that Muslim outreach … is more important than protecting the lives of our servicemen, and that’s crept into the military brass to the point where they can’t engage in preemptive fire. They can’t engage in return fire until they’re fired upon once. They’re sent into battle without adequate equipment,” he said.

Perhaps the greatest insult to the families was at the funeral for their sons in Afghanistan. The military refused to allow a Christian minister or chaplain at the service and instead brought in a Muslim cleric who proceeded to slander the fallen.

“For some bizarre reason, probably this Muslim outreach again of Barack Obama, they had a Muslim cleric give a prayer. Why the heck you would have a Muslim prayer and the servicemen are Christian is beyond imagination. So it has to come from the top down. And this cleric then proceeded in Arabic. No one understood it at the time, but we have a video of it, and it was translated by certified translators. He proceeded to damn my clients’ sons, and others who died, as infidels and that they should go to hell under Allah, the Muslim god,” he said.

“That’s unbelievable. We’ve never even gotten an apology from the military that they did that,” said Klayman, who is demanding a congressional investigation and added that an announcement of litigation will be coming soon.

“This is a major scandal. This is as big if not bigger than Benghazi because it concerns all of the military,” he said. “The mid-level military brass are not serving the interests of the brave fighting men that serve behind them. But the problem is that the tone and substance of these policies come from Barack Obama himself.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/biden-now-blamed-in-seal-team-6-deaths/#u1fUtOtyPHRlpI2J.99

The IRS v. Catholic Vote

This is one issue that Catholics and others of faith are able to stand together when faced with our very oppressive government that seeks to silence and intimidate any and everyone that expresses opinions and convictions that differs with the policies of the Obama administration. When you read the Catholic response below, it almost causes one to desire to be a Catholic.

cv-logo5It’s true.

The recent revelations concerning the illegal actions by the IRS targeting conservative groups compel me to speak out.

In July 2009, the Chicago IRS office threatened the CatholicVote.org Education Fund.

The CV Education Fund is our 501(c)3 tax-exempt entity, created to educate, inspire and mobilize Catholic voters. As you may know, 501(c)3 charities, unlike our sister org (CatholicVote.org, a 501c4 organization) are not permitted to intervene in any political campaign or to oppose or support any political candidate.

We never did.

But according to the IRS, an unnamed source provided them information, including an email that we distributed prior to the 2008 election, which prompted their ‘examination.’

The email in question was titled “Barack Obama on the Issues of Importance to Catholics” and it specifically disclaimed any endorsement or approval of any political candidate.

In fact, our email did not even offer our position! Instead, we used actual Obama press releases and news stories to provide voters information on his positions on the issues of “abortion, stem cell research, contraceptives, and gay marriage.”

We urged voters to gather the facts, and ended our email with this line: “Let’s have an informed electorate on Tuesday.”

For this, we received a lengthy letter with over 50 questions asking for everything from how many people are on our email list, bank account names, and our checking account numbers.

Yes, even our checking account numbers!

To properly respond to the IRS, we were forced to divert staff time and precious resources to pay for legal counsel. Over a period of weeks, we provided the IRS everything they asked for.

But we didn’t stop there.

As a part of our response, we cited the IRS code, which explicitly states that charities like ours are permitted to reach the public with a ‘pure issue message.’ Nothing in the law prohibits organizations like ours from informing voters about the positions taken by candidates for public office. Our 501(c)3 entity has never endorsed, supported or expressly advocated the election or defeat of ANY political candidate.

We argued that the IRS code is vague and standardless, and that no objective standard exists to regulate what might or might not constitute political intervention – thus opening the door to abuse. We told the IRS that groups like ours should not be subjected to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.

If they chose to fine us, we were prepared to sue.

The IRS ultimately chose to do nothing – they backed down.

Why is this important? Because the IRS scandal brewing in Washington D.C. suggests that their examination of the CatholicVote.org Education Fund could have been politically motivated.

Were we targeted for our political views? Who and what prompted the IRS to investigate us?

Did their investigation have anything to do with our “Imagine the Potential” viral video celebrating the gift of life, including the choice for life made by Barack Obama’s mother that was watched by millions of people? This video was released 5 months before we were investigated and received national attention including coverage on the front page of the Washington Post website.

Was the IRS investigation intended to intimidate us, or have a chilling effect on our future plans?

We may never know. But we are going to do our best to find out. Reluctantly, we have decided to retain counsel to evaluate the IRS’ conduct and determine whether we can take action to fight back against this abuse of power. We want to know who induced the IRS to come after us, or whether that was a pretext, and whether the IRS or any government agency was attempting to thwart our lawful issue advocacy.

This is America. Something must be done to fight back. What we are witnessing in Washington is disgusting and shameful. We are better than this. Those responsible should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Thankfully we have thick skin, and some top-notch attorneys.

You can chip in to support our effort here.

But at least now you know.

And you deserve to know that we will always defend our right to speak the truth, and to provide you and every Catholic in America the resources they need to vote with an informed conscience.

Thank you, as always, for your ongoing support and prayers.

Sincerely,
Brian Burch,
Director CatholicVote.org Education Fund

Benghazi talking points, version 12.0

p1-CoverHillary2-620x400By: John Hayward 5/10/2013 09:07 AM

Game, set, and match… if the rest of the media keeps running with this story, now that ABC News has broken it.

As ABC duly acknowledges, it’s not entirely brand-new information, as it builds from the landmark Weekly Standard report on smoking-gun emails related to the politicized editing of the Benghazi talking points, posted online last week. But ABC News enhanced the story by getting its hands on even more documentation, and the result is a story that can no longer be kept under quarantine in the conservative media “ghetto,” where the rest of the media dismisses accurate, well-documented stories by sneering that only the likes of Fox News care about them.

What ABC News brings us is a version history of the Benghazi talking points, in which they passed through 12 versions that began with reasonably accurate and complete information from the intelligence community… and ended with the malarkey peddled by the Administration:
ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.

White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.

That would appear to directly contradict what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said about the talking points in November.

“Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC’s best assessments of what they thought had happened,” Carney told reporters at the White House press briefing on November 28, 2012. “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”

Carney has said the revisions to the talking points were merely “stylistic.” Yes, I believe that style is called “lying.”

For the benefit of liberal forum trolls, and a few mainstream media reporters, who can’t figure out why the Administration would orchestrate a cover-up when they supposedly had nothing to hide, the material uncovered by ABC News makes it crystal clear:

State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland raised specific objections to this paragraph drafted by the CIA in its earlier versions of the talking points: “The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya. These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.”

In an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? Concerned …”

The paragraph was entirely deleted.

The genesis of the “spontaneous video protest” fraud is also revealed in these emails, as the CIA’s first draft incorrectly suggested the Benghazi attack was apparently “spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo,” an idea whose origin remains unclear, because in reality there was never any reason for anyone knowledgeable about the attack to believe that. It should also be noted that the Cairo protests themselves only incorporated the infamous YouTube video as an after-the-fact justification; they were originally organized for the purpose of demanding the extradition of the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel-Rahman, on the anniversary of 9/11. At any rate, the CIA analysts continued, “That being said, we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qaeda participated in the attack,” and they named the al-Qaeda affiliate called Ansar al-Sharia.

As Wednesday’s testimony made clear, a five-minute phone call to Deputy Chief of Mission Gregory Hicks in Tripoli could have cleared up the “protest” nonsense… but instead, at the urging of Victoria Nuland, the Administration went in the opposite direction, scrubbing everything except the nonsense. Everything about al-Qaeda and the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi leading up to the attack was purged from the talking points.

Obama’s political operatives were right to be concerned. Can you imagine what the public response would have been, if U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice hit the Sunday talk shows to dispense honest, accurate, complete information? ”Yes, it’s clear there were mounting security issues in Benghazi, and a disturbing level of terrorist activity, culminating in an organized attack involving crew-served weapons and precision mortar fire that killed our Ambassador and his heroic, outnumbered defenders. But we made no effort to rescue him, took absolutely no precautions to send special-ops teams or air power to his rescue on the anniversary of 9/11, and in fact we reduced his security over his protests, because… oh, darn, look at the time, I’ve got to go. Have a great day, everybody!”

Does anyone in the media – aside from the hacks ready and willing to suppress any story that hurts Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton – really still need the dots connected for them? More hearings are on the way, in which tough questions will be asked about how the State Department’s internal review managed to miss all the blockbuster revelations of the past week. The liberal media can’t pretend this is just a “Fox story” any more.

I’m old enough to remember when they wouldn’t need any prodding to investigate an Administration that lied to the American people, and to the families of the fallen. Pat Smith, mother of slain diplomat Sean Smith, recently expressed her frustration at the difficulty of getting the truth out of Hillary Clinton and her operatives to Jake Tapper of CNN (he was formerly with ABC News.) Tapper responded, “I don’t find it surprising that you haven’t gotten answers, because I haven’t either, and I’ve been reporting on this since September.” Remarkably few of his colleagues have expressed any such frustration, or indeed much in the way of curiosity.

Screen Shot 2013-05-12 at 5.32.17 AM
American Crossroads put together a video effectively contrasting the Aministration’s false statements with testimony from this week’s hearings. If the President was a Republican, this is what the first segment of your nightly newscast would look like.
Screen Shot 2013-05-12 at 5.39.51 AM
Update: Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA) called for a congressional investigation, based in part on the stories of relentless talking-point revision: “The death of Ambassador Stevens and other Americans in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 is upsetting, and I remain troubled by the aftermath and the fact that the terrorists involved have not been identified or captured.  I have long supported a congressional investigation and want to get answers to important questions such as could the consulate have been better secured and did the administration mislead the public.  The recent testimony of Mr. Hicks, as well as news reports that this administration may have stricken references to terrorism in CIA reports about the attack, further justify why I’ve demanded such an inquiry, including cosponsoring legislation that would require a thorough investigation.”

Israeli Agent Gives America Advice

This is not to push a panic button, but EVERY ONE of us, needs to have a family plan….please read all the way thru to the end.

Juval Aviv was the Israeli Agent upon whom the movie ‘Munich’ was based. He was Golda Meir’s bodyguard, and she appointed him to track down and bring to justice the Palestinian terrorists who took the Israeli athletes hostage and killed them during the Munich Olympic Games.

In a lecture in New York City he shared information that EVERY American needs to know — but that our government has not yet shared with us.

He predicted the London subway bombing on the Bill O’Reilly show on Fox News stating publicly that it would happen within a week. At the time, O’Reilly laughed, and mocked him saying that in a week he wanted him back on the show. Unfortunately, within a week the terrorist attack had occurred.

Juval Aviv gave intelligence (via what he had gathered in Israel and the Middle East) to the Bush Administration about 9/11, a month before it occurred. His report specifically said they would use planes as bombs and target high profile buildings and monuments. Congress has since hired him as a security consultant.

Now for his future predictions. He predicts the next terrorist attack on the U.S. will occur within the next few months.

Forget hijacking airplanes, because he says terrorists will NEVER try and hijack a plane again as they know the people onboard will never go down quietly again. Aviv believes our airport security is a joke — that we have been reactionary rather than proactive in developing strategies that are truly effective.

For example:
1) Our airport technology is outdated. We look for metal, and the new explosives are made of plastic.

2) He talked about how some idiot tried to light his shoe on fire. Because of that, now everyone has to take off their shoes. A group of idiots tried to bring aboard liquid explosives. Now we can’t bring liquids on board. He says he’s waiting for some suicidal maniac to pour liquid explosive on his underwear; at which point, security will have us all traveling naked!

Every strategy we have is reactionary.

3) We only focus on security when people are heading to the gates.

Aviv says that if a terrorist attack targets airports in the future, they will target busy times on the front end of the airport when/where people are checking in. It would be easy for someone to take two suitcases of explosives, walk up to a busy check-in line, ask a person next to them to watch their bags for a minute while they run to the restroom or get a drink, and then detonate the bags BEFORE security even gets involved. In Israel, security checks bags BEFORE people can even ENTER the airport.

Aviv says the next terrorist attack here in America is imminent and will involve suicide bombers and non-suicide bombers in places where large groups of people congregate. (i.e., Disneyland, Las Vegas casinos, big cities (New York, San Francisco, Chicago, etc.) and that it will also include shopping malls, subways in rush hour, train stations, etc., as well as, rural America this time. The hinterlands (Wyoming, Montana, etc.).

The attack will be characterized by simultaneous detonations around the country (terrorists like big impact), involving at least 5-8 cities, including rural areas.

Aviv says terrorists won’t need to use suicide bombers in many of the larger cities, because at places like the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, they can simply valet park a car loaded with explosives and walk away.

Aviv says all of the above is well known in intelligence circles, but that our U. S. Government does not want to ‘alarm American citizens’ with the facts. The world is quickly going to become ‘a different place’, and issues like ‘global warming’ and political correctness will become totally irrelevant.

On an encouraging note, he says that Americans don’t have to be concerned about being nuked. Aviv says the terrorists who want to destroy America will not use sophisticated weapons. They like to use suicide as a front-line approach. It’s cheap, it’s easy, it’s effective; and they have an infinite abundance of young militants more than willing to ‘meet their destiny’.

He also says the next level of terrorists, over which America should be most concerned, will not be coming from abroad. But will be, instead, ‘homegrown’, having attended and been educated in our own schools and universities right here in the U.S. He says to look for ‘students’ who frequently travel back and forth to the Middle East. These young terrorists will be most dangerous because they will know our language and will fully understand the habits of Americans; but that we Americans won’t know/understand a thing about them.

Aviv says that, as a people, Americans are unaware and uneducated about the terrorist threats we will inevitably face. America still has only a handful of Arabic and Farsi speaking people in our intelligence networks, and Aviv says it is critical that we change that fact SOON.

So, what can America do to protect itself? From an intelligence perspective, Aviv says the U.S. needs to stop relying on satellites and technology for intelligence. We need to, instead, follow Israel’s, Ireland’s and England’s hands-on examples of human intelligence, both from an infiltration perspective as well as to pay attention to, and trust ‘aware’ citizens to help. We need to engage and educate ourselves as citizens; however, our U. S. government continues to treat us, its citizens, ‘like babies’. Our government thinks we ‘can’t handle the truth’ and are concerned that we’ll panic if we understand the realities of terrorism. Aviv says this is a deadly mistake.

Aviv recently created/executed a security test for our Congress, by placing an empty briefcase in five well-traveled spots in five major cities. The results? Not one person called 911 or sought a policeman to check it out. In fact, in Chicago, someone tried to steal the briefcase!

In comparison, Aviv says that citizens of Israel are so well ‘trained’ that an unattended bag or package would be reported in seconds by citizen(s) who know to publicly shout, ‘Unattended Bag!’ The area would be quickly & calmly cleared by the citizens themselves.

Unfortunately, America hasn’t been yet ‘hurt enough’ by terrorism for their government to fully understand the need to educate its citizens or for the government to understand that it’s their citizens who are, inevitably, the best first-line of defense against terrorism.

Aviv also was concerned about the high number of children here in America who were in preschool and kindergarten after 9/11, who were ‘lost’ without parents being able to pick them up, and about our schools that had no plan in place to best care for the students until parents could get there. (In New York City, this was days, in some cases!)

He stresses the importance of having a plan, that’s agreed upon within your family, of how to respond in the event of a terrorist emergency. He urges parents to contact their children’s schools and demand that the schools too, develop plans of actions, just as they do in Israel.

Does your family know what to do if you can’t contact one another by phone? Where would you gather in an emergency? He says we should all have a plan that is easy enough for even our youngest children to remember and follow.

Aviv says that the U. S. government has in force a plan, that in the event of another terrorist attack, EVERYONE’s ability to use cell phones, blackberries, etc., will immediately be cut-off, as this is the preferred communication source used by terrorists and is often the way that their bombs are detonated.

How will you communicate with your loved ones in the event you cannot speak to each other? You need to have a plan.

Robin L. Wulffson, M.D.

Judge Jeanine’s EPIC Smackdown of the mother of the Boston jihadi bombers

Judge Judy has presented the most eloquent articulate piece on the mother of the Boston Bombers. She said what most American feel, but simply don’t have the forum.

You definitely want to watch this one all the way to the end. Judge Jeanine doesn’t leave anyone guessing as to how she feels about statements that have been made by this mother who is as radicalized as her bomber sons.

Screen Shot 2013-05-06 at 4.37.31 AM

U.S. Government Foxes Now in Control of the Henhouse

What went wrong with American policy

The following post was released by Act! for American on May 2, 2013.
Last year we put out a series of emails describing the purge of any references to radical Islam in federal government counterterrorism materials.

This didn’t happen by accident. It’s the result of a conscious and deliberate policy decision at the highest levels of the Obama administration.

Please view the short video below, put out by our friends at EMET.

We now know that Russian authorities wire tapped a phone call between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his mother, in which they discussed “jihad.” This phone call was part of the reason the Russians alerted the FBI about Tsarnaev.

Had John Brennan, now our CIA director, listened in on this phone call, he almost certainly would have dismissed any concerns about Tsarnaev.

Why? Because Brennan has stated publicly he believes the notion that “jihad” is connected to terrorism is false. Brennan believes “jihad” is a “holy tenet” of Islam, because he claims it refers only to personal improvement.

Or what our friend Dr. Walid Phares calls “Islamic yoga.”

This administration refuses to acknowledge any jihadist ideology behind Islamic terrorism. The short video below is a must-see in this regard.

We can only speculate what might have happened when the FBI investigated Tamerlan Tsarnaev if our counterterrorism strategy included identifying jihadist ideology as a prime motivator of jihadist attacks.

But since the FBI can’t consider jihadist ideology when it does such investigations, it’s no wonder it dropped its investigation of Tamerlan Tsarnaev.