Ruffled Afghan feathers: tears of a clown

Remember, Hamid Karzai, the former president of Afghanistan? Hamid Karzai Tweets out after the MOAB was dropped.

It didn’t take long for the poppy of corruption in Afghanistan to play the humane card, from the opium capital of the world.

“I vehemently and in the strongest words condemn the dropping of the latest weapon, the non-nuclear bomb, on Afghanistan by US military.
This is not the war on terror but the inhuman and most brutal use of our country as a testing ground for new and dangerous weapons.
It is upon us, Afghans, to stop the USA. “ — Hamid Karzai tweeted

Where do you start with a statement like that?

How about from the beginning? In the strongest words he condemns this. He couldn’t be more against our actions. Thanks for admitting, at least, that it is a non-nuclear bomb. So it could have been worse, Hamid the horrible.

Then he condemns it on humanity grounds. He has some nerve talking about humane actions compared to the 9/11 terrorist attack on innocent civilians. That which caused the long overdue response to Afghanistan, after refusing requests for its cooperation through official channels. That inhumane response, even to 9/11 attacks?

Now that last part requires just a little extra attention. He calls on Afghans to “stop the USA.” I didn’t know the Resistance movement had expanded to Afghanistan now?

Lest Hamid the turncoat forget, may I remind him that mission, goal sentiment is exactly what caused the ‘War on Terror’ road show all those years ago — spawned right from his back yard in the terrorist haven, Afghanistan.

I think we have the moral high ground and victory here. Playing the ‘humane card’ from the abyss in Afghanistan, how about that? Priceless.

Huamne is not your strong suit, Karzai. But neither is “stopping the USA.”

Mo-Bro still the undeclared terrorist org

13 reasons to declare Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization

Trump reportedly backing off of executive order
Updated: 03/30/2017

Leo Hohmann — WND

President Trump has decided not to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization, at least for now, according to published reports citing pressure from the U.S. State Department and the King of Jordan.

Anonymous sources told the Washington Times that the administration “backed down from a plan to designate the Brotherhood” after an internal State Department memo advised against it.

The State Department’s argument – put forth in a memo to the White House – comes down to a belief that there is actually more than one Brotherhood and that one side is not as bad as the other because it works through democratic processes in the Middle East, the Washington Times reports.

Yet, it’s always been known that the Brotherhood operates on multiple levels.

According to scholar Martin Kramer, the Muslim Brotherhood from its early days had “a double identity.” Kramer, as quoted by Discover the Networks, writes:

“On one level, they operated openly, as a membership organization of social and political awakening. [Founder Hassan] al-Banna preached moral revival, and the Muslim Brethren engaged in good works. On another level, however, the Muslim Brethren created a ‘secret apparatus’ that acquired weapons and trained adepts in their use. Some of its guns were deployed against the Zionists in Palestine in 1948, but the Muslim Brethren also resorted to violence in Egypt. They began to enforce their own moral teachings by intimidation, and they initiated attacks against Egypt’s Jews.”

Former Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., one of the earliest advocates of banning the Brotherhood in the U.S., describes it as “the mother lode of global terrorism.” She told WND President Trump is unlikely to be successful in defeating Islamic terror without confronting the head of the snake.

“It is the umbrella organization from which all terrorism flows because the Brotherhood’s goal is global Islamic rule,” Bachmann told WND. “It’s no coincidence that every terrorist act stems from the same Muslim Brotherhood motivation: Global governance under Islamic Shariah law.”

Read more: http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/13-reasons-to-declare-muslim-brotherhood-a-terrorist-organization/#CPpfdsqV6KPM1Vu7.99

Again with the anonymous sources but, that aside, it is a reminder of the real problem. Sound familiar? Of course it does. The Muslims play the notion to the hilt that on one side there are terrorist Islamists while on the other there are those peacenik Muslims. Which ones are the activists? That would be the terrorist, caliphate ones — including ISIS, al Qaeda, Taliban et al.  It’s blatantly obvious the peaceniks are not the activists, else they would be at odds with Islamist terrorists. But that disagreement and conflict is strangely missing, which is part of the problem.

It would be hard to imagine the “Shining city on a hill” — as Reagan coined the US — being the biggest promoter of abortion on the planet, if it is to remain true to that notion. But no, it doesn’t make sense. Nor does it make sense not to label a terrorist organization a terrorist organization, one with ties deep into this “shining city on a hill”.

Threats foreign and domestic

Taking stock and identifying all threats, foreign and domestic. WIP – work in progress.

Take it from a retired Former Commander in Chief of U.S. Pacific Fleet, James A. Lyons.

“IdentifyingTheThreat”

Published on Feb 19, 2017

As responsible Americans we must identify all threats foreign and domestic AND protect our fellow citizenry by raising awareness.

Free speech is rioting and damaging property

Free speech was once again on full display in Berkeley, CA on Wednesday night. Milo Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak at the campus in Berkeley but was prevented from that by the free speech police (brownshirts) and a coalition of tolerance.

So we see this is not your parents’ free speech. Now there are designated free speech zones, which doesn’t protect from the tolerance brigade attacking any undesirable speech.

Free speech now means the right to destroy property with impunity, and rioting to prevent other speech they don’t like. Media claims this seems ironic considering the Berkley campus was the birthplace of free speech in the sixties. Really? But we always had free speech in that thing called a Constitution. Those rights did not come from Berkeley.

Actually, Berkeley wants abortion of free speech — in the womb — out of their own selfish convenience. So now free speech is really approved speech. All other “speech” is cause for rioting, violence, protests, or all the above. That equals freedom in their 1st Amendment.

LA Times called this a “free speech clash.” Why is it so hard to say riot? Other media reported it was peaceful until anarchists started rioting. It usually is peaceful before rioting. Forced cancellation of a scheduled speaking event is a real clash of free speech.

Update: Robert Reich floats idea on CNN that the rioters may have been right-wing paramilitary types trying to deceive people that it was the leftists. Possibly even in concert with Milo.

RightRing | Bullright

Get ready for Terrorists Lives Matter

Terrorists Lives Matter is now cranking up the protestors against Trump’s anti-terrorism Executive Order that bans and restricts travel from certain countries. From JFK to the Statue of Liberty, to the editorial pages, leftists take to protesting.

Gee, could it be a useable voting bloc? The professors of crisis are hard at work.

And the activist news media falls right in line to advocate for terrorism. Then they start with the “but this is a recruiting tool for ISIS” hogwash. Any hope that the left will wake up and see daylight is vastly exaggerated. At least they’ve been exposed for who they are. Don’t these people know that terrorism/terrorists have been extorting our laws for decades? No, they don’t care. But the left desperately tries to super-spin it as a gift to ISIS playing right into their hands

The people who advocated for Unconstitutional Executive Orders before, now defiantly protest legal ones. Even notable law professor Johnathon Turley said precedent of law is very much in Trump’s favor for his actions. That doesn’t stop the ACLU.

Suddenly Trump’s Executive Order causes the left to bend further for terrorists’ agenda. Yet we are the bad guys? Give me a freaking break. The word “resist” is now their slogan. Wow, instead of encouraging and welcoming terrorists into the country, the president tries to halt it and they cry resist. But we’re helping terrorists?

Hints of this came in December, when the black liberation groups honored terrorists like the one on OSU campus as victims. It seems like just name any anti-life issue or event and leftists can get behind and rally to it. And they’ll find a way to justify their support. Since everything is reversed now, they will support the tyranny of anarchy over the rule of law. Terrorists or shooters become victims and police become the problem. A border wall is offensive but illegal immigration is not. Anything opposing their agenda is called racism and condemned.

A two teir system has emerged. If you are an illegal “undocumented” alien, you qualify for special protections and immunities from the law. Whole cities now stand up and say they’ll go to any lengths to secure and protect illegals from the rule of law — even if they commit crimes. See, it is completely backwards. Problem after problem and issue after issue.

An entire city has to be inconvenienced and held hostage because of their agenda to support illegals. The hell with lawful citizens, special evolving protections need to be granted for law breakers and illegal aliens. And then they blame the root cause for their unlawful situation on the rest of America. How fair and just is that?

Before their favorite line sprouts from everywhere: as I have said over and over, it is not about “who we are” — it is all about who they (terrorists and Islamists) are.

What the heck, another week under Trump and another protest. I’d call that “winning’.

RightRing | Bullright

Dear Jeh Johnson

You bitch and moan about the Russian hacking threat while saying nothing about countless death threats to electors around the country. Or all the assassination threats aimed at Trump, or the hyperbolic fake stories on Islamophobia, or the cop-hating agenda. Very selective outrage.

Jeh, you’re colder and more calculated than a Russian bear. Who needs a Russian threat when we got you? There’s a bear in the woods alright, closer to home than we’re told.

RightRing | Bullright

ISIS and Democrats: apples to apples

Of all the comparisons I have, the one I come back to time and again is comparing Democrats to ISIS, or more directly to Islamic radical terrorists. It works. Some people would say that is a bit extreme. But I think it applies and not in a forced way.

Why? First of all, because radicalism is big part of their strategy. And because terrorizing to influence people is, by nature, their goal. Political objectives of both may be murky at times but it drives their strategy.

Radicalism is the central connection. When I think about the Democrats, and party in particular, the term that always comes up is radicals. Obama confirmed that. After the last 8 years, it is hard to deny Democrats are radical. It’s their M/O and in their DNA.

Now that leaked emails about the inner workings of the DNC and Hillary’s campaign came out, it only confirms what we knew by their own words. Democrats’ talk amongst themselves exposes their mindset.

This could be a very long post…but it’s not. Or as Rep. Ted Poe from Texas says:
… “and that’s just the way it is.

Backfire: first 2016 prez debate

Sure no matter what, everyone seems to think Trump didn’t do as well as he should have. Fair criticism. He did leave an awful lot on the table — more like a smorgasbord. I think there is more than enough room for a backfire, or blow back as it may be.

Well, so much material to work with on Hillary. What was up for grabs on the table?

Travelgate
Email Server
Benghazi
Senate run 2000 fundraising
Wall St speeches
Pay to play
Foundation connections
Ethics.
Clinton Foundation — her home away from home. Shutdown issues and ethics.
Whitewater — their premier scandal
Cattle futures were very, very good to her
FBI Background Scandal — collecting and using information on opponents.
Hillary speeches were anything but free – follow the money — 11 mil in one year.
Broken promises and shattered ceilings
DNC scandal — leading to firing DWS and resignations. Politics of no choice.
Above the law
Norman Hsu Scandal and Jorge Cabrera Scandal
Damagegate to the White House — returning many things.
Records — always, the continual cover-up of her records… and her Record
Iraq vote — she actually had one, which she promptly ran away from thereafter and in her first presidential bid.
Russian reset — failure and her central focus. Getting translation wrong was not the only failure.
Reset to Red Scare
Libya and her failed mission in Benghazi.
Failed state policy on Libya
Egypt — walk like a Mo-Bro Egyptian.
Judgement disaster – this one could be disastergate.
Support Iran Deal — touts it as one of her signature achievements
TPP — she can run but she cannot hide her glowing endorsement for it.
Refusal to label Boko Haram
Her cozy partnership with Muslim Brotherhood.
Support for Refugee increases
Many lies of Hillary — she was within the law while breaking it.
Her passivity on Terrorism
Her attack on women — more like war on women. Failure to stand up for women.
Foreign Clinton Foundation donors while she endorsed beneficial policies.
Her responsibility Deficit — always claims to take responsibility, then never does.
A history of scandal and corruption — unfit and unqualified, lawfully prevented

 

Even Germany’s Angela Merkel says she wishes she could roll back time.– in regret for the refugee policy and problems. Hillary never learns, she’s irredeemable and incorrigible.

But then 11 hours of testimony to Congress on Benghazi couldn’t even put a dent in Hillary’s contemptible Libyan legacy. Nothing covers her server emailgate either.

Now the debate of so many missed opportunities. However, nothing made the Clinton record go away. She cannot delete that. Bleach-It cannot remove that stain. So it’s all still hanging like a cloud over Hillary Clinton. They did not disappear.

RightRing | Bullright

NY, NJ bomb suspect

So we have a terrorist “suspect” who was 1)known to authorities before, who was apparently 2)a bomb maker, who was 3)from Afghanistan and who was 4)not on a terrorist no-fly list. His name is Ahmad Khan Rahami …. not Stanley Loner Jones.

But the Clinton News Netwrok’s problem was with Trump mentioning “bombing” after the incidents occurred. Again, what we do know seems as troubling as what we don’t know.

Tweet of the Day

UPDATE: he was just “struggling to fit in”

The lesson is: when you come from Afghanistan — just struggling to fit in in America — you return to Afghanistan multiple times, then come back and start building and setting off bombs. Entirely a natural progression based on America and their ability to fit in.

‘Fitting in,’ like other Americans, now means bomb skills and blowing things up . Sounds just like every other American I ever ran across — regardless where he comes from. Geesh, what else is there to know?

Now if we could just start to profile screen for people just looking to fit into America.

Hillary can’t hide from the truth

Hillary is like the first female ambassador of ISIS. She aided in creating ISIS. Now she claims they are rooting for Trump to win. Why would they do that, when no one did more for their efforts than Obama and Hillary?

Counter Jihad

The result was that the western part of Iraq once again became fertile ground for an Islamist insurgency. ISIS swept western Iraq because of the failures of Hillary Clinton and her boss, President Barack Obama.

But that is only half the story. ISIS also exists in Syria. How is it that the United States allowed it to survive there? Lee Smith, at Tablet magazine, points out that letting Syria fester was the intentional policy of the Obama administration — in order to cosy up to Iran.

Audacity: Clinton Claims ISIS ‘Praying to Allah’ to Elect Trump

Probably the scariest part is that she falls for propaganda and apparently gave up critical thinking some years ago. Now she says trust her to protect America’s interests.

For someone who will not say ISIS terrorists are Muslim or Islamic, she claims they are praying to Allah over Trump. I bet they are secretly hoping for Hillary — in their Islamic way — who’s been very, very good for them.

Conclusion: Hillary needs to be put out to permanent pasture with her hubby, Bubba and fenced off from public service, ever.

Former Military leaders support Trump

88 former military leaders and Generals support Trump, in a letter released.

CNN

The group, which was organized by Maj. Gen. Sidney Shachnow and Rear Admiral Charles Williams, praised Trump and declared that “the 2016 election affords the American people an urgently needed opportunity to make a long-overdue course correction in our national security posture and policy.”

“enemies have become emboldened, sensing weakness and irresolution in Washington … in our professional judgment, the combined effort is potentially extremely perilous.”

[in their national security letter] “As retired senior leaders of America’s military, we believe that such a change can only be made by someone who has not been deeply involved with, and substantially responsible for, the hollowing out of our military and the burgeoning threats facing our country around the world. For this reason, we support Donald Trump’s candidacy to be our next Commander-in-Chief.”

Intell failures and media attacks on Trump

I recently posted on the cooked reports about progress on ISIS. It’s been in the news. Whether its cooked reports, cooked polls, cooked politics, cooked media reporting, seems it’s all the same. O’Reilly even said don’t trust anything coming from the media.

This week, Trump receives his first briefings sparking more media attacks. Have you ever seen one man be attacked that way? Well, the reporter asked Trump point blank if he trusted the intelligence? What would make them ask that and why? So Trump was hesitant to just accept it considering the background of what has been going on.

Politico:

Earhardt followed up by asking whether Trump trusts “intelligence.”

“Not so much from the people that have been doing it for our country. I mean, look what’s happened over the last 10 years. Look what’s happened over the years. It’s been catastrophic. And, in fact, I won’t use some of the people that are sort of your standards, you know, just use them, use them, use them, very easy to use them, but I won’t use them because they’ve made such bad decisions,” said Trump

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-us-intelligence-briefing-227109#ixzz4HhmYUztO

Gasp, comes the response across media. “Did you hear what he said?” What did he mean by that and why would he say such a thing? It’s outrageous.

Well, has all critical thinking been abolished now? Seems so.

Britain finally convicts Choudary

It’s about time. Maybe at least it will end his commentary supporting Islamic radicalism?

Britain’s ‘most hated man’ Anjem Choudary convicted for ISIS support

By Bryony Jones, CNN — Bryony Jones is a journalist at CNN International in London.

(CNN)A notorious hate preacher who led a flag-burning demonstration outside the US embassy on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and voiced support for jihad has been convicted of inviting support for ISIS.

Anjem Choudary, 49, has courted controversy over two decades, skirting the edges of the law, backing extremism but with no proof of actually inciting violence. He earned the wrath of Britain’s tabloid newspapers, making him – by his own admission — the country’s “most hated man.”

In 2014, he pledged allegiance to ISIS and its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, bringing him under scrutiny and leading to his arrest. […./] “

More: http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/16/europe/anjem-choudary-hate-preacher-convicted/index.html/

But the sentence is only up to ten years. Is it time for life sentences in these cases? This does seem punitive, when they can also have a radical recruitment effect in prison.

Cooked Books on ISIS and beyond

Yet another symptom of the national disease rears its ugly head.

Scathing House Intel Report on ISIS Fuels Trump’s Attack

Foreign Policy Magazine
A new report showing the Pentagon exaggerated its battlefield successes gives the GOP nominee fresh ammunition in the political fight over the terror group’s rise.

A new congressional investigation has concluded that senior military officials presented an overly positive spin on the progress of the U.S. fight against the Islamic State, but its initial findings stopped short of explicitly charging the Obama administration with cooking the books.

The White House shouldn’t break out the champagne: The findings could still be a lose-lose proposition for both the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton just as Donald Trump appeared to be on the ropes amid plunging poll numbers and sharp attacks from members of his own party. […./]

Read more

Funny how media always stops short of accusing Obama or Hillary of cooking the books. Where else does the direction come from? Well, FBI Dir Comey stopped short of saying Hillary should be prosecuted. However, Hillary and Obama are the two people most in need of prosecution in America. But that has been turned into a taboo.

A new area of investigation of Hillary’s Clinton Fundation corruption popped up and what happened? Loretta Lynch said it was more political so a case is not warranted. But the media can come out afterward to (1)clean up the news damage and (2)to say they did cover and talk about it, to say there was not much there. See that is the racket: no one can say MSM actually buried it, they just buried the truth about it.

The next step is Hillary and Bill will try to claim that DoJ’s failure to open the investigation was a validation that they did nothing wrong. (they’ve played that game for years) Who else could use a taxpayer-funded investigation failure as a political victory? Can you say Clintons? Look how much time and money these two cretins cost taxpayers.

Now we have the confirmation of cooking the books with false intelligence on ISIS progress. Nothing to see there for media. Except when the US uses phony intelligence to make policy it is very dangerous. Trump’s statement about Obama and Hillary being honorary founders of ISIS is a serious, egregious charge. Cooking our intelligence, because the C-in-C does not want bad news about ISIS, is no big problem to media. Imagine a Republican doing that? It must go to the President because he is in charge. We knew this was going on but when confirmation comes out it gets whisked away, like ISIS, as if it didn’t exist.

What scares many people is we know how important intelligence is. To have that cooked is akin to aiding and abetting the enemy.It puts our nation and military at risk because our policy and strategy is based on that intelligence. A foreign agent would like to taint our intelligence to compromise our mission. What is Obama doing then?

Obama vacations in style at Martha’s Vineyard preparing for his exit with faulty intelligence at his fingertips, which could jeopardize our country and future missions. He’s the Margaretta Commander in Chief. We even have an enemy he cannot name.

Accountability means nothing to Obama or the perfumed heiress Hillary. So he’s with her, she’s with him, Dems are with her and we are screwed. Where do they get off calling Trump a risk? Where are military, CIA, national security spokesmen who politically attacked Trump as unqualified? …It makes me sick.

RightRing | Bullright

What is the Terrorism debate about numbers?

What is this numbers game over the number of dead Muslims verses the non-Muslims?

I’ll give anyone the prize of the week if they can tell me why it matters so much that terrorists are (1)killing other Muslims and (2)that they are killing more Muslims than us — prsumably non-Muslims? Might as well watch this before it disappears.

This Georgia Professor goes off that terrorists are killing Muslims.

I confess I don’t understand her point of argument. But it is the same one even Obama uses. Since they are killing other Muslims, is that proof that they are not Muslims, Islamic or terrorists? No. Does it mean we are not a target or that they not are coming after us, as Buck Sexton said? No. Then what could it mean?

Note how the moderator, Don Lemon cuts Buck off and then proposes that maybe the terrorists are also Muslim? Of course, the only ones denying terrorists are Muslims is probably Obama and the White House. But what does that all matter?

Of course they are Muslim, Islamic Terrorists and of course they also kill other Muslims. Is anyone really disagreeing with that? I didn’t think so. But this seems to be their chief talking point, “they are killing Muslims too.” Well, duh! And this means what exactly?

They never tell us what it is supposed to mean. We are supposed to conclude that they are not just after us. Does it mean they aren’t targeting us only other Muslims? No. Whew, I feel better now because they are killing other Muslims too, not just us non-Muslims.

Terrorism, by design, has a certain randomization to it. Maybe that was frowned on at one time, by ethical terrorists, but seems to be justified now. (if there is any justification for terrorism in their minds) Come on, people, we are above this simple numbers game stuff. Why do they tell us all the time that we Americans and Westerners are their targets? Don’t you think they can rationalize killing 100 Muslims if 15 or 20 are non-Muslims? Can’t they also kill other Muslims that are in their way to prove a point and send a message to other Muslims? Of course. So this argument is almost as ridiculous as it sounds. But I am not trying to prove that they do not kill other Muslims. It should make the point that they are plenty evil enough to kill anyone. They’re terrorists, it’s what they do.

Her other point was just as bad, explaining their “lashing out” motivation. It sounds a little like John Kerry. So they kill out of weakness, out of desperation. I get it, the weaker they are the more of these attacks they do. Every time liberals try to explain terrorism they confuse the crap out of it and end up making excuses for terrorists. Like what we are doing is “a recruiting tool,” so stop it. Stop our action and the terrorists will stop? No.

This is to imply a terrorist’s mind is totally logical and rational. But Obama has been making these arguments for years and they don’t sound any better than they did then. And we’re told how logical Obama is. In fact, they are as old as the Saudi sand.

RightRing | Bullright

Perspective On BLM Mantra

I am fed up with BLM movement of chaos. People will say “what about what they stand for and the reasons for it – principles?” I’ll say BS and hyperbole. Our perspective is Key.

Philippians tells us to think these things: whatever is noble, true, righteous, and honorable, to paraphrase. If you do, then one cannot help being offended by events we see daily.

Philippians 4:8
“Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honorable, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.”– ASV

The Black Lives Matter and its protests are an anathema to all that advice. To the contrary, we’ve concentrated on the exact opposite. People can become desensitized to violence and chaos because of the volume of events and sensational media reports at lightning speed. Thus, like John Kerry called terrorist shootings “daily fare.”

And all the explanations about it do not really help.

What we’ve been hearing for years and seen in these protests has bugged me. The tactics of these groups is that of radical thugs.

However, just to take their main chant as an example. I have a few ideas. That is their famous “No justice no peace”. Turn that around and suppose we say “no peace no justice?” How about that?

How can you have justice when there is no peace? Or you don’t have justice in a war zone, which is what they are turning it into. Random killing of cops in NY or Texas in reaction to a shooting in Missouri, Baton Rouge or Michigan doesn’t matter where. Cops seem to be a target anywhere because of those stories. Is that fair?

Then, of course, Obama comes out to not calm the emotions and bitterness but stoke it. He does it every time so it is not by accident. Trayvon Martin he personalized saying it could be his son. As a response to Islamic radicalism and terrorism he blames Crusades and talks about Jim Crow. There did not have to be even a remote connection, but he does it. Then he goes on to pander to and stoke the BLM movement or the Islamic radical movement. Not that he does nothing about these things but he actually extorts and politicizes them.

See, the result is that BLM and the readical left do not want peace, yet we are supposed to want justice under these circumstances. There is chaos. They want us to demand justice when there is no chance or promise of peace. More chaos, yet they demand justice. What we are getting is anarchy or at best mob thuggery as a result.

RightRing | Bullright

PETITION on BLM

Formally recognize Black Lives Matter as a terrorist organization.

Created by Y.S. on July 06, 2016

terrorism is defined as “the use of violence and intimidation in pursuit of political aims”. This definition is the same definition used to declare ISIS and other groups, as terrorist organizations. Black Lives Matter has earned this title due to its actions in Ferguson, Baltimore, and even at a Bernie Sanders rally, as well as all over the United States and Canada. It is time for the pentagon to be consistent in its actions – and just as they rightfully declared ISIS a terror group, they must declare Black Lives Matter a terror group – on the grounds of principle, integrity, morality, and safety.

Petition here:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/formally-recognize-black-lives-matter-terrorist-organization

Benghazi Report doesn’t phase the NYT

The NYT had their piece after the release of the House Select Committee report on Benghazi, and said that:

At a news conference at the Capitol on Tuesday, Mr. Gowdy praised as heroes the Americans who died in the attacks on Sept. 11, 2012. They included Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and Sean Smith, a State Department information officer, who were killed at the main American diplomatic compound in Benghazi by a mob of militia fighters who had been incited by an American-made video deriding the Prophet Muhammad. The fighters were apparently further inflamed by news of an assault on the American Embassy in Cairo.

See article: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

Are we now going in reverse, or have we been transported back in time to the original lie about the cause of the Benghazi Attack?