imageedit_3_5623861033

How Did ISIS Come to Be and Just WHOM Do We Aim The Finger?

ISIS 11October 30, 2014

The terrorist group ISIS is located in Iraq and sporadically throughout parts of the globe. ISIS Terrorists has many World Leaders scrambling to get a handle on them while their citizens fearfully wait and wonder how and when they will strike next. Others, however, are trying to figure out just how they came to be, and who to blame for them.

It would be opportune for the present Iranian regime to first put blame for ISIS on Iran but if you look closely at the facts you will see a very different story unfold.

If a finger must be aimed then it may need to be aimed right back at us, the United States of America. Western Europe, and their allies also have fingers pointed at them as well. This may not be a popular stance for some Americans but the facts speak for themselves.

Before the U.S.’s disastrous incursion and occupation, which was markedly supported by Britain, there was no al-Qaeda or allied Salafi fanatic existence in Iraq under the regime of Saddam Hussein. Once the U.S. invaded, the extremists took control of most of the northern and western parts of Iraq, despite claims to the contrary by the Bush administration.

HusainHussein’s regime prevented Al Qaeda from operating out of Iraq, according to a Senate Intelligence report. “Iraq had also been supported by the West before the 1991 Gulf War as a counterbalance against the revolutionary Islamic Republic during the Iran-Iraq War,” reports The Diplomat. “The U.S.-led invasion changed all of that.”

Once Hussein’s rule was taken down the country was destabilized. Both the Armed forces and civil service were eliminated and “replaced by partisans of sectarian Shiite parties and factions, some of which were closely allied to Iran,” reports The Progressive. “Sunni extremists, believing Iraqi Shias had betrayed their country to Persians and Westerners, began targeting Shia civilian neighborhoods with terrorist attacks. The Iraqi regime and allied militia then began systematically kidnapping and murdering thousands of Sunni men. The so-called ‘sectarian’ conflict, then, has been a direct consequence of U.S. policy.”

Al-Qaeda, ISIS’s forerunner, was established in 2004. But when the U.S. stepped in to help institute Iraq’s new government it constantly supported Iraqi’s Prime Minister Maliki’s unending persecution of civil protesters and dissidents. The Sunnis became alienated and discriminated against both in government and the armed forces.

Protesters were slaughtered and journalists were either assassinated or imprisoned. Thousands were tortured and/or detained, without trial, for years. The Sunnis, faced with uncontrolled discrimination, looked upon the Maliki government with mounting disdain as the rest of the world looked on understanding it to be one of the most corrupt regimes in the world.

ISIS-3Armed with weapons made by the U.S., in 2013 Maliki’s troops ravaged Sunni protest camps. It was too late by the time the U.S. and Western Europe decided to take Maliki seriously and end his regime. The groundwork was already in place for a strong ISIS-led Sunni uprising in Western Iraq and became the latest offspring of al-Qaeda-fashioned radicals.

In a move that seemed to indicate the Maliki regime was not worth dying for, the Iraqi army failed to fight.

Let’ go back to 2011 for a moment and see what was happening in Syria during that same time frame. Peaceful pro-democracy protests began to be silenced by the Assad regime. It wasn’t long before the civilians transformed themselves into an armed rebellion.

The reason for this rebellion was that “In the early stages of the war, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey began funneling arms to opposition forces, seeing an opportunity to destabilize a key ally of Iran and Hezbollah, their geopolitical foes,” reports The Diplomat. “As the civil war deepened, extremist groups joined the fight against what they saw as an odious secular regime. The also became the beneficiaries of large amounts of arms and funding from Americas regional allies.”

So, Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia and the U.S. knowingly financed extremist groups, such as al-Qaeda’s affiliate group, Jabhat al-Nusra who became one of the most efficient insurgent groups going up against Syria’s regime. Many of the al-Nusra rebels began fusing with ISIS.

In short, it is the belief of many that the $25 billion spent in American taxpayer money training and arming the Maliki regime in Baghdad has a direct correlation to the rise of the ISIS terrorists.

ISIS has grown exponentially since its seemingly meager beginnings, not only in numbers but in wealth as well.

imageedit_6_4681803245

CIA estimates that the ISIS group is 20,000-50,000 strong and growing. As they take over cities and territories they focus on the prisons and release as many as possible who are then recruited or killed. In lieu of the fact ISIS are few in comparison to the 250,000 Iraqi troops, not to mention armed police, it shouldn’t be a problem to hold them off, right? Wrong.

The Iraqi army is a mess, at best. Even though they had 40 to 1 odds, the Iraqi troops ran from 800 ISIS rebels. As stated earlier, they did not wish to fight or die for a government they did not believe in so they ran.

Jayson Lyall, a Yale University insurgency expert, said, “It appears that the Iraqi Army is cleaving along sectarian lines…The willingness of Sunni soldiers to fight to retake Mosul appears limited.” What Lyall is saying is that the Sunnis are under a government that oppresses them and they don’t wish to fight each other over it. That being said, the end result is the same and ISIS runs rapid.

ISIS 14

With the lack of opposition, ISIS has been able to not only secure enormous wealth from taking over eastern Syrian oilfields in 2012 but has also acquired income from smuggling raw materials and priceless antiquities from different archeological sites. It is estimated that ISIS’s wealth was around $875 million before the Mosul takeover. After the city was captured and all taken into consideration, money from banks and other supplies, ISIS is estimated to be worth $2 billion.

It would seem this long ago, small group of fed-up individuals has not only surpassed all expectations in growth, but in wealth as well.

We now know how ISIS came to be and just who needs fingers aimed at them for starting the terrorist group, but just who is going to stop them?

 

 By, Lorra B. Chief Writer for Silent Soldier

http://SilentSoldier.us

 

imageedit_2_6844081591

How In the World Does Harry Reid Get Reelected?

 

imageedit_2_6844081591October 29, 2014

Just what is it about Democrat Harry Reid that has so many American’s questioning how and why he continues to get re-elected?

Many might attack Reid because they may simply believe he is too old to competently hold his office believing that his decisions are slightly off or unethical at best. Others may not agree with his alleged hypocrisy and shady tactics. Yet, others believe it to be a combination of those two factors and his political stance that sends them over the edge. Whatever the complaint, Harry Reid seems to be stepping on toes and leaving voters screaming for term limits.

Reid, 74, soon to be 75 on December 2, is the Senate Majority Leader and has been since 2006. He was first elected to office in 1987. That means that Harry Reid has been in office for 27 years leading some to believe he has become numb to America’s plight. Or, do all of those years of experience give Reid an upper hand in dealing with the pressing issues of today’s America? If you ask Mary Landreiu (D-LA) she would probably say, yes. Or, would she?

“I think Harry Reid gets beat up more than he deserves. I am going to wait to see what the leadership looks like. We’ll see.” These were Landreiu’s words on whether or not she would vote for Reid. “I’m not saying yes and I’m not saying no.”

 


 

Interesting since Landrieu stated in April that she would absolutely vote for Reid.

Reid has struggled with popularity and a recent poll shows that only 13% of Americans have a positive or ‘somewhat positive’ view of him. That means that twice as many citizens see Reid in an unfavorable light making this the lowest rating since the Nevada Democrat became majority leader.

But why is Reid seen in this negative light? According to Megyn Kelly of Fox News, some of his most highlighted offences are that he stole lemonade stand money that a little boy was raising to help his dying father. She stated that he, allegedly, beat his wife for ten years or so. Whether that is the truth or not has yet to be seen but the damage, in the public eye, has already been done.

Reid 2What has been evident and true concerning the tactics of Harry Reid is that he will seem to do anything to keep control of the Democratic seat, whether he is in it or not, by making outlandish remarks and by flip-flopping on many issues.

Reid has made ridiculous statements concerning Obamacare and has, according to The Blaze, “asserted that the stories of Americans who lost coverage, or had to pay more, or had to find new doctors under the Affordable Care Act are all lies.” This, of course, isn’t true in the slightest as many Americans have not only lost their doctors but have also had to endure higher costs as well.

Reid even went so far as to call all the ads concerning Obamacare lies and those who posted the ads liars. It wasn’t until later that same day that he returned to the Senate floor and said, “I can’t say that every one of the Koch brothers’ ads are a lie, but I’ll say this…the vast, vast majority of them are.” Really?

 


 

His statements on Obamacare were wrong but the fact that Harry Reid made Judicial Watch’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians” list…again, is remarkable.

“The Judicial Watch list is alphabetical, so there is no way to tell whether he’s the most corrupt or 10th. But, Nevadans know that Reid routinely makes headlines for alleged “influence peddling,” securing tens of millions of dollars worth of deals for his sons and their clients, including a Chinese green energy group; securing $21.5 million to build a bridge over the Colorado River from a gambling town in Nevada to a town in Arizona where Harry owns 160 acres of undeveloped land; misappropriation of campaign funds; and an alleged $600,000 bribery deal and more,” according to The Blaze.

Reid doesn’t spend time defending himself against accusations of wrongdoing nor does he explain why his positions seem to change from vigorously being against an issue to later being all for it.

On illegal immigration, in 1993, Harry said: “if making it easy to be an illegal alien isn’t enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee access to all public and social services this country provides. Now that’s a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense at county run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?”

ReidReid seemed adamant about not allowing this type of abuse of our resources for illegal immigrants. But now he favors comprehensive immigration reform which rewards illegal aliens every avenue to citizenship. He supports amnesty. He is all for the Dream Act, allowing kids of illegal aliens to obtain in-state tuition at colleges and universities. He voted “no” on restrictive welfare for illegal aliens.

What happened Harry Reid? Didn’t you say it was “insane” to promote this kind of welfare environment?

The Federal Reserve is another area that Reid has flip-flopped on. In 1995, he stated, “I have sponsored legislation ever year that would call for an audit of the Federal Reserve system. I offer that amendment every year, every year it gets nowhere.”

Something changed, however, and Reid refused to even mention the Federal Reserve Transparency Act for a vote. In 1995 the Federal debt was $4.9 trillion and today it is over $17.3 trillion. The fact that Reid doesn’t seem to be interested in a vote to audit the Federal Reserve leaves Americans wondering why.

It isn’t just the casual American citizen who is backing away from Reid, fellow constituents are as well.

“Harry Reid and Mich McConnell have given us the most dysfunctional government in a generation and they need to step aside,” stated Rick Weiland (D-SD). “They both failed the American people and it’s time for new leadership.”

Democrat Mark Warner of Virginia also said that “Both parties might be better off with new leadership.”

There are some in Washington who “have talked about a ‘do-nothing Congress’ –and that could certainly be said of the Senate,” According to CBN News. “Critics say the reason for that pretty much comes down to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.”

“Washington political observers like John Hart, editor-in-chief of Opportunity Lives, say the Nevada Democrat’s near total clampdown on votes and amendments is historic. He [Reid] has blocked senators from offering amendments more than all other majority leaders in our history times two.”

reid4It is by limiting these amendments and votes that Reid keeps himself and other demarcates from being held accountable during the campaign “for votes they never had to cast.”

Nothing good can come of this type of deception. For example, there have been only 14 votes on Republican amendments since July of 2013. Those votes were only 14 of hundreds upon hundreds filed!

“By blocking almost every senator on almost every issue…Reid takes away the basic right to representation…This is about the rights and privileges of every single American citizen.”

There are many reasons for Americans to be disillusioned with politics and even more, it seems, with politician Harry Reid. There is much written on Reid about his wrongdoings and shady character but I have yet to come across anything containing rebuttal to his accusers. Perhaps, in time, he will answer for the allegations against him. In the meantime, how does Harry Reid continue to be reelected?

 

By Lorra B. Chief Writer for Silent Soldier

http://SilentSoldier.us

JC Campbell, from We The Peoplecontributed to this article

imageedit_2_2628985572

Big Brother Is Watching YOU

imageedit_2_2628985572October 20, 2014

The Washington Post: If you take to Twitter to express your views on a hot-button issue, does the government have an interest in deciding whether you are spreading “misinformation’’? If you tweet your support for a candidate in the November elections, should taxpayer money be used to monitor your speech and evaluate your “partisanship”?’

My guess is that most Americans would answer those questions with a resounding no. But the federal government seems to disagree. The National Science Foundation , a federal agency whose mission is to “promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity and welfare; and to secure the national defense,” is funding a project to collect and analyze your Twitter data.

The project is being developed by researchers at Indiana University, and its purported aim is to detect what they deem “social pollution” and to study what they call “social epidemics,” including how memes — ideas that spread throughout pop culture — propagate. What types of social pollution are they targeting? “Political smears,” so-called “astroturfing” and other forms of “misinformation.”

Watching 5

Named “Truthy,” after a term coined by TV host Stephen Colbert, the project claims to use a “sophisticated combination of text and data mining, social network analysis, and complex network models” to distinguish between memes that arise in an “organic manner” and those that are manipulated into being.

But there’s much more to the story. Focusing in particular on political speech, Truthy keeps track of which Twitter accounts are using hashtags such as #teaparty and #dems. It estimates users’ “partisanship.” It invites feedback on whether specific Twitter users, such as the Drudge Report, are “truthy” or “spamming.” And it evaluates whether accounts are expressing “positive” or “negative” sentiments toward other users or memes.

The Truthy team says this research could be used to “mitigate the diffusion of false and misleading ideas, detect hate speech and subversive propaganda, and assist in the preservation of open debate.”

Watching 3Hmm. A government-funded initiative is going to “assist in the preservation of open debate” by monitoring social media for “subversive propaganda” and combating what it considers to be “the diffusion of false and misleading ideas”? The concept seems to have come straight out of a George Orwell novel.

The NSF has already poured nearly $1 million into Truthy. To what end? Why is the federal government spending so much money on the study of your Twitter habits?

Some possible hints as to Truthy’s real motives emerge in a 2012 paper by the project’s leaders, in which they wrote ominously of a “highly-active, densely-interconnected constituency of right-leaning users using [Twitter] to further their political views.”

Truthy reminds me of another agency-funded study, in which the Federal Communications Commission sought to insert itself into newsrooms across the country. That project purported to examine whether news outlets were meeting what researchers determined were the “critical information needs” of the American people. And it involved sending out government-funded researchers to ask editors and reporters questions about their news philosophy and editorial judgment.

Once this study was brought to the attention of the American people, howls of protest from across the political spectrum led the FCC to scrap the project — thankfully. The episode reaffirmed that the American people, not their government, determine what their critical information needs are and that the First Amendment means the government has no place in the newsroom.

Watching 7That principle applies here. Truthy’s entire premise is false. In the United States, the government has no business entering the marketplace of ideas to establish an arbiter of what is false, misleading or a political smear. Nor should the government be involved in any effort to squint for and squelch what is deemed to be “subversive propaganda.” Instead, the merits of a viewpoint should be determined by the public through robust debate. I had thought we had learned these lessons long ago.

Now, I do understand the motivation behind this scheme, even though I disagree with it. To those who wish to shape the nation’s political dialogue, social media is dangerous. No longer can a cadre of elite gatekeepers pick and choose the ideas to which Americans will be exposed. But today’s democratization of political speech is a good thing. It brings into the arena countless Americans whose voices previously might have received inadequate or slanted exposure.

The federal government has no business spending your hard-earned money on a project to monitor political speech on Twitter. How should it instead have reacted when funding for Truthy was proposed? The proper response wouldn’t have required anywhere near 140 characters. It could have been, and should have been, #absolutelynot.  By Ajit Pai

 

By Lorra B. Chief Writer for Silent Soldier

http://SilentSoldier.us

 

imageedit_2_2796657204

Political Correctness–Treading On My Rights to Get Yours?

imageedit_2_2796657204

September 26, 2014

Whether you consider yourself politically far to the Right, far to the Left, or somewhere in between, Political Correctness has probably had some type of effect on you.

“The cliché term Political Correctness or ‘PC’ usually refers to upholding a social taboo against language and attitudes that might be considered offensive and/or stupid,” according to RationalWiKi.

Wikipedia defines “Political correctness…[as] the attitude or policy of being excessively careful not to offend or upset any group of people in society who are believed to have disadvantages.”

How did this liberal degrading of our freedom of speech begin in which the words we speak or the actions we take can be deemed politically incorrect? Not surprisingly, this political trend can be pin-pointed to the 1960’s and in American Universities.

It began, innocently enough some would say, when feminists took great notice of the inequality when gender neutral pronouns where being used, such as him, he or his. It was at this point that emphasis was stressed in the importance of using politically correct terminology such as he, she or them.

The argument for this revelation was “that no one would be able to understand that the masculine gender included the feminine gender in neutral contexts,” according to Conservapidia.

imageedit_5_8690305944It was at Universities all across America that PC sprung up with undeniable speed and liberals began to push this new ideology down the throats of every citizen. Political correctness was used by liberals to prevent acknowledgment of gender, sexual orientation, nationality, and religious differences.

What, then, did this new world of political correctness mean to Americans? It meant that freedom of speech rights would start to look a little different, a little stifled. It meant that Americans would have to alter the way they chose to speak in order that no one would be offended. It meant that “groups which (or whose putative leaders or other activists) claim some status a systemically oppressed of discriminated against will periodically attempt to change the terms by which they are referred to and demand that society as a whole change its usage of words as well,” according to Conservapidia.

The Constitution recognizes that freedom of speech, the First Amendment, is one of Americans most fundamental rights and is the foundational stone of our freedom.

But something has happened to our First Amendment rights since the 1960’s and they look much different today then they did then.

“Most people use the term political correctness to describe different things—but in the end it does not matter what the issues are—because all political correctness is designed to control the actions and behaviors of others,” stated nbcnews.com.

In our new world citizens are asked to do things such as to remove the American Flag from their work stations, lockers and their school children. Soldiers are asked not too wear their uniforms to schools. God is being taken out of most everything, including holidays. Many common words are no longer acceptable and the list goes on and on and on. How, then, are First Amendment rights being honored? In the name of PC, topics, symbols, expressions and ideas have been deemed off-limits for Americans.

There are vast miles between the idea of not wishing to offend another to the destination we have arrived, thus causing conflict, intimidation, censorship, and a restriction to our fundamental freedoms which is spreading through our society like wildfire. 

These are only a few examples of PC in our country. Most citizens might agree that they seem extreme. Most might even go so far as to admit they can see where freedom of expressional rights had been violated. Yet, this is the road America is driving down.

There are those who believe PC is a good and a just thing because, after all, who wouldn’t want to make the world a better place, a kinder place? Who wouldn’t want to knock out phrases constructed to hurt people or put a stop to racial hatred completely? In theory this is a great idea.

For Pro-PC citizens, banishing things that can be interpreted as Politically Incorrect is viewed as a blessing necessity.

By banning offensive speech, wearing particular items of clothing, writing in a way as not to offend, or a plethora of other activities in the name of political correctness, you tread on the rights of other citizens and threaten the very ideal of what this great nation was founded on. Those who scream for their rights to PC step all over the rights of others who scream for their First Amendment rights. How is this justice exactly?

imageedit_8_2557589951“In this day and age those willing to make the biggest fuss, the PC vigilantes or PC Police, so to speak, seek to set the agenda for what constitutes offensive or unacceptable speech…But this violates the principles of freedom of speech and freedom of expression,” stated The Pendulum: Political Correctness Has Gone too Far.

For example: Some holidays have been robbed of their former glory. Jesus, who is the whole reason Christians celebrate Christmas, has been all but eliminated in the name of PC as not to offend those who don’t believe in Him. Easter Eggs (though not the reason for Easter, but that’s a whole other topic) are no longer what some kids are allowed to bring to school. They bring Easter Spheres instead. Halloween has been banned in many school districts claiming it to be an overly religious holiday. Let’s not forget Frosty the Snowman. He is now called a Snowperson.

“Other than just robbing us of our cardinal civil liberties, the over-the-top PC movement has further, unintended ramifications that are lost on all of those who further push its absurd agenda,” The Pendulum went on to say. “Not only does political correctness wrongly censor personal opinions, but it does nothing to address any underlying problems driving statements and actions in question. Often times it just breeds increased resentment or relegates the topic to non-discussion—that is not progress.”

What if you were fired or forced to resign because of your opinions or because of the causes you supported? If you think that’s only something that could happen in, say, Hitler’s time, think again because it’s happening today and all in the name of PC.

For example: 

  • Mozilla CEO and co-founder, Brendan Eich was forced to resign because he donated to a campaign to ban gay marriage in California. It is his right, whether you agree with him or not, to donate his money where he chooses, right? 
  • NPR fired Juan Williams for admitting he was concerned when he saw Muslims on an airplane even though he cautioned not to brand Muslims as terrorists. Where are his rights protected to express himself freely? 
  • NBA’s Donald Sterling was banned for life from the NBA and fined $2.5million for his racist comments. Where the comments awful and offensive? Most would agree that, yes. Not the point.

We are not talking about whether a person used unbelievably bad judgment or even if the comments were in bad taste. What we are talking about is the slow and meticulous death of the foundations this country was built on.

“The obsession of the morally superior, sensitive, and conspicuously compassionate elite with the subjective feelings of people is part of today’s prevailing therapeutic vision of man,” writes Rebirth of Reason.

“This infatuation with sensitivity has spread throughout the media and academia, leading to the creation of feel-good euphemisms which part with accuracy and unambiguity in the interest of feeling and sympathy.

“Unfortunately, these ‘linguistic smile buttons’ simply camouflage reality rather than change it.”

The mind can not be forced into submission simply because it is deemed politically correct to do so. How does changing the language we use erase a history of belief systems or the cruelty of eons of bad behavior? Will policing our behavior, our language, our self expression keep hate or any other ignorant forms of prejudice from rearing its ugly head in future generations?

imageedit_10_5538010332

Because the facts are presented to us in pretty packages with pink bows does not mean that what’s inside of it isn’t ugly.

Understanding can only come through open dialogue. You cannot change someone’s mind by censoring thoughts or words.

“When the policing of this thought crime occurs, minds are not being changed—but hearts are being hardened,” Elon University’s Student News Organization. 

 

By, Lorra B. Chief Writer Silent Soldier

http://SilentSoldier.us

 

Brittany Maynard Won’t Kill Herself November 1: “Doesn’t Seem Like the Right Time Now”

Originally posted on Christian Patriots:

Brittany Maynard has officially decided to delay her decision to kill herself under Oregon’s assisted suicide law on November 1. She says it “doesn’t seem like the right time now” to end her life.

Although cancer patients and pro-life groups have tried to talk her out of the decision, it now appears Maynard may have either been used by assisted suicide advocates to promote their agenda or may have been a part of a plan working in concert with them to attempt to legalize assisted suicide in additional states.

The 29-year-old terminally ill patient made nationally-discussed plans to take the lethal pill on November 1st to end her own life. After suffering from severe headaches, Brittany Maynard found out she had stage II glioblastoma multiforme and had up to ten years to live. However, after she had surgery, doctors found out that she had the most deadly form…

View original 27 more words

Official use only: Joe Biden’s cheap vacation sparks investigation

Originally posted on tomfernandez28's Blog:

Screen Shot 2014-10-30 at 11.04.50 AM

US Vice President Joe Biden and other White House officials are taking heat for allegedly using a federally-owned log cabin to take family vacations, despite the fact that it has been designated only for official use since 1992.

The incident revolves around a four-day trip the vice president took with his wife and 11 other members of his family in August. The Biden clan stayed in the four-bedroom Brinkerhoff Lodge, which is located at Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming. However, it doesn’t appear the family paid for the visit.

Family members accompanying US officials on trips are usually required to pay their own way and for any extra charges.

Following the news, first reported by Time’s Zeke Miller, the Interior Department announced it is opening an investigation into Biden’s trip, as well as similar travels of a number of other Obama administration officials. In addition to the vice president…

View original 204 more words

Featured Image -- 6743

No Good Options for GOP on Obama’s Immigration Move

Originally posted on TIME:

When President Obama signs an executive order giving temporary deportation relief and work authorization for millions of undocumented immigrants, Republicans across the country and on Capitol Hill will blow up. But there’s not much they can do about it that will make a difference.

All Republican options have fatal flaws. Pass a bill to overrule the executive action? Obama will veto it. Try to override the veto? Not enough votes in the Senate, even if Republicans control it. Attach a rider to a government funding bill? End up with another unpopular government shutdown. Sue the president? Spend lots of taxpayer money and wait months if not years only to get rejected by a judge.

Still, the last option on the list may be the one Republicans go with.

While they are keeping their options open before the President shows his hand—as my colleague Alex Altman reports, it’s still unclear…

View original 676 more words

The Gold Riggers: Distorting Perceptions of Economic Reality

Originally posted on Stop Making Sense:

Paul Craig Roberts and Dave Kranzler write for CounterPunch:

‘The Federal Reserve and its bullion bank agents (JP Morgan, Scotia, and HSBC) have been using naked short-selling to drive down the price of gold since September 2011.  The latest containment effort began in mid-July of this year, after gold had moved higher in price from the beginning of June and was threatening to take out key technical levels, which would have triggered a flood of buying from hedge funds.

The Fed and its agents rig the gold price in the New York Comex futures (paper gold) market. The bullion banks have the ability to print an unlimited supply of gold contracts which are sold in large volumes at times when Comex activity is light.

Generally, on the other side of the trade the buyers of contracts are large hedge funds and other speculators, who use the contracts to speculate on the direction…

View original 178 more words

Featured Image -- 6739

Investigator Blames Child’s Death On Violent ‘Black Culture’

Originally posted on News One:

David Daniel Clayton County Investigator-WSB-TV screenshot

Georgia county investigator David Daniel (pictured) resigned this week after a Facebook, blaming the death of a 1-year-old Rodrickus Robinson on violent “Black culture,” according to Raw Story.

SEE ALSO: Substitute Teacher Calls Black Students ‘N-Word,’ ‘Slaves’ During History Lesson

Robinson died over the weekend, after he was caught in the crossfire of a gunfight in his Atlanta, Ga., neighborhood. The shooting reportedly prompted Clayton County Investigator Daniel to rail against the Black community during a visit to the Facebook page of WSB-TV.

Raw Story reports:

“Violence with guns is unfortunately a part of the Black culture and will never get better until the government stops supporting them and they are taught to work for what they get and not take from others,” he wrote.

Several Facebook commenters lashed out by calling the remarks “racist.”

“It had nothing to do with the child when it should have been…

View original 81 more words

Islamic Indoctrination In U.S. Public Schools HEATING UP;Students Reciting “Shahada”!

Originally posted on tomfernandez28's Blog:

Screen Shot 2014-10-30 at 11.09.45 AM

IT has never been the case that this site has “cried wolf”, relative to Islam or the Marxist left. If anything, readers should know that this investigative journalist has evinced remarkable “restraint”, considering the explosive info which comes this way, some of which is “too hot” to reveal. Believe it.

BUT one needn’t immerse themselves in the jihadi muck to know this: it is against the law to teach/indoctrinate religion within the public school system, and the Establishment Clause, housed within the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, is immutable. Yes, the oft-mentioned “separation of Church and State”. How dare the PC thought police – in the (mis)education department – allow this blatant violation, one which is counter to American law and ethos!

MORE specifically, the teaching of the “Shahada” should be viewed as the last straw…the “red line”, or more aptly termed, the “green line”…at least for ANY parent…

View original 1,528 more words

Jerusalem holy site closure ‘declaration of war’ – Abbas

Originally posted on ~~Defender of Faith~Guardian of Truth~~:

Israeli security forces stand behind a security perimeter outside the Menachem Begin Heritage Centre (29 October 2014)

Israeli security forces stand behind a security perimeter outside the Menachem Begin Heritage Centre (29 October 2014) The shooting comes amid heightened tensions between Israelis and Palestinians in Jerusalem

A spokesman for Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has described the closure of a disputed Jerusalem holy site as a “declaration of war”.

The move came amid tension and violence after the shooting of a Jewish activist. Israel’s PM urged calm, saying Mr Abbas was stoking unrest.

Yehuda Glick, a campaigner for greater Jewish prayer rights at the Temple Mount/al-Haram al-Sharif, was wounded.

Israeli police later killed a Palestinian suspected of shooting him.

The man, named as 32-year-old Moataz Hejazi, was shot after opening fire when police surrounded his home.

Rabbi Glick is a well-known US-born campaigner for the right of Jews to pray at the site, which they are currently prohibited from doing. The compound is known to Jews as the…

View original 788 more words