Kasich and Obamacare

Rhino Ohio Republican traitor Kasich

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, a Republican who campaigned as a budget hawk and rode the Tea Party wave to victory in 2010, has agreed to accept Obamacare funding to expand his state’s Medicaid program, breaking ranks with fellow Republican governors and the Tea Party that elected him. 

Kasich’s decision, announced yesterday, could encourage other Republican governors to do the same, joining the five who have done so already.

Originally, the Obamacare law forced states to expand their Medicaid programs. Many cash-strapped states objected, and joined the Obamacare lawsuit that the Supreme Court decided last year. One of the few bright spots for conservatives in an otherwise devastating (and, many argued, poorly reasoned) decision was that the Court affirmed the 10th Amendment right of states to opt out of the Medicaid portion of Obamacare.

But a few Republican governors--even those who said they had opposed Obamacare--decided that the federal government’s offer under the law to pay 100% of the initial cost of expansion and 90% thereafter was simply too good to refuse. The prospect of being able to tell voters that he had vastly expanded Medicaid access--and the fear of facing Democrat attacks for not doing so--seems to have enticed Kasich to accept the deal.

Philip Kelin of the Washington Examiner notes that Kasich was likely feeling weakened after losing a referendum on public sector union reforms in 2011. Ironically, voters who rejected those reforms also passed a constitutional amendment on the same ballot that prevents the state from participating in Obamacare’s insurance mandates. Kasich has now retreated from a stance against Obamacare that once enjoyed wide public support.

Kasich’s decision could now also place him in opposition to congressional Republicans as they confront President Barack Obama and the Democrats over federal government spending. The White House has pledged that it will resist any proposal that makes cuts to Medicaid spending--including the spending on which Kasich and a handful of other Republican governors now depend to pay for expanding an already-bloated program.

In addition, Kasich has given credibility to the arbitrary way in which the executive has implemented Obamcare, granting waivers to favored unions and corporate clients. The Huffington Post’s Jeffery Young notes that the terms of the deal Kasich is negotiating with the White House have yet to be finalized, but that it will likely include a relaxation of the requirement announced in December that states must expand Medicaid eligibility to those earning up to 133% of the poverty level to receive the full amount of federal aid.

Perhaps the best symbol of Kasich’s new approach to federal government spending and arbitrary rule-making was his effusive praise for White House adviser--and consummate left-wing Chicago insider--Valerie Jarrett: “I want to thank Valerie Jarrett today for being willing to work with us.” Next, Kasich will try to bring Republican state legislators aboard.

Klein calls Kasich’s about-face “political cowardice.” But the left is celebrating. Democrat strategist Ed Kilgore crowed that Kasich’s move “will make the arguments of nay-sayers harder,” adding that he had given up his “political stock in trade” of fiscal conservatism, 

What supporters of Obamacare--and Gov. Kasich--still fail to reckon with is the strain Obamacare puts on the federal budget. That is, once again, someone else’s problem.

Steve Vaus' Song Gonzalez

Steve Vaus is a good friend to many of us in Zinzinnati. He comes here once a year for a terrific concert. Steve is a very talented Christian musician who has played at the White House and The Grand Ole' Opry. Alan

Drew Zahn wrote the following article.

“Come and Take It,” the song that has rallied gun owners with its remember-the-Alamo-like message, now has an accompanying music video with a special message for Barack Obama and members of Congress.

Grammy-winning musician Steve Vaus, creator of the Buck Howdy character, recorded the song that defies those advocating gun confiscation with one of the slogans of the Texas Revolution, “Come and take it.”

Though the song itself is more vague, the video leaves no doubt who Vaus is talking to in the lyrics.

“Mr. President, members of Congress,” Vaus says in the opening to the video, “you’ve been making a lot of noise about taking our guns away. But you might want to review history.

“1835. Gonzales, Texas Territory,” Vaus continues. “The authorities wanted to confiscate the big gun that protected that colony. You know what the people said? ‘Come and take it.’ Because they were willing to fight for their freedom and their guns. So are we.”

The video then launches into the pointed chorus: “Come and take it if you want it. Come and take it if you think you can. Come and take it, but we’ll warn you, you’ll have to pry it from our cold, dead hands.”

The lyrics continue, “We want the freedom that God gave us, so you best not cross that line. If you want this gun you gotta to come through us and take it, one shot at a time.”

The slogan, “Come and take it,” became the battle cry and banner of the Texas Revolution after the 1835 Battle of Gonzalez, in which Texians defied the Mexican government’s demand to return a cannon that had been given them for self-defense. Rather than surrender the cannon to Mexican dragoons, Texians stormed the Mexican camp and drove the soldiers away.

As Vaus’ song sings, “You just don’t mess with Texas, especially when it comes to guns.”

Listen to the song “Come and Take It” here.

In the video, Vaus concludes, “Just like Gonzales, we’re keeping our guns.”

The video itself can be seen below:

http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/video-warns-obama-people-will-fight-for-guns/print/#ooid=c2aWdxODpRmj9RVcT52dVSBZJlAoO3dI

Vaus’ song proves particularly timely, as President Obama recently announced 23 new “executive actions” aimed at restricting gun use and availability in the U.S. and called for Congress to pass further gun-control legislation.

Several states are mulling ways to counter the president’s agenda, and many individuals fear the president is putting the U.S. on a path toward confiscating guns.

Vaus’ song, however, warns that gun ownership is a God-given right and violators of that right had best beware.

Steve Vaus has performed, produced and recorded with Billy Ray Cyrus, the Jonas Brothers, Willie Nelson, Kenny Loggins, Leann Rimes, Randy Travis and Kenny Rogers; he’s a four-time Grammy nominee (with a win in 2010) and has performed with the Billy Graham Crusades, at the Grand Ole Opry and at the White House.

A previous song by Vaus, “We Must Take America Back,” drew massive attention when it was released in the 1990s.

“There’s an unspoken fear, We’re on our way down,” he penned. “We must take America back, Main Street to Wall Street, cities and states. Washington, D.C., before it’s too late:”

Last year, Vaus stirred controversy with his satirical look at the government’s decision to impose invasive body-scans and full-body patdowns on airline travelers. Millions have viewed his work online.

The song was a parody of “Help Me Make It Through the Night”:

Vaus also, in the period after 9/11, created “There Is an Eagle,” which zoomed to the top of the country charts.

Visit the artist’s website now.

The 1992 song, “We Must Take America Back,” was the most requested song in many radio stations’ inventories after listeners chanced to hear it.

Obama's Targets

Who's next?

Pressure for turning over the Justice Department memos on targeted killings of Americans appears to be building on Capitol Hill amid signs that Brennan will be grilled on the subject at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. 

On Monday, a bipartisan group of 11 senators -- led by Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon — wrote  a letter to President Barack Obama asking him to release all Justice Department memos on the subject. While accepting that “there will clearly be circumstances in which the president has the authority to use lethal force” against Americans who take up arms against the country,  it said, “It is vitally important ... for Congress and the American public to have a full understanding of how  the executive branch interprets the limits and boundaries of this authority.”

So, I guess we are to believe the government on faith when they claim someone is a member of a terrorist group. I am sorry I do not trust the king (tyrannical govt.)that much. Alan 

Below are videos on this topic:

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/04/16843014-exclusive-justice-department-memo-reveals-legal-case-for-drone-strikes-on-americans?lite

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” -- even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.

The 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects abroad, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the  September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes. 

The secrecy surrounding such strikes is fast emerging as a central issue in this week’s hearing of White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, a key architect of the drone campaign, to be CIA director.  Brennan was the first administration official to publicly acknowledge drone strikes in a speech last year, calling them “consistent with the inherent right of self-defense.” In a separate talk at the Northwestern University Law School in March, Attorney General Eric Holder specifically endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans, saying they could be justified if government officials determine the target poses  “an imminent threat of violent attack.”

But the confidential Justice Department “white paper” introduces a more expansive definition of self-defense or imminent attack than described  by Brennan or Holder in their public speeches.  It refers, for example, to what it calls a “broader concept of imminence” than actual intelligence about any ongoing plot against the U.S. homeland.   

Michael Isikoff, national investigative correspondent for NBC News, talks with Rachel Maddow about a newly obtained, confidential Department of Justice white paper that hints at the details of a secret White House memo that explains the legal justifications for targeted drone strikes that kill Americans without trial in the name of national security.

“The condition that an operational  leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states.

Read the entire 'white paper' on drone strikes on Americans

Instead, it says,  an “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government may determine that the targeted American  has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is  no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.” The memo does not define “recently” or “activities.”

As in Holder’s speech, the confidential memo lays out a three-part test that would make targeted killings of American lawful:  In addition to the suspect being an imminent threat, capture of the target must be “infeasible, and the strike must be conducted according to “law of war principles.” But the memo elaborates on some of these factors in ways that go beyond what the attorney general said publicly. For example, it states that U.S. officials may consider whether an attempted capture of a suspect  would pose an “undue risk” to U.S. personnel involved in such an operation. If so, U.S. officials could determine that the capture operation of the targeted American would not be feasible, making it lawful for the U.S. government to order a killing instead, the memo concludes.

The undated memo is entitled “Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al Qa’ida or An Associated Force.”  It was provided to members of the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees in June by administration officials on the condition that it be kept confidential and  not discussed publicly.

Although not an official legal memo, the white paper was represented by administration  officials as a policy document that closely mirrors the arguments of classified memos on targeted killings by the Justice Department’s  Office of Legal Counsel, which provides authoritative legal advice to the president and all executive branch agencies. The administration has refused to turn over to Congress or release those memos publicly -- or even publicly confirm their existence. A source with access to the white paper, which is not classified, provided a copy to NBC News.

“This is a chilling document,” said Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU, which is suing to obtain administration memos about the targeted killing of Americans.  “Basically, it argues that the government has the right to carry out the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen. … It recognizes some limits on the authority it sets out, but the limits are elastic and vaguely defined, and it’s easy to see how they could be manipulated.”

In particular, Jaffer said, the memo “redefines the word imminence in a way that deprives the word of its ordinary meaning.” 

A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the white paper. The spokeswoman, Tracy Schmaler, instead pointed to public speeches by what she called a “parade” of administration officials, including Brennan, Holder, former State Department Legal Adviser Harold Koh and former Defense Department General Counsel Jeh Johnson that she said outlined the “legal framework” for such operations.

Pressure for turning over the Justice Department memos on targeted killings of Americans appears to be building on Capitol Hill amid signs that Brennan will be grilled on the subject at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday.

On Monday, a bipartisan group of 11 senators -- led by Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon — wrote  a letter to President Barack Obama asking him to release all Justice Department memos on the subject. While accepting that “there will clearly be circumstances in which the president has the authority to use lethal force” against Americans who take up arms against the country,  it said, “It is vitally important ... for Congress and the American public to have a full understanding of how  the executive branch interprets the limits and boundaries of this authority.”

Anticipating domestic boom, colleges rev up drone piloting programs

The completeness of the administration’s public accounts of its legal arguments was also sharply criticized last month by U.S. Judge Colleen McMahon in response to a  lawsuit brought by the New York Times and the ACLU seeking access to the Justice Department memos on drone strikes targeting Americans under the Freedom of Information Act.  McMahon, describing herself as being caught in a “veritable Catch-22,”  said she was unable to order the release of the documents given “the thicket of laws and precedents that effectively allow the executive branch of our government to proclaim as perfectly lawful certain actions that seem on their face incompatible with our Constitution and laws while keeping the reasons for the conclusion a secret.”

In her ruling, McMahon noted that administration officials “had engaged in public discussion of the legality of targeted killing, even of citizens.” But, she wrote, they have done so “in cryptic and imprecise ways, generally without citing … any statute or court decision that justifies its conclusions.”

In one passage in Holder’s speech at Northwestern in March,  he alluded – without spelling out—that there might be circumstances where the president might order attacks against American citizens without specific knowledge of when or where an attack against the U.S. might take place.

“The Constitution does not  require the president to delay action until some theoretical end-stage of planning, when the precise time, place and manner of an attack become clear,”  he said.

But his speech did not contain the additional language in the white paper suggesting that no active intelligence about a specific attack is needed to justify a targeted strike. Similarly, Holder said in his speech that targeted killings of Americans can be justified  if “capture is not feasible.” But he did not include language in the white paper saying that an operation might not be feasible “if it could not be physically effectuated during the relevant window of opportunity or if the relevant country (where the target is located) were to decline to consent to a capture operation.” The speech also made no reference to the risk that might be posed to U.S. forces seeking to capture a target, as was  mentioned in the white paper.

The white paper also includes a more extensive discussion of why targeted strikes against Americans does not violate constitutional protections afforded American citizens as well as   a U.S. law that criminalizes the killing of U.S. nationals overseas.

It  also discusses why such targeted killings would not be a war crime or violate a U.S. executive order banning assassinations.

“A lawful killing in self-defense is not an assassination,” the white paper reads. “In the Department’s view, a lethal operation conducted against a U.S. citizen whose conduct poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States would be a legitimate act of national self-defense that would not violate the assassination ban. Similarly,  the use of lethal force, consistent with the laws of war, against an individual who is a legitimate military target would be lawful and would not violate the assassination ban.”

Rove's Rhinos

The Republican elephant

John DeMayo wrote the following article. 

By now all Americans—regardless of their political ideology, especially conservatives—should be fed up with the government failures produced by political operatives and big money’s influence in our elections. Election after election, power brokers like the infamous political Republican strategist Karl Rove and his campaign money machine are working to deprive Americans of the fundamental concept of choice in our elections. If Mr. Rove continues to have his way, conservative Americans will only be allowed to vote for candidates of his choosing in the foreseeable future.

Super Pac “American Crossroads”—founded in part by Karl Rove—has branched out on a new political influence peddling venture call “The Conservative Victory Project”. “The Conservative Victory Project” will operate independently of the National Republican Senatorial Committee and “American Crossroads”. It is being funded by big Republican campaign contributors frustrated by American Crossroads failure to aggressively inject their money and influence into Republican vs. Republican contests. According to reports “the Conservative Victory Project” unlike “American Crossroads” will be disclosing all of it donors. How refreshing, if true.

Marketing their mission as “picking the most conservative candidate that can win”, the Rove agenda is attempting to bring a new discipline to the Republican Party, by protecting incumbents and candidates they support, from challenges presented by the Tea Party and so-called far right conservative groups. Apparently big Republican donors aren’t happy with anti-establishment conservative Republican candidates—chosen by free and fair elections—defeating there candidates and subsequently losing to a Democrat. So now big Republican money will be using their wealth to elect prolific Rhino ringers rather than fight for a true conservative candidate—who they feel—cannot defeat a Democrat in a general election.

I can’t speak for the diverse and hard to define new Republican Party, but history doesn’t speak well for moderate Republican leadership in American government. Somehow I doubt that continuing the push for watering down conservatism in American politics, just to win elections, will solve any pressing problems in our nation. In fact, it will only produce more John McCains, Lindsay Grahams and Marco Rubios. Political compromisers of the worst kind, who support politically expedient legislation designed for party health rather than American prosperity.

Call me an idealist, but our federal representative’s elections were never designed to be decided by men like Karl Rove or any well-funded political action committee. You can thank the 17^th amendment to the U.S. Constitution for that disastrous change in American elections and governance. Yet Mr. Rove and his financial backers (no better in my mind than the Left wings David Axelrods) will soon begin intensely vetting—in other words— threatening to destroy the character of prospective conservative candidates that don’t conform to their concept of a “winning conservative.” Karl Rove is once again packaging candidates that can win Independents, Republicans as well as the rare and elusive, if not extinct, conservative Democrat voter. Candidates that will do and any say anything to keep big Republican money happy with carefully directed legislative votes sprinkled with Karl Rove’s brand of political cronyism.

What kind of odds would you give a traditional conservative war veteran or businessman from the heartland of America in a Karl Rove vetting process? Better yet what kind of odds do you give to our Republic’s future survival if so-called Karl Rove/Conservative Victory Project moderates are the only candidates you will be allowed to vote for? Personally, it’s been a long time since I had faith in any of my available choices for candidate for public office as determined by the current two party power struggles. More big money Karl Rove candidates are the last thing our morally bankrupt political process needs.

For those Americans who will self-servingly attack my opinions and observations as disloyal to the new Republican Party and their evolving strategies, I would advise them to learn a little more about Mr. Rove.

Since his college years, Karl Rove has had—to put it nicely—a checkered political career. His devotions are not conservative. Rove is all about winning at any cost, even if that means using underhanded and corrupt methods to get the job done. Mr. Rove’s affinity for hard edged tactics designed to secure victory for a Rove candidate, over a true conservative candidate, serves American voters no better than allowing a biased liberal media to select our conservative representatives. In today’s reality the only difference is a D or an R after their names. I think most Americans realize conservatism is being abandoned by the Republican Party and without successful traditional conservative American principles resurgence in U.S. government, our Constitution and Nation is toast.

Washington D.C. and its current culture are destroying our country. Karl Rove is not and never has been an ally of freedom and liberty. He is both a political mouth piece and puppet for powerful financial influences who want their controllable candidates of choice running our country, not the candidates of conservative American voters chosen in free and open elections.

Keep an eye on Mr. Rove and his new “Conservative Victory Project.” If our nation is fooled into believing that Karl Rove is our answer to political victory and regaining control of our elected representatives voting behavior, we will all have another thing coming.

Assad Responds to Israel's Air Attack

Below is a video link to the bombing of Jamaraya
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Fvideo%2F2013%2F02%2F02%2Fsyrian-tv-broadcast-images-of-israeli-ai%3FvideoId%3D240913651%26videoChannel%3D1&ei=TbsPUcLABYHN0AH3y4DQAQ&usg=AFQjCNG5oR-WVmM8No3CXxY7lUqp_R5erw&sig2=95BsLTHRnY1PJHPIbue_Yw&bvm=bv.41867550,d.dmQ

The Syrian ruler Bashar Assad accused Israel Sunday of trying to "destabilize" his country. In his remarks on the reported Israeli air strike in Syria after meeting Iranian National Security Director Saeed Jalilee, Assad said that Syria was able to confront "current threats... and aggression."

Syrian ruler Assad has ordered the resumption of weapons transfers to the Lebanese Hizballah. This was agreed with Iran’s National Security Director Saeed Jalilee, who arrived in Damascus after Israel’s air strike last Wednesday on the Jamraya military complex north of Damascus.
Assad assured the Iranian official that he would not be deterred by what he called acts of “aggression.” It was up to Syria and Iran to put their heads together to find a safe method of getting the hardware across to Hizbollah without exposing it to Israeli attack in truck convoys on the open road.
Jalilee is in Damascus to discuss with Syrians and Hizballah how to activate against Israel the secret mutual defense pact binding Iran, Syria, Hizbollah and Hamas. Israel has imposed a no-fly zone over a buffer zone straddling the Syrian-Lebanese border and placed it under the control of its air force.
Israeli officials have been warning for months that the IDF will not allow the transfer of advanced Syrian weapons, including chemical and biological weapons, to terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda affiliated Al-Nusra Front and Hezbollah.
Ehud Barak told the Munich security conference Sunday “…what happened in Syria several days ago… that’s proof that when we said something we mean it… and we say that we don’t think it should be allowed to bring advanced weapons systems into Lebanon.”
Israel’s actions were taken because transfers of advanced weapons and chemical and biological weapons were expressly prohibited under UN Security Council Resolution 1701 which ended the Israeli-Hizballah war in 2006.

End Times News & Gospel Message Feb. 4, 2013

1. Politico News reported that The president’s top climate appointees and the outside advisers best positioned to shape his agenda are a team replete with heavy hitters — including green-minded business leaders, buttoned-down environmental lobbyists and bureaucrats who have spent years wrestling with the minutiae of regulations. At this point, who will likely be Obama's Climate Change "Dream Team"?

Denis McDonough

1. The president’s green brain trust starts with his chief of staff,  Denis McDonough. He has spoken for years about the urgency of tackling global warming and assuring supporters that Obama’s heart is in it. McDonough is a radical Climate Change advocate. Furthermore, McDonough is a radical Leftist/Marxist as he advocates a global "Re-distribution of Wealth". In May, 2007,  he co-wrote an op-ed for the Center for American Progress on the “obligation” the U.S. and other wealthy countries owe to help poor nations cope with climate change. Even though a "Re-distribution of Wealth" has never succeeded in any place or time where it has been tried, the concept is, nevertheless, a favorite amongst the radical environmentalists.

Heather Zichal

2. Heather Zichal is the deputy assistant to the president for energy and climate change. She has been pushing green policies on Capitol Hill and in the White House for more than a decade. She quickly rose from a young House aide to top energy and environmental adviser for Sen. John Kerry during his 2004 presidential run and for Obama in 2008. She was Kerry’s legislative director as well. Heather is certainly helped by the fact that her old boss, John Kerry is a member of Skull & Bones.
3. John Kerry, the new Secretary of State is primed to take climate change to new heights on the international stage
4. Most of the real action on climate will stay within EPA with Bob Perciasepe and Gina McCarthy.

Tom Kuhn

5. Tom Kuhn is the president of the Edison Electric Institute is almost by default a leading member of a list of business and industry leaders who could influence the administration’s climate agenda.
Other names popping up which will push for the President's agenda are former Exelon CEO John Rowe, Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers and NextEra Energy Executive Chairman Lew Hay.

Frances Beinecke

6. Frances Beinecke is the president of the Natural Resources Defense Council. The Natural Resources Defense Council is one of a few really powerful New Age groups which push for such concepts as sustainability, conserving natural resources, and imperiled ecosystems.

Gene Karpinski

7. Gene Karpinski is the president of the League of Conservation Voters.
8. Fred Krupp is the voice of the Environmental Defense Fund. He is respected as a moderate voice who tries to broach deals with Republicans and industry.
The key to this debate is the assertion that "Man's Activities" are creating this global crisis!
Therefore, the President has assembled his "Dream Team" of leaders who will make an unprecedented effort at writing legislation aimed at preventing a global disaster which is not happening! You know, that is the very essence of successful propaganda: to so convince the public that a problem exists that they will support your solution, even though much evidence exists which should convince the public otherwise.
The repeated mass media lie that global Climate Change", plus the teaching of this lie in public schools for the past two decades, are finally having their intended effect. America may soon have its own set of perfectly needless laws intended to solve a problem that does not exist. Dr. Faulkner presents all the evidence against Climate Change that any thinking person would need to realize that this supposed global disaster is simply intended to convince people that only a New World Order can solve this disaster.
The secret societies were planning as far back as 1917 to invent an artificial threat ... in order to bring humanity together in a one-world government which they call the New World Order (NOW). Read William Cooper’s, "Behold A Pale Horse", p. 27
President Obama is set to make an unprecedented move to create the Illuminati plan to solve this artificial threat.
Now the UN admits solar activity may play significant role in global warming.
The Earth has been getting warmer, but how much of that heat is due to greenhouse gas emissions and how much is due to natural causes? A leaked report by a UN group dedicated to climate studies says that heat from the sun may play a larger role than previously thought ... results do suggest the possibility of a much larger impact of solar variations on the stratosphere than previously thought, and some studies have suggested that this may lead to significant regional impacts on climate,” reads a draft copy of a major, upcoming report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)."
The report from the IPCC is priceless. We can only hope that conservative Republican senators and representatives will use this report as the basis for defeating this senseless set of laws and regulations.
Friends the Illuminati using the false crisis of Global Climate Change as a means to force a global dictatorship upon all peoples of the world and ignorance of the people and deception are the major parts of the satanic program.
The NWO will turn humanity upside down in order to bring the anti-christ to power. Protocol #13 of the Learned Elders of Zion states, Who will ever suspect, then, that all these peoples were stage-managed by us according to a political plan which no one has so much as guessed at in the course of many centuries?" 

2. The Washington Times reported that Transportation Security Administration (TSA) checkpoint screeners are receiving training to prepare them for the possibility of a mass shooting at one of the agency’s airport checkpoints, and those TSA personnel are being instructed to save themselves should a shooting occur.
Isn’t it interesting that TSA would train its people to only save themselves and not to try to defeat the shooter or to protect the lives of civilian flyers? Does the TSA already have intelligence about a possible future checkpoint shooting?"
At this point, it is impossible to know whether the TSA is simply trying to be prudent or whether another Manchurian Kandidate shooting is planned.
Some fear that the Department of Homeland Security has detected a threat and is already moving to prepare staff to either handle it or get out of the way. We do know the Illuminati likes to telegraph their plans prior to the execution of the plan. For example, Aurora and Sandy Hook appearing in the Dark Knight Rising movie.
 Some terrorist incidents have already been attempted at the airports and/or on airplanes. The "underwear bomber" and the "shoe bomber" are two cases in point.
The Illuminati Card Game illustrates that public mass murder is part of the Plan of the Elite to so infuriate the public that they would demand gun confiscation. Hence, an airport mass shooting on the scale of the public school shootings might occur.
In several instances, the incident at the women's school in Canada, the shopping mall in Canada, the Stockton, California, massacre, and the murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane  the shooters were all ex-mental patients or were current mental patients who were all on the drug Prozac. This drug, taken in certain doses, increases the serotonin level in the patient, causing extreme violence. Now add posthypnotic suggestion or control ... and you get mass murder. Friends, what is the purpose of these mass shootings? I quote Bill Cooper: "The Middle Class is begging the government to do away with the 2nd Amendment".
Every instance of a horrific mass murder spree where the perpetrator used guns gives the Federal Government more leverage to persuade undiscerning Americans to support a government program to seize all weapons from every citizen. The government still has that huge problem: how to persuade 100 million gun owners to surrender their 300 million guns.

Recent unrest in Egypt

3. During a “Sixty Minutes” joint interview with President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Obama boasted that “You know, when it comes to Egypt, I think, had it not been for the leadership we showed, you might have seen a different outcome there.”

It’s hard to disagree with the president, his administration contributed to the turmoil now gripping Egypt and leading Al Jazeera to describe Egypt as “a complete state of collapse.”

Under Obama’s leadership, his administration promulgated the false image of the Muslim Brotherhood as “moderate Islamists”. Just last September, for example, an administration official, defending the White House’s plan to forgive $1 billion in Egyptian debt, said of the Muslim Brotherhood’s supposed commitment to economic reform: “They sound like Republicans half the time.” And let’s not forget Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s memorable description of the Muslim Brotherhood in February 2011 as “largely secular.”

As a consequence of his delusions about the good intentions of the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama tilted U.S. policy in their favor to lead the post-Mubarak regime at the expense of the more pro-democracy secularists who sparked the revolution in Tahrir Square in the first place two years ago.

On the second anniversary of the revolution violent clashes broke out in Cairo and other Egyptian cities. There were protests aimed at the Muslim Brotherhood’s (MB) high jacking of the revolution with its Islamist Constitution that marginalized women’s and minority rights. Later confrontations with the police also erupted in response to the death sentences handed down by a court against 21 soccer fans in Port Said for their role in a deadly riot last February.  As a result, at least 50 people lost their lives and more than 300 were injured many of them at the hands of the police.

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, the MB’s hand-picked candidate, responded with a declaration of a state of emergency in the three Suez Canal provinces hardest hit by the violence including Port Said. His edict suspended the ordinary judicial process and many civil liberties in favor of extraordinary presidential and police powers. Morsi was angry and almost screaming during his televised address announcing the state of emergency.

What does the Obama administration have to say about the rising anger against the MB regime and President Morsi’s clamping down on the liberties that Obama thought he had helped usher in with his support of the revolution and Morsi’s election? Precious little.

A senior Obama administration official, who would speak only on condition of anonymity, was quoted as saying that the Morsi regime was “obviously having growing pains.”

To ease those “growing pains,” the Obama administration is reportedly going ahead with plans to provide Morsi’s government with F-16 fighter jets and military tanks, part of at least a billion dollars in aid that is on top of the loan forgiveness the Obama administration has in the works.

The State Department has not responded to a request for comment about the report of the pending delivery of the F-16 planes. However, Obama’s nominee to replace Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, Senator John Kerry, last week during his confirmation hearing defended the Obama administration’s plans to gift the Morsi regime with at least four F-16 fighter jets. Sure, Kerry conceded, Morsi’s recently disclosed hateful insults against Jews that he uttered in 2010 were “reprehensible” and “unacceptable by anyone’s standard.” But they should not get in the way of our “critical interests with Egypt.” Unsaid were whether those “critical interests” include Morsi’s willingness to use military tanks against his own people, his cozying up to Iran and the threats his MB patrons have made against Israel that our F-16s can be used to carry out.

The Obama administration’s policies in Egypt have been an abysmal failure.  And Obama is doubling down in his reliance on Morsi’s hollow assurances that he is committed to democracy. But for the “leadership” that Obama showed in Egypt during and after the revolution that deposed Mubarak,  we might well “have seen a different outcome there” – a far better one for the Egyptian people and American national security interests.

Ahmadinejad at a nuclear plant

4. A successful covert strike on Iran’s nuclear program is vital in order to demonstrate strength in the wake of the nomination of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. Iran expert Kenneth Timmerman reports that “the Iranian regime loves Chuck Hagel” and that its state-controlled press is interpreting his nomination as a sign that the U.S. is eager for a “grand bargain.”

The Hagel nomination undermines the credibility of the U.S. pledge to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, even if it means military action. In 2006, Hagel said a military strike “is not a viable, feasible, responsible option.” The Iranian regime certainly knows of his record, which even includes opposing the designation of the Revolutionary Guards as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
The Iranian regime will also doubt that the U.S. would support Israeli action. In 2006, Hagel criticized Israel’s offensive against Hezbollah, decrying the “systematic destruction of an American friend Lebanon” and declaring, “this madness must stop.” If Hagel wouldn’t support an Israeli offensive against Hezbollah, then there’s little reason for the Iranian regime to believe he’d support an Israeli military offensive against its nuclear program.

 

4. Bob Livingston of Personal Liberty wrote the following article. It’s very deceptive to call Obamacare socialized medicine. The law has nothing to do with health care. It’s just the opposite. Its sickness care. The Nazis had their gas chambers and America has medical care, which is the most sophisticated killing machine that demented minds can create.

Livingston is correct. ObamaCare is really a way for the government to usher its sick and its elderly into eternity. A senior citizen these days cannot escape the mandate from the government to attend a conference on their own impending death. Whereas the emphasis in our old system of Health Care was placed on ways to heal and to return to normal life, the emphasis on ObamaCare is to ensure that the elderly and the sick elderly leave this life as soon as possible, so that their care will not burden the state.

If you don't believe me, just listen to this news segment.

"Obamacare is not health care. It has absolutely nothing to do with health care. It’s a great transfer of wealth and population control with a ticket to the death panels when we are no longer considered productive citizens ... The medical establishment promotes sickness under the pretext of health care ... Despite denials by the elites, a government-run health care system ... will condemn millions of elderly and disabled Americans to substandard care and perhaps even to fatal rationing of medical resources."

The term "medical resources" should sound very ominous to you. Under this system, a person diagnosed with a terminal illness has no inherent right to receive whatever treatment is available; oh, no, an ill person must appear before a panel of "experts" to make their case that they should receive whatever the medical establishment has that might heal the illness.

Members of the panel are instructed to consider several factors in determining if the ill patient receives treatment or if they will just be allowed to die.

1) The age of the ill patient

2) The overall health condition of the ill patient

3) The medical history of the biological parents of the ill patient

4) How long the patient might live after the procedure

5) How much more the patient might contribute to society after they are healed.

If the "death panel" concludes that the government is not likely to "get their money" back from a productive and healed patient, that panel is likely to deny the patient his or her access to life-saving medical treatment.

This system is Nazism revived to its theological core, so it will turn into Nazism in practice. But, then, the drive to this current New World Order (NW)) is Nazism to its inner core So, how does a person beat ObamaCare so they can live to an age determined by God? People need to dramatically change their eating habits, their lifestyle, and their medical treatments.

5. Natural News reported that in a stunning display of ignorance, researchers attempted to create a mental diagnosis that can be applied to entire families at once. Parental alienation disorder was denied acceptance into the psychiatric bible, the DSM-5 in spite of 'intense lobbying' by supporters. This unofficial yet bold new disorder occurs to more than one person at a time.

This is Communism. Under the old-style dictatorship, Communist authorities would simply slap a label of insane on Christians because they believed that anyone who held to Biblical beliefs, and rejecting Communism, was insane. Therefore, authorities turned psychiatric wards into prisons. They also held the right to declare an entire family insane or mentally incompetent.

The trend in the industry, worldwide, is to expand the market for pharmaceuticals. By increasing the number and breadth possible medical diagnoses, more and more people have become mentally ill. More mentally ill people means more business for big pharma and psychiatrists."

6. YNET reported that in 33rd government will be sworn in shortly, and, regardless of the make-up of the next coalition, it must succeed in determining the country's borders. The issues are literally life-and-death for the Jewish state.

The issue of Israel's borders is the most important of all. Israel must separate itself from the Palestinians and determine borders that will secure a democratic, egalitarian, legitimate and just state that will maintain a Jewish majority for generations to come.

Liberals have lied to you, saying that separating the Palestinians from the Jewish people will cause Israel to lose her Jewish majority, thus dooming the nation. The opposite is true; the only way for Israel to survive is to force the Palestinians out of Israel and into their own nation. The only question is whether Israel will force today's "House of Esau" back into Jordan, which is their natural historical home. If the pro-western government of Jordan falls to Islamic forces, Israel might very well use the Israeli Defense Force to force the Palestinians out of Israel and into Jordan.

Now, let us return to our featured news story.

"... we must first determine the geographic borders, and then address the rest of the pressing issues: Morality, equal share of the burden, basic rights, separation of religion and state and rule of law. We will not have welfare, education, equality or national resilience until we separate from the Palestinians. “

Bible prophecy does, indeed, foretell that there will be two political entities during End Times, but Israel will annihilate the Palestinians lock, stock and barrel.

Israel must divest itself from being responsible for the Palestinians.

 

7. The New York Times says Washington aims to set up drone bases in northwest Africa to fight Islamist extremists' there. Washington will use the bases to bolster surveillance of al-Qaeda's (AQ) terrorists and affiliates in the region, as well as on other Islamist extremists, in a bid to end terrorism's grip on the region.

The US Army is likely to set up a drone base in Niger, on the eastern border of Mali. French forces in Mali are waging a campaign against AQ in the Islamic Maghreb, a military official said. US Africa Command was also looking at an alternative location for the base in Burkina Faso.

America is leading the fight to destabilize Africa. (See the "Non-Integrating Map") Entrenched dictators, religious extremists, and leaders who will not buck under to the NWO will be removed because the way must be made clear for the Club of Rome plan to establish Kingdoms 7 and 8 for the anti-christ.

The U.S. invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq and our drone wars in Yemen (and the occupation of Yemen) and Pakistan and our covert wars in Libya and Syria and all over this region is part of the "Pentagon's New Map Strategy" in this part of the world called the "Non-Integrating Gap".

The Non-integrating Gap Region

America is spearheading the effort to destabilize this entire region so that these backward countries can jump-start into a modernization campaign that will bring their economies into the planned cashless system of the anti-christ.

The NWO goal fulfills Daniel 7:7-8 where he is shown that, at the End of the Age, all nations of the world are re-organized into 10 kingdoms.

The Illuminati not only wants to organize the world into 10 kingdoms, they want these nations to be modern so their economies can function in a cashless system.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are winding down, so the American effort is expanding southward to Yemen, to the Sudan, to Niger, and to Mali, just to name a few countries. Therefore, if military operations are moving southward in Africa, it stands to reason that military bases have to move south as well.

For now, officials say, they envision flying only unarmed surveillance drones from the base, although they have not ruled out conducting missile strikes at some point if the threat worsens.

Believe me, American officials will one day declare that the threat is worsening. Niger and the U.S. reached a status-of-forces agreement that provides legal protection to US troops in the country, including any who might deploy to a new drone base.

We are privileged to watch End Times Bible prophecy being fulfilled via Daniel 7:7-8

Under the guise of "fighting terrorism", the Illuminati is destabilizing entire continents. How many people will have to die for this vision to be realized? The Bible in the book of Revelation states 2/3 of the Jews and Gentiles.

Beyonce Signals Her Illuminati Handlers

Well, we now know who Beyonce definitely works for..................know we know how she became so popular, famous and wealthy, she shold her sold to satan................some people even noticed her strange Bin Laden eyes..........God have mercy on her soul!

I have also heard unconfirmed rumors that Beyonce belongs to a group called "The Organization" a group of black entertainers. One member of the "The Organization" allegedly made the statement, we don't care how many niggers die from hearing our music we just want to sell CDs and make money!