Thanks To Liberals--They Guarantee The Second Amendment

Standing Guard | More Americans Stand By The NRA As Liberal Elites Try To Foist Their Values On Everyone

by Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President - Tuesday, November 21, 2017

W

Photo credit: Michael Ives

 More

SUBSCRIBE

This feature appears in the November ‘17 issue of NRA America’s 1st Freedom, one of the official journals of the National Rifle Association.  

The heart and soul of America is at stake.

We have an epic battle on our hands, a titanic struggle over not just our Second Amendment-protected freedom, but for all of the freedoms and values that define our great country.

You know what I’m talking about. You feel it in your heart. The liberal elites from Hollywood to New York City, to the political elites of Washington, D.C., are doing everything they can to impose their utopian and, frankly, un-American vision upon us all. And they’re not one bit interested in our vision of our great nation of personal freedom and constitutional liberty. In all my years of leading the NRA, I’ve never seen a national news media as hateful and poisonous as it is today. Every single day, they spew venomous lies to denigrate NRA members, demonize law-abiding gun owners, and rip apart the fabric of the America we all cherish and hold dear.

All while most Americans have lost faith in the institutions we used to be able to count on, except for one—the National Rifle Association of America. Today, more Americans trust the NRA than either national political party, and more than almost all of our political leaders and institutions. And Americans sure don’t trust the news media! But they do trust the NRA. They trust the NRA to tell the truth, to say what we mean, and to stand and fight for what we believe. More than anything, we stand and fight for the right of every law-abiding citizen to exercise his or her Second Amendment-protected freedom—unfettered by government intrusion—to defend and protect themselves, their families and their communities.

The majority of Americans, like never before, have embraced that simple, God-given right to keep and bear arms for personal protection. They know that at the scene of the crime there is only the criminal and the victim. Despite all their best intentions, the police arrive in the aftermath of the violence.

It is a battle between good and evil, and the NRA and the Second Amendment stand on the side of the good guys … and most Americans stand with us. Facing 25,000 violent crimes committed per week in this country, and outraged by a catch-and-release criminal justice system that fails to arrest, prosecute and imprison repeat violent offenders, Americans have come to realize the hard truth that government has abdicated its responsibility to protect us. Worse, the anti-Second Amendment elites are working hard to strip away our freedom … to deny our very right to survive the violence they have failed to prevent.

From gun bans to licensing and registration schemes, even calls to abolish the Second Amendment forever, the political elites, media elites and celebrity elites don’t believe you have the fundamental right to defend yourself … and they’ll stop at nothing to remove your freedom from their vision of America. But their vision for our country, and our freedom, is dead wrong. History proves it.

Just look at Paris or Boston or Brussels or San Bernardino, Calif.—where all the gun laws the elites dream about were on the books and completely failed to protect innocent people from the terrorists and violent criminals bent on destruction. In all the world, disarmed citizens are reduced to innocent, easy prey. We cannot and we will not allow that to happen, not here in the United States of America.

The hypocrisy of the elites is sickening. They will always have their guns, their security systems behind their walled neighborhoods and their armed personal security details. If you’re a celebrity or a friend of the mayor … if you are among the wealthy and connected … you can get your permit.

But honest folks like you and me? No permit for you … no freedom for us to protect ourselves. The majority of Americans cut through all that hypocrisy and know that, in the end, we’re on our own. We know that when it comes to defending our families and homes, freedom is and must always be in our own hands … the freedom that can only be found in the Second Amendment.

Americans also believe that precious, life-saving freedom should not end at the state line. That is why the NRA is fighting right now to enact national Right-to-Carry reciprocity. 

As more and more Americans embrace their firearms freedom, the time has come for Congress to enact Right-to-Carry reciprocity and for the president to immediately sign the bill. People want and deserve the ability to protect themselves from the monsters and menaces lurking among us. No one should be forced to face evil with empty hands.

That is the freedom we all fight for, and we must stand together and fight harder than ever to keep our freedom and save our nation. That is why every gun owner and patriot of freedom should join us. Join the NRA, renew your membership, and bring a friend or neighbor into our ranks.

That is how we save our freedom, together. The anti-freedom elites are coming after us with everything they’ve got—all the billions of dollars and anti-gun media and Hollywood celebrities they can muster.

But they don’t know you. They don’t know the heart of a freedom-loving NRA member. They don’t know how much the majority of Americans love their country and their freedom.

The NRA knows … and for those millions and millions of good, decent, honest Americans, the NRA—stronger now than ever before—will always stand and fight.

Will Liberals Only Awaken To The Threat Until Their Women Are Enslaved, That Sharia Law Is Instituted And Dhimmis Are Forced To Pay Jizya?

Why liberals keep giving radical Islam a pass — and what it will take to change their minds

Dave Urbanski Feb 7, 2017 8:24 am

Kashmiri demonstrators hold up a flag of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) during a demonstration against Israeli military operations in Gaza, in downtown Srinagar on July 18, 2014. (Image source: Tauseef Mustafa/AFP/Getty Images)

124Follow

• SHARE
• TWEET

One might conclude that given example after example of radical Islam’s heinous acts around the globe even after 9/11, liberals would cease giving them a pass or the benefit of the doubt.

But even after Fort Hood, Boston, Paris, Garland, Chattanooga, San Bernardino and Orlando — to name a few attacks — some liberals clearly don’t feel that way. Indeed, a new CBS poll indicates that 66 percent of Democrats believe Islam is no different from other religions when it comes to encouraging violence.

People hold candles during a vigil for shooting victims Dec. 3, 2015, at San Manuel Stadium in San Bernardino, California. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

Who can forget left-wing actor Ben Affleck’s infamous appearance on “Real Time” when he became incensed at host Bill Maher and atheist icon Sam Harris for daring to say Islam’s general reluctance to call out and combat radical elements is a problem? Affleck referred to that conclusion as “racist” and “gross.”

Maher — a rare liberal who’s outspoken in his criticism of Islam — countered that it’s “the only religion that acts like the mafia; that will f***ing kill you if you say the wrong thing, paint the wrong picture or write the wrong book.”

Loud and opinionated comedienne Rosie O’Donnell — who praised Affleck’s words after the “Real Time” dust-up — drew honest-to-goodness applause on “The View” a few years before saying that “radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam.” To her credit, left-wing icon Joy Behar attempted to temper O’Donnell, saying, “Christians are not threatening to kill us.”

And of course, former President Barack Obama refused to place the words “radical” and “Islam” together, which led to many to conclude he was giving special favor to Islam while never hesitating to openly criticize Christianity.

After last June’s terror attack at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Obama said using the term “radical Islam” won’t change a thing.

“What exactly would using this label accomplish? What exactly would it change? Would it make ISIL less committed to trying to kill Americans? Would it bring in more allies? Is there a military strategy that is served by this?” Obama asked. “The answer is, none of the above. Calling a threat by a different name does not make it go away.”

Republican President Donald Trump disagrees — and made it a point to emphatically call out “radical Islamic terrorism” during his inauguration address last month and promise to end it.

So what will it take to change liberals’ minds on the subject? Another 9/11-scale attack — or worse? And what other factors might be playing a role in the left’s seemingly ingrained desire to not look radical Islam square in the eye and take it on?

Robert Spencer — director of Jihad Watch and a noted authority on the pervasiveness of radical Islam — told TheBlaze he’s seeing the left not only continuing to give Islamic extremism a pass but also noticing liberals beginning to normalize elements of it.

And he needed to point no further than the much-heralded Women’s March, which hit the streets the day after Trump’s inauguration — and featured speaker and march organizer Linda Sarsour, a “Palestinian Muslim American” who’s come under scrutiny for threatening statements she made against Islam critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali several years back.

“Ms. Sarsour is not interested in universal human rights,” Ali told the New York Times, adding, “she’s a defender of Sharia law. There’s no principle that demeans, degrades and dehumanizes women more than the principal of Sharia law.”

Despite this, Spencer said liberals continue their “glamorization and glorification” of Sarsour — as well as their “vilification of anyone who points out her ties to Hamas, vicious hatred of Israel … even in publications such as Elle.”

Other normalization examples include the “the proliferation of World Hijab Day events, which ignore the many women who have been brutalized or even killed for not wearing the hijab, and the spread among Western leftist feminists of the idea that the hijab and Sharia restrictions on women’s rights are a beautiful sign of cultural diversity, to be celebrated rather than condemned.”

Spencer agreed, too, that left-wing bias against Christianity and Judaism finds a kindred spirit with radical Islam, as both share “hatred for Judeo-Christian Western civilization.” Furthermore, radical Islam’s goal of bringing down “the West” taps into a kind of liberal self-loathing that wouldn’t mind seeing America brought low, given it’s viewed by some liberals “the source of all the evil in the world.”

Another tool the left tends to use — and Affleck’s “Real Time” appearance spells it out — is the characterization of Islam criticism as “racism,” despite the fact that Islam isn’t a race.

“Racism is our national trauma,” Spencer added to TheBlaze. “The endeavor to portray Muslims as ‘brown’ and foes of jihad terror as disliking them solely for racial reasons is a cynical and dishonest enterprise that has the effect of intimidating people into being afraid to oppose jihad terror. Of course, many leftists are so poorly educated and unable to think critically that they no doubt believe all that.”

So, what — if anything — might possibly turn the tide on the left?

Spencer noted that it very likely would take something at least as terrible as another 9/11-scale attack, as “with with every jihad attack some people wake up.”

But the “leftist intelligentsia knows that,” he said, which poses an issue, since “after every attack, there is a strenuous effort to exonerate Islam from any responsibility for it.”

Here’s Spencer discussing Islam and the left’s assault on free speech in 2009 — and you might say his words have proven rather prophetic in America over the last several years:

Obama's Biggest Lies

Washington Post catalogues the biggest lies Obama ever told

Sara Gonzales Jan 19, 2017 4:33 pm

In this photo taken Jan. 18, 2017, President Barack Obama speaks during his final news conference in the briefing room of the White House in Washington. (AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

122Follow

• SHARE
• TWEET

The Washington Post marked the end of the Obama administration with a list Thursday that likely didn’t please the outgoing president’s supporters.

For the last five years, the Post has made its political Fact Checker a staple of the publication. Ranked by “Pinocchios,” contenders receive one Pinocchio for a little lie and can earn up to four Pinocchios for the most outrageous of fibs.

Though the Post ran its trademark Fact Checker during President Barack Obama’s first campaign, it wasn’t until 2011 that it became a fixture there, so admittedly the publication missed some blatant dishonesty.

But the newspaper has fact-checked more than 250 statements made by the current president. On his last full day in office, the Post published a catalogue of Obama’s 10 biggest lies.

Included on the list, unsurprisingly, was Obama’s statement to the American public while rallying for Congress to pass his signature health-care legislation, Obamacare: “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it.”

“If you like your health-care plan, you can keep it”
This memorable promise by Obama backfired on him in 2013 when the Affordable Care Act went into effect and at least 2 million Americans started receiving cancellation notices. As we explained, part of the reason for so many cancellations is because of an unusually early (March 23, 2010) cutoff date for grandfathering plans — and because of tight regulations written by the administration. So the uproar could be pinned directly on the administration’s own actions.

Another whopper was Obama’s claim that all but 10 percent of the federal deficit was due to former President George W. Bush’s policies. Pushing back against criticisms of running up the deficit at an unparalleled rate with stimulus packages and bailouts, Obama made this claim during his 2012 campaign.

“90 percent of the budget deficit is due to George W. Bush’s policies”
During the 2012 campaign, Obama repeatedly reminded voters that he became president during a grim economic crisis. But he went too far when he claimed that only 10 percent of the federal deficit was due to his own policies. About half of the deficit stemmed from the recession and forecasting errors, but a large chunk (44 percent in 2011) were the result of Obama’s actions. At another point, Obama also falsely suggested that the Bush tax cuts led to the Great Recession.

And throughout Obama’s two terms in office, he has been quick to dismiss clear acts of terrorism — using phrases like “workplace violence” or blaming a YouTube video for an attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The Post also included his categorization of the Benghazi attack as “an act of terror” and his reference to ISIS as a “JV team.”

“The day after Benghazi happened, I acknowledged that this was an act of terrorism”
Obama did refer to an “act of terror” in the immediate aftermath of the 2012 Benghazi attacks, but in vague terms, wrapped in a patriotic fervor. He never affirmatively stated that the American ambassador died because of an “act of terror.” Then, over a period of two weeks, given three opportunities in interviews to affirmatively agree that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack, the president obfuscated or ducked the question. So this was a case of taking revisionist history too far for political reasons.

“I didn’t call the Islamic State a ‘JV’ team”
In 2014, Obama repeated a claim, crafted by the White House communications team, that he was not “specifically” referring to the Islamic State terror group when he dismissed the militants who had taken over Fallujah as a “JV squad.” But The Fact Checker obtained the previously unreleased transcript of the president’s interview with the New Yorker, and it’s clear that’s who the president was referencing.

But the Post did leave out some key falsehoods recited by Obama over the years. Here are a few:

“Over the past eight years, no foreign terrorist organization has successfully executed an attack on our homeland that was directed from overseas.”

Playing a semantics game, Obama misrepresented the fact that there have been many terrorist attacks carried out on American soil by those with ties to foreign terrorist organizations. In fact, in the case of the 2009 Fort Hood shooting in Killeen, Texas, Major Nidal Hasan murdered 14 people on the military base while shouting “allahu akbar” and was shown to be in direct contact with Al Qaeda terrorist leader Anwar al-Awlaki prior to the attack.

ISIS themselves also claimed responsibility for a 2015 attack in Garland, Texas, when two men were taken down by police officers after they shot up a community center hosting a Muhammad cartoon contest.

Over the last eight years, there were even more terrorist-related attacks in the country, including the San Bernardino attack, Boston Marathon attack, and a 2009 Little Rock, Arkansas, attack when Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad shot two soldiers at a military recruiting station. Muhammad also had ties to al-Qaeda.

---

“Let me say this as plainly as I can: by Aug. 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end.”

Obama claimed that combat operations would be finished by 2010 and later took credit for ending U.S. combat in Iraq. But his own former Defense Secretary Robert Gates disputed that in 2016, the White House did a “disservice” to troops by engaging in word games.

“I think that it is incredibly unfortunate not to speak openly about what’s going on,” Gates told MSNBC. “American troops are in action, they are being killed, they are in combat. And these semantic backflips to avoid using the term combat is a disservice to those who are out there putting their lives on the line.”

---

“We have not had a major scandal in my administration.”

Obama sidestepped the comprehensive list of scandals that plagued his tenure as president. These scandals include but are not limited to: the Operation Fast and Furious gun walking scandal, the IRS scandal involving IRS workers intentionally targeting Tea Party organizations, and his own Secretary of State Hillary Clinton using a private email server.

One Change Encounter--Can It Change Things?

Muslim Sits Next to Eric Trump on Plane, Learns He’s Not a Threat to Non-Radical Muslims

 Share on Facebook Tweet Email Print

A Muslim comic who sat next to President-elect Donald Trump’s son on a transatlantic flight found out just how ridiculous the media’s narrative regarding Trump and Islam is.

According to The Hill, comic Mohammed Amer was flying to Glasgow, Scotland, when he was seated next to one of the most famous political children in the world — Eric Trump.

“Hey guys heading to Scotland to start the U.K. Tour and I am ‘randomly’ chosen to sit next to non (sic) other than Eric Trump,” Amer posted on Facebook Thursday.

“Good news guys Muslims will not have to check in and get IDs. That’s what I was told. I will be asking him a lot of questions on this trip to Glasgow, Scotland. Sometimes God just sends you the material. #Merica #UKTour #HumanAppeal #ThisisNotAnEndorsement #Trump2016ComedyTour”

Al-Arabiya said that reactions on Facebook were typical responses to the media’s narrative.

“Ask him what they plan to do about the white supremicists (sic) in his father’s team and all of them that support his father from among the people,” user Siraaj Muhammad wrote.

“You are a better person than I am Mo. I would have asked to move,” user Sara Wessling said (Amer joked that his seat was “too comfortable”).

Perhaps most interesting was the fact that most of what the media has been reporting about Trump’s draconian measures on Islamic terrorism seems to be a preposterous fiction, at least if you believe what Eric Trump is saying.

Yes, the president-elect is harder on extremist Islam than either President Barack Obama was or former first lady Hillary Clinton would have been — not that that bar is set very high. After Paris, Nice, Orlando, San Bernardino and Brussels, is this a bad thing?

Our policy toward radical Islam must be driven by reality, not kumbaya agenda pushing. That doesn’t mean that new Dark Age envisioned by the sensationalist media is going to come to pass.

When the Trumps speak to the people — without media filter — their ideas seem a lot more reasonable.

Perhaps that should make America realize that the problem isn’t Trump’s policies — it’s the way they’re being sold to us by a media that’s diametrically opposed to anything the president-elect does. Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you agree.

What do you think about what Eric Trump said?

When American Awaken From Their Slumber?

8 BLOODY TERROR ATTACKS IN U.S. IN 18 MONTHS HAVE 1 THING IN COMMON

Media fail to connect dots: 'They're willfully lying to the public'

Published: 4 days ago

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2014/06/lhohmann_avatar.jpg

 LEO HOHMANN About | Email | Archive

image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/themes/worldnet-theme/_/images//feed.png

 Subscribe to feed

1.9K

Share on Facebook

 

Share on Twitter

 

Email

 1.9K

image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/printer_famfamfam.gif

 Print

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/11/Abdul-Ali-Artan-Lantern.jpg

Somali refugee Abdul Ali Artan, suspect in the Ohio State University campus stabbing spree on Nov. 28, 2016 (Photo: Twitter/The Lantern)

When Abdul Ali Artan tried to run over a crowd of helpless students at Ohio State University, then got out of his car and slashed as many as he could with a butcher knife, media titans CNN, CBS and NBC treated it as an isolated incident.

Law enforcement, from the local level on up to the FBI, said they did not know what could have motivated the young Muslim student to act in such a premeditated, violent way against his fellow students on a chilly Tuesday morning in Columbus.

Artan, an 18-year-old freshman at OSU, had immigrated from his native Somalia through Pakistan, arriving in Columbus at the invitation of the U.S. government, which considered him a “refugee.”

But the media failed to connect any of the dots with a host of similar attacks on U.S. soil, let alone the even larger number of strikingly similar attacks in Europe committed by migrants from Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa.

News outlets also failed to report that Columbus is America’s second-largest distribution point for Somali refugees after Minneapolis.

A simple perusal of some very recent history, roughly the previous 17 or 18 months, would have turned up the following incidents:

1. Chattanooga shooting: 24-year-old Muhammad Abdulaziz offers up mass shooting at Navy recruitment center, leaving five U.S. servicemen dead in July 2015.
2. University of California at Merced knife attack: 18-year-old student Faisal Mohammad slashes students, teacher in November 2015, four wounded.
3. San Bernardino shooting: Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik attack office Christmas party, leaving 14 dead and several wounded in December 2015.
4. Orlando gay nightclub shooting: Omar Mateen on June 12, 2016, left 49 dead, 53 wounded.
5. Nazareth Mediterranean Restaurant knife attack: Mohamed Barry slashes diners in Columbus, Ohio, with machete in February 2016, four wounded.
6. St. Cloud Crossroads mall knife attack: Dahir Ahmad Adan seeks out non-Muslim shoppers with military-style knife on Sept. 17, 2016, 10 wounded.
7. Chelsea Manhattan bombing: Ahmad Rahimi plants pipe bombs that go off on Sept. 17, 29 wounded.
8. Ohio State knife/car attack: Abdul Ali Artan, rams his car into crowd of students, slashes them with butcher knife, 11 wounded, on Nov. 28.

A little further back, in 2013, the Boston Marathon bombing by the Tsarnaev brothers left three dead and more than 300 injured.

The one common denominator of all nine attacks is that each was carried out by Muslim immigrants or sons of Muslim immigrants.

And the last four attacks on the list – the knife attack at the restaurant in Columbus, the knife attack at the mall in St. Cloud, the bombing in Manhattan and the knife attack at OSU – were all carried out by Muslims who came to America through the United Nations refugee resettlement program overseen by the U.S. State Department. Three of the four used knives, a key component of global Islamic terror inspired by multiple verses in the Quran.

One of the primary responsibilities of any reputable journalist is to not only report the news of the day, but to report it in context. It is only through context that the consumers of the journalistic product can receive a full understanding of the events happening in the world around them. There was none of that going on Tuesday when the news broke of a knife attack on the campus of Ohio State. Not even the most-recent Muslim knife attack, carried out two months earlier by another Somali refugee in St. Cloud, was mentioned in connection with the Ohio story.

Why so little context? Why so little information about the refugee program and its recent failures to screen out bad apples?

Why do mainstream media, along with U.S. law enforcement, provide cover for the U.S. immigration system and the refugee program in particular?

The answer is clear, say several experts who follow the refugee program.

Get “See Something, Say Nothing: A Homeland Security Officer Exposes the Government’s Submission to Jihad,” by former DHS officer Philip Haney and WND Editor Art Moore, at the WND Superstore!

Keeping Americans in the dark

“Law enforcement and the media want to keep Americans in the dark about this threat,” says Pamela Geller, president of the American Defense Initiative who blogs at the Geller Report and authored the book “Stop the Islamization of America.”

VIDEOMd. man got thousands from Islamic State: DOJ

Mute

Current Time0:02

/

Duration Time1:13

Loaded: 0%

Progress: 0%

“Law enforcement claims it’s to protect Muslims from a ‘backlash’ that never materializes,” Geller told WND. “The media is committed to dissembling about this threat.”

Geller revealed in an article several years ago that the Society of Professional Journalists has guidelines telling journalists never to associate Muslims or Islam with terrorism.

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/11/pamela_geller.jpg

Activist/author Pamela Geller

“They’re willfully lying to the public,” she said.

“They seem to be committed to a globalist multiculturalist agenda that involves bringing large numbers of Muslims into the country,” Geller added. “Connecting the dots would wake too many people up to what is happening.”

Perhaps most disappointing is the failure of Christian pastors and teachers to give any concrete, accurate information to their church flocks about what Islam teaches from the Quran and other Islamic texts.

“They have been indoctrinated with the idea that it would be ‘racist’ to do so,” Geller says.

Robert Spencer, who edits the JihadWatch blog for the David Horowitz Freedom Center and has authored several best-selling books, including “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades,” said he believes U.S. law enforcement takes its cue from the Obama administration.

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/06/Robert_SPencer.jpg

Author Robert Spencer

“And they are committed as a matter of policy to denying that there is any jihad threat at all,” Spencer said. “With each attack, they explain it away and defend Islam. They claim it will alienate moderate Muslims if we speak about the motivating ideology behind this threat; they never explain why they think moderate Muslims would be offended by discussing understandings of Islam that they ostensibly reject.”

Fitna: The root of modern ‘Islamophobia’

Phil Haney, co-author of “See Something Say Nothing,” tracked the OSU story from the time it started breaking Tuesday morning.

“Underneath all this hand-wringing about why did he do it, he already said why he did it,” Haney told WND. “On his Facebook page he said he’s sick and tired of Muslims being killed in different parts of world, and that is fitna. It always comes back to fitna.”

“Fitna” is an Arabic term used in the Quran to describe a yoke of oppression, a trial or an injustice thrust upon the Muslim believers by the non-believers. The modern word for a fitna would be “Islamophobia.”

By continuing the politically correct policy of avoiding the issue behind each new terror attack, the mainstream media enable the Muslim leaders to further their teaching of young Muslims to feel like they are part of a persecuted minority in America.

“Islamophobia” has become such a prevalent theme, widely taught within the American Muslim community today, that we can expect more backlash from angry Muslims who have had their minds poisoned by this indoctrination, Haney says.

“This stifling emphasis dominates the mindset of American Muslims, and their social-political allies [on the left], and it prevents us from honestly and courageously addressing the true nature of a global ideology that aggressively promotes its agenda of supremacy,” Haney said.

“Anyone who attempts to move beyond the ‘Islamophobia’ mantra is reflexively labeled as a bigoted racist,” he added, “while the Muslim community enjoys immunity from any responsibility for its communal actions.”

DHS agent Philip Haney’s blockbuster revelations of the federal government’s appeasement of supremacist Islam are told in his book, “See Something Say Nothing.”

Click here for reuse options!

Copyright 2016 WND

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/9-bloody-terror-attacks-in-u-s-in-18-months-have-1-thing-in-common/#o4qWHgkXA7Ds6MWS.99