Our Safety Was NOT Protected By The Government In San Bernardino, Nor Will It Be In Any Place In The US. The Security Claim Is Only A Front To Take Away Freedoms From The Good Guys!

San Bernardino terror attack lays bare the fraud of government

Posted on December 7, 2015 by Bob Livingston

Every so often an event occurs that lays bare the fraud of government better than anything that can be written or said. We saw such an event last week.

In my writing of late, I’ve focused on the Machiavellian strategies employed by the government and its main players to steal from you your wealth and liberties and to turn this once-Constitutional republic into a Third World collectivist nanny-state hellhole, all under the sweet-sounding sake of safety and name of democracy. You can read some of them here, here, here and here.

The massacre of 14 people (plus 21 wounded) in San Bernardino, California, by American Muslim Syed Rizwan Farook and his Pakistani wife, Tashfeen Malik, peeled back the veneer of massive government fraud and deception. The so-called war on terror, the surveillance state, the security state and oppressive gun laws are nothing more than feckless distractions designed to give the illusion of safety while your liberties are stolen from you one by one.

The American government and its shadow, deep state operatives, along with allied governments and their intelligence agencies, used Muslim sectarianism to create al-Qaida and ISIS, supplying them with weapons and training in proxy wars and for the purpose of overthrowing sovereign governments. This is part of the globalists plans to blow up the Middle East, preserve the petro-dollar and ensure the dominance of our “allies” in the region: Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel. This is part of the long-range neocon plan as outlined in the Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

It began in the 1950s with the CIA operation, funded by Kermit Roosevelt with CIA money, to overthrow the elected government in Iran via a “spontaneous” popular revolt, continued with the first Gulf War attack on Iraq, and evolved into the now 14-year-old war in Afghanistan, and the subsequent destruction of Iraq, Libya and now Syria.

After 9/11, orchestrated (if you believe the government’s conspiracy theory) by CIA operative Osama bin Laden, the government embarked on a “war on terror” to “keep us safe.” The idea, George Bush the lesser assured us, was to kill “them” over there so we wouldn’t have to kill “them” over here.

So for 14 years straight, and nigh on 25 years if you take it back to Bush I’s unconstitutional first Gulf War, which never really ended, we have been killing “them” over there. But that didn’t keep “them” from setting off a bomb in the World Trade Center in 1993. It didn’t keep “them” from flying airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001. And it didn’t keep “them” from creating a bomb factory and acquiring weapons and hording ammo for a big attack in San Bernardino last week.

Nor did the surveillance state, which monitors everyone’s communications and bank and credit card transactions to such an extent that the NSA felt the need to create a $1.5 billion 1 million square-foot data center in Utah to store everything it’s ever collected on everyone.

Farook was an American citizen who, despite trips to countries with histories of radicalizing young men and frequent communications with what the security state describes as people on the FBI’s radar because of their connections to terrorism, remained under their radar while he and his wife acquired paramilitary training and, along with a group of a half dozen or so other “Middle Eastern” men built bombs in the middle of a residential neighborhood. The Department of Homeland Security’s “See something, say something” program failed because saying something, as DHS requests in pamphlets and public service announcements, often gets one tagged as racist or Islamophobic or xenophobic. (See the response to Ahmed Mohamed, the clock boy.)

Malik was a vetted foreigner — vetted by the security state — and allowed into the country despite her ties to Muslim countries known to support terrorism. As NBC explains it: “Malik entered the U.S. on a K-1 visa, which is required of a fiancé [in this case, a fiancée] engaged to a U.S. citizen. These visas are granted after the applicant undergoes a rigorous security screening process aimed as (sic) preventing so-called ‘Green Card’ marriages.”

In addition to collecting all our communications and financial transaction data, the security state watches us with drones and security cameras on every corner, as well as with vehicles containing backscatter cameras that see through our walls and into our vehicles. It gropes and/or forces us into radiation spraying scanners before we can travel, questions us at random checkpoints, and paws through our bags and forces us to empty our pockets before entering public venues.

California has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation. Yet Farook and Malik used legally acquired weapons with appropriate background checks. No word has yet been uttered from the MSM or the FBI whether the bomb-making material they possessed was legally acquired, however.

So as we now see, none of this “keeps us safe”: not the so-called war on terror, the surveillance state, the security state or the oppressive (for law-abiding citizens) gun laws. For who feels “safer” from the threat of terrorism in America today than he did 25 years ago? Certainly not the American public, despite assurances from the mainstream media and the government men and women who claim that’s the purpose of the war on terror, the surveillance state, the security state and oppressive gun laws.

So what do we hear from the MSM and the government men and women? After hours of hoping the shooters were conservative white men and, failing that, trying to hide the ties to radical Islam and attempting to deflect from the terrorism angle, we hear from the establishment and the government men that what we need is more war on terror, more surveillance state, more security state and more oppressive gun laws.

Oh, and we also heard — before the MSM was even comfortable with releasing Farook’s name — from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), who dutifully explained once again how Islam is a religion of peace. CAIR, it must be noted, has a history of funding terrorism and is a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood, a terror organization bent on destroying the west. The MSM, somehow, let that little tidbit slip past as CAIR “condemned” the terror attack and Farook’s relative explained how no one saw it coming.

You Can Thank Obama For ISIS

OW OBAMA AIDED ISIS

Exclusive: Joseph Farah asks if president was intent on helping terror group all along

Published: 21 hours ago

 JOSEPH FARAH About | Email | Archive

  Receive author alerts  Subscribe to feed

• 
• Text smaller
• Text bigger

     429

Perhaps the single costliest, most demonstrable crime of Barack Obama’s time in office is what he did to fuel the rise of the army of the Islamic State in Syria, which now threatens to take over Syria, Iraq and other Middle East while murdering thousands and posing an extreme terrorist threat to the U.S.

Obama claims not to have seen this coming.

But others certainly did.

Two years ago, I pointed out that Obama was, in effect, siding “with al-Qaida and other Muslim Brotherhood terrorist groups in the effort to overturn the regime of Bashar Assad” by intervening in the civil war in Syria.

“As a Syrian-American myself, I have watched Bashar al-Assad and his father before him murder their own rebellious citizens,” I wrote in August 2012. “I’ve seen them turn away visitors to Syria based on their religious beliefs. I’ve seen them host various terrorist groups. I’ve seen them impose their will on neighboring Lebanon. I’ve seen them assassinate political opponents.”

For two generations, I had observed the atrocities of the Assad leadership – deploring its alliance with Iran and Hezbollah and police-state tactics.

Nevertheless, it was easy to see U.S. intervention against Assad would not only result in “incomparably worse leadership than Assad” but an existential threat to every Christian in the region, I explained.

“America has no interests in toppling Assad,” I wrote. “Only a nation that wanted to provoke instability in the Middle East would be backing the Muslim Brotherhood. And maybe that’s what Barack Obama wants. How else can one explain America’s bizarre actions in the region?”

That wasn’t the first time I had warned about the U.S. meddling in Syria.

In June of 2012, I wrote: “There’s a certain eery consistency to the Obama administration’s foreign policy. It’s always wrong. U.S. support for the rebellion in Syria is a sad illustration. Now, don’t get me wrong. I have always been a staunch critic of Bashar al-Assad and his tyrant father before him. But, in the Middle East, the choice is often between bad and worse. And, predictably, Barack Obama has chosen worse by siding with Islamists over the authoritarian dictator with plenty of faults of his own.”

Sometimes I hate being right, but the handwriting was already clearly on the wall.

“For Americans, our prime concern should be humanitarian in a conflict like this,” I wrote more than two years ago. “While Syria is an anti-Semitic and anti-Israel police state, what will inevitably follow the fall of Assad will make the current regime look like a benevolent picture of stability by comparison.”

I further predicted a Christian genocide in the Middle East if the Syrian regime fell.

Did I have a crystal ball? No. Did I have access to intelligence briefings not available to Obama? No. Did I divine this information through supernatural powers? No.

I saw all this coming simply by understanding the players and knowing the conditions of the region.

I also questioned Obama’s justification for his plan to bomb Syria two years ago. Back then, he wanted to bomb Assad’s forces. Today he is talking about bombing ISIS forces in Syria. Why was he hell-bent on bombing the wrong side in the civil war? He claimed it was because Syria had chemical weapons and used them. This from the man who steadfastly opposed the war in Iraq, a nation that also had chemical weapons and used them against the Kurdish population and Iran before that.

Obama forgot about his plan to bomb Syria when the plan was condemned by many in Congress, but he did arm the Syrian opposition. Those weapons, some of them very sophisticated, have all wound up in the hands of ISIS, which was always the strongest component of the anti-Assad forces.

Maybe it was just incompetence by Obama when he pushed all the wrong buttons leading to the empowerment of ISIS.

Maybe it was just gross negligence on the part of Obama and his administration that directly resulted in the rise of ISIS.

Maybe it was just his inexperience or detachment or lack of sophistication that led to the new killing fields of the Middle East.

But his policies in Syria and Iraq over the last two years have resulted in a bloodbath that shows no signs of abating. His administration is floundering in its response, refusing pleas for rearmament and aid by the Iraqi government and the Kurds.

The reality is that Obama could not have done any more to help ISIS if it were his intent.

And that raises the unavoidable and uncomfortable question: Was it his intent?

Obama Is Our Trojan Horse And He Is Doing Everything In His Power To Promote Islam And Destroy This Country.

s Barack Obama Aiding And Abetting ISIS?

August 13, 2014 by John Myers 

 2357 295

 

 32 3817

FILE

[The Muslim call to prayer is] “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.” — Barack Obama

To borrow upon the famous quote from one of the world’s greatest leaders, Winston Churchill, during the Battle of Britain and apply it to President Barack Obama’s response to the Islamic threat that is ISIS: Never in the field of human conflict was so much harm done to so many by just one man.

Churchill and Obama: seldom have two names in one sentence been in such contrast. There stood Churchill, a patriot with a distinguished military record who wanted to take part in the invasion task force that hit the beaches of Normandy only to be ordered not to by the King of England. Churchill, was always at the ready to die for his country. Churchill was striving for world democracy and freedom.

Then there is Obama who is, at the very least, sympathetic to Islam and its goal of global domination.

The most damning evidence against Obama has been his mishandling of the Islamic State group: the most powerful jihad against Christians since the Middle Ages. ISIS stands at the cusp of overrunning and controlling the Mideast in a way that has not been seen since the Ottoman Empire ruled the region 400 years ago.

Does Anyone In Government Read History?

ISIS is unlike any threat the United States has faced. It is determined to build a united greater Arabia, and it may have the petro-wealth and determination to do it. The group’s violence knows no limits. Even al-Qaida has disavowed ISIS.

History is filled with revolutions upon which every cycle becomes more extreme, more violent.

During the French Revolution, Maximilien de Robespierre was a prominent leader who was both celebrated for the reforms he brought and despised for the terror that he helped instill — a terror so frightful his own head was taken by the guillotine.

It was the same during the Iranian Revolution 35 years ago. Sadegh Ghotbzadeh, who went on to become Ayatollah Khomeini’s foreign minister, was part of the group of radicals who overthrew the Shah of Iran. Two years later, Ghotbzadeh was executed, ostensibly for not being radical enough. The same fate almost happened to the first president of Iran, Abolhassan Bani-Sadr, who was also not seen as religious or righteous enough and had to flee for his life to France where he is living out his old age today.

Radical Islam is on the same path and the culmination of it to date has been ISIS, which is not a group of fundamentalists whose goal is to punish Westerners because of their presence in the Mideast but rather a religious, political and military powerhouse that has been growing unchecked since Obama’s withdrawal from Iraq at the end of 2011. Given that Obama announced this move when he ran for President in 2008, all ISIS has had to do was be patient. The result is a military force that is overrunning Iraq’s much larger army and now has some of the best U.S. military hardware. Its ultimate goal is not just to drive Westerners from the Mideast, but to have Islam as the dominant religion with sectarian systems of government around the world.

Bush Broke It, Obama Crushed It

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell famously dissuaded President George H.W. Bush from pushing into Iraq after American forces had driven Saddam Hussein from his occupation of Kuwait saying, “If you break it, you own it.”

Carry the argument over to a piece of fine bone china and Bush did break it. And as wrongheaded as the invasion and unwanted occupation of Iraq were, George W. Bush was willing to own it and fix it as best he could. In contrast, Obama has walked away from the China shop, swept the shards under the rug as best he could, and posted a neon sign that said: “Please loot at your convenience.”

That a fundamentalist group like ISIS is growing in power and prestige must be left at the doorstep of the current occupant of the White House. Some people may say it has happened out of ignorance, while others sympathetic to Obama will say it is because of his background as an anti-colonist. I say it is because he is an Islamist and a radical one at that.

Obama has downplayed the threat of radical Islam inside and outside the Mideast all along. At the Democratic National Convention he declared that al-Qaida is on the path to defeat. How right he was. What we didn’t know was al-Qaida’s defeat was from an almost unopposed ISIS, which was wreaking havoc on Syria. The President had to know this through his daily intelligence briefings. He also had to know ISIS was taking aim at Iraq, a country in which America sacrificed more than 4,000 lives and nearly $2 trillion — a sacrifice made for a country with massive oil reserves lying at the doorstep of even larger oil reserves in Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Of course, Obama has ordered a handful of airstrikes this week as he has hunkered down thinking over this Iraq crisis between golf games during his current vacation at Martha’s Vineyard. And let’s not forget that in June, Obama sent 300 military advisers to Iraq. Three-hundred! That’s a handful more men than George Custer had at Little Big Horn.

Obama: Ignoramus Or Islamist?

I don’t for a moment believe that Obama is stupid, that he doesn’t realize the stakes in the Mideast, including his tepid diplomacy regarding fighting in Gaza. If I am right, and if you agree with me, that only leaves us with one answer: Obama is purposefully letting Islamic extremists overthrow governments that were outlined and established by Western imperialists, regardless of the costs to the world and to the United States.

Forget what the bleeding-heart liberals and the Muslim apologists in the mass media say; growing radical Islamic elements are bent on world domination just as surely as was the Kremlin under Josef Stalin. Their message abounds and volumes have been written about it.

Below is just one example from the Minister of Interior and National Security in the Hamas government in Gaza, Fathi Hammad: 

“We look forward to future victories, in which, Allah willing, we will liberate our land, our Jerusalem, our Al-Aqsa [Mosque], our cities and our villages, Allah willing, all this in preparation for establishing the next Islamic Caliphate. Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are at the brink of a period of global Islamic culture, whose fuel is Gaza, whose spearhead is Gaza, its Jihad fighters (Mujahideen) and commanders are Gaza, Allah willing.”

Today, ISIS with its army could soon earn $100 million per month as it seizes control of captured oil and gas facilities in Syria and Iraq.

Most dangerous of all is that as ISIS garners greater wealth and more territory, the United States is defended by the beliefs and actions of Obama, a man who is the leader of the free world who has ushered these shameful utterances to a Christian Nation:

• Obama recites the Muslim call to prayer in Arabic.
• Obama praises and glorifies Islam: “convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith.”
• Obama states, “Islam has always been a part of America’s story. There is a mosque in every state in the union.”
• Obama bows to the Saudi king, yet does not bow when meeting the queen of England.

Obama’s words and his inaction against radical Islam show him for what he is, an Islamic wolf clothed as a Christian.

A few months ago, I wondered how much worse can things become given Obama has only two and a half more years in the Oval Office. Given his actions as President and as a sympathizer for radical Islam, things could become much worse.

Yours in good times and bad,

Obama Administration Foolishly Believes Caliphate Would Never Evolve From al Qaeda

Obama Administration Always Scoffed At Idea A Caliphate Could Rise From Al-Qaida’s Ashes

August 12, 2014 by Ben Bullard 

 22 16

 

 0 74

John Brennan, current director of the CIA and a former counterterrorism advisor to President Barack Obama, expressed the Administration’s dismissive attitude toward planning U.S. strategy around the real ambitions of al-Qaida and its offshoots back in 2011.

But here we are.

Brennan delivered his prepared remarks to the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies on June 29 of 2011, unveiling Obama’s National Strategy for Counterterrorism, “which formalizes the approach that we’ve been pursuing and adapting for the past two and half years to prevent terrorist attacks and to ensure al-Qa’ida’s demise.”

The idea that America needs to prepare itself for terrorism emanating from anything so organized and powerful as an Islamic caliphate, he said, is “absurd,” a “feckless delusion that is never going to happen.”

“Our strategy is also shaped by a deeper understanding of al-Qa’ida’s goals, strategy, and tactics. I’m not talking about al-Qa’ida’s grandiose vision of global domination through a violent Islamic caliphate.  That vision is absurd, and we are not going to organize our counterterrorism policies against a feckless delusion that is never going to happen.  We are not going to elevate these thugs and their murderous aspirations into something larger than they are.

“Rather, President Obama is determined that our foreign and national security policies not play into al-Qa’ida’s strategy or its warped ideology.  Al-Qa’ida seeks to terrorize us into retreating from the world stage.  But President Obama has made it a priority to renew American leadership in the world, strengthening our alliances and deepening partnerships.  Al-Qa’ida seeks to portray America as an enemy of the world’s Muslims.  But President Obama has made it clear that the United States is not, and never will be, at war with Islam.”

The Story Of The Wide Open Southern Border Poses More Serious Problems Than Just Illegal Kids.

Obama’s Border Plans and Some Guys Named Al

By Roger L. Simon

August 6th, 2014 - 10:58 pm

inShare

 

In a lust for Latino votes and voters — and, oh yes, great compassion for the children of Central America, etc. — Obama seems poised to act unilaterally on immigration, granting a massive amnesty to illegal aliens while doing little or nothing about border security.

In two words, this stinks. It stinks not because of the children, good or bad, justifiable or not, invading our border, or the nice or not so nice people currently here, or even the drug cartels, murderous as they are. Those are problems — in many cases bad problems. But they can be handled in a variety of ways with a variety of solutions, including some compromises that may or may not make you happy, but, you know, that’s life. It’s not perfect, in case you haven’t noticed.

This stinks for a far more important reason on which compromise would be suicidal — some guys named Al. I’m talking about al Qaeda, al Nusra, al Shabaab, Ansar al Islam, Al Umar Mujihadeen, the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, Boko Haram, etc., etc. Okay, they’re not all named Al, but you get the idea. They all would be delighted to cross our border to kill us, maybe destroy our civilization into the bargain.

In fact, another Al, a newly celebrated one, Al Baghdadi, the head of ISIS, now the Islamic State, told our soldiers he’d see them in New York when he was released from an Iraqi jail. We’ve see what’s happened since then — mass killings in open graves, heads on stakes, Christians in forced conversions, etc. Holocaust stuff. And just the other day they made a video pledging to wave the black flag of Muhammed over the White House.

Were they kidding? Was Hamas kidding? Al Qaeda? Hezbollah? The Taliban? Whatever avatar of the Muslim Brotherhood pops up tomorrow or next Tuesday?

Can you imagine what would happen if these people got into our country and blew up a handful of shopping malls in Texas or… or… well, we’ve all made up the scenarios and they’re not very farfetched. They’re just as real as those 40 monstrous Hamas tunnels shooting out into Israel from Gaza.

Who knows how many are already here? According to one report, immigrants from over 75 countries entered this country illegally in the last four years. No, they weren’t all Scandinavian.

Yes, an open U.S. border is suicidal these days. More than that — it’s nuts! Any president who really cared for the American people would set border security as priority number one.

Ours hasn’t, obviously. He has other plans — vote-getting plans, “compassionate” plans. But I wonder if he ever wakes up at night, wondering who’s riding those endless jet skis crossing the Rio Grande. If something really bad is about to happen. If he doesn’t, there’s something really wrong with him.