Here’s what President Obama should have said on Sunday night. Sen. Ben Sasse from Nebraska articulates who we’re fighting and what we are fighting for. (H/T Truth Revolt.org)
A niggling incongruent bit of information
Tashfeen Malik, erstwhile jihadi bride of Sayed Farhood and Islamist terrorist has been reported on since the San Bernadino terrorist attack last week. There are many things we know and many things we don’t know and then there are things the press reported that make no sense, if you are to believe the facts as presented. The FBI affirms that both Malik and Farhood were radicalized for some time before this terrorist attack. They’re following all sorts of leads, but one lead they should look into is how this online marriage came about.
Muslim women raised in Western countries have been surrounded by a culture where women interact with men outside their family, without supervision or social stigma. Malik was born in Pakistan and raised in Saudi Arabia, so why would this “devout Muslim” woman, whom Farhood’s family claims that they never even saw her face, look for an American husband or for that matter chat online with a male stranger? Somewhere in this mess are middlemen matchmakers, perhaps jihadist family members or a jihadist group, who arranged this marriage. It seems incomprehensible that a devout Muslim woman, with her background, would hook-up with an American, Muslim or not – it just makes no sense, unless she was sent to carry out a terrorist attack or their families arranged this marriage. The press just blithely reported this meeting online, no questions asked, but there’s more to it – more men involved in this.
Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Islam, Terrorism
Words matter, so keep your dictionary handy
Here are my observations on President Obama’s Oval Office speech Sunday night. His narrative writers carefully chose those words, to serve as propaganda, to sway public opinion after seeing devastating poll numbers on how Americans feel about the President’s response to ISIS and Islamist terror. For them, this wasn’t meant to be an actual change of course, only a change in word choice. The Obama administration does have a strategy, however that strategy is not to defeat ISIS, but to fundamentally transform (revolution) America. If you pay attention to the Obama agenda and the things that inspire this president to get passionate and animated, you’ll discern it has nothing to do with fighting Islamist terrorists, heck, he’s planted Islamist sympathizers and enablers in the US military and throughout his administration to insure Muslim sensitivities aren’t offended rather than find a strategy to defeat Islamist terror. That’s the truth! Now, if you juxtapose that with his actions to attack the police, while championing black thugs who get into altercations with the police, the Van Jones plan hits you in the face: it really is top down, bottom up, inside out – they are working to fundamentally transform (revolution) America.
President Obama knew his speech would incite a reaction from the political far-right and actually they’re trying to create more divisiveness and that’s why they descend on these police/black clashes, Al Sharpton has an open invitation to the White House, the military has been cut and being the last bastion where an Alpha male ethos survived, they effectively neutered the US military – where our Secretary of Defense warbles on about transgenders and females in combat jobs making us stronger. The White House reaction to this latest terrorist attack on American soil was meant to antagonize the political right – they want the racists and bigots to react, so they can justify confiscating guns from private citizens – they want to incite a race war in America – that is the truth!
Donald Trump, whom more and more Americans fed-up with Obama’s non-response are supporting, is there to incite the worst among the far-right. I still believe Trump is a Trojan Horse set in motion by the Clinton political machine, but have no proof. To understand Trump’s appeal, refer to my post, “He never means anything serious till he talks about justice and right.” His rabble-rousing feeds Obama’s strategy and will insure a GOP defeat in 2016. And in the midst of all this, there’s big money from George Soros and leftists funding Obama’s fundamental transformation (revolution), from BLM movement, to the Islamist apologists, to the Syrian refugee invasion.
I’ve written about it many times:
Building trust: The high road for America
The Obama/Black Grievance Community/Arab money connection?
Donald Trump’s response isn’t the problem
At this point, we’ve got Donald Trump, ostensibly a very recent conservative convert (Trojan Horse or dupe of the Clintons) inciting the far-right to act out and you’ve got the far-left (ensconced in the White House, with the power of the executive branch, using executive power to subvert The Constitution and fundamentally transform (revolution) America). The far-left wants to incite the far-right to violence, so they can then use the levers of executive power to advance their revolution.
You can read the Van Jones plans in his STORM Handbook, but just like Malik Shabazz went from being a leader of a reviled hate group in America to the National President of Black lawyers for Justice, Jones these days isn’t a radical subversive, nope, he’s the clean-cut, well-spoken political analyst on CNN and the president of Rebuild the Dream…. what could sound more benign….
America, the Republic, is being redefined out of existence, but really the far-left wants the far-right to react violently, so that President Obama can use the power of the Presidency to strong arm his fundamental transformation (revolution) with a national police force, widespread gun confiscation from private citizens and a flurry of executive orders to quell free speech. Loretta Lynch signaled that, by warning Americans she will prosecute hate speech. Words matter, so keep your dictionary handy!
Filed under Uncategorized
Ralph Peters unloads
Ralph Peters, one of my favorite military analysts and one of America’s most creative military strategic thinkers, calls it like it is. Please be warned Peters used a little salty language, but here again sometimes that says it best. (Hat tip to PJ media, where I saw this video first)
Filed under Culture Wars, Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism
Diversity does not make us stronger
“Speaking from the Oval Office and surrounded by members of his national security team, Obama said the shooters perhaps had “mixed motives.”
“It is possible that this was terrorist-related. But we don’t know. It’s also possible that this was work-related,” he said.”
‘Mixed Motives’ in California Shooting by Michele Gorman
President Obama lives in a leftist bubble, where he turns every situation into a college classroom debate forum on his ideological causes. He fixates on “narratives” and word choice over substance. Most of the rest of the world lives where reality smacks them in the face, where brute force decides life and death struggle and where stark truths about human nature can’t be edited out, as some politically inconvenient line. Most of us in America live in the real world too, where we look at a situation like the San Bernadino terrorist attack, quickly assess the facts and form our conclusions based on those facts.
With unerring bad timing, President Obama makes bold declarations about America’s enemies, where events unfold that quickly blow apart his carefully constructed “narratives. “ISIL is contained,” the day before the Paris attack or “No specific threat to US,” just a week ago.
In keeping with the Obama administration bad timing, Secretary of Defense, Ash Carter, announced all combat positions will be open to women the day after the San Bernadino terrorist attack by Islamic radicals. Assuredly, Secretary Carter believes that “diversity” makes us stronger, which he stated, but here’s the truth – selecting the best qualified people for military positions and maintaining high standards makes our military stronger.
So, selectivity, not diversity makes our military stronger and that means assessing the qualifications that best meet the mission.
In grueling combat jobs, where even most men fail to meet the physical standards, common sense and endless research can pinpoint with reliable accuracy where the female anatomy falls short on meeting these standards. The Army made sure some females made it through Ranger school, where questions of different treatment to get them through the course have been raised, but be that as it may, in reality very few women will rush to get into the elite units and few (if any) have the physical ability to pursue a career in these jobs. Adding women to these jobs adds no advantage – absolutely NONE. It creates another PC myth that must be maintained, even if the lie costs lives on the battlefield. That’s the truth. The entire hoopla about opening these fields to women is really about female officer career advancement, not about making the military stronger.
In the real world, where America’s adversaries size up our force, they hear the claptrap from the Pentagon, but they watch closely what happens in reality, far away from the DC echo chamber. President Obama has slashed our forces, he has purged top generals and promoted sycophants, his military decisions lack any coherence or strategic sense. And then we come to this latest announcement – yes, while feminists cheer about the prospect of women in combat, America’s adversaries are laughing at us. The day after an Islamic terrorist attack on American soil, the President preened on about “mixed motives”. Then his attorney general publicly announced her greatest fear is not another terrorist attack or keeping Americans safe, nope her greatest concern is that Americans don’t use hate speech against Muslims. And finally the Pentagon announced women in combat jobs…
America sits a divided nation – where every public institution lumbers under the weight of highly-charged factionalized fighting. One can only wonder what event or chain reaction will set the final collapse in motion. If our Republic is going to survive, the last thing to believe is that “diversity makes us stronger”. What made America great was not “diversity”, it was diverse people UNITED by a belief in a set of common civic values. Having common civic values and a common belief in The Constitution would help gird up our once great nation’s crumbling pillars. I’ve written about this need to find common ground many times (here, here, here, here and here) and as I said more than a year ago:
Truth matters and therein the fate of America lies. We have hostile camps in America, left and right, black, white and every shade in-between, who find it easier to treat each other as enemies rather than talk and find common ground as fellow American citizens. We’ve got too much diversity training and not enough American citizen training:
“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Filed under Culture Wars, Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism
You’ve got to stand for something
Plenty of home truths in this song worth thinking about!
Filed under Food for Thought, General Interest
Just, Get Real!
General Mike Flynn, former DIA director, used the phrase that it’s time to “get real” in our fight against ISIS. It’s time to “get real” in putting the pieces together with this terrorist attack on American soil yesterday! The Obama administration will bend over backwards to call it everything except what it is – A TERRORIST ATTACK! The media keeps yammering on about how this shooter in San Bernadino left this workplace Christmas party angry. The shooter happens to be a devout Muslim, who recently traveled to Saudi Arabia – okay, that could be “not definitive”, but come on he went home and returned with his wife and reports indicate a third person and all of them were heavily armed, wearing black gear. Well, here’s a clue from a co-worker of the terrorist:
“Baccari said his co-worker, who said he was raised on a farm with goats and chickens, was reserved. Several months ago Farook grew out his beard. He appeared committed to his family, and never displayed any unusual behavior or discussed any radical political views.”
The suspect left THREE IEDS in the Inland Regional Center before fleeing the scene of their massacre. Sure, random act by disgruntled employee is to go home and gather together, not only the wife and guns, but IEDs lying around the house. Sure, he went home and just randomly constructed some IEDs, because he got pissed at the Christmas party. GET REAL!
I can tell you that for sure, that while the President will fixate on the gun problem in America, he’s barking up the wrong tree, by assiduously avoiding facing the Islamic radical problem. I know, the left will next say the work Christmas party was insensitive and “incited” this violent response… Yes, don’t make them angry, or else. Just wait, this line of insane reasoning is coming.
So sick of the venal politicizing Islam’s dark, radical underbelly, after more than a decade and thousands of American lives lost in a fight where our leaders refuse to identify the enemy – it’s Islamic radicals who are following an ideology that is promoted and funded by some of America’s supposed allies in the Mid-East! That’s not “hate”, that’s called identifying those who hate America and want to annihilate us (hint: America’s enemies).
Filed under Culture Wars, Foreign Policy, General Interest, Islam, Military, Politics, Terrorism
A “get real” approach
Spiegel Online International ran an interview with General Mike Flynn, the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, November 29, 2015, which offers some excellent insights into the challenges with defeating the Islamic State. It’s rare to find an American general who will candidly state the truth, so I find General Flynn’s “get real” approach, a breath of fresh air. The interview is in English. Here are a few takeaways:
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Is the Balkans mission a model for the current war?
Flynn: We can learn some lessons from the Balkans. Strategically, I envision a breakup of the Middle East crisis area into sectors in the way we did back then, with certain nations taking responsibility for these sectors. In addition, we would need a coalition military command structure and, on a political level, the United Nations must be involved. The United States could take one sector, Russia as well and the Europeans another one. The Arabs must be involved in that sort of military operation, as well, and must be part of every sector. With this model, you would have opportunities — Russia, for example, must use its influence on Iran to have Tehran back out of Syria and other proxy efforts in the region.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: For that to happen, the West would have to cooperate fully with the Russians.
Flynn: We have to work constructively with Russia. Whether we like it or not, Russia made a decision to be there (in Syria) and to act militarily. They are there, and this has dramatically changed the dynamic. So you can’t say Russia is bad, they have to go home. It’s not going to happen. Get real. Look at what happened in the past few days: The president of France asked the US for help militarily (after the Paris attacks). That’s really weird to me, as an American. We should have been there first and offered support. Now he is flying to Moscow and asking Putin for help.
(Hat tip to Debra Heine, at PJ Media, who posted a more extensive piece on General Flynn’s interview)
Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, Terrorism
Thinking aloud on radical Islam in America
Time often distances us from realities of our history that, if remembered, would guide us through treacherous waters in the present. America’s difficult past with slavery leads to a glossing over of many inconvenient facts, which seem impolitic to mention in our PC culture. Being fully aware that some will dismiss these facts as mere “conspiracy theory mutterings” or “racist and hate”, I’ve decided to write this post anyway. For regular readers, you’re forewarned, I’ve covered this before in various posts,, but I felt like mentioning it again.
A chronological listing often helps you see connections that you miss when studying history neatly delineated into subject matter or particular eras. Comparing chronological listings from various regions of the world, side-by-side, gives you an added perspective on events. Considering this timeline methodology led me to ponder why the press assiduously avoids noticing the connections between many violent black street gangs in America, Islamic supremacist movers and shakers, and their involvement under the larger umbrella of the ongoing “civil rights movement”, largely controlled by black American groups.
Consider that college kids today have no actual remembrance of the Soviet Union or the Cold War. From the beginning of the Bolshevik control in Russia in 1917, their goal was not just control of Russia, but a spread of Communist ideology world-wide. So, as the Soviet Union emerged, ideological compatriots throughout the West worked to advance their revolution. Just a stone throw’s back on our American history timeline, during the 1930s, Communist Party (CPUSA) made it’s strongest in-roads, recruiting and agitating within the American black community. The Soviet Union directed and funded CPUSA activities. Due to the Great Depression, Marxist ideology gained traction with urban poor. Then add in the alarming fact that many of the most radical activists from the Vietnam-era anti-war movement (many of them communist ideologues and CPUSA affiliated) settled into academia and project an out-sized impact fomenting political upheaval, culture change and divisiveness, in addition to controlling education in America. This anti-American indoctrination, which is institutionalized at the top of our educational system, serves as the springboard for America’s future leaders.
In numerous past posts I’ve chronicled tidbits of information, that while I can’t state absolute cause and effect, form more than just a conspiracy trail leading nowhere. There is some “there” there, the issue is figuring out how much. Let’s look at one such black leader, President Obama and consider his background, minus the conspiracy theory stuff, but sticking to things that are facts. First, his mother and grandparents were not your ordinary American-flag waving, apple pie type folks – that is a fact. His grandfather and likely his mother too, were Marxist ideologues. Growing up in Hawaii, Obama’s grandfather formed a friendship with Frank Marshall Davis, an actual card-carrying member of CPUSA, whom Obama mentions numerous times in his autobiography, “Dreams of my Father,” as his mentor. Obama’s father, likewise, was a Marxist. Looking at Davis, you can see by his political activism in Chicago, there was active recruitment and advancement of CPUSA goals within the black community. Valerie Jarrett’s parents and future father-in-law were also part of this Chicago petri dish of swirling far-left activism.
The Soviet Union directed and funded CPUSA. Here’s a link provided to me in a comment at another blog, which deserves a thorough investigation by US intelligence, because, if true, it would be another foreign attempt to subvert the US Constitution. Back in April 2015, in a comment on another blog I mentioned the connections between violent Muslim black street gangs and these protests in Ferguson and Baltimore. A commenter provided this link to a
“Not strange at all, LB. I commend to your attention this piece concerning Vernon Jarrett, a friend and contemporary of Frank Marshal Davis, and father-in-law of Valerie Jarrett. It explains that connection.”
~M.
This article mentions a 1979 newspaper article written by Valerie Jarrett’s former father-in-law, veteran Chicago newspaperman, Vernon Jarrett, who wrote about OPEC beginning funding of black students and black colleges. The linked article above, by Frank Miele, mentions Jarrett as relating a conversation with Khalid al- Mansour (the former Donald Warden, who a was a founder of the black-power movement in the Bay area). Al-Mansour was a lawyer for OPEC, along with his many other activities. Here’s a link with some bio info on al-Mansour.
While these two articles approach the question raised whether Barack Obama’s law school fees were paid with Saudi money, the larger question is did the OPEC nations or Saudi Arabia undertake a funding project in the 80s and 90s to spread Wahabbi (radical) Islam in black colleges and black communities. Here’s a 2013 piece from The Vancouver Sun:
“In 2003, a United States Senate committee on terrorism heard testimony that in the previous 20 years Saudi Arabia had spent $87 billion on promoting Wahhabism worldwide.
This included financing 210 Islamic centres, 1,500 mosques, 202 colleges and 2,000 madrassas (religious schools).
Various estimates put the amount the Saudi government spends on these missionary institutions as up to $3 billion a year.”
The article continues:
“It is widely believed by western intelligence agencies that in the 1980s and 90s, the Saudi government had a deal with Wahhabist terrorist groups like al-Qaida that their fundraising would not be hindered so long as they only operated in foreign countries.”
If true that would be two foreign subversive elements tossing money into fomenting anti-American indoctrination and radical activities in black communities. Watching the evolving black movements in America, it was noted that ISIS signs showed up in the protests, but the mainstream press dismissed that as protests attract all sorts of kooks. Yes, the same thing could be seen in Baltimore, but what the mainstream press completely missed in Baltimore was violent black (Muslim) street gangs were involved in fomenting the rioting, then pretended they were part of the keeping the peace actions and in the mix descended the likes of Malik Shabazz. From my May 10, 2015 post, “Follow the money”, here is who Shabazz is:
“In light of the racial tensions, our federal government and the media pretend all these race riots aren’t being fueled, in large part, by Marxist radicals, stalwart race hustlers like Al Sharpton, and MUSLIM black gangs and thugs – like the Nation of Islam, the New Black Panthers, Black Guerrilla nation and many more. The media, by and large, tiptoes around acknowledging that radical black Muslim gangs serve as a home-grown terrorist training ground.
Malik Shabazz, formerly in the Nation of Islam, former head of the New Black Panthers, a Muslim black supremacist, virulent anti-Semite and now the head of some nicer sounding National President of Black Lawyers for Justice, became a champion of the black people against the police in Baltimore and here’s the connection of the black Muslim gangs banding together for “justice”. Really, the attempt to cover-up the Islamic connection among American academia, the Obama White House, and even the Southern Poverty Law Center is astounding. You can check out the New Black Panthers at the SPLC website and no where in the first pargraph describing the group is the radical Islamic connection mentioned (way down the page you can find his connection to Nation of Islam):
“The New Black Panther Party is a virulently racist and anti-Semitic organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews and law enforcement officers. Founded in Dallas, the group today is especially active on the East Coast, from Boston to Jacksonville, Fla. The group portrays itself as a militant, modern-day expression of the black power movement (it frequently engages in armed protests of alleged police brutality and the like), but principals of the original Black Panther Party of the 1960s and 1970s— a militant, but non-racist, left-wing organization — have rejected the new Panthers as a “black racist hate group” and contested their hijacking of the Panther name and symbol.”
So, you got that, Shabazz has now morphed into the benign champion of black men. He is the National President of Black Lawyers for Justice… This also is an old tactic of the Communists – they co-opt western democratic language to confuse and deceive people – they’re all about democratic values and fairness and equal rights oh, and of course “workers rights”… Sadly, young people today don’t even realize they’re being conned. I mean, what could be wrong with a rabid Muslim racist, who advocated for the overthrow of the US (an ANARCHIST), being the leader of Black Lawyers for Justice…. The press goes along with the con.
Americans apparently decided to dismiss inquiring deeper into President Obama’s links to radicals in the black community. Sure, no worries with launching his political career in Bill Ayers living room (a Marxist and domestic terrorist). No worries with choosing an avowed Marxist who wrote a entire manifesto on overthrowing the US (avowed Marxist Van Jones and his STORM). Whenever the topic of communist infiltration in America comes up, the political Left recoils and charges McCarthyism, but the fact is the Bolsheviks initiated just such a program, that continued throughout the Soviet Union’s existence and black Americans were a key target of their efforts. Did the Saudis initiate a similar program in the late 70s?
Filed under Culture Wars, General Interest, History, Islam, Politics, Terrorism, Uncategorized
libertybelle diaries 