Swamp Dupes President Trump into Expanding US War into Syria

Click here to view the original post.

Let me get right to the point.  President Trump is a complete moron if he honestly believes his military advisors are setting him up for success.  I want President Trump

Like A Bad Penny

Click here to view the original post.

There was a joke that ran around the internet a couple of times about an old man who went up to the White House after inauguration day and asked the Marine on guard duty to see President Obama.

The Marine answered truthfully that Obama wasn’t in the White House any more and the old man moved on. But he returned the next day and the one after, making the same request and receiving the same reply.

Finally, in exasperation, the Marine asked why the old man kept asking the same question, to which he responded, saying that he enjoyed hearing the answer.

Well, I seriously doubt that happened January 21st, but there are a lot of people who are glad to see that Obama is no longer in the White House. There are also those who are not glad to see Trump in there. Both groups have a right to their opinions, but regardless of what anyone’s opinion is, Trump won the elections and he’s the president.

Sadly, few Democrats are willing to accept this, rather running around saying how Trump isn’t their president. Obviously they failed Civics 101, or they’d know that Trump is, in fact, their president, whether they like it or not.

I’m sure that those same people would rather see Obama still seated in the Oval Office, or if not him, then his surrogate, Hillary Clinton. But Hillary didn’t win, regardless of how many liberal pundits proclaimed her president even before the elections. On January 20th, Obama and his family moved out the White House to make room for the new First Family.

A Busy Retirement

Unlike other former presidents, Obama didn’t move very far away. When President Bush retired from the presidency, he went back to his home in Texas. But Obama moved just two miles down the road, into a mansion he bought during his last year in office.

That was suspicious in and of itself; as if Obama wanted to keep his fingers in politics, using whatever influence he had as a former president to try and preserve and protect his legacy.

Many Democrats still respect the former president and would gladly do whatever he asked of them, especially considering the polarization that currently exists in Congress and the nation.

Obama made it fairly clear, on a number of occasions, that he wasn’t just going to enter into quiet retirement. His first statement on that was to claim that he would be quiet, unless his successor did something that went against “American values.” Of course, just about everything that Obama himself did went against true American values, as he was trying to redefine those values the eight years he was in office.

Then there was all the political litter he scattered around his last days in office, signing executive orders, implanting his own people into the bureaucracy and a host of other activities, which were intended to do nothing more than make the job of governing more difficult for Donald Trump and make him look incompetent to the American people.

Trump is a better manager than that, and while it is costing him time to deal with Obama’s political mess, he is taking it in stride and not allowing it to delay the implementation of his campaign promises.

A few whistleblowers have actually come forth to talk about the political landmines that Obama left behind. One Lieutenant Colonel in particular, who is retired from working in intelligence, said that Obama laid “tripwires” in the intelligence community, political appointees, who were converted to career intelligence officers, and who remain loyal to Obama. These officers are exploding well-planned political bombs to undercut Trump’s presidency.

According to this source, Tony Shaffer, the takedown of Trump’s National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, was one such operation. That was not some random act or failure on the part of Flynn, but rather a planned and coordinated attack, intended to deny Trump of one of his most important advisors.

It’s unknown how many of these undercover agents Obama left behind, but you can be sure there are plenty of them. It usually takes about a year for an incoming president to work his way through all the previous president’s political appointees, replacing them; but this is even worse.

Not only does Trump have to replace Obama’s appointees, but he’s also got to ferret out the ones who have been hidden in the ranks of the civil service. It is clear where their loyalty lies, and that’s with Obama. They are apparently willing to sacrifice their careers and even the country on the altar of politics.

Perhaps Obama has given them some guarantee of employment after losing their cushy government jobs; but for whatever reason, they are not afraid to use their positions to thwart the new President.

Obama is Calling the Shots 

And his minions are answering. They are ignoring their legal responsibility to the new government and the new president, choosing rather to obey Obama over Trump. This puts them in the place of obstructing anything and everything that Trump has promised to do.

It has become clear in the last couple of weeks that Obama is constructing a shadow government, which he runs from his mansion, a mere two miles from the White House. Using those appointees as a base, he’s weaving a nationwide web of activists, under the cover of his non-profit organization – Organizing for Action.

This organization, which was originally created to support Obama’s bid for the White House, represents itself as non-partisan; but it’s agenda and politics are clearly allied with the Democrat Party. Even more importantly, it is allied with Barack Obama himself, giving Obama an army of over 30,000 activists, assigned to over 200 chapters, nationwide.

This is the organization which has been hiring paid activists to participate in the supposedly spontaneous grass-roots demonstrations against Trump. Started during the election and continuing ever since, my personal belief is, these demonstrations are intended to disrupt society and put pressure on Donald Trump to resign the presidency.

Of course, that’s foolish. Trump isn’t the type to buckle under when threatened, he’s the type to shoot back. Considering that he’s carried a concealed weapon for years, I think that shooting back can be taken both literally and figuratively. He hasn’t shot anyone yet, but…

What Trump is doing was made clear by his pick for Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, who has already directed the Department of Justice to prosecute rioters, charging them with the vandalism and damage they cause.

That’s a whole lot different than under Obama’s reign, when Black Lives Matter and other groups were not only forgiven for their actions but encouraged by the president himself to continue causing destruction and mayhem wherever they could.

With $40 million in donations sitting in the Organizing for Action war chest and a nationwide network of minions at his beck and call, it is clear that anything Obama said about retiring from politics was just one more lie, from a man who was used to spreading lies like a farmer spreads manure.

Obama may have retired from government service, but he has definitely not retired from politics. Rather, he’s gone back to his old days of being a community organizer. Only now, he’s got a bigger community of rabble-rousers to use.

They’ve even got a training manual, where Obama tells his minions what is expected of them. Leaning heavily on the teachings of Obama’s mentor, Saul Alinsky, Obama created his own version of “Rules for Radicals,” in which he lays out in detail the plans he has to overthrow the government. The manual goes into great detail about how to disrupt Republican politicians and their events; using every opportunity possible to make them look bad in the eyes of the public.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that the sort of tactics that the left has been using? Haven’t those tactics cost them over 1,000 legislative seats in the last six years? If so, then why do they want to continue using the same tactics? Are they trying to commit political suicide or are they just not getting the fact that their tactics aren’t working?

It is clear, from what we’re seeing, Obama himself is the center of all Trump’s opposition. While Hollywood celebrities and the mainstream news media both have their part, the conductor of the orchestra is none other than the former occupant of the White House, Obama himself. He has pitted himself against the sitting president and obviously feels that he can cause Trump to topple by e volume of  his noise.

Video first seen on CNN.

So while Trump is calling for unity across the aisle, Obama is still beating the drum of division. Not only that, but he’s enticed a whole bunch of other people to beat the same drum.

As long as that’s going on, we’re not going to see unity, no matter what Trump does. We’re going to see the division that Obama created continue, while Obama is busy blaming everyone else for it. At this point, there is no way of telling exactly what Obama’s end game is; but I wouldn’t be surprised if it wasn’t a complete overthrow of the current government, with him returning to the White House as a conquering savior.

Of course, the law doesn’t allow for that. If he keeps going the way he is going, there will come a point where he crosses the line and his actions are clearly illegal. At that point, Trump’s administration may be forced to arrest him, and suffer the consequences of such an action.

Arrested, Obama becomes a martyr to his own cause, allowing him to unify even more people against the current administration. That’s not something we want to see.

Someone on the left has to wake up to how destructive their tactics are to their own agenda, and it has to be someone who the rest of the Democrat Party will listen to. Right now, there are no clear leaders and there is no clear message.

All we have is the obstructionist message from Obama, being repeated by many others. If that’s the best they can do, the Democrat party isn’t going to survive.

This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia. 





President Trump’s Misplaced Faith in the Generals

Click here to view the original post.

Approximately, one month ago, President Trump tasked the Pentagon with delivering him a plan to defeat the Islamic State or IS.  What Trump failed to understand was the same people

Off grid pot growers have problems stashing the cash

Click here to view the original post.

What do we do with all the Green?

Legalization of marijuana in 28 states across the US has caused off-grid pot growers to jump for joy, but ongoing issues with depositing the large amounts of cash generated from the business, (and uncertainty on Trump’s stance) has put a damper on the industry.

Pot growing requires a lot of power and is therefore an expensive off-grid venture – cannabis is something that needs regularity, 12/12 light without interruption and regular temps – it is hard to create a stable indoor environment without large solar panels and batteries to guarantee access to power. While new technologies to assist in the process are being developed by NOW Corporation, these wind turbines, called exoPower, are still in the trial stages.

Although difficult, off-gridders like Hezekiah Allen, who grew up in rural Humboldt County and tended a small medical marijuana farm in Northern California, managed to run a profitable business for years, but was forced to bury his cash in the same way many cannabis corporations did in the past.

“I had three different safes buried on a 200-acre parcel,” Hezekiah said. “Fifteen steps from the oak tree, a lot like a pirate. I had a little map. Pretty inconvenient and not the best cash management system. Bankers on the north coast talk about mildewy money. They can tell it’s been buried.”

Times have changed. Hezekiah left his growing operation to serve full time as an advocate for marijuana farmers, and now works to get their profits out of the ground and into banks as the executive director of the California Growers Association.

“We don’t want to lie anymore, we don’t want to have to hide what we are doing,” Hezekiah said. “We want to be open and transparent about what we are and want to do. [Banking] is an area where there are some really bad behaviors being reinforced.”

Although California voters approved the legalization of recreational pot, these businesses are still faced with one major unresolved issue: banking. As marijuana is still illegal under federal law, it is also illegal for banks to work with any marijuana-related businesses. This is forcing the majority of the state’s legal cannabis community to continue to operate in the shadows, despite the state legalization.

While the Obama administration in 2014 issued stringent guidelines that allow banks to pot-related businesses if they are following state laws, most banks have not been willing to risk the lingering threat of criminal prosecution or spend the resources it takes to comply with the additional rules of business.

Rob Rowe, vice president and associate chief counsel of regulatory compliance for the American Bankers Association, said it all comes down to risk assessment – and with the added uncertainty around Trump’s stance on the matter, it doesn’t seem like the outlook will improve any time in the near future.

“Bankers have said that in the current environment, with the enforcement and examiners looking at everything bankers are doing, they aren’t really predisposed to take on anything risky,” Rob said. “And banking a marijuana business is risky.”

The medical marijuana industry has grappled with this for years in California and elsewhere. Now, entrepreneurs and conglomerates going after a slice of lucrative recreational pot sales will have to confront the banking challenge.

Costs of running business

No banking access means businesses must pay employees, bills and taxes in cash. Clients are unable to pay using credit or debit cards, and there is no way to process business loans or real estate mortgages. The company effectively has no paper trail – no official records to build credit or establish a financial identity. And these businesses – whether they be licensed recreational sellers, medical marijuana farms, or trade associations – are forced to stash a lot of cash, making them a target for violent crime.

Michael Julian, CEO and president of MPS Security, which caters to marijuana-related businesses, said business owners are forced to get creative with finding places to hide their money.

“They have tens of thousands, if not millions, of dollars,” Michael said. “And it’s not as secure in a vault in their establishment, in a closet at home, in their mattress, in the trunk of their car, whatever.”

A recent survey by the California Growers association found 75 percent of its members don’t have a bank account, and the ones who do have had three or more accounts closed in the course of doing business. A 2015 survey by Marijuana Business Daily of more than 400 cannabis professionals nationwide also found 70 percent of businesses that deal directly in marijuana operate without traditional banking services. As for firms that support the business but don’t handle the plant, 49 percent don’t have bank accounts.

The long-running conflict between the banks and the industry has been ongoing since 1996, when California became the first state to legalize medical marijuana. The conflict ballooned when recreational pot sales started in Colorado and Washington in 2012, but with more and more states entering the recreational market, including California, Massachusetts, Nevada, Maine, Oregon, Alaska and the District of Columbia, the problem will be compounded. Adding in the states that allow medical marijuana brings the total to 28 states, plus D.C., with cannabis laws on the books.

According to experts, the only real solution is for Congress to remove marijuana from the list of Schedule I narcotics, putting the drug on par with an FDA-regulated medicine rather than heroin or cocaine. Until that happens, state-legal marijuana-related businesses are treated under the letter of the law the same as cartels trafficking methamphetamine.

Banking on marijuana

In 2013, the Obama administration released a document called the ‘Cole Memo’, which stated it would generally not prosecute marijuana businesses that were following state law and didn’t engage in certain activities, such as selling to children, crossing state lines or funding criminal organizations. In a separate memo, months later, the administration modified the way banks conducted business with state-legal operations, making it easier under new guidelines from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the federal agency that monitors banks for fraudulent activity, such as money laundering. But banks were also reminded that marijuana remains illegal under federal law and is subject to prosecution.

Under the guidelines, banks serving marijuana-related businesses must file suspicious activity reports, or SARs, so the transactions are transparent and can be tracked by the government. Three kinds of reports dictate the level of suspicion against the businesses: ‘Marijuana limited’ SARs indicate the business is following state law and no red flags suggest it is breaking any other laws; ‘marijuana priority’ suggests the business may not be following other laws and may be involved in suspicious activity; and ‘marijuana termination’ alerts to a bank account that has been shut down for suspicious activity.

The SARs must be filed when an account is opened and then quarterly after that, listing every transaction that has been made. Banks are also told to investigate and track marijuana businesses they are serving, making sure they are not violating any guidelines.

The American Bankers Association stated on its website that the level of scrutiny was “far beyond” that expected of any normal banking relationship.

“Because of the standards in place, if we do this we have to have someone almost embedded in the customer 24/7, and we’re not 100 percent certain we saw everything we need to see,” Rob said. “We’ve got to have such close tabs and use so much resources to closely monitor everything with these businesses, it’s just not economical.”

However, according to data from FinCEN, some banks have taken on the risk of working with marijuana-related businesses; in the first six months that the new guidelines were in effect, banks across America filed 502 SARs marked as ‘marijuana limited,’ according to Dynamic Securities Analytics statistics. During the same period, FinCEN received 123 ‘marijuana priority’ SARs and 475 ‘marijuana termination’.

Rob said banks generally keep quiet about it due to the perceived consequences of doing business with the volatile industry.

“Bankers will say that we know someone who is (serving a marijuana business), but it is the exception to a general policy, a one-off thing,” Rob said. “I’ve heard from dispensaries that say we don’t want to call attention to it because we had trouble getting an account and don’t want to lose what we’ve got.”

Mike Cindrich, an attorney who represents marijuana-related businesses and is executive director of the local chapter of NORML, a marijuana advocacy group, said there are ways around the banking ban on marijuana-related businesses – but he wouldn’t recommend them. One such way would be to set up limited liability corporations that are management companies providing a list of services, from payroll to accounting to bookkeeping to property management. The money from the marijuana business flows to the company – usually with a nondescript name that doesn’t disclose its ties to marijuana – and is deposited in the company’s bank account. This is technically money laundering, and illegal, but some companies have found success with the tactics. Others have been busted by banks and their accounts closed.

“When you start doing something that looks like money laundering, funneling cash from a non-profit to something that looks like an LLC, now someone is looking at felony charges,” Mike said. While he “sternly advises against it,” Mike said he could see how marijuana operators feel like they are being backed into a corner by the government.

“They’re not leaving the cannabis community with many options here,” he said. “It’s a complete nightmare for these businesses. People who don’t want to be legitimate, it’s very easy for them to not report this cash. If we want legitimacy and for these businesses to come out into the light, then we should allow full banking because it allows this money to be accounted for, taxed, tracked, traced. If this is something the feds really want to keep an eye on they’d change the banking laws altogether and make this happen.”

Trump stance

The cannabis industry has been suspicious of President Trump’s election, waiting to see if the new administration will address the growing legal marijuana market and how it conflicts with banking laws.

Trump voiced support for legalization but brought up some concerns about the drug during his campaign. He did not make it a major issue, and the industry believes Trump will focus on his bigger priorities – terrorism, immigration, the border wall.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the former Republican senator from Alabama who once said “good people don’t smoke marijuana,” is a bigger worry. As head of the U.S. Department of Justice, Jeff has control over how the government enforces federal law and could reverse the Obama administration’s willingness to look the other way as long as dispensaries followed state law.

The Attorney General said he would review the Cole Memo and commit to “enforcing federal law with respect to marijuana, although the exact balance of enforcement priorities is an ever-changing determination based on the circumstances and the resources available at the time.”

The post Off grid pot growers have problems stashing the cash appeared first on Living Off the Grid: Free Yourself.

Middle East on Brink of Major War after Saudi Warship Hit by Iranian Anti-Ship Missile

Click here to view the original post.

Again, the news cycle is moving so quickly, no one is able to completely keep up.  However, with all of the focus on executive orders on immigration some major events

Radical Leftists Stock Up on Guns Preparing for Violent Resistance to Trump

Click here to view the original post.

Oh how quickly the roles have changed.  Just a year ago, only crazy “deplorables” were clinging to their bibles and guns.  Now it looks as though the Leftists are suddenly

After Casual Communism, Racial Division & Angst!

Click here to view the original post.

After Casual Communism, Racial Division & Angst! James Walton “I Am Liberty” Audio in player below! On this special edition of the I AM Liberty Show we are going to celebrate the peaceful transfer of power in the United States. In straight forward terms we are celebrating the end of the Obama age. Let’s be … Continue reading After Casual Communism, Racial Division & Angst!

The post After Casual Communism, Racial Division & Angst! appeared first on Prepper Broadcasting |Network.

Exposing the Fake News Spin: Fox News misses “small fact” and fails to mention group trying to influence Trump’s Iran policy is a long time radical Islamic-Marxist terrorist organization

Click here to view the original post.

Today, I read a Fox News article entitled, “Iranian dissidents seeking meeting with Trump.”  See: (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/23/iranian-dissidents-seeking-meeting-with-trump.html).  According to the article, Iranian dissidents have penned a letter to Trump urging him

Obama Warned Putin About Cyber Attack On Power Grid; Believed Russians Had Practiced ‘Dry Run’

Click here to view the original post.
Obama Warned Putin About Cyber Attack On Power Grid; Believed Russians Had Practiced 'Dry Run'

Image source: NASA

WASHINGTON — The White House was so concerned about Russia interfering with the election or even attacking the power grid that it used the so-called red phone system to place a call to the Kremlin on Oct. 31, warning the Russians and President Vladimir Putin about repercussions.

That’s according to NBC News, which quoted two unidentified senior intelligence officials – both non-partisan career officers

“[President Obama and White House officials] believed the widespread attack on the Internet on Oct. 21 blocking millions of Americans from popular websites was a possible dry run for a massive attack by the Russians on Election Day — maybe even pulling down the electrical grid. It spooked the White House,” NBC News Correspondent Cynthia McFadden said in a Dec. 19 report.

Get Free Electricity — And Never Be Without Power!

The red phone system was created during the Cold War to prevent misunderstandings between the two nations. Today, it employs a secured satellite link and is rarely used.

“It’s extremely unusual, and doing so sends a signal unto itself, so it’s a dramatic step to pick that phone up and use it” former NATO head and retired Admiral James Stavridis told NBC News.

The Oct. 21 denial of service attack took down the websites of several major companies, including Amazon, PayPal, Twitter and Netflix. When the White Made the call on Halloween morning, it believed the Oct. 21 attack had originated from Russia.

“Back in October it was viewed by some as a possible dry run for a massive attack on Election Day,” McFadden said.

Be Prepared: Get The Ultimate In Portable Backup Power!

According to the intelligence officials, the White House told Russia: “International law, including the law for armed conflict, applies to actions in cyberspace. We hold Russia to those standards.”

One senior advisor urged Obama to warn Russia that any meddling in the election would be viewed as an act of war, although he chose not to be that specific, NBC News reported.

This was the second time Obama warned Putin about hacking. He pulled Putin aside at the G20 Summit in Hangzhou, China, in September and issued a similar warning.

Do you believe Russia, or other countries, has the power to take down the U.S. power grid? Share your thoughts in the section below:

Are You Prepared For Extended Blackouts? Read More Here.

The Price You Will Pay for Trump Dumping the Iran Nuclear Deal

Click here to view the original post.

The current “deal” with Iran over its nuclear program is better defined as policy capitulation.  To be viable, the deal must have teeth and achieve the endstate desired by the

Is a Violent Anti-Trump Revolution Possible in the US?

Click here to view the original post.

Most of you have read a lot of articles and reports lately concerning escalating protests and violence across the country.  Many of you are rightfully asking how far this will

Election Fraud Alert: Democrats’ Plan to Steal Election Using Electoral College Gaining Support

Click here to view the original post.

Last Minute Survival exclusively warned before the election that Democrat Party operatives planned to steal the election “legally” by pressuring Democrat appointed electors to vote for Hillary irrespective of their

UPDATE: How the Election is being Legally Rigged

Click here to view the original post.

Before the first votes were cast, I penned a unique piece on how the election could be “legally rigged” by manipulating the votes of state electors.  LMS was the only

Here, On The Other Side

Click here to view the original post.

Donald Trump

I don’t know about you, but I feel like I’ve just stepped out of H. G. Wells’ famous time machine and I’m standing on the other side of a great gulf in time.

After over a year of grueling, divisive political campaigning, Donald Trump has finally won the election to become the 45th president of these United States.

If anything, this election has divided this country even more than the last eight years of Obama’s presidency.

Democrats and Republicans have always been opposites, but since the makeup of these two parties has split along liberal/conservative lines, their opposition to one another has become even more obvious. No longer is it just that they support opposite sides of the same issue, now they don’t even see it as the same issue.

What I mean by this is well illustrated by the recent controversy over transgender bathroom rights.

To liberals, the issue is fair treatment for what is clearly a minority group. They apparently can’t even see that giving that fair treatment puts women and girls at risk. But to the conservatives, the issue is all about protecting those girls and women. If the transgenders feel slighted by that, sorry, but safety has to come before their feelings.

So now we have a new president elect, who somehow has to unite this divided nation and govern for all. That will be a monumental task, even without Obama having spent the last eight years trying to create division along whatever lines he could.

The question is, is Trump up to the challenge? For that matter, is anyone capable of uniting us once again?

The White House?

Of course, I have to say that winning the election doesn’t guarantee much of anything, right now. While Trump is the president elect, Obama is still in office. With all the election fraud that’s been going on this election, I have to wonder if the Democrats have some plan to keep him out of office, even if they have to break the law to do so.

George Soros, the Democrat sugar daddy and puppet master all but said that they do. In a televised interview, he said that Trump would win the popular election, but that Hillary would ultimately occupy the White House. How can that be? What did he mean by that remark?

Until inauguration day in January, things are still at risk. The Democrats could try to raise legal issues, saying that the count was inaccurate, as they did in the 2000 presidential elections. This seems to have become standard policy for the Dems, who seem to think that there’s no way that they could lose an election. After all, they’re the “elect.”

There’s also the possibility of something happening with the Electoral College vote on December 19th, or for that matter, when they deliver their votes to the Senate President, Joe Biden on December 28th.

There could even be problems when Congress meets to do their official count of the votes on January 6th. With all the election fraud that’s come to light in the primaries and general election, the possibility of fraud in the Electoral College can’t be ignored.

Then there’s Obama himself. Someone wrote an article about how Obama will stay in office, “impeaching” the citizens of the United States for not voting in Hillary Clinton. While I’m fairly sure that the article in question was a gag piece, it has made its way around social media a couple of times.

But there is something that Obama could do, and I’ve written about it before. That is, he could declare martial law, suspending the Constitution. All he would need is a good enough excuse to pass scrutiny.

That excuse could come from widespread violence or social unrest; and he’s got the means to make that happen. The police in Los Angeles and other major cities are preparing for mass riots (which liberals call “demonstrations”) in the wake of the election.

ISIS has also called for violence, specifically on election day. While I haven’t heard any reports of terrorist incidents happening, that’s not to say that they still can’t. They have already shown their ability to infiltrate the United States and their capability to operate here. The big question is how many people there are here who claim an affiliation with ISIS and how well they can organize themselves to sweep the country with violence.

Should either of these groups rise up and fulfill their promises, we could see a bloodbath in the streets. That would be all the excuse that Obama would need, in order to declare martial law and keep Trump out of office.

Whether he could get away with that, or whether he would be forcibly removed from the White House in such an event is yet to be seen. At that point, it would be up to the military and the Secret Service to remember their vows and decide to take action.

The President Elect

But let’s assume for a moment that none of this happens and the transition of governmental power goes through smoothly, as it has so many times before. What then can we expect?

The first big question that’s in everyone’s mind is whether Trump will live up to his campaign promises or not. The mainstream media has been calling him a liar for months now, even if that required them lying to do so. They’ve painted him with the same brush used on any politician, that of bending the truth to meet their needs and telling the people what they want to hear, just so that they can garner votes.

The real question is whether Trump is just another politician or if he’s who he claims to be; and the kicker is that nobody truly knows. Since the mainstream media has done everything they can to paint him in a negative light, the picture of Trump that we’ve seen is a clouded one, at best.

But Trump has been a public figure for more than just his campaign. For years, he’s been one of America’s most-recognized citizens. While that has not always been good, it has given us some insight into who the man is, what he believes and how he operates.

Throughout the campaign, there have been people coming forth who have known Trump through the years. Some were employees who praised him as a boss. Others were ordinary citizens who talked about kind deeds that he did for them. But other than the attempts to paint him as a sexual abuser right before the elections, few have come forth to say anything negative about their dealings with the Trump.

Considering how much of a public figure he has been, I would think that if he was anything like what the mainstream media has tried to paint him to be, we would have all seen it by now.

The one truly worrying thing about Trump is that for most of his life he’s been a Democrat. He’s supported the Democrat Party and Democrat candidates; he’s even reportedly friends with the Clintons. So it’s a bit hard to accept that he is now a staunch conservative, committed to conservative ideals.

Yet, he’s making all the right noises and all the right moves to show himself as a conservative. The list of Supreme Court Justice candidates that he’s put together is impressively conservative. He also came forth with the most conservative platform that the Republican Party has seen in 20 years.

Then there’s his “contract” with the American People. The actions he’s promised to undertake in his first 100 days in office are clearly conservative, hitting on all the high points of his campaign and many of the silent majority’s biggest concerns.

The Transition

Over the next several weeks, we will be able to see Trump in action as a leader. His first big job is to select his cabinet, something that is traditionally announced by Thanksgiving. This should be interesting. One of the ways that Trump has been successful in business is in his selection of managers. He has always sought out the most qualified and competent, giving them the authority and responsibility to do whatever was necessary.

This even came through in his hit television show, “The Apprentice.” At its core, that show was about picking the best possible person to run a business. The various tests and challenges the candidates faced were all about testing their ability to effectively run a business. Who cares about theory; Trump wanted people who could think outside the box and get things done.

So we can expect the same out of his cabinet selections. No, I’m not saying that he’s going to run it like a game show. What I’m saying is that he’s going to look for competence. For people who can think outside the box, and for people who can get things done.

The country is in need of such people. We are a country in crisis, and it’s going to take some new ideas and some out of box thinking to straighten it out. We can’t expect Trump to do it all himself, he’s going to have to select the right people and let them do their jobs. So the people he selects in the next few weeks are critical to the effectiveness of his presidency.

From the few positions that have been announced so far, it looks like Trump is going to be putting together a dream team. Trey Goudy has been mentioned for Attorney General, Ben Carson as the Surgeon General and Newt Gingrich as a possibility for the Secretary of State.

While none of these is definite yet, they show the caliber of people who Trump is looking at. He wants the best, not just some political figure who’s looking to get their ticket punched.

While I’m sure that some top spots will go to political figures, especially those who have hopped aboard Trump’s bandwagon, he’s looking more to the business sector, than he is to the normal pool of politicians only. This fits with the whole tone of his campaign, which has been about the American people taking our government back from the political class.

The Election

If anything, this election has shown how sick and tired the average American is with what has become the political ruling class. The Founding Fathers never envisioned such a group for our country and did everything in their power to prevent it. Yet, even with the constraints of the Constitution to guide us, we have drifted that way more and more for over a century.

The American people are a fiercely independent people, and this election has shown that we haven’t lost that independence. This isn’t a partisan move, but one that has been clearly shown in both major political parties.

Millions of Democrats abandoned the party’s chosen candidate and followed Bernie Sanders, who came close to winning, even with all the voter fraud that was used to defeat him. On the Republican side, the electorate has abandoned a wide-ranging field of establishment candidates, in favor of Trump, a political outsider.

But the truly amazing thing was that both Democrats and Republicans voted for Trump, many abandoning their lifelong party affiliation to do so.

This is a clear mandate to Washington that We the People are tired of business as normal. We are tired of a political ruling class. We are tired of our elected leaders treating us like nothing more than peasants. We are tired of being lied to, and we are tired of being mistreated by those who are supposed to serve us.

This election has been a breakwater; leaving behind the old system and its corruption, in favor of a new order.

One that returns back to the values this country was founded upon and back to running the country according to the Constitution. Not an adulterated version of the Constitution; not a modified version; not even a version that’s been twisted and tortured by the various laws passed through the years; but the Constitution itself.

It’s up to Trump to ensure that he follows through on his promises and doesn’t let things go back to the old way. But it’s up to you and I as well. We have our part in this presidency; that of keeping an eye on our President Elect and making sure that he does what he said he’d do. If not, we need to get rid of him.

Hopefully, Washington will get the message, and the political class will stop acting like our masters and start acting like public servants once again. If that doesn’t happen, then the breakwater has been nothing more than a symbol; and a worthless symbol at that.

If change is going to happen in Washington, it can’t just happen in the White House, it has to happen in both houses of Congress as well. But it needs to go farther than that; it needs to permeate every department of the federal government as well.

We the People have spoken. We’ve used our voice in the voting booth, selecting an outsider to take control of our government and give it back to the people. But we can’t stop now.

That message needs to keep going forth, to make sure that the politicians and bureaucrats hear it, and that they fear us and the power we wield over them. Until they do, it is we who fear them.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.





7 total views, 7 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Trump Wins in Historic Anti-Establishment Victory, but Temper Your Jubilation: The Good, Bad, and Ugly of What’s to Come

Click here to view the original post.

Last night, Donald Trump won a historic victory by all accounts.  America’s silent, dispossessed majority has spoken and it should serve as a warning to anyone discounting the anger of

ISIS Threat against Election likely US Government False Flag

Click here to view the original post.

Last week, news broke that the Islamic State (IS) had issued threats against New York, Virginia, and Texas.  The report claimed that intelligence sources indicated that IS may be planning

Something Big Is Underway On All Fronts: “Within The Next Few Weeks The Future Of The United States Will Be Decided”

Click here to view the original post.

Survival World News


By Jeremiah Johnson – SHTFplan.com

As of this writing, the increased U.S. troop presence in Eastern Europe includes a battalion-sized element of American troops being emplaced in the Suwalki Gap, Polish territory that borders Lithuania in a 60-mile stretch of corridor.  The Russian Defense Ministry announced that 600 Russian and Belarussian airborne troops conducted training exercises in Brest, on the Belorussian-Polish border only a few miles from where the U.S. forces are deploying in Poland.  This on the heels of Britain deploying 800 men, tanks, and jets to Estonia, along with pledges of Challenger 2 tanks, APC’s (Armored Personnel Carriers), and drones.  Two companies of French and Danish Soldiers will join the British in the deployment to Estonia.

For the first time since 1945, Norway has violated its treaty with Russia (then the Soviet Union) not to station foreign troops on its soil.  A company of U.S. Marines will soon be…

View original post 1,368 more words

Filed under: Civil Unrest / War, News/ Current Events

SOFREP’s Most Important Story Reveals How US being Tricked into WWIII

Click here to view the original post.

Jack Murphy, an author at SOFREP recently had the opportunity to interview Syrian President Assad.  Whether or not you like President Assad, you need to hear Andrew Wilkow’s short interview

Vice President Joe Biden Announces War with Russia

Click here to view the original post.

I am not being dramatic when I say our Vice President just unilaterally declared war on Russia.  In diplomatic circles, the phrase “words mean things” is quite literal.  This week,

Obama Signs Order Warning About Downed Power Grid, ‘Cascading Failures,’ No Water Supply

Click here to view the original post.

Obama Signs Order Warning About Downed Power Grid, 'Cascading Failures,' No Water Supply

WASHINGTON — President Obama signed an executive order related to space weather Thursday, and in the process acknowledged that solar storms could take out the power grid, water supplies and other critical infrastructure – not only in the United States but throughout the world.

“Extreme space weather events — those that could significantly degrade critical infrastructure — could disable large portions of the electrical power grid, resulting in cascading failures that would affect key services such as water supply, healthcare, and transportation,” the order states. “Space weather has the potential to simultaneously affect and disrupt health and safety across entire continents.”

The executive order, titled “Coordinating Efforts to Prepare the Nation for Space Weather Events,” laid out a plan to prepare the country for a major solar storm. Four years ago, Earth was nearly hit by a storm that could have taken out the power grid, NASA scientists have said. In 1859, a solar storm slammed into Earth and rendered telegraph machines – the most advanced technology of the day – unusable. Northern lights were seen in the Caribbean. It was dubbed the Carrington Event.

“Successfully preparing for space weather events is an all-of-nation endeavor that requires partnerships across governments, emergency managers, academia, the media, the insurance industry, non-profits, and the private sector,” the executive order read.

The order puts the authority of the president and the White House behind the 2015 National Space Weather Action Plan. It also directs the executive branch to come up with a national strategy for dealing with an electromagnetic storm that disrupts or disables the electrical grid.

Are You Prepared For A Downed Grid? Get Backup Electricity Today!

Still, the plan has its critics. Peter Pry, who served on the Congressional EMP Commission and the EMP Task Force, was asked by Off The Grid News Thursday for his comments about the plan. He pointed OTGN to a column he and CIA director R. James Woolsey co-wrote last year criticizing the National Space Weather Action Plan.

“It is a plan to develop a plan to protect the nation from space weather. The ‘action’ in the ‘Action Plan’ is to do numerous studies before taking any real action that would protect the national power grid,” they wrote in December 2015. “Federal scientific and research bureaucracies, such as NASA and NOAA, make their living by doing studies.”

The power grid, they asserted, needs to be protected – something the plan does not do.

Among other things, Thursday’s executive order by Obama:

  • Orders all federal agencies to implement the recommendations in the National Space Weather Action Plan.
  • Directs federal agencies to work with state, local, tribal and foreign governments, private business and other entities to develop a coordinated response to space weather.
  • Orders the National Science and Technology Council to establish a Space Weather Operations, Research and Mitigation Subcommittee to coordinate and oversee research into the phenomenon.
  • Orders the Department of Defense to monitor space weather and consider it a threat to future military operations.
  • Orders the Interior Department to step up research into space weather and technology designed to counter its threat.
  • Orders the Commerce Department to issue regular space weather forecasts and warnings of events.
  • Orders the Commerce Department to make real time data about space weather available to everybody.
  • Orders the Energy Department to come up with plans to protect the electrical grid from space weather and restore it if disrupted by electromagnetic storms.
  • Orders the Department of Homeland Security to issue regular alerts and warnings about space weather.
  • Orders the Department of Homeland Security to coordinate responses to space weather and recovery from it.
  • Orders NASA to create a national research program designed to improve space weather forecasting by studying the sun and the Solar System.
  • Orders NASA to conduct space weather research missions.
  • Orders NASA to develop better technology for space weather research.

“It is the policy of the United States to prepare for space weather events to minimize the extent of economic loss and human hardship,” the order said.

Whether the executive order actually does anything to protect the power grid remains to be seen.

What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:

Are You Prepared For Extended Blackouts? Read More Here.

Thank You Russia: My Open Letter to President Putin

Click here to view the original post.

If no one else will say it, I will.  Thank you Russia for exposing the rampant corruption in our government and their crony relationships with those in the media and

Prepper Update of World Events for Week of October 10, 2016

Click here to view the original post.

The following summary of recent world events is decidedly negative.  This is not due to overt pessimism as much as the facts are just plain bad.  In fact, I didn’t

Is the US about to Lose Its Last Foothold in Iraq, Create a Terrorist Caliphate, or Start World War III?

Click here to view the original post.

I have been warning about the brewing showdown in Syria and how it could quickly escalate in minutes to the brink of World War III.  A key warning embedded in

The Party of Voter Fraud Exposed

Click here to view the original post.


As things are closing in on election day 2016, one of the hot button topics that should be being discussed, but isn’t, is voter fraud.

The Democrat primaries were rife with fraud, even though the party officially denies it. But in state after state, Bernie Sanders lost, not to an overwhelming number of Hillary votes, but due to an overwhelming amount of voter fraud. And Democrats still accuse the Republican Party of fraud.

Back in the 2012 presidential elections, the Democrats accused Mitt Romney of voter fraud, long before the elections, simply because a relative owned stock in one of the companies which supply the computerized voting booths. There was absolutely no evidence of any Republican voter fraud brought to light, but the howling on the left was all but deafening.

But then, there’s one thing you can be just about sure of, where the Democrats are concerned. That is, they are probably doing anything they accuse the Republicans of. They constantly accuse Republicans of being racist, and also of building up the national debt, in order to hide their own spending.

So, it’s perfectly reasonable to assume that their accusations of voter fraud are merely a cover for their own efforts to fraudulently win the elections.

Rather than listen to all the noise, we’ve got to look at where the action is. And where it’s been for who knows how long is in the Democrat camp. Time after time, reports come forth, talking about how votes are switched from Republican to Democrat. But the opposite never seems to happen.

Then there are those districts which Democrats win with more votes, than there are voters living in the district. Somehow, that never seems to happen in favor of Republicans. But enough cases like that happened, in both the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections, that Obama might not have won without them.

With the voter fraud propagated by the establishment Democrats in the primaries, there is no reason why anyone should think that November’s election might be any different. On top of that, Jeh Johnson, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is taking over the elections, supposedly to ensure that they are “fair” elections.

What I’d like to know is what definition of “fair” is Johnson using. It’s quite possible that his definition of fair, like many Democrats, is that Hillary Clinton wins and occupies the White House, regardless of how the people vote.

There’s a strong possibility that the fix is already in on this election. George Soros, the financial power behind all things liberal, legal and not so legal, made it clear in an interview that Donald Trump will win the popular vote, but Hillary Clinton will be the next president. There are several ways that this can happen and his statement could have been pure braggadocio, but it’s also possible that he knows something that nobody else does.

Video first seen on sara wan.

If there’s anything that has become clear this year, it’s that there are things going on in the background, which aren’t for public consumption. What kinds of things? The type which normally make up conspiracy theories. There are people in power, movers and shakers in the world, who work to make things come out in their favor. These are the true one percenters, the people behind the one world government.

These “elite” think that they are smarter than the rest of us and therefore have the right to decide the course of the world. What they really are is a bunch of ruthless money men, who use their wealth and the resulting influence, to make politicians and businessmen dance to their tune. In doing so, they effectively control the world.

These are the kinds of people who are behind the Democrat Party, and George Soros is either the first amongst equals or their front man. He calls the tunes and the Democrat Party dances to them. One of the tunes he has called, is for Hillary Clinton to be the next president.

No wonder George Soros hates Donald Trump. Soros is worth an estimated $24.2 billion, alongside of which Trump’s $4.2 billion is pocket change. Yet Trump is running against Soros’s horse in this race, and doing rather well. This alone speaks well for Trump, as he is unwilling to go along with the elites who are trying to call the shots.

The Mexican Backup 

Over the last several years, we’ve seen Obama politic and posture to create a lasting Democrat Party legacy. More than anything, he has worked to ensure that the Democrat Party has ongoing control of the White House, and through it, the country’s destiny. Some of his biggest actions have been done with nothing more than that in mind.

The whole argument about voter identification is about this. To say that requiring voter ID is racist is ridiculous; especially when you consider that Mexico requires voter ID, and Democrats say that requiring voter ID disenfranchises Mexican voters.

Actually, saying that requiring voter ID is too big a burden to place on minorities is racist in and of itself. By saying this, they are saying that minorities don’t have the intelligence and ability to get a legal identification. Yet, they require identification from these people to get their food stamps and other government handouts. So clearly the racism argument is one of convenience, not one of principle.

Of course, the voters they are concerned about disenfranchising aren’t American citizens; but rather, Mexican citizens who crossed the border illegally and are now living in the United States without legal permission. These people can’t get an acceptable ID for voting with, because they don’t have the right to have such an ID.

But then, getting those people in the country and getting them to vote is all part of the plan. Most Mexicans vote Democrat, because the Democrats cater to the poor and needy, promising to give them free handouts. Since most illegal aliens qualify as being poor, they vote for the party who will help them out, when they can vote. It just so happens that it’s the same party who thinks that they have a right to be here and take advantage of all our social services, even though they aren’t here legally.

In this, we see the second part of the Democrat plan to gain total dominion of the United States. If they can get enough people in the country who are dependent on the government, they can win election after election, no matter what Republicans do.

This is somewhat like the story of two wolves and a sheep voting on what they are going to have for lunch. Since the sheep is outnumbered by the wolves, their vote doesn’t matter. Likewise, if the Democrats can get enough poor people to be dependent on government handouts, and they are the party pushing for those government handouts, then the votes of the working class won’t matter.

Obama’s illegal actions to give executive amnesty to illegal aliens fits in here. By doing so, he is increasing the Democrat Party voter base, without it costing the Democrats a thing. All they have to do is keep giving away taxpayer money, and those who have received amnesty will keep their loyalty to the Democrats and keep voting for them. To do this, they need to intentionally keep the Mexican voters ignorant about who they are.

The cynicism of all this is mind-boggling. The black community is waking up to the idea that the Democrats are merely using them to get their votes. But the Hispanic community hasn’t seen that yet. When they do, the exodus of Hispanics from the Democrat voter rolls will be much faster and much more furious than Eric Holder’s scandal.

All this ties together. It’s all part of the same plan. Democrats are interested in one thing and one thing only; that’s power. They want to control every aspect of our lives, making us slaves in all but name. And they’ll dip to whatever level is necessary to complete that goal. Voter fraud, lying to their own voter base, keeping people ignorant, allowing non-citizens to vote, it’s all the same to them.

In their eyes, the ends justify the means. As far as they are concerned, nothing they do is wrong, and nothing they can do is as evil as allowing Republicans to have control of our country. If they have to break the law to keep that from happening, they will… then they’ll blame the Republicans for doing it.



This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.







10 total views, 10 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Obama Warns About Cyber Attack – ‘We’re Moving Into A New Era’

Click here to view the original post.
Obama Warns About Cyber Attack – ‘We’re Moving Into A New Era’

Image source: White House, Pete Souza


President Obama expressed concern Monday that the United States is locked in a cyber arms race with Russia and other countries that could quickly escalate into war.

Speaking to reporters at the G-20 conference in Hangzhou, China, Obama admitted that he is worried about a cyber conflict between the two nations.

“We’re going to have enough problems in the cyberspace with non-state actors who are engaging in theft, and using the Internet for all kinds of illicit practices, and protecting our critical infrastructure and making sure that our financial systems are sound,” Obama said.

“What we cannot do is have a situation where this becomes the wild, Wild West where countries that have significant cyber capacity start engaging in unhealthy competition and conflict through these means,” Obama said.

Discover How To Become Invisible In Today’s Surveillance State!

China and India are other major players in cyber warfare. It is believed that China has the power to take down America’s power grid via a cyber attack.

“Look, we’re moving into a new era here where a number of countries have significant capacities. And, frankly, we’ve got more capacity than anybody, both offensively and defensively,” Obama warned. “But our goal is not to suddenly, in the cyber arena, duplicate a cycle of escalation that we saw when it comes to other arms races in the past, but rather to start instituting some norms so that everybody’s acting responsibly.”

Terrorists Are Eyeing These Vulnerable, Unprotected Parts Of The Power Grid -- And There's 10,000 Of ThemObama noted that past arms races have escalated into war. Many historians think a race between Britain, Germany and the United States to build battleships helped trigger World War I.

A major concern of Obama is that there are no norms or guidelines for cyberwarfare as there are for other kinds of conflict. For example, the major powers have signed treaties banning some physical weapons — such as landmines and poison gas — and restricted the use of others.

Obama wants a cyber treaty.

“That’s been a topic of conversation with President Putin,” Obama said.

Asked if Russia is trying to influence the US presidential election through hacking, Obama did not answer it directly but said: “I’m not going to comment on specific investigations that are still live and active. But I will tell you that we’ve had problems with cyber intrusions from Russia in the past, from other countries in the past.”

Are You Prepared For A Downed Grid? Get Backup Electricity Today!

The Democratic National Committee’s computers were hacked, potentially by hackers within Russia.

Obama’s remarks came after The Washington Post reported that US intelligence and law enforcement officials are concerned about a broad Russian covert operation to sow distrust in American political institutions. That operation would reportedly involve cyber warfare against election systems and candidates.

“We’ve seen an unprecedented intrusion and an attempt to influence or disrupt our political process,” US Representative Adam B. Schiff (D-California) told The Post. Data stolen during the DNC hack was released on WikiLeaks and forced Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz to resign. Putin has denied any Russian involvement in the attack.

Officials are so concerned about the intrusions that Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. is spearheading the investigation into them, The Post reported.

“[E]ven the hint of something impacting the security of our election system would be of significant concern,” an unidentified official told The Post. “It’s the key to our democracy, that people have confidence in the election system.”

What is your reaction? Share your thoughts in the section below:

You’re Being Watched: 7 Sneaky Ways The Government Is Tracking Your Every Move. Read More Here.

Mainers Didn’t Want An 87,500-Acre National Monument, But Obama Created One Anyway

Click here to view the original post.
Mainers Didn't Want A 87,500-Acre National Monument, But Obama Created One Anyway

Image source: Downeast.com


PORTLAND, Maine — America’s newest national monument is also one of its most controversial. President Obama turned 87,500 acres of forest land in northern Maine into the Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument with the stroke of a pen Wednesday, despite the opposition of many residents and the legislature and governor.

“The president is using the [National Park] Centennial as a cover to subvert the will of Maine’s citizens and leaders,” US Representative Rob Bishop (R-Utah) charged. “The only votes taken on this proposal, at the local and state level, have demonstrated opposition from Mainers.”

The president used his executive power to create monuments to get around a federal law that requires Congressional approval for the creation of a national park, Bishop charged. Bishop, the chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, alleged that Obama used the 100th anniversary of the National Park Service as an excuse for his action.

The northern part of Maine is often called the “North Woods.” Roxanne Quimby, the co-founder of the company that makes Burt’s Bees products, donated the land to the federal government. Her goal was to protect it from logging and real estate development.

‘Miracle Oil Maker’ Lets You Make Fresh Nut Oils Within Minutes!

Maine Governor Paul LePage, a Republican, expressed concern about the monument.

“The Legislature passed a resolution opposing a National Monument in the North Woods, members of Maine’s Congressional delegation opposed it and local citizens voted against it repeatedly,” a press release from LePage read. “Despite this lack of support, the Quimby family used high-paid lobbyists in Washington, D.C., to go around the people of Maine and have President Obama use his authority to designate this area a National Monument. This once again demonstrates that rich, out-of-state liberals can force their unpopular agenda on the Maine people against their will.”

The resolution passed the state House, 77-73, and the Senate, 18-17. US Sen. Susan Collins of Maine also expressed concern and signed a letter stating that Mainers “do not take lightly any forced action by the federal government to increase its footprint in our state.”

Conservation or Job Killer?

Local residents charge that the move will kill jobs in their economically depressed region. The White House said the action will benefit the community

“The new national monument – which will be managed by the National Park Service – will protect approximately 87,500 acres, including the stunning East Branch of the Penobscot River and a portion of the Maine Woods that is rich in biodiversity and known for its outstanding opportunities to hike, canoe, hunt, fish, snowmobile, snowshoe and cross-country ski,” a White House press release read.

Quimby also donated $100 million to the federal government for the upkeep of the monument, the press release said. The donation might be necessary because the National Park Service lacks the funds to maintain the monument, The Hill reported.

Maine’s congressional delegation is divided over the monument, which might form the basis for a future national park.

“I believe that the president’s proclamation, along with the binding commitments in the deeds conveying the land, address the essential elements of those conditions, and that, as a result, the benefits of the designation will far outweigh any detriment and — on balance — will be a significant benefit to Maine and the region,” US Senator Angus King, an independent from Maine, said.

But US Representative Bruce Poliquin, a Republican from Maine, opposed it.

“Our local job creators — not Washington bureaucrats — know best how to use our working forests and provide proper access for industries to create more jobs including those in the outdoor recreation businesses, like snowmobiling, hunting, rafting, camping and so on,” Poliquin said.

What is your reaction to President Obama’s action? Share your thoughts in the section below:

Bust Inflation With A Low-Cost, High-Production Garden. Read More Here.

“Louisiana? We Don’t See Nothing”

Click here to view the original post.

louisiana floods

It’s become increasingly clear over the last several years that the news media in this country has abandoned their post.

Whereas once upon a time we could count on them to keep us informed about what is going on in the world, they have given up even pretending to do that. Instead, they are focusing on a never-ending string of fluff stories, intended to distract us from what is going on in Washington, rather than inform us about what our government is doing.

All my life, the mainstream media has leaned towards the left and supported the Democrat party. That’s nothing new. I’m used to seeing them badmouth Republicans and other conservatives, while letting Democrats get away with things.

But what I had seen before is nothing compared to what I am seeing now. There is no longer even a patina of legitimacy in the mainstream media. They have finally and fully sold out.

This is tragic, because the media holds a very important place in American society and politics. Or, I should say, they used to. The Founding Fathers intentionally gave us a free press, so that we would be protected from our government. That press would dig in and root out the rot that the government was trying to hide, letting us know what wrongs they were committing.

As recently as Nixon, the news media was on the job, doing what they were supposed to do. They uncovered the whole Watergate fiasco and slaughtered President Nixon’s reputation, putting his crimes on public display. Of course, he was a Republican, which might have added to their journalistic zeal, but still, they did the job right.

That birthed a whole new generation of “investigative reporters” who grew up in collage hearing about the glory days of the Watergate scandal. For a number of years, the goal of every journalist graduating from college was to break another such story; and so they worked hard to find one to break.

But that’s all in the past. Perhaps it will come back if Trump wins the election and becomes president, but I doubt it. Today’s media doesn’t care about the truth anymore, all they care about is furthering a liberal agenda.

So regardless of who wins the election, you can be sure that they will continue along that line. Oh, they might attack Trump to make him look bad, but it will be done with the intent of furthering progressive liberalism, not because Trump deserves it.

A clear part of this strategy is always to make Democrats, the party of the liberals, look good and to make Republicans, the party which is supposed to be for the conservatives, look bad. They do this, while pretending to deliver the news, through the stories they select and the way they choose to “spin” those stories.

History Repeating, Still Nothing to Learn from It

The current situation in Louisiana is a perfect example. Eleven years ago, Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans and the Gulf shore states. The dikes around New Orleans failed and the city flooded, forcing hundreds of thousands of people to evacuate. Many lost their homes and all their worldly goods, and some even lost their lives.

That hurricane hit while President George W. Bush was on vacation at his ranch in Texas, causing him to cut his vacation short and return to Washington early. While he had been managing the crisis from his ranch, the president needs the full capability of the government to handle a crisis, and that’s located in Washington.

I think it’s important to note some of the actions that Bush took, before returning to Washington. While they were not perfect, they did show that he was not unaware of the situation and that he was doing his job to bring relief. Specifically, he:

  • Declared a federal state of emergency in Louisiana, before the hurricane hit, opening up avenues for federal aid.
  • Coordinated with the National Hurricane, FEMA, DHS and the governors of the affected states, before the hurricane hit.
  • Visited the affected areas days after the storm hit.
  • Replaced FEMA’s leadership, when it wasn’t getting the job done.
  • Accepted responsibility for the response, both the good and the bad.
  • Passed and signed legislation committing over $52 billion in disaster relief

As he flew back, Air Force One overflew the damaged areas so that Bush could get a birds-eye view of the damage. But on that trip, he didn’t stop. That was a few days later. But the media bashed him mercilessly for his “flyover,” accusing him of not caring about the people suffering on the ground.

We heard and saw reports about the damage that Katrina caused daily. Over and over again, the press hammered the government for their slow and uncoordinated response. While some of the blame was misdirected, blaming Bush for things that were actually the Governor’s and local officials’ fault, there was plenty that went wrong and plenty to blame. The media did their job and shoveled that blame out in bucketfuls.

Along with everyone else, I believe the federal response to Katrina was uncoordinated, slow and poorly executed. I hoped that the government and especially FEMA, the government’s department to take care of such emergencies, would learn from their mistakes and be better prepared the next time a disaster struck. But my hope, like that of many others, was in vain.

Seven years later, Hurricane Sandy struck the Eastern Seaboard, hitting most heavily in New Jersey. But FEMA’s response was no better. Rather than working proactively to be able to bring aid to the people, they didn’t put out requests for quotes (RFQs) until the day after the hurricane hit. Once again, the federal government failed the people they were sworn to protect.

But you and I didn’t hear that, because it wasn’t reported. We didn’t have an endless litany of the government’s failures in that disaster. In fact, we hardly heard a thing about it.

Yet the people on the ground suffered much like those in New Orleans had. Some were without lights for weeks. Many had to resort to dumpster diving, in order to find something to eat. Rather than bringing in help, FEMA brought along truckloads of red tape for those who were seeking to rebuild their lives.

What’s the Difference?

Where was the media outrage?

I’ll tell you where it was… it had been packed away in the closet, awaiting another Republican president. The media’s fair-haired boy, Obama was sitting in the Oval Office; and they wouldn’t do a thing to tarnish his reputation. Rather than working overtime, as they had done to blame Bush, they were working overtime to hide the facts and protect Obama.

Such is the American mainstream media.

It is now eleven years after Katrina and five years after Sandy. Once again, Louisiana is underwater. But this time, it’s not New Orleans that’s underwater, but rather one-third of the state’s parishes (that’s counties to you and I). Seventy-five percent of the homes in those parishes are severely damaged; the homes of about two million people. Yet we haven’t heard hardly a word about it.

Why haven’t we heard anything? Because Obama is on vacation. The news media is protecting him once again. He’s not going to break off his time of playing golf and hob-nobbing with the rich and famous for something as minor as a bit of flooding, even though there are Blacks whose homes have been flooded too.

He took a few minutes out of his busy vacation to declare it a federal disaster area, but aside from that, he hasn’t even done a press release sympathizing with those who are suffering.

There is one other thing he’s done… or rather, had his Department of Injustice do. That is to release a document demanding that officials who are bringing relief to the area not discriminate. That’s right; while black and white Cajuns are working to save each other’s lives, he’s already trying to turn this into another misguided racial battle.

Video first seen on USA Today.

And the media is covering it up. Oh, if you asked them, they would disagree with me. They’d probably say something like “It’s not newsworthy.” That’s their favorite excuse for hiding things. But who decides what’s newsworthy? The news media. So what they’re really saying is, they don’t want to cover it.

As far as the media is concerned, those two million suffering people aren’t worth mentioning. If a black thug gets himself shot while committing a crime, they make headlines for a week. But honest, law-abiding citizens, who are struggling to survive aren’t worth the time it takes to mention them.

I don’t know what this is, but it’s certainly not the country that the Founding Fathers created. Can you imagine Ben Franklin ignoring the plight of these people, so that he could talk about transgender bathroom rights?

I said it eight years ago and I’ll say it again. The most dangerous thing that Obama has done to this country has been the loss of the media. When he convinced them to stop reporting news and become his lackeys, we lost the ability to see what our government is doing. They can now do anything they want, and we won’t be any the wiser.

No wonder our freedom is being eroded away. When those who are responsible for keeping watch over that freedom have sold out to the enemy, we have no recourse left.

Our country is on a downhill slide and it will only get steeper. But then, the media will do all they can to tell us that everything is just fine.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.




3 total views, 3 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Report: Obama’s ATF Has Been Illegally Tracking Gun Owners

Click here to view the original post.
Report: Obama’s ATF Has Been Illegally Tracking Gun Owners

Image source: Wikipedia


The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is illegally stockpiling vast amounts of data about gun owners, according to an audit by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

GAO in a report earlier this month announced that the ATF violated both federal law and its own policies by not deleting Federal Firearms License [FFL] information on two data systems, thus not complying with “the appropriations act restriction prohibiting consolidation or centralization of FFL records.” An FFL is a firearm retailer.

The information was found during an audit.

FoxNews personality Andrew Napolitano, a former judge on the New Jersey superior court, said that when passing the law more than a decade ago, Congress was concerned about an “anti-gun president.”

Be Prepared. Learn The Best Ways To Hide Your Guns.

“Congress decided that since the states regulate guns, and not the federal government, the federal government would never be able to keep a list of every gun owner and every gun owned by that person,” he said. “But they are.”

The federal government, by law, is supposed to collect the data “for statistical reasons only” — meaning they are to destroy names and addresses, Napolitano said.

“Look where we are now,” he said. “Now we have a president who doesn’t believe in the right to keep and bear arms. He might be succeeded by another president who doesn’t believe in the right to keep and bear arms, who has a small army, the ATF, who knows where every gun is, and who owns the guns and could harass or confiscate.”

ATF’s action, Napolitano said, “violates federal law, it violates a Supreme Court opinion, it violates our natural right to self-defense — which is protected by the Second Amendment.”

What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:

Tired Of Losing Freedoms — And Looking For Another Country? Read More Here.

Obama’s DOJ Has Seized Control Of Local Police, And No One Noticed

Click here to view the original post.

Obama’s DOJ Has Seized Control Of Local Police, And No One Noticed

President Obama’s Justice Department has effectively taken control of police departments across the country by using a sneaky legal trick endorsed by the United Nations.

Incredibly, it has been completed through simple lawsuits.

Placing local enforcement under federal control is much easier than you might think. The Obama administration has done it 26 times using a legal mechanism known as a consent decree, The Washington Post and Lifezette.com reported.

Here is how the process works:

The Justice Department’s civil rights division files a federal lawsuit against a local government, alleging civil or constitutional rights violations. A federal law, the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (42 U.S.C. § 14141), gives the DOJ the power to do this, noted Robert Romano of Americans for Limited Government.

To settle the suit, the local government enters into a special court order, called a consent decree, which puts the DOJ in charge of major aspects of local law enforcement.

Survive Blackouts With Wind Power! Click Here.

“The municipality then simply agrees to the judicial finding — without contest — and the result is a wide-reaching federal court order that imposes onerous regulations on local police,” Romano wrote at Lifezette of the practice. “This makes local police directly answerable to the Civil Rights Division at the DOJ.”

Independent monitors ensure that the decree is being followed. The decree gives the DOJ the power to tell the cop on the beat what to do. For example, it can write policies for departments and require the use of body cameras. The policies can cover everything from training to the use of force.

The investigations often begin after allegations of unlawful arrests, illegal searches and racial profiling, The Post reported.

“A good example is that we took on a bunch of cases where one of the critical elements was how police use force against persons who are in mental health crisis,” former DOJ attorney Jonathan Smith told The Washington Post.

Obama’s DOJ Has Seized Control Of Local Police, And No One Noticed

Image source: Public Domain Pictures

The DOJ can bury local police departments with red tape by using consent decrees, Romano alleged. A March 30 decree between Newark, New Jersey, and the DOJ was 77 pages.

Consent decrees can increase costs to local taxpayers. An investigation by The Post and Frontline determined that DOJ-ordered reforms cost a total of $600 million. Most of that money came from local taxpayers.

Police departments in Los Angeles and Chicago — America’s second and third largest cities, respectively — are currently operating under consent decrees. Miami police are operating under a consent decree, too.

“Officer morale in some of the departments plummeted during the interventions, according to interviews,” The Post reported of the DOJ’s efforts. “Collectively, the departments have cycled through 52 police chiefs as the agencies tried to meet federal demands. Some departments have struggled to sustain reforms once oversight ended, and in some cities, police relations with residents remain strained.”

The reforms don’t always take care of the problems that the Department of Justice was trying to fix.

Get Out Of The Rat-Race And Make Money Off-Grid!

“The hard question — have you stopped doing the things that got you into court in the first place — is something that these consent decrees seem to have trouble answering,” Jeffrey Fagan, a professor of law at Columbia University who has studied reform agreements, told The Post.

Police departments may have to go along with consent decrees in order to get federal funding.

“These consent decrees are in essence regulations,” Romano wrote, noting that the decrees take place “without the niceties of administrative procedures requirements, public comments, or even any congressional oversight.”

A United Nations official has endorsed the Department of Justice policy of intervening in local police matters.

“The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice has provided oversight and recommendations for improvement of police services in a number of cities with consent decrees,” Maina Kai, a representative of the UN Human Rights Council, said on July 27. “This is one of the most effective ways to reduce discrimination in law enforcement and it needs to be beefed up and increased to cover as many of the 18,000-plus local law enforcement jurisdictions.”

What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:

Tired Of Losing Freedoms — And Looking For Another Country? Read More Here.

White House Warns: THIS Event Would Impact ‘National Government Stability’

Click here to view the original post.

White House Warns: THIS Event Would Impact ‘National Government Stability’

WASHINGTON — The threat of what the White House calls a “significant cyber incident” against the power grid is so great that the Obama administration has unveiled a major new strategy, complete with a six-level schema that acknowledges the most severe attack could cause widespread blackouts, deaths, and even impact the stability of the federal government.

The Presidential Policy Directive on “United States Cyber Incident Coordination” was released July 26 and intended to “provide clarity and guidance about the Federal government’s roles and responsibilities” during a cyberattack.

“Cyber incidents are a fact of contemporary life, and significant cyber incidents are occurring with increasing frequency, impacting public and private infrastructure located in the United States and abroad,” the directive states.

Modern technology has made life easier and is essential, the directive states, but “the same infrastructure that enables these benefits is vulnerable to malicious activity, malfunction, human error, and acts of nature, placing the Nation and its people at risk.”

Get Free Backup Electricity — That Works Even During Blackouts!

Much like the now-defunct Homeland Security Advisory System, the directive unveiled a color-coded system to help the public understand the significance of a specific cyberattack. Dubbed the “Cyber Incident Severity Schema,” it includes six levels:

Level 5 (Emergency or Black) – “Poses an imminent threat to the provision of wide-scale critical infrastructure services, national government stability, or to the lives of U.S. persons.” The critical infrastructure services includes the power grid.

Level 4 (Severe or Red) – “Likely to result in a significant impact to public health or safety, national security, economic security, foreign relations, or civil liberties.”

white house cyberLevel 3 (High or Orange) – “Likely to result in a demonstrable impact to public health or safety, national security, economic security, foreign relations, civil liberties, or public confidence.”

Level 2 (Medium or Yellow) – “May impact public health or safety, national security, economic security, foreign relations, civil liberties, or public confidence.”

Level 1 (Low or Green) – “Unlikely to impact public health or safety, national security, economic security, foreign relations, civil liberties, or public confidence.”

Level O (Baseline or White) – A nuisance attack that causes no damage.

In addition to creating a cyber incident schema, the directive also:

  • Defines a significant cyber incident as: “A cyber incident that is … likely to result in demonstrable harm to the national security interests, foreign relations, or economy of the United States or to the public confidence, civil liberties, or public health and safety of the American people.
  • Establishes the US Department of Justice, acting through the FBI and the National Cyber Investigative Joint Task Force (NCIJTF), as the federal lead agency for investigating cyberattacks.
  • Creates a Unified Coordination Group (UCG) that will organize the response to a major cyberattack. The cyber UCG will coordinate response with local, state, regional, tribal and foreign governments.

The US will use sanctions against foreign governments that launch cyberattacks against America, Americans or American allies, White House counterterrorism advisor Lisa Monaco told the media. Monaco did not say what the sanctions would be, but named Russia and China as possible targets.

Obama himself mentioned the possibility of sanctions against China over cyberattacks in September 2015. The president later backed down after a discussion with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping.

“We are preparing a number of measures that will indicate to the Chinese that this is not just a matter of us being mildly upset; but is something that will put significant strains on the bilateral relationship if not resolved,” Mr. Obama said in a question-and-answer session with business leaders on economic issues. “We are prepared to take some countervailing actions in order to get their attention.”

The directive came during the same week when authorities confirmed that the Democratic National Committee’s computer system had been hacked. Many observers blamed Russia for that attack.

Do you believe a cyberattack is inevitable? Share your opinion in the section below:

Are You Prepared For Blackouts In Your Area? Read More Here.

White House Answers Petition to Label Black Lives Matter a Terrorist Organization: Careful What You Wish For

Click here to view the original post.

A White House petition was generated that gathered over 100,000 signatures to label the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement a terrorist organization.  In response, the White House stated it didn’t

US Back to War with Iraqis AGAIN: All Sides Merge to Attack US Troops

Click here to view the original post.

Those of us that fought in Iraq are well aware of the potent militia force, known at the time as the Mahdi Army, controlled by the Iraqi Shiite Cleric Moqtada

Trusting The Government… A Tenuous Thing

Click here to view the original post.

survivopedia columFor anyone, living in any time period, anywhere in the world, there is a need to trust the government where you are.

We create governments to provide for the common good, and in doing so, give them an enormous amount of power. Yet we see throughout history, that such power is abused.

Part of the problem is the types of people who are drawn to that power aren’t the types we should give it to. Yet, all too often, we do just that. Then, when we the people, are hurt by our governments, we wail and bemoan the way they have acted, especially the way they have acted towards us.

Today, this very same phenomenon is happening all around us. Trust in the U.S. federal government is at an all-time low. People from all walks of life and all parts of the political spectrum are publicly proclaiming their lack of trust in the government ; not all for the same reason, but for a host of wrongs which either the government has done or people think the government has done.

Let me say right here that the U.S. government has beaten the odds when it comes to doing the right thing. As bad as our government has been at times, and as much as we all complain about it, the United States has actually managed to do right, more than wrong, on the world stage. I realize that there are a lot of people who won’t agree with me on that, but the fact remains that the trust our country has received from others is based upon the history of this nation and how we have treated the rest of the world.

That’s not to say that the U.S. government is perfect, because it’s not. Everyone knows that our government has worked to depose rulers and governments which we didn’t agree with. The righteousness of such actions is at best tenuous, as none of us has a crystal ball which we can use to see the real difference such actions have made or what would have happened without them.

Can You Tell Who Is to Blame?

We can’t really blame these actions on just one party or the other, although many people try. Typically, whichever party is currently in power reaps all the blame for whatever happens on their watch. This happens more with the Republican Party than is does with the Democrat Party, simply because the news media is more closely associated with the Democrats. But we conservatives blame the Democrats, just as much as they blame the Republicans; we just don’t have as loud a voice.

But here’s the thing; there are many things which our government does, which transcend the party. If they were mere partisan politics, then when control of the country’s political power changed hands, those things we deem reprehensible would come to a screeching halt.

Yet look at the actions of the NSA. Thanks to Edward Snowden we know much more about the activities of that shadow organization than we ever did before. Yet the revelations that Snowden made weren’t things that just happened during Barack Obama’s presidency. Nor did they start in Bush’s presidency.

The Echelon program, which develops the bulk of the information that Snowden released, was started back in the 1960s. Yet it stayed in place through several changes in presidents and switches in congressional power.

Video first seen on The Alex Jones Channel.

We have to realize and accept that the government, our government, the one which is supposed to be by the people and for the people, really isn’t on our side. They’re on their side; the side of the bureaucrats and politicians. At times that works to our benefit, but there are also times when it doesn’t.

One of the biggest problems we face in trusting our government is that we really don’t know what they are doing. Part of this is necessary so that they can do their jobs, but another large part is willful silence on their part, so that we don’t know what they are doing. This part has long fueled people like Alex Jones who make conspiracy theories their business.

The problem with any conspiracy theory is that simply calling it that or associating an act of the government with that term destroys any credibility. Once something has been labeled a conspiracy theory, it is part of our culture to dismiss it. But that doesn’t mean that it isn’t true. There have been things our government has done, which were incorrectly labeled conspiracy theories. But they actually happened.

When Reality Beats Fantasy

Depending on which list you look at, there are supposedly 33 different conspiracy theories that ended up being true. Whether that list is totally accurate may be another cause for speculation. But I think it’s fairly safe to say that at least some of them actually happened.

Of course, this makes it impossible for any of us to know what is true and what is merely a rumor being floated by whoever wants to make the government look bad. Personally, I think the government is perfectly capable of making themselves look bad, without any of us helping.

Then there are the thing which the government does in secret, which are done for the sole purpose of trying to get we the people to do what the government thinks we should do. While our government may not be as controlling as some others that have existed, pretty much everyone who has power in our government has an agenda, and a lot of that agenda is forcing us to do the things that they think we should… supposedly for our own good.

Take Fast and Furious, as an example. The first I heard of that was when BBC broke the story. In that first article, they said that the purpose of it was to raise the fear of gun violence in the United States, by giving guns to the warring drug cartels of Mexico.

Interestingly enough, I’ve never seen that angle presented in the American news media, not even in conservative outlets on the Internet. But if the BBC was right, our government has engaged in heinous crimes, which resulted in the deaths of innocent people. That’s not conspiracy theory, according to one of the most trusted news sources in the world, that’s fact.

Before you think that our government wouldn’t involve itself in killing innocent people, remember how many wars our nation has been in. Wars, by definition, require killing people. And while our nation has tried to always be on the side of righteousness in the wars we’ve fought, some of them have been seriously questioned.

But wars have not been the only time when our government has gotten involved in mass killings. There have been other times when the federal government has used death as a means to try to control public opinion. One of the most infamous ones of these happened during the Prohibition.

The Prohibition was all about forcing morality down people’s throats, in place of alcohol. Overall, it was less effective than trying to get children to eat their vegetables. But that didn’t stop the self-righteous in our government from trying. They not only outlawed alcoholic beverages on a nationwide basis, but did everything in their power to keep people from drinking.

In this case, “everything” included the very citizens they were trying to save. The Prohibition created a very active black market, with bootleggers making moonshine in hidden stills and running it to speakeasies around the country. Much of that moonshine was created from stolen alcohol; alcohol intended for industrial uses.

Alcohol which is not for human consumption, such as that which is used in industry, is “denatured” to avoid the taxes associated with alcohol intended for drinking. This basically means doing something to the alcohol to make it non-drinkable; either making it taste bad or making it poisonous. While most industrial alcohol of the day was denatured by adding things that would make it taste bad, the government pushed manufacturers to use poisonous chemicals, such as methyl alcohol.

So, what was the result in this propaganda ploy? Over 10,000 American citizens were killed. Many more suffered serious health problems, such as blindness, even though they were not killed. Yet, even knowing that this was killing people, it took years of discussions in Congress to put it to a halt. I ask you, if the government did that then, what would stop them from doing something similar now?

Who Is Paying the Price Now?

I think that there’s a point in which politicians and high ranking bureaucrats lose touch with reality. Specifically, they lose touch with the reality of individual lives. Rather, they see “the people” as a nebulous mass to be manipulated and controlled. Since they are no longer individual lives to be considered, it’s easy for these supposed public servants to see the loss of some of those lives of little consequence, if it could lead to a larger good.

Historically, some of the world’s greatest leaders have fallen into this trap. Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler and Chairman Mao were all responsible for ordering the deaths of millions of their own countrymen. Yet they each did it for “the greater good.”

This brings us to the United States of today. I’ve heard conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory over the last seven years, many more than I ever heard before. Perhaps this is in part due to the internet, but I don’t think that’s all of it. The internet didn’t spring into life when Obama was voted into office, it pre-existed his reign by a number of years.

Yet, there have been a large number of “convenient disasters” during his time in office. Starting with the Sandy Hook shooting, and running right through the Boston Marathon Bombing, reports have abounded about how many of the killings have been ordered from the Oval Office… while being sure to maintain plausible deniability.

We all know that one of Obama’s chief goals is to disarm the American people. That’s made clear, every time there is a public death. It doesn’t matter if it’s a police officer killing a supposedly innocent young black suspect… I mean male, or the work of an extremist Muslim terrorist, Obama can be counted on to use it to beat the same drum, over and over again. According to him and those that travel in the same circles, it’s the guns that commit the crime, not the criminals.

In Obama’s eyes, getting rid of guns serves the greater good. Therefore, it’s not much of a stretch of the imagination to think that he would order the killing of American citizens, in order to further that goal.

All he has to do, to justify it in his own mind, is think of the number of lives that he thinks he is going to save by taking guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. As he has repeatedly said, if only one life is saved, it’s worth it.

But what’s the “it” in that sentence. The evidence that Sandy Hook was staged by the government is rather compelling. There are just too many holes in the official story, starting with the lack of ambulances and rescue crews at the scene, and ending with the fact that the school has since been torn down. How convenient.

Likewise, there are a lot of holes in the Boston Marathon story, especially in the government’s actions in response to it. Since when is there a need to establish martial law and treat ordinary Americans like criminals, just to catch one or two real criminals?

I know this much for sure. We live in a time when the lack of trust that the average American has for the government is well and truly earned. None of us have any real reason to trust those in Washington, regardless of what political party we affiliate ourselves with or what part of the political spectrum we call home. Our government has stopped working for our good long ago, and is now working to change this country into something that will not be to our benefit.

If there was ever a time in the history of the United States of America to keep our guns and plan to survive without the aid of a central government, now is that time.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.




4 total views, 4 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 2    Average: 1/5]

Orwellian Thought Crime to Become a Reality…Attempt to Extend Hate Crime Laws to Police

Click here to view the original post.

Ever wonder how your tyrannical government is going to impose European style laws against free speech?  Read on.  “Hate Crimes” have always been a slippery slope legally as they punish

While World was Distracted Iran Received the S-300 Missiles that Could Lead to World War III

Click here to view the original post.

While the world has been distracted by the quickening of the dissent into global chaos, it was easy to miss a major even that occurred this week.  Russia delivered the

The plan to suspend open carry at the RNC is a dangerous setup

Click here to view the original post.

After the assassination of three police officers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Fox News began broadcasting comments from various “conservative” commentators demanding that Ohio’s open carry law be suspended in Cleveland

Post Coup Aftermath in Turkey

Click here to view the original post.

What can we expect next from Turkey?  Although, elements of the coup are still holding out in Ankara, the coup leadership has allegedly fled Turkey by helicopter to Greece and

Will Ankara be the next Benghazi?

Click here to view the original post.

Right now Ankara is being heavily bombed by aircraft.  The targets appear to be government installations, but many of the bombs are dropping near the US Embassy and residences of

BREAKING: Anti-GMO Labeling Bill, Backed By Monsanto, Goes To Obama

Click here to view the original post.

BREAKING: Anti-GMO Labeling Bill, Backed By Monsanto, Goes To Obama

WASHINGTON – The House of Representatives sent a bill to President Obama Thursday that would overturn a landmark Vermont law requiring the labeling of GMO foods.

The bill, which was backed by Monsanto and passed the House by a vote of 306-117, would give America’s largest food companies three options to label their products that contain GMO ingredients: a label on the package, a symbol on the package, or an electronic QR code that must be scanned with a smartphone to find out what is in the food.

Opponents of the bill blasted Congress for not only overturning the Vermont law but also for passing a bill that doesn’t give consumers clear information. Smaller food companies would have the option of listing a website or telephone number.

Need Non-GMO Seeds? Get Them From A Company You Can Trust!

Vermont’s law was simple and would have required foods to say: “produced with genetic engineering.”

(Listen to Off The Grid Radio’s special episode on GMO foods here.)

“If there is an acknowledgement about the right of a consumer to have access to information, why not give them the information in plain and simple English?” Rep. Peter Welch, a Democrat from Vermont, said on the House floor, according to the Burlington Free Press. “This is a win for Monsanto and big food producers.

Story continues below video

“It guts Vermont’s labeling law and makes a mockery out of consumers’ right to know. Absurdly, rather than requiring a simple, plain English GMO label, it allows a producer to require shoppers to call a toll free number or look up a website on their smartphones to figure out what’s in the food they’re buying. Let’s get real. This is not a compromise. It’s a thinly disguised effort to block the right of consumers to know what’s in the food they eat.”

Obama is expected to sign the bill, although the Center for Food Safety is urging consumers to call the White House (202-456-1111) and urge him to veto it. The Bill is S. 564.

“When President Obama was running for office in 2008, he promised he’d label GMOs as President,” the Center said in an email. “This is President Obama’s last chance to get GMO labeling right – by vetoing this sham labeling bill and supporting mandatory words on the package.”

What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:

Bust Inflation With A Low-Cost, High-Production Garden. Read More Here.

Movement To Nationalize Police Training Gains Momentum

Click here to view the original post.
Movement To Nationalize Police Training Gains Momentum

Image source: Pixabay.com

The movement to place local law enforcement training under federal control has gained momentum following several high-profile controversial encounters involving police.

“There are approximately 18,000 departments in the United States,” former Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey told NBC’s Meet the Press. “In my opinion, far too many. And we need to look at a long-term goal. More regionalization, better training, more consistency in policy and procedures.”

Ramsey was the co-chair of The President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, whose purpose was to develop a blueprint for reforming American law enforcement. The final report, released in May 2015, reads like a blueprint for having the federal government gain more control over local police.

Produce Boiling Hot Water, Anywhere, Anytime With Absolutely No Power Whatsoever…

Ramsey is one of a growing number of people who believe recent police shootings and violence should serve as a pretext for centralization of America’s law enforcement efforts. President Obama said after the Dallas tragedy that he wants any solutions to be based on the report.

Centralized Police Training

“We need to bring people together, but we need more consistency in terms of the training that’s provided, the selection and hiring of individuals,” Ramsey said.

The Task Force issued a final report that recommended more federal government involvement.

“The U.S. Department of Justice, through the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and Office of Justice Programs, should provide technical assistance and incentive funding to jurisdictions with small police agencies that take steps towards shared services, regional training, and consolidation,” the final report recommended.

The report also said that the federal government should have a larger role in police training.

“The Federal Government should support the development and delivery of training to help law enforcement agencies learn, acquire, and implement technology tools and tactics that are consistent with the best practices of 21st century policing,” the report states.

The training would be directed by the Department of Justice.

What is your reaction? Share it in the section below:

Are You Prepared For A Downed Grid? Read More Here.

Global Updates July 12, 2016: World Chaos is Accelerating

Click here to view the original post.

It has been some time since I posted.  I apologize as a lot has transpired over the last two weeks.  To make up for lost time, I am going to

Your Freedom… Is It To Die For?

Click here to view the original post.

Survivopedia freedom and guns

It would almost be amusing, if it were not so sadly tragic, how easy it is for the POTUS to manipulate and re-direct the minds of so many Americans who should know better.

With a nascent grass roots effort emerging to scrutinize the legality of Bureaucratic Fiat lists like the No-Fly list now seeded and sprouting in the forest of dissident citizenry, Obama simply brought out his two-stroke despotic weed whacker to trim us down, and made us all feel bad and guilty that we don’t have another killing of due process add-on gun ban to the illegal ‘no-fly’ list.

Laundering the Brains of ‘We, the Sheeple’

The main nonsense logic being that if they are ‘bad enough’ to not be allowed to fly, they are bad enough not to be allowed to have a gun. But if they are THAT bad in the first place, then why aren’t they arrested and charged accordingly?

Also our ‘honorable’ Congressional legislators just wrapped up a Broadway Stage performance in their last session before breaking for the holiday entitled ‘Feckless Government Dysfunction’, starring the House Democrats as comedy REPs ‘acting’ in the best interest of our Constitutional rights.

Instead of someone introducing a Declaration of War resolution against the Middle East enemy Islamic State, which just initiated a direct guerilla attack on our American soil in Orlando, murdering innocent civilians, in their own declaration of war on America…

The Leftist totalitarian branch of our government got into a hissy-fit to disrupt proceedings until they got their impudent temper tantrum way to illegally eviscerate more of our 2nd/A rights from our Constitution, along with our 4th/A rights to due process. Doubtless, we have all gone mad.

But this could fall into the ‘nothing is as it seems’ category. It might have really been a distraction re-direction to get an ‘insider’ deal going with the Omnibus bill.

They knew they’d be hard pressed for gaining any new gun control legislation. But they wanted to try to derail some Republican initiatives, by ‘scaring’ the Republicans into thinking they might not be able to prevent a universal background check winning vote, or a couple of other incremental gun control. All of these measures in their slowly but surely ultimate goal of total Australian/Canadian/UK confiscation and disarmament agenda. They at least might get some concessions on something else Obama can use to bolster his voting bloc…like maybe an ease up on immigration reform?

The amazing part is that some of the Republicans apparently want to do a treasonous compromise for their personal share of the spoils.

In the recent Senate voting session John McCain, and a couple other-I-don’t-know-what-you-call-‘em, turncoat politicians pretending to be Republicans actually voted ‘YES’ in the Senate FOR a proposal essentially allowing the FBI to arbitrarily and capriciously snoop through anybody’s emails any time they want for any reason WITHOUT A WARRANT!

I know Johnny Boy McCain, didn’t have a very nice stay at the Hanoi Hilton back in the day, and I deeply respect his service, but DUDE, did the NVA guards hit you in the head too hard too many times? Get help, John, please?

Fortunately, all the Fascist gun control bills failed in the Senate last time, but only by a thin margin of maybe a couple votes on some proposals! And just now the ‘enemies at the gates’ introduced yet another new bi-partisan compromise ‘no fly-no buy’ bill in the Senate! Also supported by a RINO Senator named Flake.

Video first seen on Sen. Jeff Flake.

But we didn’t elect a republican Senate and Congress majority to do what the liberal leftist Democrats want! We hired them to STOP their totalitarian party from gaining any more ground on their path to enslave us!

There can’t be any compromise on our freedoms? All that does is make it easier for them the next time they slide down the slippery slope to totalitarianism? They must be stopped now!

Make sure you contact your Congressional Reps TODAY and let them know in no uncertain terms that they had better NOT vote in ANY new anti-Second or 4th Amendment laws! Let them know you’re concerned and will be checking how they voted!

And in Addition to Obama’s Manipulative Disinformation…

You have master liars like Rep Jim Himes, who was one of those loud mouth anti-2nd/A birdbrain who walked-out during Speaker Ryan’s moment of silence for not pushing for more Gun Control legislation in Congress last week. Which they insultingly maintain is the cause of, and cure for, all the world’s problems.

In a subsequent media interview, Himes later asked the ultimate absurdity question of “why can’t it be at least as difficult to get a gun as it is to get a driver’s license?”

Well, obviously you never owned a car, or you are just terminally cognitively afflicted, Mr. Himes, otherwise you should know that you don’t need a NICS background check to buy a freaking car and be subjected to ownership bans. Even if you’ve committed a serious crime WITH your car, that doesn’t preclude you from owning cars or driving them on your own land like it does with guns, even if you didn’t even use a gun to commit a crime.

If you are too fool to see the insidious totalitarian disarmament agenda here, Mr. Hines, then you are too irresponsible to be trusted with legislating our future? You should resign before you irreparably harm our country, and its liberties.

Besides being in a very different ‘Public Safety’ category, mostly concerned with personal self-defense, guns have a completely different purpose. They are more of a private, individual concern, and the comparison is like alligators to artichokes.

Cars are statistically far more deadly when humans are in control of them than any firearms, due, among other things, to their ubiquitous and pervasive public social integration, and their high capacity speed and power. Far more foot pounds of potentially deadly energy than any bullets.

Indeed, almost every crime from murder to theft of the vehicle itself somehow likely involves a vehicle. So that’s why vehicles should perhaps require additional training and supervision in their function. They simply ARE MORE commonly dangerous than firearms, in complete contrast to the specious analogy you, Mr. Himes, presented.

And, the most important thing is to note in your flawed comparison that long before there were cars, people had the inherent uninfringed right to own firearms because cars simply won’t protect us much against a vicious predator, human or otherwise trying to hurt us, or a tyrannical government as well as an AR-15’s will.

Then Representative Himes persisted in mewling in affectatious public safety anguish by adding another statement that he couldn’t understand, the profound mystery of why a fairly reasonable set of {gun control} measures unleashed a torrent of hate, threats, and anger worthy of Dante’s ‘Ninth Circle of Hell’ toward elected officials who speak out for reform?

Could it be that the people are really not as stupid as you think, Mr. Hines? And they get riled when you say ‘reform’ but really mean ‘registration’ for future confiscation? Because the reality is that there is no such thing as a ‘reasonable set of gun control measures’. They are ALL anti-liberty measures.

And that the people-even many democrats and liberals- really do understand that it’s nonsense and patently dishonest to argue that there’s no such thing as an absolute right? If that were true, then why even have a Constitution? We can just make millions of Old Testament ‘Torah/Tanakh’ laws and change them anytime our leaders feel like it and be beheaded if we don’t like it?

But then it would be much worse because you can’t trust your elected officials like Himes as it is when their buddies are so agenda corrupt that they Edit Out the fact that the Orlando terrorist murderer announced he was a Jihadist soldier from the 911 call tapes, and who knows what else they covered up?!

‘Please, Stop Me…Before I Kill Your Freedom Again!’

Finally, Representative Himes said that people can’t expect to own a gun anymore without gun control reform because owning a weapon without hindrance, delay, or training… cannot trump a shooting victim’s right to see their next birthday?

Oh, please. The nauseating stench of your phony self-righteousness wafting through the halls of Congress is like what the first American soldiers entering the Auschwitz camp experienced.

And then-to add a sardonic barb to the insult, Himes says that most people agree with gun control and ‘…Congress exists to reflect the will of the people.’

I hope you don’t forget that, Mr. Himes. Because I think you are wrong. I don’t believe that the majority of true Americans want more gun control or more privacy loss.

And you can’t be ‘stopped’, Representaive Himes, because you don’t subscribe to the reality that we are all equal in the spectrum of our creation, like Thomas and Ben put forth in the Declaration of Independence. You and your wretched ilk believe you were created MORE equal and therefore eminently qualified to dominate and regulate the rest of us.

So all we can do is remove you from office to prevent future violations of our civil rights in your obsessive compulsive quest for totalitarian control over us.

Because most free thinking liberty loving Americans don’t believe your agenda based lies, right?


Then why did a Quinnipiac poll released the other day claim that 86% percent of the people they polled are in favor of a ‘no fly, no buy’ ban, and over 90% are in favor of universal background checks? Why? Because I think that Quinnipiac University is a Leftist brainwashing information manipulating POS organization and really only surveyed around 1600 people nationwide!

And if you try some demographics polling magic and happen to target Watter’s World types, and other ignorant, delusional, mind numbed and misinformed, easily bribed and manipulated sheeple, and you puppet string them with certain questions designed to elicit the desired response, guess what?

You get exactly what the mainstream media likes to use to blow out of proportion chunks all over with the help of people like Bill O’Reilly proving that he’s just as bad as Obama in many power elite ways.

He insisted that ‘universal background checks—even if they really don’t prevent crime—are not that bad because they are not actually gun ‘registration’’ either.’ When, indeed, that’s exactly what Universal Background checks are. They are, in fact, universal pre-confiscation registration.

Don’t believe me? I can even demonstrate it for you if you want to give me your name on your National I.D. card, I mean your 2005 ‘Real I.D. Act’ driver’s license/State I.D. “…your papers, please?” card.

I’ll then tell you exactly how many background checks you had and what guns you own. Or give me the serial number of any gun you have that may have been bought through a dealer, and I’ll find out who bought it, along with how many others were bought on 4473 form by the same person.

Brady Bill NICS background checks for gun purchases are nothing less than below radar gun registration data bases. Which are supposed to be illegal according to the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act. So how did Hawaii just get away with making an illegal law mandating actual total Registration -and having the gall to call it exactly that, ‘Gun Registration’, of ALL firearms in their State, AND reference that ‘data base’ with the new FBI universal data base on law abiding citizens?

Because the wannabe Island Slaves ‘submitted’ to letting their state dictatorship get away with it, that’s how! And the urban myth that the NICS data base must be deleted after 72 hours only applies to the general public according to the FOP act of ’86. NOT to LEO investigations, LOL!

So they really have a permanent registration data base of guns already. But now, with the Congressional vote, they are going for broke on any and all private transactions to be NICS background checked, as well? And we all know what history teaches us will happen once ALL gun ownership is registered?

Cold Hard Truth Be Told

In an open free society like America, the last one on Earth, by the way, there is simply can’t be total crime prevention or complete public safety. It’s a proven impossibility even in already disarmed populates like France!

The reality is that if you want to live in an environment of maximum liberty, free thought, and unbridled movement and privacy. Then the only thing that you must accept, Representative Hines, is that there will always be a percentage of violence in a social population that you can do nothing about it, until the essence of flawed human emotional content can evolve out of its natural violence and avarice mode through education and self-improved behaviorism.

In other words, NO amount of ANY so called humanitarian public safety crime prevention laws, administrative mandates, or restrictions will ever work to any imagined or hoped for value producing levels. And worse, in reality, these specious intentions only represent a more insidious deleterious opportunity for expanded government power and control motivation.

Just ask Hitler’s propaganda minister. When I listen to BO giving his obligatory ‘guns are always and forever the problem’ sound bites, I experience a gut-wrench deep in my bowels I never felt even when being shot at in combat.

Can ‘They’ really actually think we are all that degeneratively gullible? The answer is YES! And they’ll use that against us to submit us to totalitarian dictatorship.

What About Giving Me Liberty or Giving Me Death?

Well, your freedom, in case you forgot, is fundamentally more important than life. For without it, there IS NO life. Just verify that with anyone who lived under tyranny. That in itself nullifies their silly argument that “oh, but if gun control even just saves one life it’s all worth it?”

No, it is not worth it! Because that’s a terrible lie. The facts are that gun control costs more lives because it endangers people by limiting their ability to optimally protect themselves from bad humans and, as we’re seeing lately, and even more importantly… bad government. It’s a statistical, proven fact. More gun control puts more people in danger. Period.

And the other conveniently interpolated re-directed mind control technique the Totalitarian Leftists like to deploy, is to simply ignore the Constitution any time they feel like It. Or attack it as irrelevant or archaic.

Even though the fact remains that the 2nd/can’t be ‘infringed’ because it is the law of the land. It is clear and indisputable that all so-called added gun control laws are illegal because they are unconstitutional!

There’s not even a need for gun control if the criminal justice system wasn’t so dysfunctional. A more efficient system would be a far better deterrent than banning any inanimate objects. If a person does a crime, with or without a weapon, arrest and punish accordingly, depending upon the nature and level of egregious harm done.

Permanent disarmament bans not only don’t prevent recidivism but they do lay the groundwork for tyranny. It eventually makes all of us criminals by target focused laws, then subjects us to gun prohibition, and adds to their creation of the sub-cultural anti-social class of ‘ex-criminals’ we now have despite no further criminal behavior. And we remain law-abiding and nevertheless still permanently punished.

This is not the stuff of a rational society of enlightened higher consciousness. But it is certainly the ‘meat’ in the future feasts of Fascism…

Do You Suck at Being a True American Patriot?

You might… If all you thought about or discussed with anybody this 4th of July weekend holiday revolved around shooting off some firecrackers, and how much beef and beer you’re going to need for the face-stuffing contest at the barbecue later. Instead of discussing with your family and friends and contacting your Representative on each and every bill they vote on this week.

The ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ vote in the House this time could change your little ‘Molon-Labe’ world like you can’t imagine. All these incessant Totalitarian legislative proposals and bureaucratic mandates are scaffolding for when Hillary gets in, and starts building her gallows for our liberties faster than her lying denial of the Benghazi debacle?


Unfortunately, we have a lot going against us. In a ‘Watters World’ caricature where so many of us let our freedom drift away into the sunset like a beautiful balloon, never to be seen again, and we now face a not-so- brave new Hunger Games Orwellian world, that could eventually make places like Somalia seem like an alternative choice.

You see, too many people who work harder at avoiding the social issues that affect them directly in their wallets, security, and freedom in life, then they do to preserve their liberties. Their battle cry is ‘…give me Apps and AMP Energy drinks or…I’ll just moan and groan.’

So most people just don’t really give a damn about gun control or dystopian privacy invasion. They’d rather keep their noses buried in their smartphones playing ‘Angry Birds’ during the commercials interrupting their TV cartoon shows, when they’re not texting mono-syllabic code, or sending porn selfies to their similarly civically buds somewhere else in the dehumanized vacuum of cyberspace.

So it is up to the rest of us true patriots. Just like it was back in the 1770’s. A minority that saved the majority. Because right now, it seems like the American Revolution was for nothing.

But If we re-group and stay in the political fight, we CAN still win!

And guess what, my fellow American patriots. Thanks to the way the Framers set it up, you don’t even have ‘to die for’ your freedoms anymore. All you have to do is get out there… do your duty to get seriously politically active. And VOTE!

Then maybe the next Independence Day celebration will really mean something again?


This article has been written by Mahatma Muhjesbude for Survivopedia.com.









5 total views, 5 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 2    Average: 5/5]

To serve in the military today is to swear an oath to destroy America and serve the global elite

Click here to view the original post.

Today, I watched as Secretary of Defense Carter gave “a major announcement” that transgender people will now be allowed to openly serve in the military.  As absurd as this should

Guns, Blood and Hypocrisy: The Largest Dealer Pushes For Gun Control

Click here to view the original post.

Survivopedia gun control

Were you relieved to hear that the US Senate shot down all four gun control measures presented by the Democrats on June 20th? I was, but I was also just as disturbed to see that SCOTUS refused to hear the case against assault weapons bans.

No doubt Hillary and her merry band aren’t going to stop pushing for gun confiscation here in the United States.

So why is it that the Obama administration allowed Hillary to make so many deals that practically sold our military assets to countries that have a record for serious human rights violations?

How is it that these countries, plus one or more companies that sold these weapons through Hillary also contributed massive amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation and/or to her political campaign?

When Sam Jacob at ammo.com sent me this infographic, my first thought was “this is incredibly disturbing because terrorists will be coming through our leaky sieve of an immigration system with guns that Hillary sold to them even as she moves to disarm our innocent citizens.”

If you, or anyone else needs a good answer for why our citizens need to own an “assault weapon” here in the United States – quite frankly – the way things went down in Syria and this infographic says it all!

Guns, Blood and HypocrisyWorldwide Weapons1


This article has been written by Carmela Tyrell for Survivopedia.





1 total views, 1 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

More Violence, More Political Hay for the Left

Click here to view the original post.

Survivopedia hay for the left

Rahm Emanual, the mayor of Chicago, Obama’s home town, has been quoted many times as having said, “You never let a serious crisis go to waste…” But few people ever remember the end of that quote, which is the truly telling part. It goes on to say, “…And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”

Leaving the grammatical mistakes aside, this quote gives us a keen insight into progressive-liberal thinking. While they try to paint themselves as the party of compassion, Democrats are anything but compassionate.

Their history makes this clear, even though their telling of it is the opposite. We must remember that it was the Democrats, not the Republicans who were and are trying to oppress the blacks. So, while they claim to support blacks today, it’s only to get their vote.

Liberals know that they can’t get their extremist agenda passed into law; so in many ways, they’ve given up trying. That’s what’s behind many of Obama’s executive actions, as well as many of the court cases that the left brings up, purely for the purpose of defining case law to mean what they want it to mean.

With this in mind, it’s no surprise that Obama has chosen to use the Orlando shooting as one more opportunity to make political hay, rather than to do anything meaningful to protect the people of the United States of America. He cares about us just about as much as Democrats in general care about blacks.

No, I’m not being cynical with this, merely observant. Time after time, Obama has used a crisis to further his political agenda, rather than to do anything worthwhile. Once again, rather than address the elephant of Radical Islam in the room, Obama has chosen to use this act of violence to claim that there’s a need for more gun control.

In the world according to Obama, it was actually a 29 year old gun named Omar Mateen walked into the Pulse Nightclub, a gay bar in Orlando, Florida and opened fire, all by itself. I’ll have to say, that was quite a gun. I’ve never seen a gun that can walk, let alone one that has the mental capacity to pick its own targets, based on its religious/political views. Obviously, my guns are defective, or just too darn lazy to do what the president says that guns are supposed to do.

It’s become like a broken record, with Obama repeating the same talking points over and over again, each and every time that some Islamic radical or crazed young man goes off and kills a bunch of people. His total disregard for the facts and his total denial of the reality of radical Islam has turned his response to these attacks into a circus side-show, rather than a meaningful response from the man who is supposed to be the most powerful man in the world.

But maybe this time was just a little different. Obama did say that they (meaning his administration) believes this to be a terrorist act, as well as a hate crime. Of course, that statement didn’t include anything about the killer being a Muslim extremist or his ties to ISIS. Nor does it admit the fact of Islamic terrorism. But that’s all right, as far as ISIS is concerned, because they took credit for the act themselves, rather than waiting for Obama to do it for them.

Perhaps Obama’s use of the term terrorist was nothing more than a precursor to his blaming this horrific act of violence on right-wing terrorists, as he has done before. I guess you could say that Muslims are conservative in one regard though, as they want to keep things the way they used to be, back in the sixth century. But they aren’t the same sort of conservatives as we have here in the USA.

Video first seen on Thisthatamazing.

So thanks to Obama’s failure to tell the truth and place the blame where it belongs, all he’s accomplished is to stoke the political fires and show how ineffective he is as a leader. As for any meaningful response, especially one that goes after the enemies who perpetrated this act of war, we’ll have to wait for the next president to come along.

Of course, that depends on who the next president will be. Hillary is in the same camp as Obama in a number of things, most specifically her feelings towards Muslims. She has made plenty of statements showing that she supports them over US citizens. And we can’t forget that Hillary, like Obama, was indicted in Egypt for their support of the Muslim Brotherhood, a known Muslim extremist organization. She seems also responsible for allowing our ambassador to be killed in Baghdad, while not raising a finger in his defense. Rather, she made a premeditated attack on a YouTube video and its maker.

So we can expect Hillary’s reaction to these attacks to be the same as Obama’s, ignoring them for what they are, and calling for greater and more restrictive gun control. After all, the more they can do to take the guns away from the people, the better they can control the people.

What Makes the Difference?

But there may be something even more sinister in wanting to take the guns away from honest citizens. Could it be that Obama, Clinton and others are actually in cahoots with the Muslim terrorists? Could their efforts to disarm the public actually be in preparation for an all-out Muslim invasion? Could they actually be so sold out to the Muslims, that they are willing to work to create an open field for them, where Muslims would have no opposition to their killing sprees?

Apparently there were no armed citizens in that bar, who could defend themselves and stop the gunman from killing others. The left will try to use that, unrealistically I might add, to show how useless a good guy with a gun is. But in doing so, they will have to ignore the work of the Orlando police, good guys with guns, who ultimately brought the killer down.

It is clear that Obama, Clinton and their cabal have missed the import of this incident, along with that of San Bernardino, California. These are clear acts of war, propagated by a terrorist organization which is calling itself a country, the Islamic State. They have declared war on us and invaded our country; and yet our political leadership is doing nothing in response. Where is the outcry from Washington? Where is the national call to arms? Where is the condemnation of the criminal government that stands behind this incident?

This was not “homegrown terrorism” as the left would have us believe. The shooter was a Muslim who declared his ties to ISIS. His parents were immigrants from Afghanistan, a Muslim country; and even though they condemn the killing their son wrought, they are the ones who brought him up in the Muslim faith. Yes, he was born on American soil, but his act of terrorism had nothing to do with that. It was an act of Islamist outrage that people would live differently than the way that they demand.

As a conservative and a Christian, I cannot and will not condone homosexuality. But as a former member of our military, I have stood to protect the homosexual way of life. How they choose to live is their decision, and as long as they do not hurt anyone else in the process, it is their right.

I imagine I could find many other conservatives, Christians and service members who would agree with me on that. But none of us would walk into a gay bar and open fire. Yet Omar Mateen felt he had the right to do so, just because he was offended by two gay men kissing. Hey, I don’t like seeing men kiss each other either, but that’s their business. My appropriate response is to look away.

War has been declared on us by Islam in general. The Islamic State itself has declared war on us. Oh, they blame it on the United States and Obama’s drone war, but that’s mere smoke and mirrors. They declared war on us, killing Americans and our allies, long before we fired our first shot. Have we forgotten 9/11?

President Bush was right to declare the War on Terror in the wake of 9/11. Regardless of the effectiveness of his actions and the accuracy of his information in attacking Iraq, he did so in the propagation of that war. He recognized the enemy and went after it; fighting the war on enemy ground, rather than giving them the opening to continue attacking us here at home. The result? There were no more terrorist attacks on American soil during the rest of his presidency.

Yet today we mourn the seventh such attack on American soil, since Obama took office. These attacks are accelerating. With the frequency between them shortening. Why? Because we have made no effective response. Our enemy only understands strength; yet we have shown them nothing but weakness.

Say what you want about Donald Trump, he has promised to do something about Muslim extremism in this country. While I don’t particularly like him as a presidential candidate, I feel confident that he won’t just sit by and condemn guns, when it is Muslim killers who need to be condemned. He may not yet have the knowledge of how he will do that, but it is clear that he has no intention of allowing these attacks to continue unanswered.

Should Trump win the election, I feel confident that one of his first actions will be to demand that the military and perhaps the Department of Homeland Security, provide him with real plans for dealing with ISIS. It may not happen the first day, or even the first week, but the order will go out.

It is time to stop Islam in its tracks. They can have their religion and they can worship their god. But they have no right to subjugate the world and they have no right to attack American soil. It is time for a strong response and we need a strong leader, who can provide that response. Anything less will lead to the continued shedding of American lives.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.




Youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BQGMzmzcd0 

2 total views, 2 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Tuberculosis is reemerging as a major health threat in the US

Click here to view the original post.

Following up to my previous articles on antibiotic resistant bacteria, Tuberculosis (TB) has reemerged as one of the major antibiotic resistant disease threats to the public.  TB in particular is

D-Day, June 6, 1944. What Has 72 Years Done To Us?

Click here to view the original post.

Survivopedia d-day

Every year, some of us remember the importance of June the 6th. That’s the day, 72 years ago, that 73,000 of America’s young men stormed Normandy, France, making up almost half of the 156,000 troops which landed on French soil, to take back Europe from NAZI Germany.

As a country, we lost 2,500 young men that day, casualties of the largest amphibious invasion in history. But those 2,500 soldiers weren’t simply forgotten; they represented each and every American alive on that day.

Although they were fighting to free Europe of the clutches of the tyrannical NAZI regime, they were also fighting for something much more precious to us as Americans… they were fighting for freedom.

Historians have dubbed that generation with the moniker “The Greatest Generation.” When you look at what they accomplished and how the country pulled together to accomplish it, that’s not too surprising.

There has been no other time in our history, when the United States pulled together for a single purpose, like it did in World War II. You really can’t even say that about the Revolutionary War, as there were many who were opposed to it.

But while that war brought our country to new heights of patriotism and accomplishment, it also started us on the road to decline and moral decay. Sadly, one of the things that always accompanies war is a lowering of moral standards. That was no different in the time of the Greatest Generation.

The current moral decline of the United States of America actually started in that time. While it may seem as if the Americans of that day were bigger than life, they felt an urgency caused by the realization that they might die any day. This urgency was responded to by drinking, smoking and extra-marital sex. Many lived for the day, because they weren’t sure if the next day, they would die.

Hollywood had their part in that as well; as always, showing the glamorous side of war. Part of that was including a love interest in all those war movies. Being Hollywood, love became sex; and while they didn’t show it as clearly back then, as they do today; everyone knew how to read the signs.

But even amongst the debauchery of the day, there was much nobility and bravery. Countless people dug down deep within themselves and found the strength to do what they had to do; both overseas fighting the war and here at home keeping the home fires burning. The courage displayed by that generation in facing adversary was something we could all learn from.

Video first seen on Net Stoopid.

Sadly, there seems to be little of that courage left coursing through America’s blood. Our young people don’t have the courage to face someone who is speaking something they don’t like, let alone the bullets of an enemy. Instead, they cry for “safe spaces” where they can be assured that nobody will say anything that might cause them any emotional turmoil. Apparently, forcing someone to think about their beliefs and justify them is too much of an emotional strain for today’s youth.

As a country, we have taken some huge steps backwards since that day, all in the name of “progress.”

Whereas they fought for freedom in that time, today people fight for something free. Where they fought for principle, today people fight for entitlements.

Rather than blacks and whites coming together to defeat a common enemy, today’s blacks are being told that whites are their common enemy and that they should therefore kill the whites.

World War II brought this country together in a way that has never happened before or since. The common goal of defeating the Axis powers gave us national purpose.

Later, national purpose was invested in things like putting a man on the moon and standing strong against the aggression of the Soviet Union. Yet today, we have lost our national purpose. No longer are we pulling together, but rather we are being pulled apart.

I remember asking myself the question, shortly before 9-11, whether the United States could ever pull together, like we did in World War II, to accomplish such a major goal once again. Then, on that fateful day, the Twin Towers came down and the nation pulled together in support of New York City and the War Against Terror.

But sadly, that unity has not lasted; it has fallen apart once again.

In the last seven years, we’ve seen more division in this country than has existed anytime since the Civil War. No longer is the national attention focused on defeating the radical Muslim terrorist enemy, but instead our political leadership is inviting them in to take up residence. We have blacks against whites, poor against rich, women against men and the LGBT community against those who are straight.

Is it fair to blame all this on Barack Obama? Yes, I would have to say it is. While he has not been the only one causing division, he has definitely been the most influential. He has been the most divisive president in the history of the United States, bringing to the forefront each and every phony war he could, to turn one group of Americans against another and destroy what unity we had.

He has also been instrumental in turning the tables on the War on Terror. Where we were actively pursuing radical Muslim terrorism under President Bush, Obama has all but outlawed the use of that term. He refuses to acknowledge that the possibility of Muslim terrorism exists and instead talks about right-wing terrorism, something that is totally fabricated in his mind.

Apparently in Obama’s world view, patriots who are willing to defend their country are more dangerous than radicals who are trying to destroy countries.

Liberalism has destroyed the moral fiber of this country, and they are now on the road to destroying the country itself. The list of things that liberals have demanded of our society, all in the name of some twisted idea of “fairness” could ultimately be out undoing. It is certain that their demands have made life more dangerous for many, as they push to further their agenda.

There is something inherently wrong about causing the majority of society to suffer for a minority. That is especially true when the minority is extremely small and mentally imbalanced.

Yet apparently the only way that the political left can find what they consider to be fair, is to make people suffer. They must make the majority suffer, so that the minority can have what they want; even if what they want is destructive to society as a whole.

Where is Our Country Going?

Could we once again pull together and become the great nation that we once were? Is it possible for another “Greatest Generation” to rise up and set this nation back on track? Can we throw off oppression as we once did and set our course once again by the Constitution?

We are living in a time which demands greatness. It demands people who will stand against injustice committed in the name of fairness. Who will be willing to be ridiculed by the PC police, in order to make a difference. People who care more about integrity, than they care about popularity. Those who have the moral fiber to shout from the rooftops that “This is wrong” and get others to see things as they do.

Our country’s history is filled with such people. The Revolutionary war was fought because of such people. We stormed the Normandy Beaches because of people of like character. Together, we declared “Better dead than red” against the rise of the Soviet Union. We, or rather, those who came before us had that moral fiber; it’s time that we found ours.

Conservatives are still the majority in this country, outnumbering liberals by 3 to 2. But you would never know it by looking at what’s going on in the media or the public square. It is the voice of the liberals that is being heard, not the voice of the “silent majority.”  It is time for that to change.

Unless we rise up and make our voice be heard in the halls of power and the public places across this land, we may soon find that we no longer have a voice. As in Orwell’s 1984, the voice of those who stand against a tyrannical system may very well be silenced.

I don’t know about you, but I won’t go down quietly. The Founding Fathers swore their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to this country; can we do any less? Are we willing to lay down our lives, or only to lay down? Are we willing to give up what fortunes we have, or only a mere pittance? Do we even care about our honor anymore?

If this country is  ever going to be great again, if it is ever going to have another Greatest Generation, it will be because people say “enough is enough” and take a stand.

It won’t start in Washington, but in the grass roots. But the fire in those grass roots will spread and it will eventually get to Washington, if we but fan the flame.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.




7 total views, 7 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

3 Gun Parts You Better Stockpile Before November

Click here to view the original post.
3 Gun Parts You Better Stockpile Before November

Image source: SurplusAmmo.com


We all remember the buying panic that left shelves empty after Sandy Hook and President Obama’s subsequent call for increased gun control. In fact, ever since Obama took office, we’ve seen so many of these panics that we’ve become somewhat resigned to scarcity every couple of years.

This experience has gun owners nervously looking at the 2016 presidential election and the possibility of what will happen if Hillary Clinton wins in November.

If you don’t have an AR-15, then now is the best time to buy or build one. And if you already have one or two, but like to keep spares — or want to be sure you can build in the future – then there are three key parts you should purchase now.

Lower receivers can literally be printed on 3-D printers, and trigger groups are cheap and easy to make. In fact, there are several parts that a smart shopper can be assured of supply. Yet there are three specific parts that are expensive, complex and difficult to make at home — and you need to get these now while you can.

Item No. 1: Bolt Carrier Groups

Arguably the most complex assembly in the entire gun, it is also the set of parts that sees the most stress and strain. You can print a lower out of plastic and have it work surprisingly well, but few people are equipped to machine a BCG, and then shot peen the surface to work harden it, perform a magnetic particle inspection for flaws, and then give it a final surface treatment.

Do You Know The Best Way To Hide Your Guns?
Right now, a basic mil spec BCG can be had for less than $100. (They were going for more than $250 after Sandy Hook.) Buy ‘em cheap and stack ‘em deep.

Item No. 2: Upper Receivers

A skilled home machinist could make these in a garage, but unlike lowers which can be made with jigs and kits, upper receivers are not so heavily supported in the home builder market. And for good reason; they are not a regulated part and require no paperwork to purchase, but they are also very hard to import. Shop around; deals can be had on uppers, especially if you aren’t picky about forward assists and dust covers. Two or three upper receivers put aside now is two or three ARs you can put together in the future.

Item No. 3: Barrels

Image source: WhiteOakArmament.com

Image source: WhiteOakArmament.com

Another item few can really make at home. These are labor- and time-intensive parts to build, and are often the most expensive single part of any AR build. Because of the time to make them, these are parts that dry up fast — with long waiting lists. Quality barrels can be had at reasonable prices. I’d grab a few M4 profile barrels in 1:7 or 1:9 twist, ideally with a 5.56 or .223 Wylde chamber while you still can. If you are feeling up to it, .300 Blackout, 7.62×39 and perhaps a long heavy barrel is in order. Either way, a few barrels on hand now is security against an increasingly dark future. This is one place where a bit of research and decision making comes in handy now; 5.56 barrels come in several twist rates, and just mentioning them sets off an incredible storm of debate. If you plan to shoot regular ball ammo, then 1:7 or 1:9 for general use is just fine. But if you plan for specialized ammo, or have strong and firm opinions on the matter, then buy the twist rate most suitable for your beliefs or ammo choice. That way you won’t spend the next panic — or even worse, an outright ban — hating yourself for having the “wrong” barrel.

Plan for the Worst

One can argue that there are plenty of AR parts worth stockpiling, or better still, the entire gun. Certainly a powerful argument could be made for adding complete or 80 percent lowers to this list, and I certainly would, but even during panics, 80 percent units can generally be had. Barrels, bolt carrier groups and upper receivers are three of the most expensive and complex parts of an AR, and manufacturers are unlikely to stock excessive inventory beyond projected needs.

America is facing dark and uncertain times, where our civil liberties and very way of life hangs in the balance. We still enjoy relative security and access to many items that gun grabbers want to take away from us. Smart purchases now could mean the difference between having a functional rifle and being at the mercy of an oppressive administration.

Do you agree? Disagree? Share your thoughts in the section below: 

There’s A Trick To Navigating Federal And State Gun Regulations. Read More Here.

Memorial Day Weekend Message: How to truly help veterans according to veterans

Click here to view the original post.

I hit my saturation point with the Memorial Day weekend lip service and memorials to those who died “fighting for our freedoms.”  We can argue about previous generations, but the

How Is This Separation Of Church And State?

Click here to view the original post.

Survivopedia church versus state

The left loves to use the term, “separation of church and state” against Christians.

I never see them using it against any other group, but when it comes to Christians, especially Christians having any input into the government or using their faith to guide their decisions, they’re quick to trot out that phrase.

It doesn’t matter to the liberals that they are misusing the concept of separation of church and state, or even that the phrase doesn’t exist in the Constitution. Few of them have bothered to read the constitution anyway, although they’ll all swear that it’s in there. But in fact, the phrase “separation of church and state” was originally written by Thomas Jefferson and is found in a letter that is part of the Feudalist Papers.

What the Constitution says, as part of the First Amendment, is “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” It looks to me like that doesn’t say anything about Christians not having any say in government or anyone being restricted in using the principles of their faith to make decisions in regards to our nation’s government. If anything, it says the opposite.

Nevertheless, liberals have long used the phrase “separation of church and state” as a lever to manipulate the courts and have laws enacted in their favor; most specifically, the favor of atheists. It is never used in regard to other religions, most especially the Muslim religion, which apparently has a free ticket for whatever they want to commit.

Like anything else in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, there are a number of different ways in which that phrase from the First Amendment can be taken. The traditional meaning is that there can’t be a state-sponsored religion. In addition, that has been the basis for churches having a tax-free status.

Time and time again, atheists have taken government organs to court, for using tax money in some perceived support of religion. Notable examples include the case about the Ten Commandments being in the Supreme Court’s chambers and cases about churches using government-owned facilities for their weekly services. More recently, Obama has used it to prevent military chaplains from ministering to the troops who are supposed to be under their care.

One of the key points that the left uses is that tax dollars should not benefit any religion. Of course, what they mean by that is that tax dollars shouldn’t benefit Christianity. However, those same tax dollars can benefit any of their pet beliefs, regardless of whether they try and hide them as science or whether they are blatant religious observation.

About Common Core Curriculum and Islam

Ever since Obama was elected the first time, he’s been promoting Islam from the pulpit of the presidency. This has accelerated during his second term, with him blatantly supporting Islam and attacking Christianity every chance he gets. A prime example of this is the Common Core Curriculum.

Anyone who believes that Common Core is about educating our children in academics has obviously been drinking too much of Obama’s cool-aid. It would be charitable to say that Common Core is mediocre in presenting basic academic subjects and anyone who has seen any of the rants about Common Core mathematics on the Internet will understand why I say that’s charitable.

But while Common Core is doing such a poor job of educating our kids in the academic subjects they need, it is doing a great job in indoctrinating them in liberal ideology. The authors (and I use that term very loosely) of it have spun everything from the alphabet to history to match the liberal talking points.

One of the major ways they’ve done this is to teach our children about Islam. That’s right, the same people who are saying that it’s against the Constitution to pray in school or even mention the word “God” are urging our children to dress in hijabi and obey to Allah, as part of their “cultural awareness” education.

Clearly, the Obama administration is breaking the First Amendment and trying to use the power of the federal government to further a religion, specifically the religion of Islam. But it goes much farther than our classrooms. The Obama Administration, specifically his State Department, is actively funding the religion of Islam, overseas.

In a recent investigative report, it was revealed that Obama’s State Department has given a whopping 770 million dollars to Muslim countries, specifically for the purpose of repairing mosques. The idea is hidden as a “good-will effort” towards those countries, with the idea of making them more favorably disposed to the U.S.A.

American Church

Of course, that’s assuming that it’s possible to make them more favorably disposed towards us, something which I seriously doubt. You see, even from long before Islam arrived on the scene, part of the Middle Eastern culture has been that they respect strength, and not much else. Much like with the American Indians, strength is honored because of the difficulty of their lives. A man who is not strong is not worth anything, because he cannot survive.

So, when we give them money to placate them, we show ourselves weak, not strong. In other words, Obama’s gifts are having the exact opposite effect of his stated intentions. But of course, his stated intentions and his real intentions probably have nothing to do with each other.

Considering Obama’s history of lying, and his hatred for the United States, I seriously doubt that he is actually trying to make the United States look good to Muslims. Besides, they are bent on world conquest, hating the United States as “the Great Satan” because we are stronger than they are and stand in the way of their conquest.

The Real Story

In reality, what Obama is doing is supporting Islam as a religion. Of course, to do that, you have to support it as a political entity as well.

In my opinion, considering the high number of mosques which are controlled by radical Imams and how Islam is becoming more radicalized every day, by supporting Islam, Obama is also supporting radical Islamic terrorist organizations. Quite possibly, some of that $770 million went directly into the coffers of terrorist organizations.

If so, that’s clearly treason, aiding and abetting the enemy. But even if that isn’t happening, the mere fact of paying money to restore mosques is a clear breach of the Constitution. Why is nobody screaming about this and why is he not being charged with this crime?

The Quran is clear on a number of issues, including loyalty and government. According to it, Muslims may have only one loyalty, to Muhammad and to the Quran. They are not allowed to submit to any other authority, whether spiritual or secular. In other words, radical Muslims do not accept out laws or submit to them, even if they live here in our country. Those radicals who are here, just as those in Europe, are bent on conquest, working to fulfill their prophet’s plan and create a worldwide Islamic caliphate. They are enemies of the United States.

Regardless of what any “moderate” Muslims say, that’s in the Quran. It can’t be eliminated and it can’t just be forgotten. So, there really is no way of saying that providing support to Islam is not providing support to our enemies.

We did not make them our enemies, they chose that of their own free will. Bribing them, by rebuilding their mosques won’t change that. In their minds, their hate is based upon their holy book, so they must maintain it. Failure to do so would be sin in their minds; a sin which they would end up dying for.

So Why Would They Change?

No, rebuilding mosques isn’t an answer and if Obama and Kerry truly think it is, they don’t understand Islam. They are either listening to a lie or they are trying to sell one; but either way, there is a lie that is being propagated. Just like there is the lie about Islam being a religion of peace. Three-quarters of a billion dollars isn’t going to change that.

As best I know, our government has never used tax dollars to rebuilt a church, cathedral or synagogue. To do so would be a clear violation of constitutional principles. So, if that’s the case, why should Obama get away with using tax dollars to rebuild a mosque? I would not be in agreement with the government paying for the restoration of a church, even though I am a Christian. Why should I accept our government paying to restore not only one mosque, but many.

As a Constitutional American, I take the stand that our government should not be supporting any religion, but should treat all of them equally, keeping their hands off. That fits the wording and intent of the Founding Fathers, when they drafted the Constitution. Nothing else is acceptable.

If you want to know how the war on religion could affect you and your family and ways to start preparing and protecting them NOW, click on the banner below.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.







7,458 total views, 263 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 38    Average: 3.3/5]

Is The End Of Obama’s Reign Truly In Sight?

Click here to view the original post.

Survivopedia Obama s reignEver since Obama took his oath of office and started showing his true colors, a process which can be measured in hours, his presidency has been called “imperial.” This is not to say that he acts like an emperor in any positive way, but that he acts like his word is law, legislating with executive actions and executive orders.

This use of executive orders to circumvent Congress didn’t actually start with Obama; it has been creeping into our government for a number of years.

Many have said that Bush used executive orders in that way to some extent, but it’s truly come to fruition in Obama’s years in office. Obama has made Congress about as useless as an appendix on a colon, with his vetoing of everything Congress does, demanding that they do what he wants, and writing executive orders to circumvent them whenever they don’t do what he wants.

If there is anything that makes Obama dangerous to the country, it’s his firm conviction that everything he does is right. That comes out of his narcissism, but it’s actually a rather common trait for liberals. In their minds, they are smarter than anyone else and everything they do is brilliant.

Of course, as we all know, not everything that liberals do is brilliant and in fact it usually doesn’t work. But that doesn’t change things in their minds. Any liberal initiative that doesn’t work is because conservatives get in the way and block them from doing what they want to. All they need to do is more of the same, and it will work.

Just look at the war on poverty. If we conservatives hadn’t gotten in the way, it would have worked. After all, they have only been able to spend 22 trillion dollars on the poor in the last 50 years, a mere drop in the bucket.

If we had let them do what they wanted and taken the wealth of the rich away from them to give to the poor, then the income gap wouldn’t be anywhere near as big as it is now. There wouldn’t be any less poor people, but there wouldn’t be any rich people to compare them to.

Is This the End?

But let me get back on track here. I was talking about Obama and his scheduled departure from the White House.

I’ve written before about the risk of him declaring martial law, so that he could stay in office. As the days of his reign wind down, I’d have to say that the risk of that happening increases all the time. All it would take is the elections going in a way that he doesn’t like, such as Trump winning, and he’d get his friends in #Black Lives Matter or in the Muslim Brotherhood to stir up trouble, so that he could declare martial law.

This makes it look like there might not be any way of winning this November’s election. Either Hillary wins and we have the equivalent of Obama’s third term in office, or Trump wins and Obama creates his excuse to declare martial law. It doesn’t look promising.

Obama has gone on record, stating that he feels that Trump is not qualified to be president. I find that rather humorous, considering that Obama himself didn’t have very good qualifications for the job, when he was voted in. Granted, he was a politician before running for the presidency, but he hadn’t even completed one full term in the Senate. So, he went from community organizer (read “community rabble-rouser”) to president, with a two-year stint in the Senate in-between.

While I’ve never been a Trump fan, there’s no way that Obama is qualified to rate Trump’s ability to fill the office. I’m sure that the only qualifications that Obama cares about are how well his successor will carry on his legacy. Since Trump is conservative on at least some issues, that disqualifies him in Obama’s book.

But I’ll tell you this, Trump is bound to be better for the country than Hillary, especially for the country’s economy. At least he isn’t a criminal who used their time in office to sell influence to the highest bidder. Nor does he have a personal slush fund, disguised as a charitable foundation. He also cares about our veterans and isn’t likely to say things like “What does it matter” when they get killed, along with one of our ambassadors.

But even if Obama doesn’t declare martial law, it seems clear now that he’s not going to go away. He has publicly stated and it has been confirmed by Valerie Jarrett, that the Obama family intends to stay in Washington, DC, rather than return to their home town of Chicago.

Considering who Obama is and his tendency towards narcissism, that’s disconcerting in and of itself. I really can’t imagine Obama keeping quiet when Trump does something he doesn’t like, as Bush has done so well these last eight years. If anything, Obama will get more media interviews, giving him the opportunity to badmouth Trump and his presidency, than Trump will have.

Life after Leaving Presidency. But Not Really Leaving…

Traditionally, former presidents fade into the woodwork, allowing the new president to do their job, without interference. I can’t see Obama doing that. He is so sure that he is one of the greatest presidents this country has ever had, constantly telling everyone that in his speeches, that I can’t see him keeping quiet. I especially can’t see him keeping out of the media spotlight, if he doesn’t agree with some conservative policy.

There are two more aspects of this that bother me. The first is what he’ll do if Hillary wins the election. Is he setting himself up to be puppet-master? While I am fairly sure that there are people who are pulling his strings, could he actually think that he’s qualified to pull Hillary’s? Or could he have been chosen as puppet master, so that the true puppet masters can remain in the shadows?

It’s clear that Obama thinks that he has a lot of political clout. After all, he throws it around all the time. Could he be so stuck on himself that he doesn’t realize that he will lose that clout the moment he moves out of the White House? Without the ability to do political favors, what clout could he possibly have?

Hillary is not all that brilliant. She didn’t really accomplish anything as a senator, or as the Secretary of State. In fact, I know of nothing she accomplished as Secretary of State, other than to sell her influence and American resources to other countries. Why hasn’t she gone to jail for selling our uranium to the Russians?

Perhaps Hillary is looking forward to Obama’s “advice and guidance” when she is president. That wouldn’t surprise me. But I’ll have to say that she’ll likely get tired of it rather quickly, and tell Obama to go back home. The only thing that will accomplish is cause him to go on television and attack her.

The other thing that concerns me about Obama staying in Washington is something I saw happening as soon as he won the 2008 election. Once he had secured the presidency of the United States of America, he started campaigning to be president of the world. Yes, as a true one-worlder, he apparently believes that he is going to be the first world ruler, once the world is consolidated under United Nations rule.

This is part of why Obama has pushed so strongly against Second Amendment rights. Until the United Nations ban on private ownership of firearms can be implemented here in the U.S., a true one-world government can’t be enforced. Too many Americans are against that and willing to take up arms to defend our country’s sovereignty.

I’ve never believed Obama’s stated reason for wanting to stay in Washington. While most parents would take their children’s schooling into account on a job move, that wouldn’t be their only reason for staying or moving. But he is way too self-centered to make a decision based on his kids. I think he wants to stay in Washington to stay close to the seat of power, nothing more. Talking about his kids just gives him a way to camouflage his true intent.

So, as much as I’m looking forward to seeing the Obama family move out of government housing at 1600 Pennsylvania, I don’t think that’s going to be the last of him. He’s still a relatively young man, much too young to retire. Nor does he have the disposition to fade into the background. He’s enjoyed the limelight too long and he won’t give it up easily. With his many friends in the media and his great ability to use the race card, he will make sure that his voice is heard; and sadly, there are plenty who will listen.

So it’s not time to say good-bye to Obama, as much as we’d all like. The community organizer will still be organizing the community. Who knows, maybe he’ll be the next leader of Black Lives Matter, CAIR or some other anti-American group.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.





4 total views, 4 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Obama Just Banned 7 Phrases From Federal Law

Click here to view the original post.
Obama Just Banned 7 Phrases From Federal Law

Image source: Wikipedia


It is now prohibited for the federal government to describe people as American Indians or Spanish-speaking, according to a new law signed by President Obama on May 20

The law, House Resolution (HR) 4238, targets what supporters of the bill called outdated and even offensive terms in laws which were written decades or generations ago, Media Research Center reported.

World’s Smallest Solar Generator … Priced So Low Anyone Can Afford It!

Seven terms are now prohibited: American Indian, Indians, Eskimo, Oriental, Aleut, Spanish speaking and Spanish descent. They have been replaced by phrases such as Native American, Alaska Natives, Asian American, Hispanic and Pacific Islanders.

The law amended the Department of Energy Organization Act, and the Local Public Works Capital Development and Investment Act of 1976, each of which used old terms.

“Many Americans may not be aware that the word ‘Oriental’ is derogatory,” the bill’s sponsor US Rep. Grace Meng (D-New York) said in a press release. “But it is an insulting term that needed to be removed from the books, and I am extremely pleased that my legislation to do that is now the law of the land.”

Tired Of Losing Freedoms — And Looking For Another Country? Read More Here.

White House Planning to Send Weapons to Libya: What could go wrong?

Click here to view the original post.

Our leadership at the White House, CIA, Pentagon, and State Department are unbelievably incompetent, reckless, and corrupt.  I just can’t make this up.  In another example of the absolute rampant

Constitutional Win for Gun Rights in the District of Columbia

Click here to view the original post.

In a rare win, residents of the District of Columbia won a court ruling against the District’s draconian gun laws.  In short, U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon ruled that

“Et tu, Brutus?” Is Your Church An NSA Spy?

Click here to view the original post.

SVP church NSA

I reached a sad point in life a few years ago where not much really shocks me anymore. And being a religious historian provided more knowledge and insight into understanding of the darker side of organized religion than most of the average flock or even their ministry has. So even the resurgence of abominable historic atrocities in the name of God was not that surprising to me either.

But here is something really bothers me to a point where I’m losing sleep over it. This is something way, way off the charts, even when it comes to the questionable idiosyncrasies of religionism, and it’s counterpart, government authoritarianism.

It’s something so woefully evil that everybody, regardless of your particular faith, philosophy, or absence thereof, should take this situation into serious perspective for the future of our survival as a free nation.

Our Police State USA has now reached new devastating heights of radical intrusion into our personal privacy. They are now violating your right to practice your own religion without interference and using our faith based belief systems against us as a tool to eliminate Constitutional Law!

The Church of “Latter Day Totalitarianism”

In some ways I expected this. It’s no conspiracy theory that we already know that the FBI and the DHS has paid informants or actual undercover agents in virtually every significant mosque in the country spying on the membership. Not just the known outspoken radicalized groups, which should be investigated if there is serious evidence for probably cause, but ALL mosques are now infiltrated by arbitrary government surveillance. This is blatantly unconstitutional because not all Muslims are terrorist psychos.

Unfortunately it’s not against the law for police to dress and pose as a priest or minister, doctor, or anyone else to gain the confidence of someone you are trying to gain information from. Apparently even the entrapment laws have been compromised. And FBI and police agencies are now giving specific community watch “classes” on how to carefully spy on your neighbors, friends, and family members!

We know that recently the slope got slicker and all government employees got memos to report any discussions or attitudes of animosity toward the government and even other strange emotional behavior to their supervisors immediately. Now this isn’t specifically limited to radical Islamist behavior or speech, but it includes and emphasizes all anti-government speech!

There’s even a G sponsored public media push to change everybody into a flock of stool pigeons called “if you see something, say something”. Really? Merely seeing something or saying something stupid doesn’t constitute probable cause to have swat teams flash banging your kids into blindness and deafness for the rest of their lives?

You can’t even have a criminal conspiracy charge unless there is a “furtherance of physical contribution” to any plans. But apparently the authorities somehow now think it is?

Emboldened by their apparent success in abridging free thought and speech by the lack of public or organizational outcry, the regime put their balls to the wall and then actually attempted to make climate change deniers susceptible to some kind of criminal punishment!

While it’s bad enough Hillary now exhibits no circumspection in her campaign battle cry to crush the NRA’s attempt to exercise their right to promote firearms, and sinister stump promises to eliminate certain forms of “bad speech” against others–it’s an easy bet as to which bad speech will be number one on her speech shit list—we now have…

The Scourging of Church Privacy

How about the government now violating your right to practice your faith in the sanctity and security of your own church?!

In a NorthJersey.com news article (check the reference list below), a joint FBI/DHS task force is currently actively enlisting teams of clergy, educators, and health care providers to proactively spy on their constituents.

Not just as an atter of normal citizen responsibility as, for instance, to report to police any obvious acts or threats of potential terrorist criminal activity, but to particularly target those persons not committing any criminal acts or threats or intent, but merely exercising their rights to free speech exhibiting associated anti-government/establishment emotional or mental stress. Which includes a whole lot of us, by the way (which also happens to be setting up the foundation for an entirely different future gun confiscation agenda, as well).

These spy operations will be called SRC (Shared Responsibility Community) Teams. Some aggressive police state communities are also now using something called CER (Community Engagement Round Tables) with confidential training on how to spy on folks and some churches are now using facial recognition surveillance equipment, ostensibly for security but nevertheless linking in to the NSA’s massive data collection base.

There’s even an organization registered as Churchix which provides consulting for churches who wish to get involved.


This amounts to nothing less than establishing local organization based snitch teams consisting of your most trusted associates and mentors disguised as “preventive maintenance teams” to report directly to the FBI/DHS.

Essentially bypassing the 5th and 4th amendment due process requirements and making private protected conversation available to the government without your consent to be used against you for their insidious agendas. And as always, speciously justified under the fraudulent notion of ‘public’ safety and ‘extreme crime prevention’.

Between all that and the already well established automatic voluntary information interrogation of your private info to the NSA by Facebook and other social media venues, this is really the absolute end of your privacy rights, folks!

The politically correct equivocation is that this is not just for Islamists, but also for U.S. based “domestic extremist groups”. Translation: Patriot militia groups, sovereign libertarians, “molon labe” types, and eventually, any anti-government verbal dissent or opposition.

Unholy Bedfellows

It is not widely known or universally published that historically the church (and quite a few other sectarian religious organizations) never had qualms about resorting to bribery, intimidation, and even torture and murder to enforce “the laws and will of God”.

Spying to control the flock was a deeply rooted part of the church’s operation. The Jesuits were always the Church’s equivalent to the CIA. And as bad as all this government spying on the flock is, the government couldn’t hold a novena candle to the church’s proprietary tradition of Confession. The church’s “intelligence” system doesn’t need to spend all that tax money on cloud storage of everything you say, buy, read, and do.

The local parish pastor or local church minister knows much more about everybody than the government. Because the sinful information is willingly confessed to the priests by the flock members in little rooms in the back of the church called confessionals after which the now forgiven sinners gratefully even sometimes donate money to the unholy practice.

Local non Catholic Christian churches garnish the flock’s trust withwitnessing at gatherings after sermons, and then private office counsel services by their ministers for the faithful, often with intimate revealing conversations often taking place that should be protected under client privilege law, but really isn’t under these new Police State rules.

Is this latest privacy intrusion by authorities’ the precursor of a nascent Government-Vatican power elite merger? After all, They both share the same gun control agenda?

They’re both going broke, and if economic doom soothsayers are correct the G will have to begin selling off some of the land out west they stole over the years from the ranchers to China for some cash flow, and the church might have to sell some of that gold and art they traded from the Nazis for helping them get new id’s and set up in South American and elsewhere.

So in true totalitarian ingenuity, it’s only logical and deviously clever for the G to take advantage not only of the liberty and privacy weakness along with the gullibility of organized religion, but also of their highly developed proven control methodology over their flocks.

Why NOT initiate a community Police State program where your own church clergy are working with and for the Government to spy on your personal life? Totalitarianism would work even better as a “religionist police state”. The best of both totalitarian worlds. And this shameless immoral, unethical, and unconstitutional treason on both sides… is what Jesus died for?

The Kiss of “Jude-Ass”

My immediate reaction was “wait just one Holy Cow gall dang minute! Isn’t this direct recruitment of the church as a government intelligence subcontractor a blatant violation of the 1st Amendment Separation Clause? Isn’t setting up any kind of government relationship to further government control over the people determined in some Constitutional case law as a direct assault on the 1st Amendment separation law?”

So many times I’ve said it before but…Where’s ACLU on THIS?! Maybe they’re too busy with the ‘Big Stinky Potty’ debate, Gay marriage, or some such other bullshit nonsense?

And, why is there such a noticeable suspicious absence of concern from the church and Christian leadership on this? Or more importantly, where’s the outrage and marching, and condemnation by the rank and file Christian community on this? What is this strange “church mouse” silence in the holy vestibules of our houses of prayer?

Maybe they are too afraid of losing the Big Daddy G knee bounce of not having to pay church property taxes freebie? Or losing that non-profit corp but big business money making tax break status they get for being a church?

Do they have more fear of the regime, than they have fear of God? Could it be the Lord’s way of teaching us a lesson or a warning to let us know that we should never drink the poisonous potion of Government and Faith based religions working together against the people? Mixing politics and spiritualism can ultimately destroy us all, like it did all throughout history? Which is why the Founder’s created the 1st Amendment.

Is this a sign from God? A manifestation of a foretold prophesy of hell fire and brimstone punishment for trying to making deals with the devil and having sinful dreams of theocratic power lust?

guns and god

Let the Good Old End Times Begin!

Lately I’m finding myself glancing more up at the heavens.

I’m watching for Jesus to gloriously come gliding down from the sky through the chem-trails, with His Malificent, I mean Magnificent winged angels behind him slinging their AR-15’s…Locked and loaded.

But as a refugee from a Seminary and person of the cloth myself, I had a spiritual dream that I better get up off my potato chip ass, and start prepping for his second coming– because now I’m certain that the end is near — by calling my representative and asking him about this.

No, wait, by demanding that he finds out some answers to the Constitutional validity of all this, and then email the ACLU and some others. And then go out and pick up a couple thousand more rounds.

Because like everyone else, maybe Christians are simply too busy caught up with wasting valuable time on their obsessive compulsive anti-LGBT crusade side of the toilet seat holy wars? And, of course, THAT’s exactly what the G likes to see instead of concentrating on more important things in life like the destruction of their faith from within.

And they wonder why overall church interest is in decline these days, especially with young people?

Maybe the Pope should skip the social media twitter twatting for sheep recruiting and get right to the bare essentials and do a Holy Smokin’ twerkin’ rock video with Miley? Call it “The Last Crucifixion”… of our liberties!


This article has been written by Mahatma Muhjesbude for Survivopedia.




2 total views, 2 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

‘He’s Not A King’ – Texas Governor Will Fight Obama Transgender/School Bathroom Edict

Click here to view the original post.
‘He’s Not King’ – Texas Governor Will Fight Obama Transgender Bathroom Edict

Image source: White House


The Obama administration issued a landmark directive Friday that will force the nation’s public schools and colleges to allow transgender students to use whichever restroom and locker room they wish – a move that critics say is an unprecedented infringement upon privacy and local control.

The move impacts all schools that receive federal funding — including kindergarten grades — and threatens them with loss of funds if they fail to act accordingly.

The letter does not have the force of law, but because of its ties to public funding, most schools likely will fall in line.

The letter from officials within the Departments of Justice and Education will thrust an issue that had been mostly confined to a few cities and states into all 50 states, and potentially could become an election issue.

Christian Heroes For Christian Kids: These Amazing Stories Are Putting God Back Into History!

The departments say that Title IX, which was passed in 1972 and prohibits sexual discrimination, also allows boys and girls to use whichever restroom they wish.

“A school may not require transgender students to use facilities inconsistent with their gender identity or to use individual-user facilities when other students are not required to do so,” the letter reads.

Additionally, a school’s obligation “to ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of sex requires schools to provide transgender students equal access to educational programs and activities even in circumstances in which other students, parents, or community members raise objections or concerns,” the letter states. “As is consistently recognized in civil rights cases, the desire to accommodate others’ discomfort cannot justify a policy that singles out and disadvantages a particular class of students.”

But critics in more conservative parts of the country said the Obama administration is wrong.

“I announced today that Texas is fighting this,” Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, wrote on Twitter. “Obama can’t rewrite the Civil Rights Act. He’s not a King.”

Senator Ben Sasse, a Republican from Nebraska, tweeted, “Is there any issue the Obama Administration believes can be left to state and local government?”

Do you agree or disagree with the Obama administration? Share your thoughts in the section below:

Tired Of Losing Freedoms — And Looking For Another Country? Read More Here.

Uber Update: Uber Confirmed to be providing your private travel data to the government

Click here to view the original post.

Last year I wrote a piece entitled “Why the government elite love Uber: Your travel is now a searchable public record.”  Read it here:  http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/2015/08/13/why-the-government-elite-love-uber-your-travel-is-now-a-searchable-public-record/  In it, I warned that

Drafting Women To The Army?

Click here to view the original post.

Women Army BIG_1

Trigger warning: If any liberals happen to stumble in here and read this, I warn you, you will be offended and call me every name in the book. I’m coming against your sacred cows here and you’ll be convinced that I’m a male chauvinist pig and a Neanderthal to boot.

Under President Obama, the US military has change drastically. Originally established to protect our country from foreign enemies, the current liberal administration has been working overtime to change the role of the five branches of the military from war fighting and defense, to becoming a combination social experiment and an official Peace Corps.

Of course, this goes hand-in-hand with Obama’s lack of guts, at least when it comes to dealing with our enemies. He seems to have plenty of moxie when it comes to berating his political enemies and the American public in general.

But when it comes to confronting our enemies, his most common move is to bow down to them. Then he comes back home and brags about the “great victory” he’s had.

But we’re not talking about Obama’s lack of guts today, we’re talking about what he’s doing to the military. Specifically, what he’s doing about making it a social experiment.

It seems that every liberal idea is being pushed on our military forces, at the same time that they are being denied the funds and resources they need to train for and complete their basic mission of protecting the country.

A large part of this has been in forcing the military to give preference to illegal aliens, Muslims and transgenders.

Another group which has gained a huge favorable standing in the military is women. Since the time of World War II, the military has slowly been allowing women a larger and larger role in the military, kicking and screaming in protest all the way. Recently, the last barrier was breached by women’s libbers, in the name of equality. Now, women are allowed to occupy all military positions, including all combat positions.

While that may be the law and it may be military regulation, I’m not convinced that it’s a good idea. There are two basic problems with women in a the military in general and combat units in particular.

The first is the risk of abuse for the women themselves. Placing women in a traditionally all-male environment opens them up to attack. While I can’t and won’t condone rape, men who are trained for aggressiveness, as is necessary for combat operations, may not treat women the way they deserve to be treated.

Video first seen on Greg Hengler.

The other problem is even more fundamental, if that’s possible. That is that by and large women are not as physically strong as men.

In my opinion, while there are exceptions to this, by and large women don’t have the muscle mass that men do, not even women who are weight lifters.

This affects their ability to complete their role in combat positions. As those positions were created with men in mind, everything about them, from the weight of the backpacks soldiers carry to the size of the weapons they use, is based on male anatomy.

It will take years before the need for equipment designed for women is fully realized, that equipment is developed and it is issued to those who need it.

In the mean time, many physical standards have been lowered to allow women to compete in what has previously been an all-male world. I don’t have the specifics, and they vary by branch of service and military occupational specialty (MOS), but in many cases, the standards by which women are graded is different than those for their male counterparts. Since they have less physical strength, they aren’t being expected to do as much.

While that may sound “fair” and “non-discriminatory” to those on the left, it’s actually giving favoritism to women. But then, most of the measures the left undertakes to make things “fair” actually give preferential treatment to whichever group they say is being discriminated against.

In tests run by the military, units which contain women have failed to perform at the same levels as those which are all-male. What this means is that in the name of being “fair” to women in the military and allowing them into the combat arms, the military is putting every man who serves with those women, as well as the women themselves, at greater risk.

How is that fair?

As per usual in the liberal world, “fair” means taking something away from one person, to give it to another. But in this case, the something that they are taking away could very well be someone’s life. That will never be admitted and it will never be stated in any official report, but if a combat unit is less effective with women in it, then it only stands to reason that said unit will see a greater number of casualties.

What’s Next?

But now, the insanity is going a step further. In a recent vote on an amendment to the Defense Policy Bill, a House Committee narrowly passed a measure to require that women register for the draft.

While there are still a number of steps for this bill to pass, before it becomes law, this step is the first critical one along that road. If the bill that it is connected to continues moving forward successfully, as it must, we may well see women registering for the draft in the near future.

Before I go any farther, let me say that the military draft has not been in operation since 1973. Since then, our country’s military ranks have been filled by volunteers. But registration for the draft was restarted under President Carter’s administration.

So requiring women to register for the draft doesn’t mean that they will be drafted anytime in the near future. But if there’s one thing true about the government, it’s that if anything can be turned to bad, it will be. If the draft is expanded to include women, then there will come a day when women are drafted against their free will, just as men have been in the past.

Regardless of what liberals, feminists and all the other activists who are pushing for this say, there are many basic differences between men and women; more so than what plumbing fixtures we use in the bathroom. Amongst these differences is that women aren’t born with the aggressive violent nature that men are.

When women attack, I guess their first weapon of choice is words, not fists, knives or guns. While women will take up arms in the defense of their children, it is against their nature to take up arms for other means. Yet according to the left, there is no difference between men and women. I guess they need to go back and take high school biology over again. They obviously didn’t pass it the first time.

Yes, there are women who can function in the combat arms. I have no doubt of that. Some women have more of the masculine traits than others do. That’s objective reality. But that doesn’t mean that all women can do so. There are men who have trouble functioning in war, what makes anyone think that women will be able to do so?


Women's-Land-Army-1917While there are many jobs in the military which women can perform quite well, that doesn’t mean that they can perform well in combat; and even if some can, that doesn’t mean that all can.

Nor does a peacetime test truly determine how well women will operate in combat.

Once again, some women would function well, but I seriously doubt that the majority of women would. Drafting women into the military to fill the ranks of the infantry could be disastrous.

I can’t imagine my wife or my daughters in uniform, let alone in a combat unit. While all three know how to shoot and my wife even has a concealed carry license, that doesn’t make her a soldier. If she ever had to draw her gun to protect herself, I’m quite sure she’d be terrified. Hopefully the sight of her with the gun in her hand will cause the bad guys to run off, because I’m not sure she would remember to pull the trigger.

But there’s a much deeper problem with women in the combat arms. Historically, men have gone off to war, while women have kept the home fires burning. There’s a reason for that; that’s because women are more naturally geared towards nurturing children than men are. Men go to war, because they have been given that aggressive/violent nature in order to protect their families.

So if women go off to war, who’s going to take care of the children? Even if they put regulations in place, preventing both parents from being shipped off to war, what’s to say that a national emergency won’t force some future president to countermand that regulation?

Should that happen, we might see a future generation of Americans who largely grow up as orphans. Enough studies have been done, which show the importance of both parents to a child’s upbringing, that we can be sure that such an event would be devastating to the country at large. Even if we were to win such a war, we would lose so much, as to quite possibly negate the effect of that win.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.





5 total views, 5 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

News You Need to Get: April 7, 2016

Click here to view the original post.

I am not a huge fan of the major news consolidators because they tend to mask important content with frivolous content of dubious accuracy and reliability.  Further, you tend to

An Open Letter to the US 10th District Congresswoman Barbara Comstock

Click here to view the original post.

Today’s post directly addresses an email sent out by Congresswoman Barbara Comstock of the US Tenth District to her constituents (pasted at the bottom of this post).  Specifically, it poses

Do The 2016 Elections Even Matter?

Click here to view the original post.


As we get deeper and deeper into the 2016 election season, things are getting to be more and more of a mess.

As so often happens, the campaigning is becoming less and less about which candidate can convince us that they can do the best job of being President and Commander in Chief and more and more about mudslinging.

Trump’s campaign has never really been about policy and issues, but rather about a charismatic candidate that knows how to attract the masses (much like Obama’s). Bernie has been all about making promises to give his constituents more and more freebies. Then there’s Hillary, who has been all about her ego. Cruz has tried to keep on track, but even he has been dragged into the mud, along with everyone else.

But in truth, I’m not sure that any of that matters. I say that because I’m not totally convinced that we’re going to have elections in November. Or if we do, whether the winner will be allowed to take their seat in the Oval Office. In other words, I’m not sure that Obama is going to leave.

There have been hints from the White House that Obama wants to stay. He’s even gone so far as to publicly say that he wants to serve a third term. I’m not talking about his press secretary saying that, but Obama himself. He is so convinced that he is the best president that this nation has ever had, that he probably feels that it is his duty to stay and finish the work of transformation that he’s started.

We have to remember that beneath it all, Obama is a narcissist. He doesn’t care about anyone, except maybe Michelle and the girls. But since we don’t know what goes on behind closed doors, I wouldn’t even count on that. Everything is about him and he likes it that way. Terrorist attacks, wars and other serious issues that should occupy the mind of the Chief Executive all play second fiddle to such grave matters as his golf game and partying with celebrities.

This is made clear in how he deals with these situations. How many times have we seen him leave his golf game for a minute, in order to make some poorly thought out comments on a disastrous situation, and then go right back to swinging his club? If there is any way to show his lack of caring, more clear than that, I don’t know what it is.

Yet while he studiously ignores national security, the plight of Americans out of work, the stagnant economy, and the disaster called Obamacare, he continues lying about how much better off the country is under his rule. Like I said, he’s out of touch with reality, and that’s putting it nicely.

In this, his last legal year as president, Obama has become all about his legacy. More than anything, he wants to make sure that the history books treat him well and show how great a man he thinks he is. His agreement with Iran and his recent trip to Cuba are all about this. He doesn’t care if it does any good. He doesn’t even care if it hurts the country. He just cares that future generations are able to look back and see what a great man he thinks he was and what great things he thinks he did.

This is the man we have in the White House, and have had there for the last seven years. He has ignored his oath of office since day one. Focusing instead on doing what he wants to, furthering his ideology, helping his friends, furthering Islam, causing racial division and destroying this once great land. Then he lies to us, selectively using facts and figures, even if he has to have people change them, to prove that he is doing good for the country.

It must be a fun game to be king; especially if you’re a king who doesn’t care about the people. Caring about the people is boring; it might cause you to take action for their benefit. It’s much more fun to take action on your preconceived ideas and ideology, rather than doing anything that truly makes a difference.

Of course, there are those who think he has made a difference. I even know some of them. Mostly, they are too lazy to work and are thrilled to have a president who is bent on wealth redistribution. After all, that’s better than getting up in the morning and having to go to work.

But it’s this narcissistic thinking that makes Obama so dangerous, especially when it is coupled by his disconnect from reality. He is, quite literally, likely to do anything, even things he says that he can’t do.

Just look at the executive amnesty that he’s given to illegal aliens. Even though he was quoted as having publicly said more than 20 times that he couldn’t do it, he went ahead and did it anyway. He has shown so little regard for the law and become so lawless, that he is likely to do just about anything, regardless of what the law says. He clearly doesn’t care anymore about the law.

All he does is create an appearance of doing things lawfully. That’s what his “executive actions” are supposed to do. He is saying that he has authority to do things that the Constitution doesn’t allow him to have authority over, and covering it by signing a document that supposedly makes it law. Like the documents that he’s signed, giving himself and some of his key cabinet members the right to declare martial law at any time. The Constitution doesn’t allow that; nor does any other law passed by Congress. But as it is right now, he has given himself that authority. Now, why do you think he’s done that?

Here’s my concern. Obama might be crazy, but the line between crazy and genius is often a fine one. Just look at Hitler. He was both crazy and a genius at the same time. Obama might just be the same sort. So it’s quite conceivable that he signed those executive orders because he was expecting to use them. It’s even conceivable that he did so in advance, just to hide them in the smoke and clutter. That way, if they had been challenged, it would be when nothing was happening to concern people.

Video first seen on Western Journalism.

But What Would Happen if He Declared Martial Law?

Supposedly martial law is something the military declares to protect the people, when the government can’t do its job. But in recent times, it has been something that politicians declare, to protect themselves from the people. I can assure you, if Obama declares martial law, it will be to protect himself, even if he tries to make it look like he’s trying to protect the people.

That will be very easy for him to arrange. He’s got the #BlackLivesMatter people at his beck and call, as well as lots of radical Muslims. He could use either group, or both, to social unrest and violence, to the point where it looks like declaring martial law is the only thing he can do to protect the country. Then, with martial law in place, he can suspend the elections or the change in office, or even suspend the Constitution in its entirety, sending Congress home.

It is interesting to note, at least from a purely intellectual side, that martial law has been used as the excuse to put many dictators in power. Once in power, they eliminated all opposition and any of the laws of their country that were an inconvenience to them. Once that was done, they were able to do as they pleased.

Obama has fired or caused to retire over 200 flag officers (admirals and generals), all but decapitating the military. He’s then used the military as his own personal social experiment, destroying combat effectiveness by putting the LGBT agenda first. He’s infiltrated supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood into sensitive posts in the government, especially in the Department of Homeland Security. If it wasn’t so sad, that would sound like a bad joke; putting members of a known terrorist group in charge of the security of the nation.

Many of Obama’s initiatives, especially those done by executive order, have served to weaken our country. As if we didn’t have enough people in need of assistance, he’s flooded the country with illegal aliens and Muslims, putting an incredible strain on both our economy and our national security. It is clear that we are nowhere near as secure today as we were seven years ago. It is also clear that the lawlessness that he has brought into the White House has not served the American people.

Looking at that, along with everything else he’s done, it’s not inconceivable that Obama will declare martial law, just so that he can stay in office, rather than relinquish his office to another. That’s especially true if a Republican or even a right-leaning independent were to win the election to become our country’s next president.

I am quite sure that if Obama does declare martial law, he will believe that he is doing so for the best interest of the country. The problem is, he thinks that he is the best for our country. It doesn’t matter what anybody else thinks, his voice is the only one he can hear.

So I ask you, do the 2016 elections really matter, or is Obama going to do what he wants and stay in office anyway?



This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.




4 total views, 4 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Merrick Garland For Scalia’s Place In Supreme Court?

Click here to view the original post.

big scalia garland

Ever since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court, there’s been a political hot potato being thrown around Washington.

Democrats have seen this as an excellent opportunity to get rid of one of the great defenders of conservatism and replace him with a liberal pick, changing the makeup of the highest court in the land from tilting slightly to the left, to tilting heavily to the right.

Together with the left-leaning media, Obama and liberal lawmakers have been exerting all the pressure they can on the Senate to take quick action on this and fill the vacancy. According to the law, the president nominates new justices, but he cannot appoint them. They must be approved by the senate before they can take office.

This is probably the clearest example of the huge loss that the Democrat party suffered in the 2014 midterm elections.

Before that time, the Democrat-controlled Senate, under Harry Reid’s leadership, was able to do pretty much as they pleased. They even instituted the “nuclear option” reducing the requirement for a supermajority (2/3 of the voting members) for judicial appointments to a simple majority (51%).

But now, Democrats have lost that control, even though they try to pretend that they still have it. Reid and the White House have continually tried to dictate to the Republican-controlled Senate, as well as the lower house of Congress. But this time, they’ve encountered resistance.

Senator Mitch McConnell is the Senate Majority Leader and as such he essentially runs the Senate. He has publicly stated on several occasions that the Senate will not confirm any of Obama’s lame duck Supreme Court nominations, or even have committee hearings, the first part of the process. So far, he’s held his ground and even as late as today has said that he will continue to hold his ground on this issue.

This is not an unprecedented position that McConnell is taking. It’s not uncommon for the Senate to deny confirmation hearings for appointments nominated in the last year of a president’s term in office. But it’s not unheard of to confirm those who have been appointed in the last year either.

The funny thing here (if we can find anything to laugh about in this situation), is that some of the very same Democrat Senators who were standing strong against any appointments during Bush’s last year in office, are the same ones who are coming out the strongest to say that the Republican-controlled Senate has a responsibility to not only have the confirmation hearings promptly, but to out-and-out approve whoever the President nominates.

It’s amazing how the shoe feels differently when it is on the other foot, as well as how short the memory of politicians can be. Clearly, those who are changing their tune are doing so for personal gain, or at least for the benefit of their own political party. They don’t care about what’s right or wrong, or even what’s best for the country. They are married to an ideal and they are pushing for that ideal to go forward, at whatever cost.

Video first seen on CNN.

As far as I’m concerned, Mitch McConnell is correct in waiting until after the elections to hold any confirmation hearings.

But that isn’t without some risk either. Democrats, and their media lapdogs are going to make as much hay out of the delays as they can. Past precedent will be ignored and the Republicans will be made out to be the bad guys… like always.

Of course, there is an easy solution to this; all McConnell has to do is go ahead with the confirmation hearings, putting a safeguard in place. That safeguard is an agreement between the Republicans in the Senate that no nominee from Obama will be acceptable to them.

Were the parties reversed in this situation, that solution would work. The Democrats are well-versed in marching in lockstep, with everyone following the party line. But Republicans don’t do that so well. There are actually many factions within the Republican party, unlike the Democrats. On one hand, that means that Republican lawmakers think for themselves; but on the other hand, it means that it is hard to get agreement, when needed.

A Tough Choice to Make

The candidate that Obama has selected to replace judge Scalia doesn’t make that easy either. Merrick Garland is probably the most conservative liberal that we could ever expect to see Obama nominate. For that matter, we can extend that to Hillary too. As a more centrist liberal, he has received votes from Republicans before, helping to secure the bench he currently holds.

For a liberal, Garland is an almost acceptable choice, from a Republican point of view, and in other years, he would probably receive the nod from the Republican-controlled Senate. But this is the last year of Obama’s presidency, so the Republicans have a legitimate opportunity to wait.

The biggest point against Garland is that he is in favor of gun control. Should he receive approval and join the Supreme Court, we can be sure that liberals will take the opportunity to shower the Supreme Court with gun control cases, trying to pass through the judicial branch, what they couldn’t pass through legislation. While this probably wouldn’t include a full repeal of our Second Amendment rights, it would most likely result in some new limitations.

Considering how hard Obama has tried to limit our rights to own firearms and how he has used every trick his extensive legal team can muster to take that right away from specific groups of people, it seems likely that he would not have nominated Garland, if he had any doubt about the judge’s stance on gun control.

The other big issue that would probably make or break Garland in Obama’s eyes, is his stance on abortion. Surprisingly, nobody seems to know the judge’s opinion on the matter, even after serving as a judge for 19 years. It seems that he never tried a case involving abortion and doesn’t talk about cases that he is not presiding over. Not even his staff knows his stance on abortion.

As for other issues, Garland comes across as a moderate. However, even that may not be all that great, especially when you compare his record to that of Scalia, who was a staunch conservative. So, it’s hard to say which side he would come down on, for any particular issue.

However, there is one other major area where the judge has presided over enough cases to provide clear guidance on his stance; that’s on cases involving environmental regulations. Obama has been using the EPA extensively to push his agenda, in many cases, ignoring existing law or stretching it to the extreme. It appears that Garland would back Obama’s position in this area, rather than giving the subject a fair trial.

All-in-all, this nomination is a definite hot potato. If the Senate doesn’t confirm Garland, Obama will just nominate someone else; probably someone who wouldn’t even be as acceptable as this choice is. However, if they do confirm the nomination, then we end up with a liberal supermajority in the Supreme Court; something that could last for years.

Then there’s the possibility of the Democrats winning in November. It’s quite possible that Obama made the selection he did, knowing that Garland was more palatable to Republicans than just about anyone else he could choose. If they turn him down, they can be sure that anyone Hillary or Bernie will choose, won’t be as moderate, but will in all likely be extremely liberal. Unless they can maintain control of the Senate and win the presidency, Republicans stand a chance of losing, no matter what happens.

Video first seen on David Packman Show.

As I and many others have said before, the country is at a tipping point. We have become more polarized over the years, with the rift between conservatism and liberalism growing wider by the year. A major loss in this election could drive a stake through the heart of conservative politics, effectively putting an end to it.

Oh, it won’t totally go away. There are still too many conservatives in the country to make it go away altogether. But neither party is currently supporting conservative ideals. Should the Democrats win the presidency and take control of the Senate, the conservative voice would become nothing more than just that… a voice.

More than anything, the conservative loss would happen in the Supreme Court. As I’ve previously mentioned, there are several justices on the court, who are old enough that they might die at any time. There’s no way that a Democrat president will nominate a conservative to the court, so unless the Senate is willing to keep rejecting nominee after nominee, leaving seats on the court vacant, they will eventually have to approve someone. Who that someone will be, is the question.

Of course, if the Democrats manage to take control of the Senate back, then they will win. It won’t matter if we have a Republican president or a Democrat one; the Democrats will call the shots. The only true chance that conservatives have is for the Republicans to retain control of both houses of Congress, while voting in a Republican president.

But I’ve got to say, even that isn’t much of a chance for conservatism in our country.

Survivopedia Darkest Days

This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.



3 total views, 3 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Thank you Obamacare: Drug shortages increasing in USA and will only get worse.

Click here to view the original post.

Readers of Last Minute Survival will know that I have discussed on many occasions the long term detrimental impacts of socialized health care. Some of the most serious problems that

Could Clinton Actually Go To Jail?

Click here to view the original post.


Hillary Clinton’s run for the presidency has been plagued by a constant string of scandals. Yet somehow she still manages to stay in the primaries and even to stand out as the Democrat front-runner.

But I guess we shouldn’t be surprised; after all, her husband had so many scandals while he was in office, that he became known as the “Teflon President.” Of course, he’s not the only one to ever win that title, but he was one of them.

But now, Hillary has her own list. Some are shared with her husband, but there are many more which are hers alone, not having anything to do with his presidency. Starting with Benghazi and running through her e-mail scandal, it seems like there’s nothing that Hillary does, which doesn’t rate high on the scandal meter.

The sad thing is that her followers don’t seem to care. Now, I realize that there have been many cases of political groupies who didn’t care about the scandals of their favorite candidate.

But there’s a difference between a scandal based upon not liking a politician’s decision, one that’s based on made-up “evidence” and one that exists because the politician either broke or severely bent the law. The collection that Hilary is building seems to fall into that last category, rather than the first.

While the List Itself Is Extensive, Here Are a Just a Few Highlights:

  • Benghazi – It seems pretty clear that Hillary was complacent in the death of Ambassador Stevens and three others. She didn’t allow them to be rescued and she tried to cover up what really happened.
  • Private e-mail server – Her use of a private, unsecured server for official business, including for highly classified material.
  • Clinton foundation – The Clinton Foundation seems to have been used as a back-door to give bribes to Hillary, for favors while she was the Secretary of State
  • Speaking fees – While not illegal, does anyone really think that Hillary is worth $200,000 for a one hour speech? Sounds like another back-door to getting her favors.
  • Cover-up for Bill’s mistakes – Hillary was apparently the prime mover in threatening and coercing women who accused Bill of rape to not press charges. Quite a woman’s rights advocate there, isn’t she?
  • Selling uranium to Russia – Somehow or other, Hillary used her position as Secretary of State to sell a fifth of our nation’s uranium, a vital natural resource to Russia.
  • Stealing from the White House – While this happened at the end of Bill’s presidency, he was complacent in the crime. Between the two of them, they managed to take almost $200,000 worth of art and other goodies from the White House. They were forced to return it, but anyone else would have gone to jail.

There are many others that could be added to this list, but these are the biggies; and besides, that’s enough anyway. Any one of those should be enough to send her to jail, but up to now, nothing has happened.

Sadly, many of our nation’s top politicians seem to think that they are above the law. While I won’t say that either party has a corner on that market, the Democrats seem to be better at it than anyone else. Somehow, they have claimed the Jesuit argument of the end justifying the means for themselves, and use it as justification for any number of crimes.

That doesn’t just mean a good political result either. I guess if they did it to accomplish something good it would be one thing, but all too often, it’s about building their own wealth. Considering that Hillary was supposedly broke when she and Bill left the White House, doesn’t it seem at least a little suspicious that she’s supposedly worth $40 million today?

But, it seems like it all might finally be catching up with her. The FBI is working on concluding their months long investigation into her use of a private e-mail server while employed as the Secretary of State. That alone was illegal, but what is even worse is that she allowed her private server to be used for the transmission of highly sensitive, classified information.

This really isn’t something where she can claim ignorance and get away with a slap on the hand. As a top-tier executive in the administration, she would be made aware of the rules involving classified information and would have signed some rather frightening documents which listed the penalties to be paid if she broke those laws. So her actions were taken with her eyes open. There may have been stars in her eyes, blinding them, but they were definitely open.

One of the documents which has been uncovered all but told the terrorists how to kill Ambassador Stevens. That makes her directly involved in his murder, and carries the charge of conspiracy to commit murder.

The thing is, nobody knows who read her e-mail. Since it was on an unsecured server, there’s a very good chance that any number of enemies had access to it. Both China and Russia have invested enormous effort into building their cyber-warfare corps; developing the means to break into other countries computer systems, both for the purpose of spying on them and shutting them down.

But Clinton’s server wouldn’t even have required that level of expertise. Since it was an unsecured server, pretty much any hacker could find their way in. It wouldn’t have taken the resources of a nation-state. So, terrorist organizations and others who wish us ill will could have been given access to some of our country’s deepest secrets. U.S. citizens couldn’t know those things, but our enemies could, thanks to the Secretary of State.

What’s Really Behind all This?

The Bilderberg Group has endorsed Hillary for president, something that the liberal news media is studiously ignoring. These are the liberal movers and shakers in the world, the ones who are behind the movement for a one-world order. Could they have ordered her to make her e-mail accessible, in exchange for their support? We will probably never know.

So where are we now? The FBI has stated that they are about finished with their investigation and are going to push for an indictment of Hillary. The big question is whether or not that will mean anything.

The FBI works for the Department of Justice (DOJ), historically one of the most non-partisan branches of our government. But under Obama’s rule, first Eric Holder and now Loretta Lynch have turned it into a political bludgeon to be used against anyone who doesn’t support Obama’s plan to fundamentally change the United States of America.

Rather than trying to capture criminals, the DOJ today is much more involved in trying to imprison white police officers when they are forced to shoot black criminals, attack Christian businesses when they don’t bow down to the LGBT agenda and harass the firearms industry to run them out of business. Now, their latest crusade is apparently going to be to go after climate change deniers and imprison them for the damage they are doing to the environment.

This is the same organization who has to decide to try Hillary Clinton. In testimony before Congress, the Attorney General has already dodged questions about whether she will seek an indictment and go forward to prosecute Hillary. That makes it seem like she doesn’t plan on doing so.

Of course, this is all being orchestrated in the White House. Whether Obama is doing it himself, or his lapdog Valerie Jarrett is doing it, it’s essentially the same thing. Ultimately, it may all be pulled out of the hands of the Department of Justice by Obama himself, simply by giving her executive amnesty. Actually, it’s kind of surprising that he hasn’t already offered her that.

But here’s the kicker. Rumblings are coming out of the FBI that the director, James Comey, as well as other senior FBI officials are preparing to go public with the case. That has never happened before in FBI history. The FBI is known for being sticklers for “the book” and one of the key things that the book says is not to talk about ongoing cases and investigations.

However, should Comey decide to resign over this case and the mishandling of it at DOJ level, it would send an earthquake through Washington. More than a warning shot across the bow, that’s one aimed right at the bridge. The political fallout of such a move could have grave consequences for many more people than just Hillary Clinton.

Something has to break. Clinton is as much of a liar as Obama and everyone knows it. While her followers are willing to overlook that, few others are. Hillary could never be guaranteed the support of Congress, except if the Democrats kept walking in lockstep out of political correctness.

But that’s already starting to break. Former Democrat presidential candidate, Jim Webb has said that there is no way that he will vote for Clinton. He’s even gone so far as to say that he’s looking seriously at Donald Trump and thinking about voting for him.

While Webb is only one vote, the fact that he was a presidential candidate until just a short while ago, means that his refusal to endorse Hillary and possible vote for Trump could easily serve as a wake-up call to the entire Democrat party.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.






7 total views, 7 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Putin deals Obama another strategic policy defeat in Syria as Russian military outflanks Turkey and redeploys to Armenia in preparation for major regional war

Click here to view the original post.

This week Russia announced it would begin the withdrawal of some of its military forces from Syria catching many analysts by surprise. However, it appears the US military and intelligence

A Government of the Bureaucrats for the Globalists against the People

Click here to view the original post.

Anyone that stayed awake through their civics class will recognize the spin on this article’s title. No more do we have a government that is made up of the people,

Putin Is Pulling Russia Out Of The Syrian War

Click here to view the original post.

Russian jetsIn a sudden and surprising move, President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia will be pulling their troops out of the five-year-old Syrian civil war.

In a move that supposedly has Assad’s approval, Russian troops will be pulled back to a seaport and airbase in the Syrian province of Latakia. This effectively removes them from the war, while keeping the troops available should they be needed yet again.

To understand this move, it is necessary to first understand that Russia never entered the war as part of the United States led coalition. Rather, Putin sent troops to Syria in support of President Assad, who Russia supports as an ally and client state. In contrast, President Obama severely dislikes Assad and would like nothing more than to see him out of office. His efforts in the war have not been to support Assad, but rather to contain terrorist elements in the region.

Putin states that Russia has achieved their goals in the war, in bringing Assad’s administration and rebel forces together at the bargaining table in Geneva. The talks in Geneva are anything but amicable, with the UN mediator, Staffan de Mistura, keeping the rival factions separated and working with each of them individually. Nevertheless, there is hope that these talks will be successful. Mistura has already publicly stated that there is no Plan B. The talks must succeed or the sides will go back to fighting.

Should that happen, the fighting will probably be worse than before, with greater violence and greater casualties, especially amongst civilians. A quarter of a million civilians have already lost their lives in this conflict, which has also sparked mass migration to Europe and the United States.

Whether the peace talks are in process, it’s questionable how much hope for peace there truly is. The two sides have arrived at Geneva with totally opposite positions. While that is to be expected in any such negotiations, the differences between them seem irreconcilable. Rebel forces demand that Assad relinquish all power as a starting point, with a temporary governing body with full executive power appointed to see through a transition to a new government. Assad and his government are clearly opposed to considering that idea.

What About ISIS?

While the work going on at the bargaining table coincides with a month old cease-fire, it is important to note that ISIS is not part of the discussions, nor part of the cease-fire. So, warfare continues in Syria and the Middle East. However, Russia’s actions in the war were never focused on ISIS in particular, but were aimed at supporting Assad and his administration.

Even so, Russia has probably been the most effective fighter against ISIS, since their entry into the conflict. So, while they may have accomplished their goals, the results are far from satisfactory to other players who are currently in Syria, including many of the Gulf States and the United States.

The big question facing us is what is this going to mean for ISIS? While there have been no specific responses out of their representatives, representatives of other rebel groups have responded favorably to the withdrawal of Russian forces, seeing it as an advantage to them.

It is quite likely, considering the losses that Russian forces have inflicted upon ISIS troops and installations, that they will see the movement of Russian troops in the same light.

According to reports, or perhaps propaganda, coming out of ISIS, they are growing monthly, with new recruits joining them from around the world. If that is truly the case, than any reduction in enemy forces would be seen as a net gain to them.

The removal of Russian troops would mean that they have a greater majority on the battlefield, which should see new victories, as ISIS consolidates their gains and goes on the offensive once again.

It’s important to note that the war against ISIS has been largely ineffective, as Obama’s actions seem more focused on protecting ISIS from serious harm, then bringing out their doom. The American-led coalition is not very strong, and consists mostly of nations who are against ISIS, without taking any active military action against them. Those who are taking action are doing so mostly from the air; but as anyone who knows warfare can tell you, wars are not won from the air, but by the individual soldiers with rifles, who hold that all-important piece of real estate.

With fewer opposing troops on the ground, ISIS can be expected to win new victories. While I can’t fault the fighting zeal of the troops who are actively engaged against them, most are poorly trained and not very well equipped.

Unlike the First and Second Gulf Wars, where American troops crushed Iraqi forces in a lightning-fast attack, this war has taken the character of a slugfest, interspersed with ISIS committing atrocities against their captives.

If anything, this move spells danger for the United States, as well as the many other countries which are considered enemies of ISIS. Even more so than that, it spells danger for the Kurds and others on the ground, who are fighting ISIS daily. The lack of Russia’s support for the war will free up ISIS troops, which can then be used to widen the war or can be sent out as terrorists to attack civilian populations.

Video first seen on MSNBC

How This Translates to US

I would expect to see an upturn in terrorist incidents in Europe and the United States, as ISIS renews their supremacy in the area. Their goals have not changed one iota and they are not part of the current peace talks. Therefore, they will only see the removal of Russian troops from the field of battle as an opportunity, which they will be quick to take advantage of.

We already know that ISIS has troops here in the United States, as well as in many European countries. The Paris attack was led and coordinated by ISIS terrorists, showing that ISIS has successfully infiltrated both France and Belgium.

It’s hard to say with surety how many other European countries have been infiltrated, but considering the massive swell of migration from Syria to Europe, chances are high that ISIS has cells in all of the European countries.

These terrorists have mostly gone underground, awaiting the right moment to strike. It is hard to say whether they will see the withdraw of Russia as that moment, but you can be sure that there are discussions ongoing at the highest levels of ISIS command, with the goal of determining whether this is their moment or not.

Our porous southern border has already been used on more than one occasion by ISIS; with ISIS soldiers having been caught crossing into McAllen, Texas. If ten were caught, then you can be sure that many more made it through. They are living amongst us, probably actively making plans and seeking opportunities which they can turn to their advantage.

Considering all this, it appears that the peace talks in Geneva are somewhat immaterial. Whether they succeed or fail may affect Assad, his government and the people of his country; but they will do nothing to stop or even slow the growth of the Islamic State. If anything, they will give ISIS a new opening for further attacks to gain more territory.

I see little hope in these talks; or rather, I see them as an irrelevancy. While the Russian bear may have accomplished its goals, those goals don’t fit with the needs of the world. Perhaps, that is part of Putin’s plans as well.

We must remember that Putin has rekindled Russian imperialism, along with the desire to conquer new lands and bring them under the sway of Moscow. He is smart enough and has enough

foresight to know that letting the fight continue with ISIS, while not taking any part, weakens his opposition, putting him and his country in a better position to ultimately come out on top. His actions to date have shown that he is not as concerned with helping the world, as he is in helping his own country achieve her goals.

In this, Putin’s strength and Obama’s weakness on the world stage give the Russian leader a distinct advantage. He is able to manipulate the circumstances, knowing that he can count on Obama for a lot of noise, but little else.

Strictly strategically speaking, this withdrawal could put him in a position where the world is not clamoring for American intervention, but Russian intervention. Should that happen, he will have gained something that none of his predecessors were able to accomplish, a position of leadership in the world, which is second to none.

Too bad we don’t have a true leader in the White House, who could take advantage of this situation, instead of using the military as his personal social experiment. If there was ever a time in the last 50 years when we needed a strong military, ready to deploy and defeat our country’s enemies, it is now. But we can no longer count on that happening; not while Obama is in office.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.





7 total views, 7 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 1    Average: 2/5]

Obama’s pick to head CENTCOM testifies his strategy to fight ISIL will be to use the previous failed strategy to fight ISIL. Can it get any worse for the military?

Click here to view the original post.

President Obama picked General Joseph Votel, the current commander of U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM), to succeed General Lloyd Austin as the new head of US Central Command (CENTCOM) pending

Readers Concern on Martial Law

Click here to view the original post.

I am received several e-mails from readers who are predicting that there will be something in this year’s election cycle, such as Hillary Clinton being a nominee then indicted leaving no democratic candidate, or some type of mass shooting or terrorist attack, or an Iranian nuclear attack on Israeli, or a huge military defeat for the U.S. such as North Korea attack or striking at South Korea, or one of our aircraft carriers being sunk, or a combination of events that will allow Obama to push off the elections, make a recess appointment to the Supreme Court, implement some more constitutional busting executive orders and start cracking down on right wing talk show radio and gun rights.

I can tell you the chances of anything like that happening are bleak, very remote. There could be an issue with the Democratic nominee for President, being Clinton, indicted for criminal acts relating to her violations of the safeguarding national security information and leaving the Democratic ticket open. Sure the Libs will whine and tap dance about extending the elections in order to give their new candidate time to campaign, but an indictment of Hillary will not be forthcoming. The current Administration will rationalize that this would be bad for America and especially bad for securing Obama’s legacy (no comment there) with another four years of Liberal Rule over the U.S.

As far as martial law or executive actions curtailing the second amendment – martial law would not be far behind if there was drastic executive orders undermining the second amendment.

I believe that the majority of Americans would continue on with the lives if the Administration banned assault rifles, or banned multiple sales of guns, or restricted ammunition purchases, or any number of things they really, really want to do. Yes, they would get away with it. Sure, there would be court challenges and a lot of hulabalu from the right, but it would die down.

It would not be until these restrictions were made retroactive and police action against suspected violators were commenced until there would be backlash. And backlash there would be. What you see with the current political angry propelling Donald Trump in the polls, would be tame by comparison.

I am reminding of an article written by former Navy SEAL Matthew Bracken and author of the series “Enemies: Foreign and Domestic”. In a open letter to all Law Enforcement Officers, both local, state and Federal warning them of the consequences for a police enforced unconstitutional gun restrictions or confiscation, in part he wrote:

“I am telling you now that disastrous unintended consequences will happen if Congress passes new laws banning presently legal firearms. To make it very easy to remember, and in the spirit of our beloved Department of Homeland Security’s old color-coded security threat levels, let me spell out three lines of demarcation.

The Yellow Line:

The yellow warning line will be crossed with national gun registration laws, including laws forbidding private gun sales without government permission. When that law passes, millions of Americans will feel that they have been pushed directly to the edge of the abyss above the mass graves of history. Defenders of the Second Amendment know what happened in Turkey, the USSR, Germany, China, and other nations that fell under totalitarian rule: in every case a necessary preliminary step on the road to genocide was national gun registration, followed by confiscation. The Jewish survivors of the Nazi Holocaust say, “Never again!” And so do we.

The Red Line:

The red line will be crossed with the passage of laws mandating that currently owned weapons, ammunition magazines, and ammunition quantities above a certain number must be turned in to authorities or destroyed, and thereafter their simple possession will be a felony. At that point, the nation will be on a hair trigger, with a thousand flaring matches nearing a thousand primed cannon fuses aimed directly at the next Fort Sumter.

The Dead Line:

The next line requires a bit of history to explain. In some primitive Civil War POW camps, where lack of funding or logistical constraints did not allow the construction of proper fences, a knee-high continuous railing of wooden slats encircled the prison grounds. Guards with rifles were positioned at the corners and in crude towers. If a prisoner so much as stepped over the narrow plank, he was shot dead without warning, obviating the need for a real fence to contain him. Hence the term “dead line.” Cross the line and people die, right now.

And this is what liberal Utopians must understand: after passing the yellow line with national gun registration and transfer requirements, and the red line by making possession of currently legal firearms felonious, the dead line will be breached with the first SWAT raids upon citizens suspected of owning legal firearms made illegal by the new gun control laws. People will die resisting confiscation, in large numbers.

Confiscation crosses the dead line, make no mistake about it.”

Heck, I can’t add anything to that. Everybody who has not read everything that Mathew Bracken has written, needs to do so now and make it a priority. Start with this website then order his books.

[Source: www.enemiesforeignanddomestic.com/]

Urban Man

The Battle Over Guantanamo Bay

Click here to view the original post.

Guantanamo Bay

In a recent speech, President Obama restated his intent to close Guantanamo Bay. This was one of his campaign promises, and appears to be one that he actually intends to keep. Regardless of the wisdom of keeping it open, his plan is to shut it down and put it out of business.

This really isn’t all that surprising, considering his hatred of the military and the way he’s been releasing prisoners from the Guantanamo Bay detention facility right and left. These are convicted criminals, convicted of acts of terrorism, not criminals awaiting trial. It’s almost as if he’s in a hurry to get all those terrorists out of prison and back in the terrorism business once again.

We saw this very clearly when Obama traded five convicted terrorists for the deserter Bowe Bergdahl, who converted to Islam while in captivity. Nothing suspicious there at all. He can’t invite heroes to the White House, but he invites the parents of this deserter to join him.

Rumors has it, that three of the terrorists who Obama released in trade for that deserter tried to return to the terrorism business, as leaders in ISIS. Likewise, many of the terrorists who Obama later released might have returned to their former life. While they were sent to Middle-Eastern countries where that was supposed to be impossible, it didn’t take long for them to give their hosts the slip and try to make their way back to the bosoms of their fellow warriors.

In light of this, why is closing the Guantanamo Bay detention facility so important to the left? If it’s just another military prison, what difference does closing it make? But clearly, the left and not just Obama, have decided that Guantanamo Bay needs to be closed; the sooner the better.

To understand this, we have to understand that to the liberal left, appearances are more important than substance. They are concerned with doing things that make them look good and feel good. They want to be able to say that they hold the moral high ground and that they are the ones who are concerned about the poor, minorities and all other mistreated groups. This allows them to self-validate and brag about their moral superiority.

This is really no different than liberals increasing your and my taxes, in order to be able to give that money to the poor. In doing so, they are able to make themselves look good, as the people who care for the poor, without it costing them anything. At the same time, they badmouth conservatives as not caring about the poor, even though countless studies show that conservatives give more to charity than liberals do.

So, where’s the “feel good” in closing Guantanamo Bay? It has to do with the liberal perception of the military and the CIA. Rumor has it, that both of these organizations have “black sites” overseas, where they are able to ignore the constitution and torture prisoners. While I would have to say that terrorists deserve such treatment, if anyone does, it happens to be against the law. They get around the law by doing it outside the United States.

Guantanamo Bay has become a symbol to the liberal elitists of that torture. Whether or not it truly happens and whether it ever happened in Guantanamo Bay, they’ve picked that facility to be their poster child against the “evil” military and the “evil” CIA.

It doesn’t hurt that the prisoners in Gitmo are Muslims either. Somehow, Muslims have managed to climb to the top of the heap, as far as liberal causes are concerned. They have painted a picture of themselves as the most mistreated, misunderstood and discriminated minority in the world. It doesn’t matter that there are 1.7 billion of them or that they are 22% of the world’s population; islamists still pretend they’re still a badly mistreated “minority.”

So, in promising to close Guantanamo Bay, Obama is, once again, playing to his support base. It doesn’t matter if doing so actually accomplishes anything of substance, it will look good; that’s enough.

Closing Guantanamo Bay, like many of the other things that Obama has done, is really about building his legacy. He wants to be known as the greatest president that ever was and the one who fundamentally changed America. It doesn’t matter if he hurts America or the American people in the process, as long as he gets to build his legacy.

Interestingly enough, his own Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, has publicly stated that it would be illegal for Obama to close Gitmo. He does not have the authority to do that under current law. But then, since when has he ever been concerned about what the law said or what the law allows. As long as he has his pen and his phone, nobody can stop him.

This is an important point. Republicans won the mid-term elections in a landslide, gaining several seats in the Senate, which gave them a majority. But they did not win a super-majority; the two-thirds necessary for an impeachment. So, that mechanism for removing him from office is blocked. He has fired or forced to retire over 200 generals and admirals from the armed forces, essentially remaking the upper ranks of the military into his own image.

Obama’s key question in deciding whether to retain or remove these flag officers was whether or not they would fire upon American citizens. If they wouldn’t, they were out. Those who have remained behind are the ones who are loyal to him, more than being loyal to the country. That’s dangerous.

So, Congress is unable to remove the president and the military has been rendered incapable of a coup; there is no real way to get him out of office. The Department of Justice, the branch of the government who would have to build a legal case against him, in order to arrest and try him for treason, are firmly in his pocket. So, Obama has succeeded in neutralizing his enemies and made it impossible to remove him from office.

In other words, the only leverage to make Obama obey the law is his own convictions and his oath of office. Well, we have seen how much those are worth. Obama has constantly violated his oath of office and trampled all over the Constitution. He doesn’t believe in it, doesn’t follow it and clearly wants it to be changed. If truth were known, he probably would like to do away with it altogether.

So, while Congress is standing firm against Obama closing Guantanamo Bay, there’s really nothing they can do about it. He’s already proven that he considers Congress unnecessary and that in his mind, their only purpose is to rubber stamp his actions, thereby giving them more legitimacy. Ignoring them won’t be any more of a problem for him this time, than it has any other time.

This is the man who wants to close Guantanamo Bay. He is “justifying” it by saying that Gitmo costs too much money. In this, he’s right, but only because he’s forcing it to cost too much money. That facility costs just shy of $400 million dollars per year, between the 2,000 people who staff and support it and all their material usage.

So, why does it cost so much? That’s fairly easy to see. When the facility was at its peak, it had over 700 inmates. This warranted a staff of 2,000 people. Now that it’s down to just over 100, it still has that enormous staff. They’ve got 100 doctors and nurses in the base hospital, just to take care of 100 prisoners; while we have veterans who can’t get seen at VA hospitals.

There’s a huge legal staff, who spends their time reviewing the records of Gitmo’s prison population over and over, for the 100th time. Apparently, they’re looking for loopholes to allow those prisoners to go free, and they’re doing it on your and my dime.

Then there are all the other support services to take care of that huge prison population. $750,000 was spent to build the prisoners a soccer field, which is nothing more than bare dirt, some goalposts and chalk lines. I guess chalk is expensive in Cuba.

Please note that the only reason that Gitmo is costing so much is that Obama won’t allow those people to be reassigned. He wants that big number, because it gives him a “reason” to close it. Forget the fact that little of that cost will actually go away once it’s closed; it won’t show up as a “Guantanamo Bay” cost. Rather, it will show up in other military activities, where those personnel are reassigned.

Those prisoners should not be released and they should not be reassigned to other facilities in the United States. Part of the reason they have been incarcerated where they are, is to avoid them having contact with civilians, especially the press. Bringing them into the country and putting them in military prisons here at home, which is Obama’s plan, will give them that access, so that they can use the left-stream media for propaganda purposes.

This is probably not a fight we are going to win. The military has taken a stand against Obama, as well as Congress. They have stated clearly that they will not participate in the illegal closing of Guantanamo Bay. But when push comes to shove, they can’t stop him either. Obama will either find military commanders who will accept a direct order from him, or he will use another department of the government to accomplish his plan.

This man is evil. He has no regard for our country or for the citizens of it. He has stated clearly that his plan is to destroy it, and this is just one more chess piece on the board for him to use. He is making his own rules and ignoring the law, like the king that he thinks he is. And whoever comes after is going to be stuck picking up the pieces.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.



video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIcyO4_ACy0 





2 total views, 2 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

The Sad Untimely Death Of Chief Justice Scalia

Click here to view the original post.

Chief Justice ScaliaThe death of Chief Justice Scalia on February the 13th marks the end of an era in American law. For the last 30 years, Scalia has been the main conservative bulwark, protecting the original meaning of the Constitution as ferociously as a mother bear protecting her young. Scalia’s opinions and dissents will be studied by lawyers and trial judges for decades to come.

But his death has left the country in a quandary, surrounded by controversy. As can be expected, cries of “conspiracy” and “foul play” have been raised by his death. This is not without reason, considering that found dead, lying on top of an unmussed bed, with a pillow over his head. Adding fuel to the fire, the judge who pronounced him dead was a Democrat, who decided an autopsy was not necessary.

To me, his position demands an autopsy, unless he were to die in a hospital somewhere, under the care of a physician. But to the judge who made the decision, there was no reason for an autopsy, especially considering that there was no sign of wrongdoing. A pillow over his head apparently isn’t a sign.

While the decision reached is legal, it’s still fishy. It’s especially fishy when you take into consideration the number of suspicious deaths there have been on Obama’s watch. Everyone who could even be an embarrassment to Obama has mysteriously died, including just about anyone who knew anything about his childhood, people who have opposed his extreme liberal politics and even Seal Team 6.

But, at least for now, anyone who committed any wrongdoing in Scalia’s death is going to get away with it. Other evidence will have to come forth, before enough of an outcry can be raised to warrant Congress launching an investigation. Were they to do so now, it would look like nothing more than a witch hunt.

However, the bigger issue here isn’t how Scalia died, but what that means for the country. For the last several years, the Supreme Court has been fairly well balanced between liberals and conservatives. Many say that it has been a 5/4 split, favoring conservatives. But if you look at the voting record of the various chief justices, it’s really more like a 4/1/4 split. With one justice who has been more of a moderate than a conservative, siding with the liberals in many cases.

We see this clearly in the Obamacare case. If there had been a true 5/4 split in the Supreme Court, Obamacare would have been adjured unconstitutional. But the swing vote went to the liberal side and Obama won that case. The same thing happened with the case on same sex marriages. So, while Obama hasn’t won everything he wanted from the Supreme Court, he has had some major victories.

But now things are likely to change. The most liberal president in the history of our country is poised to nominate the next Supreme Court Justice. Does anyone want to bet that he’ll pick a conservative? No, I seriously doubt that he’ll even pick a moderate. I am sure he’ll pick the most liberal justice he can find. One that will continue Obama’s work of fundamentally transforming America.

If he manages to appoint a liberal Supreme Court Justice to the bench, it will turn the Supreme Court’s makeup to 5/1/3 with five liberal justices on the court and only three conservatives. Even if the lone moderate were to side with the conservatives, they would have no chance of winning. Every case would come out in favor of liberals, pushing this country more and more down the path of progressive liberalism (otherwise spelled socialism).

This means that the death of Justice Scalia could spell the end of the United States as we know it. Federal judges are appointed for life, so there would be no recall election. The only way the court could ever change would be if the next president was a staunch conservative and had the opportunity to replace two liberal justices with conservatives. While there’s a chance of that happening, it is by no means guaranteed.

So, What’s Really the Big Deal about This?

So what if the liberals get their way on things? Right? Wrong! This isn’t about whether or not we get socialized medicine or whether the constitution allows someone to marry their dog. It’s about whether the Constitution itself even survives.

There is a very basic disagreement between liberals and conservatives about the Constitution itself and how the Supreme Court is supposed to interpret it. Conservatives hold that the Constitution is not only the founding document of our country, but it is unchangeable, except by properly executed amendments. But liberals see the Constitution as a living document, which can be changed by every generation to match their ideas.

This means that a strongly liberal Supreme Court would be actively working to change the Constitution. Although they couldn’t make amendments to it (that has to be done by Congress), they could change it in their interpretation of case law and the judgments they handed down.

This is basically what happened in the same sex marriage case. The Constitution doesn’t say anything about marriage at all. In this, the Founding Fathers left marriage either in the hands of the several states or, considering that this nation was founded as a Christian nation, probably in the hands of the church. Yet, the Supreme Court ruled that gays and lesbians had a “Constitutional Right” to marry.

Anyone who has any understanding of the law and of the Constitution can see that the Supreme Court had no right to make the judgment they did. They shouldn’t have even accepted the case for judgment, as it didn’t have anything to do with Constitutional law. But they did, and by their judgment they extended the Constitution into an area that it isn’t written to address. Essentially, they changed the Constitution.

By the way, even that judgment shouldn’t have forced the states to allow same sex marriages, because there was no law passed allowing same sex marriage. Their actions should have kicked the issue to Congress, so that they could pass a law. But in today’s twisted system, their judgment became law.

So, the thing to do is to block Obama’s appointment. There is ample precedent for that and Mitch McConnel, the Senate Majority Leader, has vowed to do just that. If anyone can block it, he’s the one in the position to do so. All he has to do is not allow the confirmation vote to go before the Senate. But McConnel hasn’t been good at standing up to Obama in the past. He’s basically caved to everything that Obama has demanded. So, there’s no real guarantee that he’ll stand his ground this time.

Democrats are already screaming that the Republican controlled Senate “do their job” and approve whoever Obama sends to them. This is not surprising, as they have been screaming for Republicans to rubber stamp everything Obama has wanted for the last seven years. Why should they change now?

But the same Democrats blocked President Bush from appointing a Supreme Court Justice during his last year in office. So, they are clearly hypocritical in their demands. Of course, they say that this situation “is different” because Bush wasn’t doing the will of the people, whereas Obama is. Apparently, Democrats define “the people” to mean anyone who agrees with them. I wonder what that makes the rest of us.

Blocking Obama’s nomination is risky, politically speaking. Democrats, and their lapdog media will make it appear that the Republicans are being obstructionists by not approving Obama’s nominee. That could cost Republicans votes for Senate seats in the November elections. If enough seats are lost, control of the Senate would revert back to the Democrats.

Now, here’s the thing. The new Senate will be sworn in about 20 days prior to the president. That means that they could push through a vote of approval in that time. Harry Reid already exercised the “nuclear option” changing confirmation votes to simple majority (51%) rather than super-majority (66%), as well as eliminating the possibility of filibuster. While Supreme Court approvals were specifically left out of that change, it wouldn’t take much to vote to allow it. Then, a Democrat controlled Senate could confirm the appointment, before Obama left office.

The other possibility is that Obama could make a recess appointment, as he did in his first year in office. The Constitution allows for recess appointments, although they are only until the next time the Senate goes into recess. So, any appointment Obama made like this would be only temporary. The only way to prevent that, is to not have any Senate recesses until the new president is sworn in.

Here again, we have to count on the strength of Mitch McConnell. There is a Senate recess scheduled and he’s the one who would have to cancel it. That’s the only way that he could prevent Obama from using a recess appointment to fill the vacant seat.

Friends, the country is quite literally at risk. Conservatives need a number of things to go right, or the Constitution will become irrelevant. We need the Senate to stay in session, Mitch McConnel to block the vote on any nomination by Obama, a true conservative president to be voted in to replace Obama and the Republicans to retain control of both houses of Congress. That’s a lot. It can’t happen if you and I don’t do our part. We’ve got to get the vote out, or the liberals will win.

It seems that each election cycle has become more and more critical. Well, this is the most critical election our country has ever faced. As the country has become more and more polarized, the risk that we face is greater and greater. If we don’t stand together and block the actions of the liberals, we will lose. Worse than that, our children will lose. The country we turn over to them won’t be the one we inherited from our parents.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.





10 total views, 10 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 1    Average: 5/5]

New Attacks In Syria

Click here to view the original post.

Even though Obama has been crowing about ISIS being contained, the war in Syria is far from over. ISIS still controls a vast amount of territory and there are many other groups fighting as well.

But what is normally looked at as a war between ISIS and the US led coalition, has actually become more of a free-for-all with many different sides fighting with and forming unsteady alliances with each other.

To start with, there’s the Syrian government itself; the one Obama threatened with his blurry red line in the sand that didn’t accomplish anything. Then, of course, there’s ISIS, the main militant insurgents trying to take over Syria. But there are other militant groups as well, many of which are fighting against both the government and ISIS.

Then there are local groups who are fighting ISIS purely for their own protection, without any stated intent to topple the government. On top of all this, we have the US led coalition, which really isn’t accomplishing a whole lot, and the Russians, who have joined the fray in support of the Syrian government.

This vast number of players has made this one of the most confusing wars in history. While there were more countries involved in World War II, than there are in Syria, there were only two real sides. That made it fairly easy to tell which side everyone was on; this war makes that all but impossible without a program to tell you who everyone is.

Why Hasn’t ISIS Been Beaten?

So, with all this vast military might available, why hasn’t ISIS been beaten and peace restored to the region? They currently claim to have more than 200,000 soldiers, making it clear that they are far from beaten.

Part of the problem has been the way that the war has been waged. While there are supposedly 60 nations involved in the coalition, that doesn’t mean that there are 60 nations fighting. Of those, only a dozen have conducted air strikes, and only a few have actually put “boots on the ground” with troops to fight against the terrorist organization. The rest have provided some military aid, some humanitarian aid and a lot of verbal support, but no real practical support.

The United States has used air power effectively in the past two Gulf wars, striking targets in Iraq and destroying much of their military’s ability to wage war before committing troops to the field. But that was done under military direction and with specific military goals in mind. That’s not what’s happening this time. Rather than allowing the military to run a true military air campaign against ISIS, Obama is micromanaging it from the White House.

Obama is no military strategist, knowing little of the operation of the military, yet he is demanding that the military present every mission to him personally for approval. That has largely eliminated the effectiveness of our air strikes, especially when you consider that Obama’s main objective in passing approval is to ensure that his buddies in ISIS aren’t harmed by the strikes.

As has been usual under Obama’s presidency, he has put rather extreme restrictions on the rules of engagement that our military is allowed to operate under. That’s why I say that his main goal seems to be protecting ISIS, rather than defeating them.

Many of the strikes that were supposed to be against ISIS have actually been committed against the other militia groups that are fighting ISIS and in cases where ISIS resources are being attacked, he is requiring them to be warned first, so there won’t be any loss of life.

Apparently, the Commander in Chief doesn’t have the guts to get enemy blood on his hands; unless, of course, those are domestic political enemies. Then it seems he doesn’t mind all that much.

But, I digress; wars are not won by air forces. It takes infantry troops to take and hold the ground. This has been true throughout the history of warfare. That’s why the infantry is the center of every nation’s military, regardless of their ideas about warfare or their military strategy.

Obama has insisted that there would be no US boots on the ground in the war against ISIS. The only troops who have been sent over have been a few special forces troops, to train and equip the Kurds. Other than that, the on the ground fighting has been left in the hands of others.

This means that most of it has been left to the local people; quickly gathered together, trained and equipped. The biggest group has been the Kurds, who have also received the brunt of ISIS’ cruelty. In response, the Kurds have been quick to join the war, carrying the fight to ISIS. They have been joined by Christians, who ISIS slaughters out of hand and even women who have escaped from ISIS captivity.

These women are some of the fiercest fighters against ISIS, perhaps because it is a personal fight for them. Some are family members of the young men who are fleeing Syria for Europe, as part of the supposed refugee migration. Others have been captured and used as ISIS sex slaves, giving them a very personal reason to fight. Their resentment and anger has created some of ISIS’ most dangerous enemies; enemies who want nothing more than to kill those who have so mistreated them.

One of the true beauties of these women fighting ISIS is that a Muslim man who is killed by a woman does not get into paradise, even if he died in jihad. This strikes fear into the hearts of ISIS warriors, as part of their motivation is the promise of paradise and their 72 virgins.

All this fighting has done little to defeat ISIS, as they seem stronger than ever. Their ranks are swelling, as fighters from around the world travel to join them. While some have been killed off, the death toll hasn’t come close to matching their recruitment efforts.

And Then Russia Joined The Fight…

The lack of effectiveness of the coalition has led Russia to join the fight. Russia has not joined the coalition though, but rather is fighting in support of the Syrian government, who they have always supported. In true Russian fashion, they have sent in massive amounts of air strikes, destroying more than the US led coalition has.

Russia is now upping the ante in this war, sending in more planes and possibly troops. Their newest fighter, the SU-35S Flanker, is joining the fray. I’m not exactly sure what good that’s going to do, as the Flanker is not a ground-attack fighter, but they must have plans for it.

They are also making extensive use of their satellite resources to track ISIS units on the ground, as well as develop their targeting list. In essence, the Russian Air Force is using the same tactics that the United States used in the last two Gulf Wars, to attack ISIS much more effectively than anyone else.

There is also talk about Russia mobilizing 150,000 troops for deployment to Syria. While that has not been confirmed and there is no evidence that any troops are on the ground yet, it takes time to mobilize troops for overseas deployments. This could be something currently in the works and the troops could be on the ground in a matter of weeks.

Countering this, there have been confirmed reports that ISIS has developed the ability to use chemical warfare agents, specifically mustard gas. While the use of chemical agents is not allowed under the rules of land warfare and several treaty agreements, ISIS has obviously not been part of any of those treaties.

While they claim nation-state status, they are really nothing more than terrorist thugs. So, they would not consider themselves limited by international convention for warfare, especially considering that the weapons arrayed against them are stronger than those that they themselves have. There is no question whether ISIS will use their mustard gas or not; they already have. The Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, confirmed this to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

This is somewhat ironic, as Obama’s line in the sand was about the use of chemical weapons. Now, rather than the government using those weapons against the insurgents, we have an insurgent group using them. Who they are using them against is still closely held information, but there is no question as to whether or not they are being used. Does this mean it’s time for Obama to draw another line in the sand?

But he won’t do that. After all, ISIS is just the JV team and they aren’t Islamic. At least, that’s what Obama says. Perhaps he’ll wake up one of these days and realize that he has created a monster and that said monster is a true threat to the world.

If not, whoever wins the elections in November had better be ready to deal with it.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.





17 total views, 17 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 3    Average: 3.3/5]

Guess Which Gun Grabbers Actually OWN STOCK In Gun Companies?

Click here to view the original post.

Guess Which Gun Grabbers Own Stock In Gun Companies? President Obama and gun control advocates may want to limit your right to purchase firearms, but they are not opposed to owning stock in gun and ammo manufacturers.

An investigation by Reuters revealed that Obama and other anti-gun Democrats have money invested in funds that involve gun stocks.

President Obama has $100,000 invested in a $16 billion Illinois state pension plan from his days in the state senate. That $16 billion plan has $5 million invested directly in several gun and ammo makers, and it also includes a small-cap mutual fund with a $9.5 million stake in Smith & Wesson, the news service reported.

But it’s not simply gun control advocates from the Illinois state legislature who have money invested in gun and ammo stocks. US Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), a leading advocate of gun control, has $115,000 invested in an S Fund through the federal Thrift Savings Plan that involves stock in gun companies. The S Fund lets members of Congress invest in mutual funds such as the First Eagle Global Fund, which has $196.9 million worth of stock in ammo and gun maker Vista Outdoor.

Guess Who Owns Stock In Gun Companies?

Image source: flickr

Former US Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy (D-New York), a relentless gun control crusader when she was in office, owned between $3,003 and $45,000 in exchange traded funds with stakes in gun and ammo makers, Reuters reported. McCarthy also invested between $2,002 and $30,000 in college savings plans for her grandchildren that involved firearms stocks.

Business is Booming

Gun ownership has soared under Obama’s presidency and has been further propelled in recent months in response to a series of mass shootings.

Do You Know The Best Way To Hide Your Guns?

Smith & Wesson’s stock value increased by 80 percent between September 2014 and September 2015, Market Madhouse reported. During the same period, applications for background checks increased by 20 percent, and observers credited the increase to louder demands for gun control.

“The politics of gun control could stay in the headlines, which we believe could lead to a record year (for gun stocks),” Chris Krueger, a senior research analyst at Lake Street Capital, wrote to investors in January.

Gun sales increased again after President Obama announced plans to expand background checks and increase licensing requirements for firearms dealers in the wake of last year’s San Bernardino (California) massacre.

The week of December 20 saw the second highest level of firearms background checks since 1998, the FBI reported.

Gun control demands have prompted firearms and ammo makers to ramp up production, Reuters reported. Vista Outdoor’s ammunition factories have been operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week for the past two years, the company’s chief financial officer, Stephen Nolan, revealed in November.

Ruger is boosting its inventory in expectation of even heavier demands this year. The company’s CEO, Mike Fifer, is afraid that demand for his products will exceed supply as it did after Obama was first elected.

“Orders at every level of the distribution channel exploded” in the weeks after Obama’s first presidential election in 2008, Fifer said, “and continued to do so for months afterward.”

What is your reaction to Obama and other gun control advocates owning stock in firearm companies? Share your thoughts in the section below:

There’s A Trick To Navigating Federal And State Gun Regulations. Read More Here.

Forget the issues with where Cruz was born; Hillary Clinton will be legally ineligible to hold office or a security clearance

Click here to view the original post.

I have had enough of waiting for the “In”Justice Department to do its job. If we fail to maintain the rule of law equitably in this country from the top

The Rise Of Rape And Islam

Click here to view the original post.

Islam rapeThe massive influx of supposed “refugees” into Europe is having a number of unexpected consequences. Perhaps the liberal politicians who agreed to their invasion were thinking these refugees would be like others, act like others and be grateful like others. But what they’ve gotten is far from what anyone could have expected.

Not only is it clear that terrorists have infiltrated the ranks of the “refugees,” as proven by the Paris terrorist attack, but it’s also clear that the rest of the “military age men” who make up the majority of the influx are determined to change Europe into what they want it to be.

On New Year’s Eve, about 1,000 of these men gathered together at the central train station in Cologne, Germany (there’s also a Cologne, France, but this happened in German) to give a special present to the women of the city. As the women passed, they were groped and sexually assaulted by the immigrant men. Some were robbed, under the covering of the distraction caused by the groping. A few were even raped.

This didn’t just happen in Cologne, but in Hamburg and other cities as well. But Cologne was the epicenter, with more than 800 women molested by these Muslim men. Many of the attackers were drunk, ignoring their religion’s probation of alcohol in favor of enjoying themselves.

We can’t even say that this is an isolated event, as I hear daily of new rapes and gang rapes happening throughout Europe. While rape has always existed and will probably exist until the end of time, what is happening now has not happened on this scale since the wars of the Middle Ages. While rape has always followed war, this is something new; using rape as a tool of war.

One More Insult to Injury

Sweden has become the rape capital of Europe and perhaps of the world, if we leave out the lands controlled by ISIS. The Muslim immigrants apparently feel they have a right to any woman who they see. This matches the teachings of their Imams and the Quran, which states that all lust is caused by women, it is not in the heart of the man. Therefore, the women are the ones who cause it.

The Imam of Cologne has even come out and said this, declaring that the sexual abuse and rape were the fault of the women, “walking around half-naked and wearing perfume.” He literally said that they should have expected it. But then, we have to realize that to these Muslim men, seeing a woman’s ankles makes her half-naked in his eyes. When all they ever saw in their homelands were women hidden by black cloth sacks, it’s no wonder that the sight of real women would excite them.

Now, I’ve got to say that modern styles for women’s clothing isn’t exactly modest. But that’s not the issue. If those women had been wearing floor length dresses, with long sleeves and high necks, it would still have been more than they could stand. Simply having a dress that actually fit and showed that the woman’s body had curves would have driven those men mad, especially in their drunken state. But such is Islam, that they blame the women for the faults of the men. That means that as long as there are Muslim immigrants, the chances of rape will be high.

A video has recently come out in which a female Muslim college professor explains that rape of non-Muslim women is acceptable in the Islamic religion. It is to be used as a means of humiliating the women, with the ultimate goal of forcing them to convert to Islam. There’s even a reference to her being converted by the sexual act. Her specific statements refer to raping women captured in war, but the invasion of Europe is a war in Muslim eyes.

According to the Quran, Muslims aren’t allowed to immigrate to infidel lands and put themselves under the authority of infidels or their laws, that is sin to them. When they go to other lands, and they are commanded in the Quran to do so, they are to go there and take the position of being the heads, over the people of the land. They are to take over the lands and subjugate them to Sharia Law.

This is called hijrah, and it is as old as Islam itself. The first hijrah was when Mohammad himself left Mecca to go to Medina. He and his followers went there for the purpose of conquest, to take the city over and force it to convert to Islam. This was the beginning of hijrah as a means of jihad and Muslims have been used ever since to conquer new lands and expand their territory.

Petting the Trojan Horse

The Trojan Horse of the Syrian refugee crisis isn’t just the terrorists who are hidden in their ranks, but each and every one of the Muslims who are emigrating. It doesn’t matter if they are radical Muslims or not, nor does it matter if they are terrorists. They are all committed to the spread of Islam and they are using this as an excuse to send millions of people into the western world for the purpose of conquest.

That may seem ridiculous to you, stating that such a small group could conquer a nation, but you have to understand their tactics. They have already taken over areas of several European countries, making them into “no-go zones.” Those areas are totally under Muslim control and governed by Sharia Law. The police and the duly elected government has no power and no say. They have effectively been kicked out and the area has effectively been conquered.

That’s been done with relatively few people, mere thousands. What will happen when there are millions? How will those governments stand against Muslim pressure, when the Muslims know exactly what buttons to push, in order to get things their way?

Muslims are winning the propaganda war. They are using our laws and our sensibilities against us. A mere 15 years after 9-11, they’ve managed to paint themselves as the most misunderstood and most persecuted minority in the world, with the greatest amount of prejudice against them. That’s a load of crap. Muslims account for 23% percent of the world’s population, 1.6 billion people. They are far from a minority.

Yet Islam is a hungry master. The Quran commands them to take over the world and they are going to do everything they can to do so. Those whom we call “moderate Muslims” are the ones who will do it. The radicals, who become terrorists, don’t take over the world. They just threaten the world so that we’ll be quiet while we’re being raped. It’s the moderates who take over cities, make no-go zones and demand that laws and customs be changed to accommodate them.

Video first seen on Politically Incorrect

The rape that is going on in Europe isn’t going to stop. About the only thing that can save Europe right now is for the people to rise up in arms and throw the Muslims out. But they aren’t allowed to do that. In most European countries, it’s illegal to own firearms. That doesn’t stop the Muslims or the criminals, but it does stop the law-abiding citizens of those countries from defending themselves.

Yet, they are trying. German men have turned out in droves and organized to protect their women. How did the government accept that? They sent 1,500 police to the rally where the men were organizing. There were only 150 in the vicinity of the train station on New Year’s Eve, and they didn’t do a thing to stop the sexual molestation, but they sent 1,500 to a protest against that attack. What does that tell you?

These sorts of attacks are going to increase. While they are mostly in Europe right now, we can soon expect to see them here on our side of the pond. As Obama allows more and more of these animals into our country, we must keep in mind that they have not come as refugees, they have not come as immigrants, they have come as a conquering army and as far as they are concerned, they’ve already won the war and our women are the spoils of that war.

This is what we can expect to face. As unpopular as Trump’s declaration about closing the doors to Muslim immigrants has been, it’s the only real answer. Something has to be done to determine if these people are going to assimilate into society or not; and those who won’t, have to be kept out of the country. Otherwise, they will take over.

Of course, there is one other option… that of civil war. It may come to that. But if it does, it will have to be because the Muslims start it. If we, the American people, start killing Muslims out of hand, we will be giving up the high ground and become something we are not.

Yes, we can defend ourselves and our loved ones. Yes, we can defend our women. But no, we can’t kill indiscriminately in that process. We don’t allow our soldiers to do that in war, and we can’t allow ourselves to do so in this war.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.







4 total views, 4 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Obama’s Sneaky New Plan To Make Everyone A Gun Dealer

Click here to view the original post.

Obama’s Sneaky New Plan To Make Everyone A Gun DealerAny individual who sells a gun to a friend or family member could be required to get a Federal Firearms or gun dealer’s license and then do a federal background check on the buyer under President Obama’s latest set of executive orders.

White House Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett told reporters that the details of the transaction will determine whether an individual must get a license.

“ATF will make clear that whether you are ‘engaged in the business’ depends on the facts and circumstances,” Jarrett said. “On factors such as: whether you represent yourself as a dealer, such as making business cards or taking credit card statements. Whether you sell firearms shortly after they’re acquired or whether you buy or sell in the original packaging.”

Jarrett and Attorney General Loretta Lynch said the rules could impact people selling as few as one or two guns.

How To Hide Your Guns, And Other Off-Grid Caches…

The rules were announced earlier this month by Obama, and the proposal drew outrage from Second Amendment supporters.

Story continues below video

Watch the latest video at <a href=”http://video.foxnews.com”>video.foxnews.com</a>

“In an era when private individuals can set up their cell phones to accept credit cards, accepting credit-card payment for one gun will now make selling firearms your ‘principal objective of livelihood,’” John R. Lott Jr. wrote on National Review.com.

Judge Andrew Napolitano, a Fox News’ senior judicial analyst, agreed.

“Mr. Obama will now require that anyone who sells a gun, that is even an ‘occasional’ seller will be required to perform a background check. By defining what an ‘occasional seller’ is, the president is essentially interpreting the law, a job reserved for the courts,” Napolitano wrote in a column.

Obama’s actions, Napolitano said, are unconstitutional.

“President Obama has very little room to issue executive orders on guns because the congressional legislation is so extensive, detailed, and clear,” Napolitano wrote. “Congress has expressly removed occasional sales (sales not made by full-time dealers) from the obligation of obtaining federal licenses and from conducting background checks. The president is without authority to negate the congressional will on this, and any attempt to do so will be invalidated by the courts.”

What do you think about Obama’s latest executive order on guns? Share your thoughts in the section below:

There’s A Trick To Navigating Federal And State Gun Regulations. Read More Here.

What Obama’s State Of The Union Address Is Missing

Click here to view the original post.

SOTUOn Tuesday, January the 12th, President Obama gave what was his eighth and hopefully last State of the Union Address (SOTU). I say “hopefully” because it is traditional for the outgoing president to leave the SOTU for the incoming president. But as we all know, Obama doesn’t care about tradition, especially when it comes to a chance to talk about himself and how great he is.

As expected, this SOTU address was a mixture of lies, half-truths and liberal talking points. He even threw in his standard lecture for the American people, about how bad we are. This time, it was about how badly we treat Muslim immigrants, one of his favorite groups of people.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the president is out of touch with the American people. He keeps talking about the huge majority of people who agree with him, while poll after poll show that the people aren’t.

But then, when the only people you listen to are those who agree with you; it looks like everyone is in agreement with you. After all, this is the president who said that he heard the voice of the people who didn’t vote, so as to have an excuse to say that his viewpoint was and is the prevalent one.

Ever the politician, Obama talked about how great the country was doing. I guess that’s to be expected, not only because the Narcissist in Chief has to make himself look good, but also because any president would want to paint a positive picture of the country. Who cares if the picture painted looks like some other country, as long as it conveys the message that liberal ideology is the correct ideology.

But in talking about how great the country is doing, he avoiding mentioning some important points. That same day, 10 Navy sailors were captured by Obama and Kerry’s buddies in Iran. He didn’t even mention them, insulting everyone in uniform, once again.

Then there was the lack of mention of Islamic terrorism, which has already invaded our country and is on the rise. Over 100 Muslim terrorists have been arrested here in the United States in the last two years, most before they were able to act.

Yet according to the Liar in Chief, there is no such thing as radical Islamic terrorism. He’d rather lie to protect his friends, than protect the people he’s sworn to protect.

So, What Did He Really Say?

To start with, Obama spent a considerable amount of his address talking about the economy. He actually went so far as to say, “Anyone claiming that America’s economy is in decline is peddling fiction.” That was an amazing statement and a very carefully crafted one as well. While it is technically correct that the economy is growing, it is growing at the slowest rate since World War II, or perhaps even before.

We all know that the official unemployment rate no longer means a thing, yet Obama keeps pointing to it as an indicator that our economy is improving. Unfortunately, all that number means is that less people are receiving unemployment today, than were receiving it five years ago.

People who are no longer receiving unemployment have technically dropped out of the workforce and are no longer looking for work. How is that an improvement? Can anyone honestly say that an increase in the number of people who receive public assistance, rather than unemployment, is an improvement?

The workforce participation rate is still on the rise. That’s a much more accurate indicator than the unemployment rate. Not only that, but a large number of the people who are working are underemployed. Obamacare has ensured that many people who need to be working full time are unable to work more than part time.

The left has been carping on about how there should be a $15 per hour minimum wage. Their justification is that people can’t live off of minimum wage. I agree, people can’t live off of minimum wage. But then, since when was flipping hamburgers ever considered to be a career? Shouldn’t those people move up to better paying, more responsible jobs? But they can’t, because those jobs don’t exist. Our stagnant economy isn’t creating them.

While not all the failure of the economy can be justly laid on Obama’s doorstep, a fair portion can. Much of the lack of recovery is due to three things, all of which are his fault. The first is the uncertainty about the economy which his administration has fostered. The second is businesses moving overseas, caused by the massive number of regulations Obama’s administration has created and the high corporate taxes they are taking from businesses. Finally, we have to thank Obamacare, which has single-handedly managed to reduce millions of people’s work week to 25 hours, when they were working 40 hours before.

Great success, huh?

His other great talking point about the economy is that he’s succeeded in cutting the deficit by almost three-quarters. Once again, this is a masterfully crafted statement. He’s not talking about the national debt, but the amount that the national debt increases each year. Compared to his first year in office, the budget for 2016 is three-quarters lower. But it’s still too high. Our government is still spending more money than they are receiving. So this figure doesn’t mean a thing.

Of course, Obamacare alone has been a huge negative influence in our economy. While millions of low-income people are now receiving Medicaid, who didn’t receive it before; other millions of people have lost their health insurance. Companies just can’t afford to pay the high premiums under Obamacare, so they are dropping insurance benefits.

The typical fast-food restaurant has more than 50 employees. These establishments run on a small margin, depending on volume to make a profit at all. But according to Obamacare, if they have 50 full-time employees, they have to give them health insurance. The answer? Cut their hours so that they can cut their benefits. If they don’t, those restaurants will be forced to go bankrupt, as their costs will be higher than their income.

But, liberals are blind to this. They say it’s the company’s fault and not Obamacare’s. That allows them to punish those businesses, demanding that they pay a $15 minimum wage. Sadly, the losers will be the poor that they claim to be trying to help.

So much for economic recovery.

We couldn’t have a speech by Obama, without him talking about his favorite subject; climate change. He actually bragged about the great strides that have been made in clean energy. It’s amazing that he would even mention that, reminding everyone of his first failure, giving millions of dollars to Solyndra and other failed green energy companies. Yet in Obama’s eyes, he’s succeeded.

Any improvements that have been made in energy costs have been made in spite of Obama, not because of him. He’s the one who single-handedly stopped the Keystone pipeline project, after sitting on it for seven years. Our current energy boon isn’t from clean energy, but from fracking, a technology that he is against, and may actually be causing an increase in earthquakes.

Hey, I’m a fan of green energy, but it isn’t working. Until some cost-effective means of storing large amounts of electrical energy can be found, it won’t. I don’t care how many solar panels you build and how many windmills you construct, they aren’t a reliable source of energy 24/7. That means that other, less environmentally friendly means of energy production have to be in operation, ready to take up the slack when wind and solar don’t work. What are those? Coal; Obama’s enemy.

We don’t need to spend money on propping up the green energy industry, we need to spend it on energy research. Maybe then, they’ll be able to find a way of making solar panels that are efficient and developing a realistic means of storing that energy.

The day of green energy has not come, regardless of what Obama says.

I could go on and on with Obama’s lies, but let me mention one more thing. According to his SOTU address, the US led coalition has become victorious over ISIS. No, we haven’t!

Our coalition is a joke, with the vast majority of the members only providing some relief to the people in the area or merely condemning ISIS. The people with boots on the ground; the Kurds, the Jordanians and now the Russians, are the ones who are winning that conflict. If anything, Obama is supporting ISIS, not destroying it.

Obama claims that we are stronger than ever and that our military is respected around the world. How would he know? He hates the military and has used it as a great social experiment. Today’s military is full of homosexuals and transgenders, as an experiment is seeing how they can be force-fed into society.

Standards are being lowered for combat roles, allowing women into military specialties they couldn’t enter before. While that is a great victory for gender equality, it has come at the cost of reduced combat effectiveness.

Hey, I believe in equality, but if a woman can’t meet the physical requirements of the job, then lowering the standards just increases the chances of her being killed. Not only that, but it increases the likelihood of those they serve with being killed as well.

Is this a correct price to pay? Should women’s rights trump the right to life? I can’t see any morality in forcing men to die, so that women can occupy positions that they aren’t physically strong enough to occupy. That doesn’t make sense. Let them serve in other capacities, but don’t drop the requirements in the name of women’s lib.

Sadly, our military is the weakest it has been since the Vietnam War. Between using it as a social experiment, cutting the military’s budget in order to have more money for social welfare, putting women in places they don’t belong and firing over 200 generals and admirals, Obama has gutted our war-fighting capability. Maybe we’re still the strongest kid on the block, but we’re not as strong as we once were.

The real cost in this will end up being the lives of those who serve in uniform. Since other countries no longer respect our military might, they won’t hesitate to use theirs.

That will end up putting us in the place of having to fight, or if not to fight, then to capitulate. When that fight comes, the losses of US servicemen and women will be higher than it should be; simply to satisfy the Narcissist in Chief’s hatred of our military.

There is much to hate in this SOTU address and even more to make us sad. Yet, Obama only has one more year in office. Unless he declares martial law and suspends the election, he will leave office next January.

Then, whoever takes over, will be faced with the biggest job of rebuilding this country has ever faced. Pull up your trousers and roll up your sleeves, the time to work at restoring our nation is coming soon.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.

4 total views, 4 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

What today’s market collapse means for the future

Click here to view the original post.

Black Friday hit world stock markets causing almost three trillion dollars in losses. As I predicted, this summer’s crash initiated a far larger crash cycle that is now returning with

The Demise Of Dollar Hegemony: Russia Breaks Wall St’s Oil-Price Monopoly

Click here to view the original post.

Just as I warned earlier this week, it appears Russia is moving to debase the Petro-Dollar, which would fundamentally destroy the quality of life Americans enjoy today. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-01-12/demise-dollar-hegemony-russia-breaks-wall-sts-oil-price-monopoly Russia has

How Secure is the State of Union Address Tonight?

Click here to view the original post.

How secure is the venue where nearly every head of the United States government will be tonight? That is a fair question and worth investigating considering how many enemies the

The Dictator Versus Our Civil Rights

Click here to view the original post.

Obama gun controlA couple of weeks ago, I wrote that Obama was going after our rights to bear arms as outlined in the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Well, the New Year was here, and as almost his very first act of business on arriving back in Washington, Obama issued a new set of executive orders, doing just that.

Obama has stated that his goal for his last official year in office, is to do something about gun control. If that’s the case, then the actions he took on January 5th are only the opening salvo against our 2nd A rights. We must realize and constantly remember, that the left’s way of doing things is the same as eating an elephant… one bite at a time.

That explains why Obama’s new executive orders seem so benign. In fact, they look like a paper tiger. In some cases, what he’s ordering merely seems to be a repeat of what’s already in the law, while in others it seems like he’s actually doing something positive. After all, spending money on improving mental health services, in order to find and help potential mass murders, actually seems to agree with what many conservatives have been calling for.

Likewise, putting pressure on states to provide more complete information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which was originally a NRA initiative, makes sense too.

Obama’s announcement of his illegal measures was nothing more than one more opportunity for the liar in chief to lecture the American public on his exaggerated liberal talking points. Rather than make any useful statement, he spread a series of lies and half-truths, some of which were immediately caught and refuted by the liberal media.

Considering the liberal media is as anti-gun as Obama himself is, their catching his lies about gun violence is really something. Yet that is exactly what they did. Some even challenged him, which is extremely rare for the liberal media to do.

Even so, suspicions run high about anything Obama does, and this is no exception. There is very good reason why we are all suspicious of Obama, and that is that what he says and what he does are not the same thing. If there is a way to use the executive orders he just released to hurt the rights of American citizens, then we can be sure that he will do so.

While Obama’s stated goal is to make our communities safe, we have to realize that his saying so is merely like the magician’s gloved hand, intended to distract people, while he does something else. So too with these measures. If he was truly concerned about the safety of our communities, he would stop going out of his way to make them more dangerous. Just in the last year, he’s personally made things more dangerous by:

  • Releasing 6,000 convicted criminals from prison
  • Releasing known terrorists from Guatanamo Bay, so that they could return to terrorism
  • Allowed tens of thousands of Muslim immigrants into the United States, without vetting them
  • Appointed Muslims with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood to sensitive positions in the DHS
  • Supported #Black Lives Matter, including their calls to kill police
  • Refused to use the term “Islamic terrorist,” but insists on calling their attacks “workplace violence”
  • Removed known terrorist groups from the terrorist watch list
  • Allowed known terrorists to cross the Mexican border into the United States
  • Allowed thousands of juvenile gang members, ranging from 16 to 18 years of age into the country

There are more, but just this sampling shows how little Obama cares about our nation being a safe place for us to live. Were he truly concerned about public safety, he would take action to protect the American people, not to make our lives more dangerous.

Does a Great Nation Need to Follow Others’ Example?

In the midst of all these things, making our lives more dangerous, Obama talks about the need to make our country more like Australia and take honest law-abiding citizens’ guns away from them. It’s clear that public safety is not his concern, but rather his progressive liberal agenda and his stated desire to destroy the country and therefore fulfill the dreams of his father.

So, while the executive orders that Obama signed may seem benign, we have to put ourselves into the convoluted thinking of a progressive liberal mind, in order to truly understand them. I don’t claim to have that ability, but as I look at them, a few things stand out to me.

As usual, the measures that Obama is taking will do nothing to prevent criminals from getting their hands on guns, regardless of what he says. Nor will it do anything to prevent mass shootings. The perpetrators of those shootings acquire their guns legally and criminals do not buy guns at gun shows, they buy them on the streets. So, on one hand we can call everything that Obama did with this latest act of anti-gun rhetoric nothing more than a circus show, except for one thing… he truly hates guns. There has to be a more nefarious purpose.

First of all, Obama has talked about closing the “gun show loophole.” I’ve been to a number of gun shows and even purchased guns at them. This loophole that he refers to is purely a thing of liberal fantasy. Anyone who has ever tried to buy a gun at a gun show knows that you have to jump through the same hoops at gun shows, that you do when buying a gun in a gun store. Perhaps that’s because the majority of the sellers at gun shows are gun store owners.

The only way you can buy a gun at a gun show, without a background check, is to buy it privately. While most gun shows are frowning on it now, you can rent a table at a gun show as a private citizen and sell some of your personal gun collection. The law allows it, just as it allows you to sell a gun to a friend or family member.

According to Obama’s new executive orders, anyone who sells guns “regularly” is going to be required to have a federal firearms license (FFL) and perform background checks. But that’s already the law. So what’s new? When asked by a reporter what the threshold was for requiring the FFL, Obama said there is no minimum. Is he planning on making people get a FFL to sell one gun from their private collection in a private sale?

That possibility has been a concern of gun-rights activists for some time. The reason is that the only way such a law could be upheld is to institute a nationwide gun registry database. Historically, that’s the necessary step before confiscation, so there’s a real danger in allowing the creation of that database.

Obama also railed against the ability to buy guns online, without a background check. This part was probably nothing more than grandstanding, as that’s illegal. Currently, firearms purchased online require the same level of scrutiny as firearms bought in a brick and mortar store. The buyer has to fill out the applicable paperwork and the seller has to call the NICS for a background check. If the firearm is to be shipped across state lines, it must be delivered to a FFL holder (gun store) for the completion of the paperwork and NICS background check.

There were two places where Obama added money to government department budgets, in order to improve gun-related services. While that is illegal for him to do, without congressional approval, everything else he did was illegal too, so we’ll set that aside for the moment. The two areas are to increase the NICS and to hire 50,000 more mental health workers.

Improving the NICS is a worthwhile endeavor. The current system has holes in it, specifically holes that allow people with mental illness to slip through. Not all states properly inform the NICS about those who have been adjured to be able to handle firearms safely. That might help catch people like Adam Lanza, before they go on a killing spree. But, once again, I have to wonder if that’s all it’s about.

I especially wonder when I couple that with the hiring of 50,000 additional mental health workers. What is the true reason for that? The obvious answer is to help find people who are not mentally capable of handling the responsibility of owning firearms. But how are they defining that?

As it stands right now, the Veteran’s Administration has been paying doctors to certify that individual veterans aren’t emotionally stable enough to own firearms. There is no hearing about this and the vet isn’t given the opportunity to defend themselves. All it takes is a doctor’s signature on a form. This atrocity is about to be extended, doing the same to the elderly who are receiving Social Security. Except in their case, the criteria isn’t PTSD, but rather the inability to handle their own finances.

The way the executive order is written, these people are unable to own firearms because they have been deemed to be mentally incompetent or unstable. Since when does the inability to write a check make someone mentally incompetent or emotionally unstable? If there’s anyone in the country who needs a firearm, it’s the elderly. All too often, criminals prey upon them, because of their inability to defend themselves. Firearms at least give them a fighting chance.

This is some of that “one bite at a time” creep that I was talking about before. First they went after the veterans and now they’re going after the elderly; who is next? What fringe group is Obama going to pick out next, in order to marginalize them and take away their Second Amendment rights?

If we add together the actions against senior citizens, the increase in mental health workers and the increase in NICS workers, we can arrive at a troubling conclusion. Perhaps Obama’s next step is to require mental health screening of gun owners. They do that in Australia and he’s been holding their gun laws up as an example. Perhaps these 50,000 health care workers aren’t going to look for the Adam Lanzas in our midst, but iThe Distead look for a means to certify gun owners as unfit to own firearms.

The fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (say that five times fast) is so extensive, that it’s all but guaranteed that every person in the world has some sort of mental disorder. Psychiatrists and psychologists have been working overtime to define conditions that can be called mental disorder. Part of this is for their moment of fame and part is that they truly believe that we all have something wrong with us (except them, of course).

One of the many mental disorders listed there is “Oppositional Defiant Disorder.” In other words, if you disagree with massive government taking control of your life, you have a mental disorder. Another is “climate change denial disorder.” Between those two alone, pretty much any true conservative could easily be adjudged to have a mental disorder. If they do that, bye-bye guns.

Is that going to happen? Once again, I don’t know. But the precedence is being built, even as we speak. We must always remember that Obama’s goal, as well as the entire progressive liberal left, is to take our guns away, so that they can have total control. They will use every means they can, and create those means if they don’t exist.

One final point; this is just January. At the end of last year, Obama clearly stated that his goal for 2015 was gun control. It is quite possible that he started early, so that he could do several rounds of executive orders, each one encroaching more and more on our rights.

If that’s the case, we have much more coming our way. Keep your eyes open.


This article has been written by Bill White for Survivopedia.









3 total views, 3 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

Russia sets chessboard for major Middle East war and transition to global dominance with one apocalyptic move

Click here to view the original post.

The United States has enjoyed the preeminent position globally as well as the Middle East for the last half a century. Like all empires, the sun has risen and now

Death Sentence For The 2nd Amendment

Click here to view the original post.

2nd AmendmentAs most of us know by now, the 2nd Amendment is all that stands between freedom and all out totalitarianism. It is the backbone of all other freedoms and rights, in a world gone raving mad with domination over others. That’s why the visionary Framers made it an absolutely unqualified, uncontrollable, ‘Shall Not Be Infringed’ for ANY reason, guaranteed individual right, period!

I saved this article for after the holidays so as not to depress anyone too much more than we already are with this out of control regime while we all were trying to enjoy what little we have left of their precious American Constitutional guarantee of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But something happened.

We all just heard on the news that ‘he’s’ at it again with despotic fiat attempts at circumventing the Constitution, like some king, or supreme theocratic ruler, or marxist dictator, or whatever he thinks he is.

This time it’s his New Year’s resolution finally getting his illegal private citizen background check (gun sale registration) for future confiscation scam going again, with a little salt in the wounds of Freedom by also making everyone on a No Fly List forbidden from having a gun, if he can sneak that in through the ’back door’ of his administrative fiats.

Never mind that the No Fly List is also constitutionally illegal, literally throwing all Bill of Rights guarantees of due process right out the third floor window! And that so many people are on it who don’t belong on it but have no recourse but to hire a lawyer spending months and years fighting it without any guarantee of getting off the list–including even a few high ranking Government officials-that it amounts to nothing less than old fashioned Gestapo tricks to eliminate your ’opposition’?

The No Fly List (part two of the ‘control all personal free movement’ agenda along with part one, the illegal I.D. card requirement in the form of the 2005 ‘Real I.D. Act’) is a genuine abusive decree because the decisions about who gets on the list are done in secret by some hack State Dept bureaucrat based only on subjective determinations with NO clearly delineated legal criteria, other than a dubious belief of potential terrorist connections! Beat THAT, Adolph, Stalin, Mao, and the rest of you old boy JV team! ACLU, where the hell are YOU!

And as long as POTUS is getting away with all this albeit with much media consternation and question, he is still laughing and holding hands with the executioner all the way to the people’s rights gallows. Only Rand Paul stood up to the task and recently introduced a Senate Bill to preclude such ‘presidential’ executive orders without Congressional approval anytime they are in conflict with Constitutional reference.

Unfortunately a case of too little too late. Fat chance it does any good now because of how long the procedure and final voting takes. Meanwhile the noose on the neck of the 2nd/A is tightening. They get away with it because our reps let them. And WE let our reps get away with letting Obama do it!

How Bad Is It?

It’s worse than bad. The tipping point of tyranny has finally fallen over into the hands of the enemy camp. Totalitarian gun grabbers are now winning strongly. Free American patriots are losing miserably. This President and his anti-Constitutional ‘think tank’ must have been staying up long nights guzzling oceans of taxpayer funded black coffee to have a plan ready to seize upon current agenda advantageous circumstances.

Amazingly they’ve even somehow garnished enough funding for this De Facto background check gun registration decree to hire hundreds of new FBI and BATFE agents to facilitate and manage this latest criminal act against the people’s privacy rights to own a gun while they cut back on Social Security benefits and still haven’t adequately brought the VA up to much needed financial improvements for disabled combat vets!

What Triggered This Bold Attack by Obama on the 2nd/A?

Obama became tactically emboldened with new polls in the recent months including a Pew Poll report indicating that over half the population would agree to expanded background checks (aka gun registration) for private citizen sales if it helped reduce ‘bad’ people from getting guns. Which eventually includes the interpretation of ’bad’ people and the attendant Fiat laws to potentially include almost each and every one of us who disagree with the regime.

This doesn’t really mean that most people agree with anti-Constitutional gun control, it simply reflects that totalitarian mind control strategies have worked better than expected under this regime. And that far too many Americans have succumbed to the bait and switch and hook of the mythical nanny state comfort zone. Which is nothing less than falling victim to the most insidiously evil plot to eventually enslave an entire nation of people ever devised by a modern government. The Great Gun Control Hoax!

In association with the regime’s agenda, and while nobody seemed to care or pay attention to any level of statutory tyranny proliferation on the state levels, the totalitarian Cosa Nostra wasted no time during Obama’s reign consolidating their forces in a pincer maneuver with New York in the East and California in the West– which on New Year’s day put statewide background check registration into law including special police units to enforce compliance in house to house sweeps if necessary, already situated in designation!

And the disease is spreading as totalitarian billionaires are donating inexhaustible funds to ensure totalitarian legislatures get in at state levels to continue expanding anti-gun laws throughout the country replicating those New York and California.

At least 18 or more states now have similar laws, and the estimate is that if this agenda continues, over half the United States will have draconian anti-2nd/A laws by the year’s end! And this doesn’t include the many Federal level anti-2nd/A death blow bills currently waiting for nothing else but another totalitarian regime POTUS and Congress to be voted in power next year!

The Real Reason for the Treason

The POTUS, his regime, and their misled minions, actually have no confusion about this. They all know the stupidity of their vacuous arguments for gun control. They are fully aware that ‘Shall Not Be Infringed’ clearly means no gun control restrictions or laws whatsoever, of any kind.

They know that restrictions or bans on material items can never solve a problem that is fundamentally an aberration of the human behavior mechanism which manifests itself in harmful social actions. They know gun control has never and will never stop gun violence or criminals from getting weapons.

They know the 1934 NFA and 1968 GCA and all other gun control efforts are, and always were, anti-Constitutional. President Johnson rattlesnaked this law through while most people were still snoozing from trying to wake up from Viet Nam. This same law would never pass again today.

Every day more TOTALITARIANS are coming full blast out of the closet and are no longer even defending their ‘rationale’ for gun control with specious notions of good public safety intentions.

They actually will now admit they want to exercise absolute control over people with too much freedom on their hands, and too many guns in those hands. Especially when the sheeple population explosion gets too large for the ’controllers’ to manage every time they need to be fleeced for necessary government profit margins. So they don’t want their government backed paramilitary police to have to face angry people–particularly the ‘Molon Labe’ types– who have the idea that they really need their silly freedoms shouting ‘Give Me Liberty, or Give Me Death’ while holding millions of AR-15’s!

So killing the Constitution is not even denied any more. The truth is that the totalitarians fully understand completely what it takes to facilitate a Marxist/Fascist agenda, which is a complete erasure of the 2nd/Amendment by any means possible. Which means spreading lies, and providing whatever public bribery they can facilitate for their minions–followed by the complete functional disarmament of the population to emasculate any future form of public protest, popular resistance, civil disobedience from becoming a formidable physical revolution against the regime.

Sadly, too many of ‘We, The People’ still don’t get that or believe it. Even though they slap us in the face with it every chance they get.

Regan quote

Any Hope for a Miracle from… God?

The tyrant in Hunger Games said profoundly that “hope is stronger than fear” when talking about oppressing the people. But he forgot to mention that hopes are easily crushed and bypassed in active physical movements, because as Einstein said, “nothing happens until something moves”.

We can hope all we want. But that doesn’t get things done to change anything. And it is the devout responsibility of each of us as American citizens to protect our precious liberties.

The sad irony is that that human nature in Americans always causes them to default to try to then do a reverse ‘back door’ approach to the problem to counter the G’s initiatory back door attack.

They’ll say things like I’ll just hide my stuff or hurry up and buy more of what I need privately before the mandate goes into effect, or get beer ballsy in their delusions of revolutions by saying Molan Labe as if it remained a viable solution. When all that does is make it easier to profile potential dissidents with the latest government NSA spying expansion (oh, you didn’t know about that either?) so they wind up just buying more weapons for government storm troopers to confiscate when they come knocking.

Unfortunately we can no longer wait until the last minute. The new ’majority’ of so called democratic Americans are turn coat Tories who welcome the totalitarian nanny state and will gladly succumb to the leftist agenda and vote according to their master’s commands.

Remember, the original revolutionary patriots also amounted to less than the majority in America at that time. But we won our liberty and justice by getting off our asses and organizing and spreading the word. Part of that is spreading the ’serious’ word to our Representatives who are our employees.

Let’s do something this week by contacting our Reps and asking a simple question like “so…Ms./Mr. Representative, what are you going to do for a living after your term ends, if you let this regime get away with this illegal gun registration mandate?”

And then ask them “why hasn’t anyone introduced a bill to repeal the 1034 NFA Act and the 68 GCA for starters? You didn’t waste time getting a repeal going for the AHC act because the insurance lobbies were so nice to you? So let’s get with it on the most important illegal law Repeal in our lifetimes. If you like that nice taxpayer provided office and bennies from your Constituency?”

Otherwise, if the FBI folds to the power and influence of the current regime, and ‘can’t determine any indictable evidence’ and Hillary is the candidate, and the RINOs in the GOP can’t get their unification act together and totally support the outsider front runners, then it’s over for our 2nd/A. No exchanges, no refunds.

I know Trump and Cruz vow to use their executive order power to delete all gun control measures as soon as they get their fingers on the POTUS White House Pen set. But that ain’t in stone yet. Remember Romney? Nobody thought he could lose. Remember also that the House and Senate are also in the race, and like State G reps, the totalitarian billionaires are also funding the Leftist U.S. Reps.

The house only needs a dozen or so to shift the balance and the Senate only needs a net Democratic gain of 5 senators to end the life of all liberties, if Hillary is elected. ALL your guns that are now universal background check registered will also be subject to universal confiscations based on ‘public safety’ as ‘administratively’ determined necessary. This will be often and swift.

And the laughing leftist totalitarians will never look back.


This article has been written by Mahatma Muhjesbude for Survivopedia.



13 total views, 13 views today

Rate this article!

[Total: 0    Average: 0/5]

What we can learn from the Oregon militia standoff and how to implement those lessons

Click here to view the original post.

Ammon Bundy’s stand against the Bureau of Land Management and the Federal Government in Oregon, whether you agree with it or not, should serve as a learning point for grassroots