Over and over, OBAMA THROUGH HIS SURROGATES AND DEMOCRAT members of Congress asked the IRS to scrutinize 501(c)4 groups for their political activity—and also to scrutinize the agency's scrutiny of those groups.

DEMOCRATS IN Congress Put Pressure on the IRS to Investigate Conservative Tax-Exempt Groups

Over and over, DEMOCRAT members of Congress asked the IRS to scrutinize 501(c)4 groups for their political activity—and also to scrutinize the agency's scrutiny of those groups.

ITS US VERSUS THEM...

THEY WANT OUR TAXES BUT THEY DON'T WANT US !! I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND THIS!!! THEY WANT SLAVES TO FEED THEIR SOCIALIST MACHINE !!

ITS US VERSUS THEM...

 

 

WE MUST SAY NO!! REVOLT OR SECEDE..

READ THE DETAILS AND SHARE THE OUTRAGE !!

A report in Roll Call in March 2012 revealed that leading members of Congress not only were aware that the Internal Revenue Service had begun investigating the political activity of would-be 501(c)4 Tea Party groups that winter, but showed to what an extent members of Congress had been actively putting pressure on the agency to take a closer look at tax-exempt conservative organizations in the wake of the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling. Reported Janie Lorber in 2012:

Tea party outrage over a spate of IRS letters to conservative groups has revived a long-standing dispute over the agency's controversial role in policing politically active nonprofits.
In January, the IRS began sending extensive questionnaires to organizations applying for nonprofit status as part of a broader project to understand whether social welfare organizations—which are not required to disclose their donors—are actually acting as political committees.
Campaign finance reform groups and lawmakers in both parties have repeatedly demanded that the IRS examine the activities of tax-exempt advocacy groups, which proliferated during the 2010 cycle and are on pace to play an even larger role in 2012.
Democrats, whose affiliated outside groups have lost the fundraising race to Republican organizations this year, have been particularly vocal, sending repeated letters to the agency requesting an investigation. On Wednesday, Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) asked his colleagues in Congress to sign yet another.

Peter Welch is a Democratic congressman from Vermont and sits on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee chaired by California Republican Darrell Issa. Welch's March 2, 2012 letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman explicitly called on the IRS to crack down on 501(c)(4)s:

We write to urge the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to investigate whether any groups qualifying as social welfare organizations under section 501(c)(4) of the federal tax code are improperly engaged in political campaign activity.
Congress created a tax break for nonprofit social welfare organizations because communities across our country benefit greatly from their important work. It is clearly contrary to the intent of Congress for organizations supporting a candidate for office or running attack ads against a candidate to receive taxpayer support intended for legitimate nonprofit groups...
We strongly urge you to fully enforce the law and related court rulings that clearly reserve 501(c)(4) tax status for legitimate nonprofit organizations. And we urge you to investigate and stop any abuse of the tax code by groups whose true mission is to influence the outcome of federal elections.

In a statement accompanying the letter, Welch's office urged the IRS to "investigate whether nonprofit 501(c)(4) organizations affiliated with Super PACs—such as Crossroads GPS, the Karl Rove-backed group spending millions of dollars in campaigns across the country—are in violation of federal law and IRS regulations."
Issa, for his part, sent a letter on March 27, 2012 in concert with Republican Jim Jordan of Ohio, who sits on House Oversight and chairs its Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs, asking the agency to look into the Tea Party group complaints about excessive information requests.
"Over the past several weeks the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) sent many organizations, operating under tax exempt status, lengthy and detailed questionnaires," Issa and Jordan wrote to Lois Lerner, the director of the Exempt Organizations Division of the IRS, footnoting the above Roll Call story and a report in CNSNews as their sources. "These questionnaires ask for information well beyond the scope of typical disclosures required under IRS Form 1024....[S]everal experts suggest these recent IRS questionnaires exceed appropriate scrutiny."
"Moreover," they added, "the IRS must apply the same criteria for all organizations applying for tax exempt status. News reports, however, indicate that the IRS efforts lack balance, with conservative organizations being the target of the IRS's heightened scrutiny efforts."
A group of 12 Republican U.S. Senators on March 14, 2012 also complained to the IRS about the handling of the Tea Party and other conservative groups. "We have received reports and reviewed information from nonprofit civic organizations in Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas concerning recent IRS inquiries perceived to be excessive," they wrote Commissioner Shulman. "It is critical that the public have confidence that federal tax compliance efforts are pursued in a fair, even-handed, and transparent manner—without regard to politics of any kind. To that end, we write today to seek your assurance that this recent string of inquiries has a sound basis in law and is consistent with the IRS's treatment of tax-exempt organizations across the spectrum."
Signatories on the letter included Orrin Hatch (Utah), Rob Portman (Ohio), Mitch McConnell (Ky.), Chuck Grassley (Iowa), and Rand Paul (Ky.).
Outside groups had been calling on the IRS to investigate non-profits—and especially nonprofit 501(c)(4) groups run by Republican political operatives—since at least the fall of 2011. The "IRS said examining the tax status of 501(c)4 political entities would be a priority for 2012," the Wall Street Journal reported in June 2012, noting that the agency was "taking initial steps to examine whether Crossroads GPS, a pro-Republican group affiliated with Karl Rove, and similar political entities are violating their tax-exempt status by spending too much on partisan activities."
Sen. Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, called on the IRS in 2010 to investigate tax-exempt groups, writing the IRS commissioner that September to request that the agency "survey major 501(c)(4), (c)(5) and (c)(6) organizations involved in political campaign activity to examine whether they are operated for the organization's intended tax exempt purpose and to ensure that political campaign activity is not the organization's primary activity." He said his request was prompted by news reports about the organizing efforts of conservative groups.
"Possible violation of tax laws should be identified as you conduct this study," Baucus wrote. "Please report back to the Finance Committee as soon as possible with your findings and recommended actions regarding this matter."
On Monday, Baucus announced plans to hold a Senate Finance Committee hearing into Friday's fresh round of revelations that the IRS had targeted conservative 501(c)4 groups.
According to a draft inspector general's audit obtained by the New York Times, the agency use of "tea party" as a key word to scrutinize applicants for tax-exempt status dated to March 2010 and continued through February 2012, when the Tea Party groups began to raise a public outcry.

Soros Gave $6.1 Million to Groups Linked to Pressure on IRS to Target Conservative Nonprofits

REVOLT... THIS IS NOT OUR COUNTRY... WE ARE WORKING PAWNS.
Soros Gave $6.1 Million to Groups Linked to Pressure on IRS to Target Conservative Nonprofits

HERE'S PROOF....

With Soros funding, anything is possible. The growing scandal where the IRS unfairly targeted politically-conservative groups can be traced back to a lobbying effort begun by George Soros-funded liberal groups in 2010, after the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling.
The talking points of these groups then bounced around a carefully created progressive "echo chamber," until they eventually made their way into established media outlets. Key IRS policy changes about how it investigated conservative groups took place soon after it received three separate letters sent by Soros-funded liberal organizations.
Several Soros-funded groups including the Campaign Legal Center, Democracy 21, the Center for Public Integrity, Mother Jones and Alternet have worked to pressure the IRS to target conservative nonprofit groups. The subsequent IRS investigation flagged more than 100 tea party-related applications for higher scrutiny, including applications that included the words "Tea Party" and "patriot."
The IRS scandal can be traced back to a series of letters that the liberal groups Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and Democracy 21 sent to the IRS back in 2010 and 2011. Both groups were funded by George's Soros's Open Society Foundations. The CLC received $677,000 and Democracy 21 got $365,000 from the Soros-backed foundation, according to the Foundation's 990 tax forms.
The letters specifically targeted conservative Super PACs like Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS, asking the IRS to scrutinize them more thoroughly to determine whether or not they should retain their tax-exempt status.
On Oct. 5, 2010, when the first letter was sent to the IRS, calling specifically for the agency to "investigate" Crossroads GPS. The letter claimed Crossroads was "impermissibly using its tax status to spend tens of millions of dollars in the 2010 congressional races while hiding the donors funding these expenditures from the American people." Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer wrote a blog post for the liberal Huffington Post to promote it, and the effort to get the media to notice the anti-conservative campaign began.
On June 27, 2011, a second letter by the CLC and Democracy 21 complained about enforcement of 501(c)(4) tax regulations, asking "that the IRS issue new regulations that better enforce the law." Two days later, an IRS senior agency official was briefed on a new policy targeting groups which "criticize how the country is being run," according to a Washington Post story. According to the Post, this policy was later revised.
A third letter by the CLC and Democracy 21, on Sept 28, 2011, got media traction. The letter showed the escalation of the left's complaint about 501(c)(4) groups. It challenged "the eligibility of four organizations engaged in campaign activity to be treated as 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations." The four organizations included Crossroads GPS, Priorities USA, American Action Network and Americans Elect.
The Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity ($2,716,328) published a "study" on 501(c)(4) groups, on October 31, which drew heavily from, and referenced, the CLC and Democracy 21. The Center for Public Integrity has strong media connections and boasts an advisory board that includes Ben Sherwood, president of ABC News, and Michele Norris, an NPR host, as well as a board of directors with such prominent names as Huffington Post CEO Arianna Huffington, Steve Kroft of CBS News's "60 Minutes" and Craig Newmark (founder of Craigslist).
This study then led to a Mother Jones article about a month later, on November 18, which was reposted on the left-wing blog Alternet on November 21. By December of 2011, the topic had been picked up in a New York Times editorial, and then began receiving other media coverage. That editorial called for "the Internal Revenue Service to crack down on the secret political money already flooding the 2012 campaign from partisan operatives ludicrously claiming to be 'social welfare' activists."
On Jan. 15, 2012, the IRS targeted groups focused on limiting government or educating people about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
Alternet and Mother Jones are both members of The Media Consortium, which is designed to do exactly what happened here. The Media Consortium was created to be a progressive "echo chamber," where 63 separate left-wing media outlets can network and share ideas, as well as cross-promote stories. Other members of the Consortium include such liberal outlets as The Nation, Democracy Now! and The American Prospect. The consortium has also received $675,000 in Soros funds since 2000. Alternet ($285,000) and Mother Jones ($485,000) have both also received individual funding from Soros's Open Society Foundations.
This isn't the only time the IRS has targeted conservative groups recently, nor is it the only connection between the IRS and Soros-funded groups. The IRS gave the left-wing journalism site ProPublica the applications for nine conservative groups pending tax-exempt status.
The IRS also released the confidential donor lists of the National Organization for Marriage to the liberal Human Rights Campaign. Both the Human Rights Campaign ($2,716,328) and ProPublica ($300,000) are also Soros-funded. Despite its blatant liberal leanings, ProPublica boasts a staff of well-known journalists, including veterans of The New York Times and The Wall Street journal, as well as of liberal operations like the Center for American Progress and The Nation, and has even won two Pulitzer Prizes.
Timeline Shows Influence of Soros-Funded Groups

• Sept. 16, 2010: TIME article "The New GOP Money Stampede" quotes Wertheimer;
• Sept. 23, 2010: DISCLOSE act, a campaign finance disclosure act specifically targeting a Tea Party group, in the writing of which the CLC participated, fails in the Senate;
• Sept. 28, 2010: Democrat Senator Max Baucus writes a letter to the IRS, citing the TIME article;
• Oct. 5, 2010: Democracy 21 and Campaign Legal Center petition IRS, Wertheimer writes HuffPo article;
• Oct. 7, 2010: Legal brief from HoltzmanVogel PLLC against the Democracy 21 petition;
• Oct. 14, 2010: Dick Durbin asks IRS to investigate American Crossroads, HuffPo coverage;
• June 27, 2011: Second petition to the IRS by CLC and Democracy 21;
• June 29, 2011: IRS senior agency official Lois Lerner briefed on efforts to target groups which "criticize how the country is being run";
• Sept. 28, 2011: CLC and Democracy 21 petition IRS again, this time about four conservative groups;
• Oct. 31, 2011: CPI "investigation";
• Nov. 18, 2011: Mother Jones article;
• Nov. 21, 2011: Alternet repost of Mother Jones Article;
• Dec. 29, 2011: New York Times oped;
• Jan. 15, 2012: IRS targeted groups focusing on limiting government or educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights;
• February 2012: First articles promoting this issue appear in New York Times, Washington Post and LA Times

$6.1 Million in Soros Funding Since 2000
Center for Public Integrity: $2,716,328
Campaign Legal Center: $677,000
Media Consortium: $675,000
Mother Jones: $485,000
Democracy 21: $365,000
ProPublica: $300,000
Alternet: $285,000
Human Rights Campaign: $600,000

Benghazi Investigation was a set up from Day 1... just like the FAST AND FURIOUS Investigation. Where is that going hmmmmmmm ??? DITRACT DISTRACT DISTRACT!!

UNREAL!! THIS IS WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU GET AN 80 YEAR OLD PATSY TO DO THE INVESTIGATION. THIS MAN IS ALMOST SENILE AND ILLOGICAL

Pickering: Why would we interview the person in charge when we could blame the flunkies, or something. WE ARE BEING SET UP...AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN... revolution..is the only way left!!

Want to know why State Department whistleblower Eric Nordstrom called the Accountability Review Board a whitewash designed to protect the highest ranks at Foggy Bottom?  Take a listen to the man who ran the ARB.  CBS News’ Bob Schieffer asked Thomas Pickering why the supposedly independent panel didn’t bother to depose the Secretary of State who was personally briefed about the attack on the Benghazi consulate by the second-ranking member of her mission in Libya while it unfolded.  Pickering replied that they’d already decided who was responsible for the failures in Benghazi and they saw no need to talk with the person in charge (via NRO):

WATCH THIS DUMBASS HERE!!!

http://youtu.be/sqBwXlp6qAM

“The decisions were made and reviewed at the level that we fixed responsibility for failures of performance,” Pickering told CBS’ Bob Schieffer, adding, ”I believe that that’s correct.” According to Pickering, he and his colleagues had ample opportunity to interview Secretary Clinton, but concluded that conducting an interview with her was not necessary. “We knew where the responsibility rested,” he said.

Pickering isn’t too impressed with the whistleblowers, apparently:

Appearing Sunday on “Face the Nation,” Pickering defended the report, which he co-authored with former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, against criticisms from three former and current State Department officials who testified last week before the House Oversight Committee. Greg Hicks – the No. 2 official in Libya at the time of the strike that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans – told the committee he believed the report “let people off the hook.”
“They’ve tried to point a finger at people more senior than where we found the decisions were made,” Pickering said, citing specifically Clinton and Undersecretary for Management Patrick Kennedy. Mark Thompson, the deputy coordinator for operations in the State Department’s counterterrorism bureau, told the House committee last week that Clinton attempted to cut out the bureau from communications about the attack.

Well, it’s difficult to find decision-making where one refuses to look. Recall what Nordstrom told Congress last week:

Nordstrom suggested the board’s report attempted to protect higher-ranking officials, and specifically faulted it for not looking at the key role played by Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy in failing to deliver the request for more security to Clinton.
He said a similar failure occurred in the 1998 bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kenya, which killed 19 Americans.
“[The ARB] has decided to fix responsibility on the assistant secretary level and below,” said Nordstrom. “And the message to my colleagues is that if you’re above a certain level, no matter what your decision is no one’s going to question it.
“I look back and I see the last time we had a major attack was East Africa. Who was in that same position, when the unheeded messengers … were raising those concerns? It just so happens it was the same person. The under secretary for management was in that same role before.
“There’s something apparently wrong with the process of how those security recommendations are raised to the secretary.”

It’s also difficult to see the pattern when you’re deliberately fixed on the anything but the big picture.

The Obama Cabal was running guns through Libya to Syria Rebels. Ambassador Stevens was part of the plan.

The bullshit being spewed now to cover for Obama is that...Hillary is the one to blame for Benghazi!! THE REAL TRAITOR IS OBAMA!

The story being hidden is that Obama and the Cabal did not do anything about the attack BECAUSE...... it would blow the lid off the "Other" story.....

The "Other" story which is more potent than the current story and is being hidden is that The Obama Cabal was running guns through Libya to Syria Rebels. Ambassador Stevens was part of the plan.

Early in Leon Panneta's testimony they created a road block by him lying under oath that Obama was briefed at 5 pm and he went to bed.

 

WATCH THE VIDEO HERE....  

WHAT A LIAR!!
PANETTA & DEMPSEY
TAKING PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY
TO THE NEXT LEVEL
http://youtu.be/P4enyBcNFNs

Then without even asking about anything he just mosied off went off to a fund raiser in Vegas....

YEAH RIGHT !!! My sources tell me that he was on top of the story and was part of covering it up... helped with the " Video Story".... but needed "Plausible Deniability" and so their official story is that he just went to bed.

NOW EVERYONE INCLUDING THE CONSERVATIVE MEDIA IS JUST PARROTING THAT LINE... that "Obama did not know anything about anything cuz he went to bed."

Look they strategised that going to bed was a better story than Gun Running to Syrian Rebels....

WAKE UP... EXPOSE THE REAL STORY !!!Sources confirm U.S. gun-running to jihadists

Center of Benghazi scandal still ignored by media!

PETRAEUS WAS SET UP 

SO HE COULD NOT TESTIFY !!!

We must track the story as to why Panneta was so vehement about Obama ONLY have one meeting at 5 pm and then did nothing. That is insanity even for a Kenyan. Just curiosity would dictate that he would at least want to know what the heck is going on!!!

Unless it was a cover up. " You go hide Mr. President... we cannot have you exposed to the stuff... so we will fall on the sword..if the coverup fails"

Thats how it went down !! GUARANTEED !!

WND has reconfirmed with multiple knowledgeable Middle Eastern security sources that the U.S. special mission in Benghazi was used to coordinate Arab arms shipments and other aid to the so-called rebels fighting in Libya and later in Syria.
WND first broke the story on the Benghazi gun-running issue just 13 days after the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks.

The scandal has garnered more news media attention since Sen. Rand Paul asked outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about the claims during hearings over the Benghazi affair two weeks ago.
Clinton claimed she did not know whether the U.S. special mission was involved in gun-running.
Paul asked Clinton: “Is the U. S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling, anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?
“To Turkey?” Clinton asked. “I will have to take that question for the record. Nobody has ever raised that with me.”
Continued Paul: “It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that may have weapons, and what I’d like to know is the annex that was close by, were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries, any countries, Turkey included?”
Clinton replied, “Well, senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. I will see what information is available.”
“You’re saying you don’t know?” asked Paul.
“I do not know,” Clinton said. “I don’t have any information on that.”
That section of the exchange with Paul was almost entirely ignored by media, which instead focused on the Republican senator’s earlier statement that if he were president he would have relieved Clinton of her post.
Reconfirmed
Now knowledgeable security sources have reconfirmed WND’s original reporting on the use of the Benghazi mission in aiding the rebels who are known to be saturated by al-Qaida and other Islamic terrorist groups.
In September, WND broke the story that the slain U.S. ambassador, Christopher Stevens, played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, according to Egyptian security officials.
In November, Middle Eastern security sources further described both the U.S. mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi as the main intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels that was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Among the tasks performed inside the building was collaborating with countries, most notably Turkey, on the recruitment of fighters – including jihadists – to target Assad’s regime, the security officials said.
While the White House has been largely mum on the alleged use of the Benghazi mission to aid the rebels, Obama administration officials did claim the White House rejected a plan to supply arms to the Syrian rebels.
If, indeed, President Obama rejected the arms plan, as reported last weekend by the New York Times, it would mean the White House went against the recommendations of outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta; Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; and then-CIA Director David Petraeus.
The plan was said to have been generated by Petraeus and Clinton.
In Senate hearings on Benghazi last week, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., asked Panetta and Dempsey whether they had supported a plan “that we provide weapons to the resistance in Syria.”
“We do,” Panetta replied.
“You did support that?” McCain asked again.
“We did,” added Dempsey, who was sitting next to Panetta.
Neither Dempsey nor Panetta elaborated on their positions.
The New York Times reported the White House rebuffed the Clinton-Petraeus plan developed last summer to arm and train Syrian rebels.
The Times, citing unnamed Obama administration officials, reported the White House rejected the Clinton-Petraeus proposal over concerns it could draw the U.S. into the Syrian conflict and the arms could fall into the wrong hands.
The plan reportedly called for vetting rebels and arming a group of fighters with the assistance of Arab countries.
WND reported Stevens himself was leading the vetting efforts, working with the Saudis to send names of potential jihadi recruits to U.S. security organizations for review. Names found to be directly involved in previous attacks against the U.S., including in Iraq and Afghanistan, were ultimately not recruited by the Saudis to fight in Syria.
The scheme appears to mirror the Petraeus-Clinton plan as described by the New York Times.
Secret activities
According to the 39-page report released last month by independent investigators probing the attacks at the diplomatic facility, the U.S. mission in Benghazi was set up without the knowledge of the new Libyan government, as WND reported.
“Another key driver behind the weak security platform in Benghazi was the decision to treat Benghazi as a temporary, residential facility, not officially notified to the host government, even though it was also a full-time office facility,” the report states. “This resulted in the Special Mission compound being excepted from office facility standards and accountability under the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (SECCA) and the Overseas Security Policy Board (OSPB).”
The report, based on a probe led by former U.S. diplomat Thomas Pickering, calls the facility a “Special U.S. Mission.”
During the Libyan revolution against Moammar Gadhafi’s regime, the U.S. admitted to directly arming the rebel groups.
Stevens himself first arrived in Libya on a cargo ship to serve as the official U.S. liaison to Libyan opposition, reportedly working directly with Abdelhakim Belhadj of the al-Qaida-tied Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.
At the time of the U.S. aid to the Libyan fighters, rebel leader Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi acknowledged in an interview that a significant number of the Libyan rebels were al-Qaida fighters, many of whom had fought U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
He insisted his fighters “are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists,” but he added that the “members of al-Qaida are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader.”
Consulate?
From the beginning, U.S. media reports on the events in Benghazi have been misleading.
The vast majority of media coverage worldwide refers to the U.S. facility that was attacked as a “consulate,” even though the government itself has been careful to call it a “mission.”
A consulate typically refers to the building that houses a consul, who is the official representative of the government of one state in the territory of another. The U.S. consul in Libya, Jenny Cordell, works out of the embassy in Tripoli.
Consulates at times function as junior embassies, providing services related to visas, passports and citizen information.
On Aug. 26, about two weeks before his was killed, Ambassador Stevens attended a ceremony marking the opening of consular services at the Tripoli embassy.
The main role of a consulate is to foster trade with the host and care for its own citizens who are traveling or living in the host nation.
Diplomatic missions, on the other hand, maintain a more generalized role. A diplomatic mission is simply a group of people from one state or an international inter-governmental organization present in another state to represent matters of the sending state or organization in the receiving state.
However, according to the State Department investigation, the building was a “U.S. Special Mission” set up without the knowledge of the Libyan government.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/sources-confirm-u-s-gun-running-to-jihadists/

MORE INFORMATION FROM THE BOWELS OF THE INTERNET!!

What was Ambassador Steven's role in the Gun Running?
In-Extremis | Katechon

Posted on Thursday, November 01, 2012 8:00:54 PM by Katechon
It is becoming increasingly clear that the Obama régime has been running guns and armaments and munitions to the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliate jihadist groups, including heat-seeking shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles designed to shoot down jetliners. The American Mission in Libya was apparently trying to buy back man-portable anti-aircraft missiles that the Obama Régime sold or gave to the Muslim Brotherhood and then went "missing." The Administration was also trying to buy back weapons previously owned by the Gaddafi Régime that spread everywhere after the "revolution."

Peter Bouckaert, Human Rights Watch emergencies director, told CNN he has seen the same pattern in armories looted elsewhere in Libya, noting that "in every city we arrive, the first thing to disappear are the surface-to-air missiles." He said such missiles can fetch many thousands of dollars on the black market. "We are talking about some 20,000 surface-to-air missiles in all of Libya, and I've seen cars packed with them." he said. [...] The United States has spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to buy them back [...]

“The rebels came from all over the western mountains, and they just took what they wanted,” said Riyad, a supervisor of the ruined arsenal’s small contingent of rebel guards.

A report by the UN Support Mission in Libya (PDF) said that Gaddafi had accumulated a large stockpile of MANPADs, and that although thousands were "destroyed" during the 2011 military intervention in Libya, there were "increasing concerns over the looting and likely proliferation of these portable defence systems, as well as munitions and mines, highlighting the potential risk to local and regional stability." As soon as islamic organizations outside Libya realized that there were Manpads available, they tried to get them.
When the Obama Régime discovered that thousands of MANPADs had "disappeared" and were "on the loose in Libya" it turned around and stuck a LOT of cash in the CIA "annex", or "safehouse" in order to BUY those weapons back. (I wrote about the CIA annex here.)
Fox News Bureau Chief of Intelligence Catherine Herridge said that the role being played by the U.S. Mission in Libya is to control the movement of weapons out of Libya to Syrian rebels fighting to bring down the Bashar Al-Assad régime. The Benghazi mission played a key role in “engaging, legitimating, enriching and emboldening Islamists who have taken over or are ascendant in much of the Middle East,” said the president of the Center for Security Policy. From there, we can infer that Ghadaffi was overthrown in order to use Libya as the doorway to get the arms in for distribution to Syria, Yemen, Jordan, Egypt and eventually Saudi Arabia. Especially Syria, for now.
That's the big picture.
The State Department and the CIA were somehow, some way running or heavily involved in this armament pipeline. But what was Stevens' function inside this apparatus? What do we know about it? I suggest that we use this thread to aggregate facts, data and sources in order to help answering that question.
Only when we will get to see more clearly what role Stevens played in the running of this armament pipeline (to the incipient Caliphate) will we begin to learn "Why the Obama régime wanted him dead?," or at least:
a) Why was the security protection for the Benghazi Mission prior to the 9/11 anniversary attack stripped?, and
b) Why did the Obama régime refuse to send (or even permit) local help on the night of the attack.
How did Ambassador Stevens help in the gun and armament running?
We know that Benghazi was staffed by CIA operatives, working for the State Department, whose job was a) to secure and destroy dangerous weapons (like RPGs and SAMs) looted from Gaddafi’s stockpiles during and after the 2011 revolution, and b) to facilitate the onward shipment of those weapons to Syria.
Was Ambassador Stevens' job to cover for all of this?
We know that Obama signed an intelligence finding in early 2012 authorizing U.S. support for the Syrian rebels, and that this summer CIA operatives were on the Turkish-Syrian border helping to steer weapons deliveries to selected Syrian rebel groups, most of them “hard-line Islamic jihadists.”
One of those jihadis was Abdelhakim Belhadj.

Abdulhakim Belhadj, head of the Tripoli Military Council and the former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, "met with Free Syrian Army leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey," said a military official working with Mr Belhadj. "Mustafa Abdul Jalil (the interim Libyan president) sent him there. -- Ruth Sherlock in Tripoli, 27 Nov 2011, for the Telegraph

Belhadj’s contact with the Syrian Free Army was part of a Lybian delegation to Turkey offering arms and fighters to the Turkish-backed Syrian jihadis.

The Daily Telegraph on Saturday [November 26 2011] revealed that the new Libyan authorities had offered money and weapons to the growing insurgency against Bashar al-Assad. Mr Belhaj also discussed sending Libyan fighters to train troops, the source said. Having ousted one dictator, triumphant young men, still filled with revolutionary fervour, are keen to topple the next. The commanders of armed gangs still roaming Tripoli's streets said yesterday that "hundreds" of fighters wanted to wage war against the Assad regime.

So we have the United-States, Libya and Turkey working together with and through Al-Qaeda-linked jihadists like Belhadj to get weapons into the hands of Syrian rebels, known to be dominated by Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.
We know also that a Libyan-flagged vessel, Al-Entisar, docked at the Turkish port of Iskanderun on September 6, 2012.

A mysterious Libyan ship [the Libyan-flagged vessel Al Entisar, which means "The Victory,"] -- reportedly carrying weapons and bound for Syrian rebels -- [...] was received in the Turkish port of Iskenderun -- 35 miles from the Syrian border -- on Sept. 6 [...] On the night of Sept. 11, [Ambassador] Stevens met with the Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin, and escorted him out of the consulate front gate one hour before the assault began at approximately 9:35 p.m. local time.
[A] source told Fox News that Stevens was in Benghazi to negotiate a weapons transfer, an effort to get SA-7 missiles out of the hands of Libya-based extremists.
[...] According to an initial Sept. 14 report by the Times of London, Al Entisar was carrying 400 tons of cargo. Some of it was humanitarian, but also reportedly weapons, described by the report as the largest consignment of weapons headed for Syria's rebels on the frontlines.
"This is the Libyan ship ... which is basically carrying weapons that are found in Libya," said Walid Phares, a Fox News Middle East and terrorism analyst. [...]
The cargo reportedly included surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles, RPG's and Russian-designed shoulder-launched missiles known as MANPADS.
The ship's Libyan captain told the Times of London that "I can only talk about the medicine and humanitarian aid" for the Syrian rebels. It was reported there was a fight about the weapons and who got what "between the free Syrian Army and the Muslim Brotherhood."
"The point is that both of these weapons systems are extremely accurate and very simple to use," Fox News military analyst Col. David Hunt explained. He said the passage of weapons from Libya to Syria would escalate the conflict. "With a short amount of instruction, you've got somebody capable of taking down any, any aircraft. Anywhere in the world."
[...] In March 2011, the Reuters news service first reported that President Obama had authorized a "secret order ... (allowing) covert U.S. government support for rebel forces" to push the Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi from office.
At a hearing on March 31, before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, several lawmakers raised concerns about the finding reported by the Reuters news service and whether the Obama administration knew who constituted the rebel forces and whether Islamists were among their ranks.
"What assurances do we have that they will not pose a threat to the United States if they succeed in toppling Qaddafi?" Republican Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., asked. "There are reports that some opposition figures have links to Al Qaeda and extremist groups that have fought against our forces in Iraq."
[...] A month after the October 2011 death of Qaddafi, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced in Tripoli that the U.S. was committing $40 million to help Libya "secure and recover its weapons stockpiles." [...]
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/25/was-syrian-weapons-shipment-factor-in-ambassadors-benghazi-visit/

The group accused of moving the weapons is the Foundation for Human Rights, and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (IHH).
U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens’ last meeting in Benghazi the night he was killed was with the Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin, who is reported to have been there to discuss a weapons transfer or a warning about the possible compromise of the Libyan weapons pipeline to Syria. Whatever the topic of Ambassador Stevens’ discussion with Akin, he clearly and knowingly put himself in harm’s way to be there, in Benghazi, on the night of September 11.

PLEASE READ AND SHARE !!! OBAMA KNEW ... LETS NOT LET HIM GET AWAY SAYING HE WENT TO BED NOT KNOWING!!!

Hussein Obama and Michelle Obama lost their license to practice law.... Make no mistake about it!

How Barack and Michelle Obama lost their law license

 Why doesn’t the media and press put these people on the clothes line?  Do you realize if it were anyone else with any proposed clout or status, they wouldn’t have a prayer with the media.  I wonder, wonder what or who is really in control that so much can be silenced on one end, yet documented and have a total unraveling of another on the other end and this person-persons get all the attention.  Why doesn’t the world hear this on World News Tonight with Diane Sawyer or any of the national news commentators?.

 
 
I knew they had both lost their law license, but I
didn't know why until I read this.
This is 100% legit.

I check it out at https://www.iardc.org Stands for Illinois Attorney Registration And Disciplinary Committee. It's the official arm of lawyer discipline in Illinois; and they are very strict about the protocol.
Big Surprise.

Former Constitutional Law Lecturer and U.S. President Makes Up
Constitutional Quotes During State Of The Union (SOTU) Address.
Consider this:
1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law
Review, is no longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order to
escape charges he lied on his bar application. A "Voluntary
Surrender" is not something where you decide "Gee, a license is
not really something I need anymore, is it?" and forget to renew
your license. No, a "Voluntary Surrender" is something you do when
you've been accused of something, and you 'voluntarily surrender"
your license five seconds before the state suspends you.
2 Michelle Obama" voluntarily surrendered" her law license in 1993. after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her license or standing trial for Insurance fraud!  
3. So, we have the first black President and First Lady - who don't actually have licenses to practice law. Facts. Source: http://jdlong.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/pres-barack-obama-editor-of-the-Harvard-law-review-has-no-law-license/ 
4. A senior lecturer is one thing, a fully ranked law professor is another.
Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of
Chicago.
5. The University of Chicago
released a statement in March 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) "served as a professor" in the law school-but that is a
title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a at the University of Chicago School of Law. Source:  http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/03/sweet_obama_did_hold_the_title.html
sA spokepokesman for the school confirmed in 2008.
6. "He did not hold the title of Professor of Law," said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law!

7. The former Constitutional Senior Lecturer (Obama) cited the U.S. Constitution the other night during his State of the Union Address. Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of
Independence ... not the Constitution.
8. The B-Cast posted the video: http://www.breitbart..tv/did-obama-confuse-the-constitution-with-the-declaration-of-independence/ 
9. Free Republic: In the State of the Union Address
, President Obama said: "We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal.

10. Um, wrong citing, wrong founding document there Mr. President.
By the way, the promises are not a notion, our founders named them
unalienable rights. The document is our Declaration of Independence and it reads:
 
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.
11. And this is the same guy who lectured the
Supreme Court moments later in the same speech?
When you are a phony it's hard to keep facts straight.
SHARE THIS PLEASE ???

Call Sign Extortion 17: ON AUG 6th 2011..SEAL TEAM MEMBERS WERE SENT TO THEIR DEATHS BY THIS COMMANDER AND THIEF OBAMA ! THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT MUST BE CHANGED! THE REGIME IN THE WHITE HOUSE MUST BE CHANGED!

Obama is doing everything he can to reduce the effectiveness of any Military Leadership that can support a Coup against the Regime Logistically!.. 

This is one step along the way. Read and be angered.

PLEASE READ THIS AND SHARE. ON AUG 6th 2011..SEAL TEAM MEMBERS WERE SENT TO THEIR DEATHS BY THIS COMMANDER AND THIEF OBAMA !  THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT MUST BE CHANGED! THE REGIME IN THE WHITE HOUSE MUST BE CHANGED!

OUR BRAVEST OF THE BRAVE .... SEAL TEAM MEMBERS WERE SENT TO THEIR DEATHS BY THIS COMMANDER AND THIEF OBAMA

FACTS ABOUT THE SEAL TEAM THAT WAS KILLED BECAUSE OF THE OBAMA RULES OF ENGAGEMENT IN THE BATTLE FIELD!THE LEFTY MEDIA MUST BE SENT THIS INFORMATION. ITS BEEN OVER A YEAR!!I call upon all Seal Team members to activate accordingly !31 US NAVY SEALS KILLED (SEAL TEAM SIX) August 2011

Billy Vaughn the father of fallen Seal Team Hero Aaron Vaughn....says, “We actually had a three star Admiral, when the families were brought in to the de-briefing, to tell us what happened, the wives, and the mothers and fathers, at Virginia Beach; one of the fathers said, ‘Why didn’t we use a drone strike that night?… The three star Admiral actually turned around and addressed the grieving families, and said, “Because we want to win their hearts and minds.”
I am furious. I say, “That’s what missionaries are for, not military. Military are there to kill the enemy.”
Karen says, “Why can we not lay pre-assault fire? Because it’s perceived as aggressive and damages our efforts to win the hearts and minds of our enemy. So, kill our sons and daughters then. I mean, that’s really, that’s your option…win their hearts and minds at the risk of killing our soldiers.”
Billy continues, “This is what it has come to. This administration and our political leaders in the military are willing to sacrifice our most precious treasure, the blood of our warriors, in order to win the hearts and minds. And, I don’t believe the American citizens are, if they knew what was going on.”



Billy Vaughn explained what happened the night his son was killed;
“…the valley was on high alert..There was an AC130 gunship in the air, there were two AH64 helicopters in the air, already in the air from the Rangers Op…The CH47 that the Seals were on had no escort …it’s policy when the choppers go out at night, they have to have escorts…so it came in to land…3 1/2 hour fire fight going on, but because of the Rules of Engagement, our air weapon support in the air is not allowed to give any pre-assault fire to suppress the enemy so that the chopper can land safely, so the air weapon support set their helplessly and watched this chopper land in the middle of a fire fight, with 30 Americans on board, and be shot down…and, when it was shot down, even though there were 3 machines in the air…they did not take out the men who shot (our soldiers)…because of the Rules of Engagement…The men ran into a Tower and the Ac's did not fire because there may have been women and children in the building close by”

On Tom Trento’s Radio Show, Billy Vaughn was asked what he would like to publicly say to Obama. He replied, “Mr. President, your failure to recognize the savage enemy; and this covers Benghazi and Afghanistan both, all of it, …your failure to allow our warriors to engage the enemy; and your failure to give them the equipment necessary to defeat this enemy, …that lies at your feet, and you need to be held responsible. It is criminal what you, I believe, have knowingly done. I believe he has tried to take down one more area of American exceptionalism and that is our military and demoralize it like he has the rest of our American institutions.”
Karen Vaughn said, “I would ask him, you need to tell me the truth Mr. President, are you ignorant or complicit? Do you understand who our enemy is or are you aiding and abetting our enemy? Which is it? Because if you understand who our enemy is and you are aiding and abetting them, then you’re guilty of treason against this country and you need to be dealt with as a treasonous president. If you’re ignorant, you need to be walked out of that office, affective immediately so that somebody can come in who understands the threat to our nation.”

Read more: http://MinuteMenNews.com/2012/11/parents-of-fallen-navy-seal-let-them-fight-or-bring-them-home/#ixzz2FvnxEZxp
READ THE STORY OF THIS KILLING :August 6, 2011: A Chinook helo is shot down in Tangi, Wardak Province, Afghanistan. Within hours, before family notifications could possibly have been completed, global press accounts positively confirm that 22 of the 30 Americans killed were not just SEALS, but members of SEAL Team 6. Again, DEVGRU operations have been, up until now, highly classified. Today, the Obama regime made a point of immediately revealing the unit identities of the SPECOPS forces among the dead.

In the past, DEVGRU men and other SPECOPS men have been killed in action, but their missions were so secret and so crucial to OPSEC that their deaths were covered-up by the government and attributed to such things as "training accidents" and the like ­ and I have no problem with that. These men understand going in to intense units such as DEVGRU that OPSEC is paramount, that they will never be publicly acknowledged for their heroism, and that if they are killed or captured in action, the government will lie about that in order to protect OPSEC and to prevent the enemy from gaining a propaganda and morale coup. Compare that reality with what happened today. The Obama regime distributed this information, and the Obama regime's lapdog press instantly splashed headlines declaring this as the Taliban's "REVENGE" for the "death of Bin Laden." As I write this now, the Drudge Report headline in bright red reads, "REVENGE: SEALS WHO GOT OSAMA KILLED IN AFGHANISTAN."

I'll say what everyone else is thinking but is too scared to say. The Obama regime is almost certainly directly complicit in these deaths. The time, location and most especially, the PASSENGERS in the Chinook were passed to the Taliban. Additionally, you can't take out a Chinook with small arms fire or even standard RPGs such as the Taliban use. The Taliban needed serious weaponry to take this helo down, and that serious weaponry needed to be in exactly the right spot at exactly the right time, ready to fire.

Why would the Obama regime kill Americans? I think the question is, why WOULDN'T the Obama regime kill Americans? The Obama regime is composed of Marxist-Leninist psychopaths. A glancing, superficial survey of 20th century history shows one glaring fact above all others: MARXISTS MURDER PEOPLE WITHOUT COMPUNCTION. Marxists also hate Americans, by definition. Three tacks:

1. The men on board the Chinook may have been the same men who participated or had direct knowledge of the staged Bin Laden raid and were killed to permanently silence them. See my email exchange of May 5 above.

2. These DEVGRU men were killed to send a signal to the surviving DEVGRU men who carried out the Bin Laden raid to keep their mouths shut.

3. Certainly, the release of the unit identity of the dead within hours ­ before even family notification could have been made (which requires an IN PERSON visit to the family, remember) was an obvious bow to Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the entire muslim world. This event was INSTANTLY propagandized by the Obama media as "revenge" exacted for Bin Laden's death.

This entire Obama situation is a conspiracy, and I say that without the slightest hesitation. Obama is not a citizen of the United States, he is a puppet front for a cabal of Marxist-Leninsts including Soros, Ayers, Dohrn, Strong, Jarrett and many, many others. These people are enemies of the United States. These people are deeply psychologically damaged, and are capable of ordering people murdered in order to protect themselves and increase their own power. The three dead homosexual black men from Trinity United Church of Christ, Young, Bland and Spencer, all of whom were sexually linked to Barack Obama, were probably the first people specifically murdered by the Obama regime. The hundreds of Mexicans and the two American agents Terry and Zapata were murdered by Operation Fast and Furious in order to advance and increase the power of the Obama regime. These SEALS and the others on board that Chinook today were almost certainly betrayed and murdered by the Obama regime.

Why did the Obama regime immediately reveal the unit identity of the SPECOPS forces involved in the first place, despite the fact that DEVGRU was highly classified? Why was the personnel composition of the Chinook released IMMEDIATELY today after the helo went down ­ before even family notifications could be made? WHY? Why would you hand your enemy, Al Qaeda and the Taliban, a massive propaganda coup? WHY?

I'll tell you why. Because the Obama regime IS THE ENEMY. They are Marxist tyrants who hold the lives of Americans not just cheap, but in scathing contempt. They will say anything, they will do anything, and they will murder ANYONE in order to protect themselves and consolidate and increase their power. Please, I beg you, for the love of God and all that is good in this world, read the history of the Soviet Union. Read about Lenin and Stalin and how they murdered people without any hesitation. Read about how Hitler was constantly ordering the murder of his own officers. Read about Communist China. Read about Mao and the millions upon tens of millions of murders he ordered. Read about the killing fields of the Communist Khmer Rouge in Cambodia led by Pol Pot. PLEASE. Marxists MURDER PEOPLE. That is what they do. The Obama regime is MARXIST to the bone. If the Obama regime is not stopped, the 30 Americans murdered today in Afghanistan will be just the beginning. I promise you that.

UPDATE MAY 7 2013:

Two members of Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command died Saturday in an apparent insider attack by a soldier with the Afghan National Army.
Staff Sgt. Eric Christian, 39, and Cpl. David Sonka, 23, were killed while conducting combat operations in Afghanistan’s Farah province, the Defense Department said in a news release Monday. Both men were assigned to 2nd Marine Special Operations Battalion, out of Camp Lejeune, N.C.
Marine officials declined to say how Christian and Sonka died, but the International Security Assistance Force said Saturday that two service members were killed when an Afghan soldier turned his weapon against them. The incident remains under investigation, Marine officials said.
Christian, of Warwick, N.Y., was a counterintelligence/human intelligence specialist, according to a biography released by MARSOC. He joined the command last May, and had been in the Corps since May 2004.
Sonka, of Parker, Colo., was a multi-purpose canine handler. He joined the Corps in August 2008, and moved into MARSOC last year.
The incident marks the second and third death of a Marine in Afghanistan in 2013. The first was Staff Sgt. Jonathan Davis, 34, who died in an improvised explosive device attack in Helmand province on Feb. 22. He was serving as an adviser to soldiers from the Republic of Georgia.
Coalition forces adopted a series of precautionary measures to combat insider attacks last year after a rash of them rattled nerves and eroded trust between coalition forces and the Afghan troops they are training. In total, at least 61 coalition service members were killed in insider attacks in 2012.
The number of deaths resulting from insider attacks in 2013 — three — has been relatively low, but the Taliban threatened recently to step them up as the annual fighting season in Afghanistan takes shape.
MARSOC, the Corps’ special operations force, lost at least five personnel to insider attacks in 2012. Two Marines died Aug. 17 after an Afghan police officer opened fire on them in Farah province. Three MARSOC personnel were killed in Helmand province’s Sangin district on Aug. 10 after a member of the Afghan Local Police opened fire in an operations center.

Cpl. David Sonka (U.S. Marine Corp)

Zoom

Staff Sgt. Eric D. Christian (U.S. Marine Corps)

 

 

Please read and Share. Our Culture and future is at stake! Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In it's fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components but its goal is to destyroy the rest of the world.

Here's how Islam works to Infiltrate a Country:

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In it's fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components.

THE SOONER REGULAR AMERICANS UNDERSTAND THIS THE BETTER CHANCE WE HAVE TO SURVIVE THIS FAST SPREADING DISASTER!

The religious component is a beard for all of the other components. Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious rights.
When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious rights, some of the other components tend to creep in as well. Here's how it works.
As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens.

This is the case in:
United States -- Muslim 0.6%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1.8%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs.
This is happening in:
Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply.
This is occurring in:
France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam.
Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:
Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.
It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts nor schools nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death.

Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddists, and Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.

In my opinion, Muslims should be expelled from all Western countries and isolated. It's the only way we can avoid the impending violence.

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most

radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

'Before I was nine, I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me

against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against

my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world,

and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris, 'The Haj'

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100%

Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in

ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by

Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such

situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children

attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an

infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain

nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national

average would indicate. Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their

birth rates are higher than the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists,

Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's

population by the end of this century.

Well, boys and girls, today we are letting the fox guard the henhouse.
The wolves will be herding the sheep!

NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a

devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant...? Just wondering.

Devout Muslims being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions?
Doesn't this make you feel safer already??

That should make the United States much safer, huh!!
Was it not "Devout Muslim men" that flew planes into U.S. buildings only 10

years ago?  We must never forget this..

Was it not a Devout Muslim man who killed 13 at Fort Hood ? (He killed

"From within" -don't forget that).

Also: This is very interesting and we all need to read it from start to finish.

Maybe this is why our American Muslims are so quiet and not speaking out

about any atrocities. Can a good Muslim be a good American? This question

was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years.

The following is his reply:

Theologically - no . . . Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon God of

Arabia

Religiously - no. Because no other religion is accepted by His Allah except

Islam (Quran, 2:256)(Koran)

Scripturally - no. Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the

Quran.

Geographically - no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in

prayer five times a day.

Socially - no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews..

Politically - no.Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders),

who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America , the great Satan.

Domestically - no. Because he is instructed to marry four Women and beat

and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34)

Intellectually - no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since

it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically - no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression.. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist.

Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually - no. Because when we declare 'one nation under God,' the

Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names.

Therefore, after much study and deliberation. ... Perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. - - - They obviously cannot be both 'good' Muslims and good Americans. Call it what you wish, it's still the

truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. The religious war is bigger than we

know or understand.

Can a Muslim be a good soldier???

Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, opened fire at Ft. Hood and Killed 13. He is a

good Muslim!!!


THINK ABOUT ALL THIS AND SHARE.... WE ARE GIVING UP OUR COUNTRY TO OUTSIDE FORCES AND WE WILL NEVER GET IT BACK!!