By Bill Federer AmericanMinute.com
The New York Times reported October 10, 1933:
“Nazi Plan to Kill Incurables to End Pain; German Religious Groups Oppose Move…
The Ministry of Justice…explaining the Nazi aims regarding the German penal code, today announced its intentions to authorize physicians to end the sufferings of the incurable patient…in the interest of true humanity…”
The New York Times continued:
“The Catholic newspaper Germania hastened to observe: ‘The Catholic faith binds the conscience of its followers not to accept this method.’…In Lutheran circles, too, life is regarded as something that God alone can take…
Euthanasia…has become a widely discussed word in the Reich…No life still valuable to the State will be wantonly destroyed.”
When Germany’s economy suffered, expenses had to be cut from the national healthcare plan, such
g alive handicapped, insane, chronically ill, elderly and those with dementia.
They were considered “lebensunwertes leben”-life unworthy of life.
Then criminals, convicts, street bums, beggars and gypsies, considered “leeches” on society, met a similar fate.
Eventually, to rid the human gene pool of what Nazi’s considered “untermensch” -under mankind, Hitler’s immoral plan sent 6 million Jews, along with millions of others, to the holocaust gas chambers and ovens.
U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop stated in 1977:
“When the first 273,000 German aged, infirm and retarded were killed in gas chambers there was no outcry from that medical profession…and it was not far from there to Auschwitz.”
British Journalist Malcolm Muggeridge explained:
“We have…for those that have eyes to see, an object lesson in what the quest for ‘quality of life’ without refere
nce to ‘sanctity of life’ can involve…
The origins of the Holocaust lay, not in Nazi terrorism…but in…Germany’s acceptance of euthanasia and mercy-killing as humane and estimable.”
The German Reichstag (Capitol building) was set on fire under suspicious conditions, after which Hitler forced old military leaders to retire.
He accused political opponents, then had them arrested and shot.
An SA Oberführer warned of an ordinance by the provisional Bavarian Minister of the Interior:
“The deadline set…for the Surrender of Weapons will expire on March 31, 1933. I therefore request the immediate surrender of all arms…
Whoever does not belong to one of these named units (SA, SS, and Stahlhelm) and…keeps his weapon without authorization or even hides it, must be viewed as an enemy of the national government and will be held responsible without hesitation and with the utmost severity.”
Heinrich Himmler, head of Nazi S.S. (“Schutzstaffel”-Protection Squadron), stated:
“Germans who wish to use firearms should join the S.S. or the S.A. Ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the State.”
When a suspected homosexual youth shot a Nazi diplomat in Paris, it was used as an excuse to confiscate all firearms from Jews.
German newspapers printed, November 10, 1938:
“Jews Forbidden to Possess Weapons By Order of SS Reichsführer Himmler, Munich…
‘Persons who, according to the Nürnberg law, are regarded as Jews, are forbidden to possess any weapon. Violators will be condemned to a concentration camp and imprisoned for a period of up to 20 years.'”
The New York Times, November 9, 1938, reported:
“The Berlin Police…announced that…the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been ‘disarmed’ with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment.”
In his early political career, Hitler said he was Christian, but once in power he began to reveal his nazified social Darwinism beliefs and became openly hostile toward Christianity.
Of the Waffengesetz (Nazi Weapons Law), March 18, 1938, Hitler stated at a dinner talk, April 11, 1942 (Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, 2nd Edition, 1973, p. 425-6, translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens):
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing…
So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the
maintenance of law and order.”
Franklin D. Roosevelt stated of Hitler, December 15, 1941:
“Government to him is not the servant…of the people but their absolute master and the dictator of their every act…
The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness which seemed to the Founders of the Republic inalienable, were, to Hitler and his fellows, empty words…
Hitler advanced: That the individual human being has no rights whatsoever in himself…no right to a soul of his o
wn, or a mind of his own, or a tongue of his own, or a trade of his own; or even to live where he pleases or to marry the woman he loves;
That his only duty is the duty of obedience, not to his God, not to his conscience, but to Adolf Hitler…
His only value is his value, not as a man, but as a unit of the Nazi state…To Hitler, the church…is a monstrosity to be destroyed by every means.”
Some Church leaders resisted Hitler, like Dietrich Bonhoeffer.
Bonhoeffer, born FEBRUARY 4, 1906, studied in New York in 1930, where he met Frank Fisher, an African-American seminarian who introduced him to Harlem’s Abyssinian Baptist Church.
He was inspired by African-American spirituals and the preaching of Adam Clayton Powell, Sr., who helped Bonhoeffer turn “from phraseology to reality,” motivating him to stand up to injustice.
Bonhoeffer helped found the Confessing Church in Germany, which refused to be intimidated by Hitler into silence.
In his book, The Cost of Discipleship, Bonhoeffer rebuked nominal Christians:
“Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline. Communion without confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ.”
Bonhoeffer stated in a 1932 sermon:
“The blood of martyrs might once again be demanded, but this blood, if we really have the courage and loyalty to shed it, will not be innocent, shining like that of the first witnesses for the faith. On our blood lies heavy guilt, the guilt of the unprofitable servant.”
Dietrich Bonhoeffer warned Germans not to slip into the cult of Führer (leader) worship, as he could turn out to be a Verführer (mis-leader, seducer).
Jimmy Carter wrote in his book Sources of Strength, 1997:
“Rev. Niebuhr urged Dietrich Bonhoeffer to remain in America for his own safety. Bonhoeffer refused. He felt he had to be among the other Christians persecuted in Germany.
So he returned home, and…in resistance to Hitler…preached publicly against Nazism, racism, and anti-semitism…
Bonhoeffer was finally arrested and imprisoned.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer died April 9, 1945, just a few days before the allied armies liberated Germany. He was executed on orders of Heinrich Himmler. He died a disciple and a martyr.”
Jimmy Carter concluded:
“The same Holy Spirit…that gave Bonhoeffer the strength to stand up against Nazi tyranny is available to us today.”
“To endure the cross is not tragedy; it is the suffering which is the fruit of an exclusive allegiance to Jesus Christ”
On February 16, 2002, Dr. James Dobson told the National Religious Broadcasters:
“Those of you who feel that the church has no responsibility in the cultural area…
What if it were 1943 and you were in Nazi Germany and you knew what Hitler was doing to the Jews…Would you say, ‘We’re not political-that’s somebody else’s problem’?”
“I thank God Dietrich Bonhoeffer did not give that answer, and he was arrested by the Nazis and hanged in 1945, naked and alone because he said, ‘This is not right.'”Dobson concluded:
Get the book, Change to Chains-the 6,000 year quest for global control
News from AmericanMinute.com
This story if true is disturbing on many levels. It says nothing of the executive branch requiring any approval from Congress, or even that Congress has approved anything.
Excerpt “The Obama administration is currently drawing up a set of rules about how the US military can defend against or conduct cyberattacks, the New York Times reports. The Obama administration is also allowing intelligence agencies to declare potential threats. But even if these threats are nothing more than a suspicion without evidence, the military now has the authority to attack foreign nations, regardless of whether or not the US is involved in a conflict with them.
Hypocrisy and hope, credit and blame in the Gunwalker Scandal — the long view & a Fanfare for the Common Man. A reckoning coming. (via Sipsey Street Irregulars)
Met at the house of the Rev. C.K. Paul, at Stourminster Marshall, Father Strickland, an English Jesuit, who said to me – “I have observed, throughout life, that a man may do an immense deal of good, if he does not care who gets the credit for it.” — Diary entry dated September 21, 1863 written by Sir Mountstuart E. Grant Duff, Scottish politician and administrator of the British Raj in India, published in 1897.
There is no news. There is only the truth of the signal. What I see. And, there’s the puppet theater the Parliament jesters foist on the somnambulant public. — Mr. Universe in Serenity, 2005.
The realization of the Gunwalker Plot continues to slowly broaden and deepen in the popular culture, and to the Obama administration it must seem like Chinese water torture as they wince in anticipation of each new revelation. The one constant that they can cling to, however — the one solace in an ever darkening gloom — is the partisan faithfulness of the major network evening news shows, and newspapers such as the New York Times and Pravda on the Potomac, the Washington Post.
As evidence, ladies and gentlemen of the jury of history, I present the undisputed fact that on the evening news shows of NBC, ABC and CBS this week not one — NOT ONE — mentioned the unprecedented subpoena by a Congressional committee of information regarding the entire top echelon of the Justice Department in the Gunwalker Scandal.
Had this scandal involved John Ashcroft and the Bush Administration, does anyone doubt that the story would led the nightly half-hour “puppet theater”? Or, that it wouldn’t have been covered like a blanket by all news departments from the moment the blood of Brian Terry dried in the desert sands of Rio Rico? Read the rest at
Can the White House get away with transparently political attempts to silence the press?
The Department of Health and Human Services’ just-released media policy makes it official that staff members and reporters are forbidden to speak to each other without reporting to public information officers and supervisors. The rules have “formalized a creeping information-control mechanism that informally began during the Clinton Administration and was accelerated by the Bush and Obama administrations,” writes FDA Webview & FDA Review editor Jim Dickinson. “The U.S. now takes a large step toward joining other information-controlling countries like my native Australia, where government employees who talk with the news media without permission commit a federal crime. I came to the U.S. in 1974 to escape this oppression.”
Poynter goes on to print Dickinson’s letter in full, where he describes HHS’ new policy as a ‘‘Soviet-style power-grab.” It’s bad enough that America is devolving into an onerous regulatory state, but impeding those who report on federal agencies and the rules they make is inexcusable. It’s hard to conjure a rationale for this that isn’t wholly political, given the unending stream of unflattering reports about the impact of Obamacare as HHS struggles to implement it.
And the Obama administration has a disturbing track record of unjustifiable press restrictions. Things were particularly bad during the gulf oil spill:
Media outlets such as The New York Times, Columbia Journalism Review, and NPR have written damning reports of the government’s unreasonable attempts to limit access to the spill. The New Orleans Times-Picayune was prohibited from flying a plane over the spill so a photographer could get pictures. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., was denied permission to take a boat out to the spill with reporters and examine the catastrophe affecting his state. The Associated Presssent a letter of protest with the White House over the arbitrary restrictions. A CBS camera crew was threatened with arrest for trying to report from a beach affected by the spill. Read the rest….
The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object. Thomas Jefferson
Is this the last generation of Americans that can be called free?
First, let’s look at the reasons that the country rebelled against Great Britain and the King and apply them to our current Government:
1. He has refused his Assent to the Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
Lets just take a few of the most recent decisions where Barack Obama and his administration have either refused to enforce laws, signed executive orders denying that they apply to him, or simply stated that he disagreed with them and would not enforce them: (a) the New Black Panther case: we have testimony that the Civil Rights division of the Obama administrations Justice Department are refusing to try cases if they involve white Americans as those being discriminated against.
September 24, 2010 – 5:40 pm – by Hans A. von Spakovsk read more and watch the video at Pajamas Media
(b) Telling the Congress that no matter if they defund the czars he will simply ignore their desires:
Obama’s Signing Statement On Presidential Czars And The Constitution
Doug Mataconis · Saturday, April 16, 2011
If Congress has refused to fund the “czars,” where exactly does President Obama get the authority and funding to pay them? Read more at Outside the Beltway:
(c) then there is DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) passed into law by an overwhelming majority and signed into law by Bill Clinton, enacted in 1996. Barack Obama decided that he did not believe that it was Constitutional, although no court had ruled that way, and told the American people that he would not defend it. From the New York Times, Feb. 23, 2011
WASHINGTON — President Obama, in a striking legal and political shift, has determined that the Defense of Marriage Act — the 1996 law that bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages — is unconstitutional, and has directed the Justice Department to stop defending the law in court, the administration said Wednesday.Read the rest at the New York Times:
2.He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglested to attend to them.
Here the complaints against Obama are many but I will limit it to two with the first being the suit against Arizona and the second being a suit against Missouri that did not get as much attention: From exposing Liberal Lies;
Obama to Protect Sharia?
Americans should be deeply concerned about the policies of President Barack Obamaand his Justice Department who show no interest in justice. Instead, they use their power to benefit favored groups such as blacks, illegals, homosexuals, and Muslims.First, we saw Eric Holder refuse to prosecute the New Black Panthers for their intimidation of white voters in a Philadelphia voting precinct on Election Day 2008. We wouldn’t want to prosecute our black brothers, now would we?
Next, we have witnessed the Justice Department, which takes its orders from King Barack, interfere with an Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship for anyone who has already been stopped by the police for another offense. With Obama’s poll numbers dropping like lead weights, he needs the Hispanic vote to swindle Americans into a second term of all that “hope and change”.
Recently, we were outraged that Eric Holder refuses to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, a ruling passed during the Clinton years. Who authorized him to begin interpreting the law? His job is to enforce it.
Now, even more outrageous, is another kiss-up to the Muslims, almost a daily event in the age of Obama. As more and more states attempt to ban Sharia law, the Justice Department may interfere in this matter by suing the individual states so they cannot enforce their ban of this Islamic law.
Elections surely do have consequences, especially when someone as radical as Obama is elected to office.
Read from Weasel Zippers:
Justice Dept. Attorney: Obama Administration May Sue States to Stop Them From Banning Sharia Law…
(RFT) — ’U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri Richard Callahan visited the Islamic Foundation of Greater St. Louis last night to address the fears and frustrations of Muslim Americans who worry they are being racially profiled and wiretapped — and to assure them that the Missouri Legislature’s attempts to ban Sharia law from being considered in state courts here could face Constitutional challenges.
Seated in front of a large Muslim audience during a town hall-style meeting at the Ballwin mosque, Callahan anchored a panel that included fellow federal attorneys (one of whom was Muslim American), as well as three members of the FBI.
“There is a worse kind of Muslim hatred recently,” said Adil Imdad, one of the event’s organizers. “Especially in the last two years, Islamophobia and fear-mongering have been spreading like wildfire, and it’s causing a lot of stress for our youth.”
The problem is now hitting a little closer to home, said Imdad, pointing to three bills currently circulating through the state legislature that seek to limit Sharia law (Islamic law) in Missouri courts. Sharia law could come into play in rulings considering child custody or prisoner rights for Muslims. As we’ve reported, the bills have become a source of controversy.
Callahan responded by hinting that, should anti-Sharia legislation get passed by the Missouri Legislature, it could be overturned by the federal courts. “The Department of Justice has a good history of challenging laws passed by state legislatures,” he said. “If some laws are passed, I think you will see challenges by the federal government on the constitutionality of them.”'”
3.He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation for large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has threatened to veto laws enacted by Congress unless they give up their rights and the rights of the American people to restrict unions and to do business without government or union interference.
Obama Threatens Veto If Congress Strips Pro-Union Election Rules in FAA Bill Read more at Red State:
4. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
How about this one for instance where he calls meetings with Congressional representatives from the opposite side and then deliberately mocks them. We have seen actions like this from Barack Obama and his administration a number of times. Or this from the AP:
Obama mocks Republican position on immigration
By Darlene Superville And Erica Werner, Associated Press Tue May 10, 201
EL PASO, Texas – In search of Hispanic votes and a long-shot immigration overhaul, President Barack Obama on Tuesday stood at the U.S.-Mexico border for the first time since winning the White House and declared it more secure than ever. He mocked Republican lawmakers for blocking immigration over border security alone, saying they won’t be happy until they get a moat with alligators along the border.
“They’ll never be satisfied,” he said. read more at Sweetness and Light:
5.He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
I don’t think that this qualifies as dissolving Representative Houses but it had the same effect: From The Westerner:
Friday, May 27, 2011
Forget Libya – Obama threatens “No-Fly Zone” over Texas
The Lone Star state’s efforts to protect its citizens from the wandering hands of the federal behemoth fail as the administration says the Constitution gives it the right to touch our “junk.” Once leaders such as Patrick Henry proudly proclaimed, “Give me liberty or give me death!” Now our government offers us the choice of scanning our bodies in an arguably unsafe manner or submitting to an enhanced “pat down” usually reserved for law enforcement officers apprehending criminals. The Texas of Gov. Rick Perry has objected — as it has in other areas of federal encroachment or neglect, such as with ObamaCare, EPA regulations, border security, etc. — that grandmothers and grandchildren flying from Dallas to Houston had to submit to this without what the courts would call “probable cause.” A bill passed by the Texas House of Representatives 138—0, HR 1937, explicitly made it a felony for a security officer to intentionally touch someone’s private parts — even outside their clothing — “as a condition of travel or as a condition of entry into a public place” unless the agent could show probable cause…more
6. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
I think that the refusal to enforce the illegal immigrations laws and to sue states such as Arizona that try to protect themselves from invasion without, would qualify, don’t you? From Reuters Jul. 2012 we have this:
Obama administration sues Arizona over immigration law
7. He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; rufusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
Perhaps the above could be considered as to how the President and his administration are endevoring to remove land from the states and put it off limits for use by the American people: From Michelle Malkin we have this:
How Obama is locking up our land, continued
By Michelle Malkin • August 16, 2010 read more at Michelle Malkin:
8. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers. See number 1 on this!
9. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
10. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their substance.
11. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our Legislature. Does the TSA qualifiy?
12. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to Civil Power. How about how he is using them in Libya, Yemen and Syria?
13. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their acts of pretended Legislation: How about working with the UN to pass laws that we are subject to in regards to our guns in direct violation of the United States Constitution
14. For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
15. For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from Punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
16. For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world. How about passing new regulations that prevent the states from getting drugs that have been previously used in executions. Or by putting in place regulations that prevent natural remedies and homeopathic products that have been in use since before the FDA was in existence, from being utilized by people within the states.
17. For imposing taxes on us without our consent. Obamacare, enough said.
18. For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by JuryHere we only have to look at the recent actions against the Amish farmer in seizing his milk, or the case where they took everything from a company that was selling natural homeopathic products. But there is also the seizing by ICE of hundreds of Domains without warning or even evidence that what they were doing was in fact illegal.
Feds sting Amish farmer selling raw milk locally
Cite interstate commerce violation
FDA Raids Nutraceutical Manufacture Demonstrating They Think They are Outside the Rule of Law
ICE seizes domains in anti-piracy offensive
You fill in the blanks on the rest of the reasons that we had a revolution in the first place and ask yourself if we are still free! I don’t know about you, but everyday, I see some new violation of the Constitution itself, or some action that calls into mind the reasons that we became the free country that I hope that we still are.
What is it going to take for America to realize that our freedoms are being removed one at a time and that we are almost in the same situation that we were in when we fought to become an independent country. If these freedoms were worth fighting for, are they not worth fighting to keep?
I do not think that it is necessary to fight a physical battle to restore our country, after all the framework is still in place. I do think however, that we as a people have to insist that our Constitution does still have meaning and that we are not willing to have our freedom lost. We do this by insisting that the laws of the land be followed and that the people that we elect to office to uphold those laws, in fact do so. If they choose not to do so, then those laws can and must be used in the way that they were intended to remedy the fact. Otherwise we will have freedom lost.
19. For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offenses:
20. For abolishing the free System of English Laws in neighboring Province, establishing therin an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
21.For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Government:
22. For suspending our own Ligislature, and declaring themselves invested with Power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
23. He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
24. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
25. He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to compleate the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworth the Head of a civilized nation.
26. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
27. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
- Cry and Howl (cryandhowl.wordpress.com)
- Obama: Above The Law? (loopyloo305.wordpress.com)
- Obama’s Twisted Logic (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
- Mr. Obama Let the Czars Go! (wdednh.wordpress.com)
- Obama Et al, Provoking Civil War? Or Crowning Obama King! (loopyloo305.wordpress.com)
I hope that Congress and the Senate are listening to the words of Rep. Allen West! But it is not just a bigger Navy that we need. China is starting to surpass us in technology too. Just yesterday they announced that they were deploying new technology in the Drilling Idustry. Read about it at the link below and then read the story about Allen West from the Hill.com:
U.S. officials should realize China is an economic and military threat to America, and take steps — like building a bigger Navy — to combat Beijing’s moves, Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) said Tuesday.
The freshman lawmaker and favorite of the Tea Party movement also said Washington should avoid Pentagon spending cuts as it tries to reduce annual deficits.
After an $18 billion cut for this year and more likely ahead, West said Washington is on pace to return the military to a time when the Army could not afford basic items, such as toilet paper.
His comments came as the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee revealed a Pentagon spending bill that would, if enacted, give the Defense Department $665 billion for 2012. That figure includes two House Appropriations subcommittees’ proposals for the base DOD budget, a military construction funding bill and a war-funding measure.
West said the moves China has made in building up its military and expanding its role in global economics make it “part of the 21st-century battlefield” U.S. officials are facing.
U.S. leaders, he said, are doing a poor job so far managing this new “battlefield.”
West called for a much larger U.S. Navy to compete with what in China will soon be the world’s largest naval fleet.
The U.S. Navy now has 285 “deployable battle force ships,” according to a fact sheet on the service’s website.
The fleet size has come down steadily over the last several decades. The Navy had 654 active warships in 1972, 594 in 1987 and 337 by 1999, according to another Navy fact sheet.
The Chinese understand what the Greeks, Romans, Athenians and Dutch did in past eras — that a large and powerful navy is the way to expand a nation’s global presence, West said.
More broadly, the freshman representative panned U.S. officials for failing, “over the last 10 years,” to clearly define America’s strategic objectives.
To that end, he called for a new strategic blueprint that matches desired military capabilities to the threats the nation faces.
West also slammed President Obama for a revised policy approach on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which would feature land swaps based on pre-1967 borders in that hotly contested region.
“I don’t care about how much land you swap, it’s about the elimination of the Jewish people” for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, West said.
The retired Army officer also pointed to the Egyptian military’s twin decisions to open a passage from that nation to Palestinian-controlled territory and allow Iranian warships through the Suez Canal.
- Discussing China’s Navy (westernexperience.wordpress.com)
It’s time to trade in the person who keep’s getting it wrong, and give the person who keeps getting it right a chance to set this country back on the right track. It’s time to chose the person that doesn’t hem and haw while people die. It’s time for Sarah Palin.
We have seen what happens when the man that rocks the boat is in the White House. We are sinking fast. It’s time for someone who knows that foundations must be build on rock in order to stand the test of time. Barack Obama spends his time golfing and partying with the rich and famous instead of paying attention to the ills of the economy. He takes the low road and accuses and blames instead of taking responsibility for his own actions. He cuts off our chance to provide for ourselves and then blames the ones who could help if he would quit putting up roadblocks.
It’s time for a real change that is not based on empty rhetoric, but on actual plans. It’s time for someone who has a goal for improving our future and not someone intent on making sure that we don’t have one. It’s time for Sarah Palin!!!
Amplify’d from pajamasmedia.com
Sarah Palin keeps getting everything right
For a silly hick snowbilly who doesn’t know anything, whom loving and tolerant liberals call a “special needs case” in honor of the new civility, Sarah Palin is establishing a track record on the issues that is, over the past year or two, without equal.
So what our president said at first, that our mission is to see Qaddafi go, he’s got to go, but then we’re told by one of his top advisers, the president’s top advisers, saying, well, no, really, Qaddafi is probably going to prevail on this. He’s probably going to prevail over the opposition. And then our president changes the tune again, saying, well, it’s not our mission to oust Qaddafi. A lot of confusion.
I would like to see, of course, as long as we’re in it — we better be in it to win it. And if there’s doubt, we get out. Win it means Qaddafi goes and America gets to get on out of there and let the people of Libya create their own government, choose their own leader. And America, no nation building. We get out. We take care of our affairs elsewhere.
Unemployment is still high. Shakespeare couldn’t come up with a better plot. But how in the world did Mrs. Palin, who is supposed to be so thick, manage to figure all this out so far ahead of the New York Times and all the economists it talked to?
She did this back in November in a speech at Phoenix, which the Wall Street Journal, in a laudatory editorial at the time, characterized as zeroing in on the connection between a weak dollar and rising prices for oil and food. “We don’t want temporary, artificial economic growth brought at the expense of permanently higher inflation which will erode the value of our incomes and our savings,” the Journal quoted Mrs. Palin as saying. “We want a stable dollar combined with real economic reform. It’s the only way we can get our economy back on the right track.” Now here is the New York Times quoting a raft of economists who have reached the conclusion that Mrs. Palin’s warning was right down the line.
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/b105ue
- NEW YORK SUN: Sarah Palin For The Fed? The big question as Chairman Bernanke gets set for his fi… (pajamasmedia.com)
- Sarah Palin: Iowa Caucus Poll (loopyloo305.wordpress.com)