January 1 will usher in the last year of the first decade of a new millennium and ten consecutive years of the United States conducting war in the Greater Middle East.
Beginning with the October 7, 2001 missile and bomb attacks on Afghanistan, American combat operations abroad have not ceased for a year, a month, a week or a day in the 21st century.
Obama fearing a revolution against him by the states, has moved swiftly by nationalizing nearly all National Guard Forces in multiple states; Georgia, Alabama, Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee, Virginia, Louisiana, South Carolina – to name a few. The Governors of the Great States of Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia still have under their Command-and-Control the State Defense Forces to go against U.S. Federal forces should the need arise. Also important to note: There are NO U.S. laws prohibiting National Guard troops from also joining their State’s Defense Forces. This dilemma occurred during the Civil War with many “citizen soldiers” choosing to serve their states instead of the Federal Government.
Obama is angered by the several State Governors who have reestablished “State Defense Forces.” These forces are described as: “State Defense Forces (also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves, State Militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are not regulated by the National Guard Bureau nor are they part of the Army National Guard of the United States. State Defense Forces are authorized by state and federal law and are under the command of the governor of each state. State Defense Forces are distinct from their state’s National Guard in that they cannot become federal entities.”
Mr. Obama is fearful of these State Defense Forces, in that he does not have control of said forces, and with the U.S. Military stretched to near breaking from multiple deployments and theatre actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, these State military forces would be under the direct command and authority of the Governors in which states have said forces. In essence, the Governors would have “de facto control” of the United States.
Notice All Of Ramadan Celebrating Islamic Terrorist Camps
The two Governors leading this move are: Tim Pawlenty, Governor of Minnesota; and Rick Perry, Governor of Texas. Both of these State Governors stated they have: “…deep fear the President is destroying their Nation.” Governor Pawlenty’s fear of Obama is that since Obama took office he has appeased America’s enemies and has shunned some of America’s strongest allies, especially Israel. Governor Perry has declared that Obama is punishing his State of Texas by dumping tens-of-thousands of illegal Mexican immigrants into the cities and small towns of Texas. Governor Perry further recently stated: “If Barack Obama’s Washington doesn’t stop being so oppressive, Texans might feel compelled to renounce their American citizenry and secede from the union.”
Dr. Lyle J. Rapacki
Lyle is an intelligence analyst and consultant who receives and disseminates critical intelligence and policy information from and to law enforcement, intelligence operatives, homeland security officials, government and community leaders. He is the author of dozens of white papers, bulletins and briefings, and he is frequently called on to share his expertise with public and private security directors and organizations.
Lyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D.
Protective Intelligence and Assessment Specialist
Consultant at Behavioral Analysis and Threat Assessment
Independent Intelligence and Information Warfare Analyst
FBI InfraGard-Arizona
ASIS-International
“There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.” President John Adams ~ October 2, 1780
George Washington takes the oath of office at Federal Hall in lower Manhattan, April 30, 1789.
On September 17, 1787 George Washington was the first to sign and accept the Constitution even though it had no Bill of Rights. It was Patrick Henry with his great speeches and lectures who in 1788 forced an agreement which promised that continued ratifica- tions of the document depended upon a Bill of Rights to be forthcoming.
In 1789 Washing- ton took office and was faced with the arduous task of pioneering the first presidency including the structuring of the militia system. By January 1790 the influence Patrick Henry had over him became quite apparent. When Washington chaired the 1787 Constitutional Convention, provi- sions had been made for the defense of the country against invasion and for stifling rebel- lions, but there was an insuf- ficiency of safeguards to be applied against tyranny brought on by public officials.
By 1790 Washington began work on his “Plan No. 2 for the Organization of the Militia.” By now he was more able to see the weaknesses in the Constitution. He openly discussed the threat of tyranny emanating from within the government. By then, Patrick Henry’s wisdom was spread throughout the 13 original states, and it was inculcated as the basis for the policies and functions of the militia. Henry perpetuated the people’s liberty. He sustained the ultimate authority of the people. Washington well under- stood the need to safeguard the nation from its foreign enemies. In his “Plan No. 2 for the Organization of the Militia” he undertook to warn about the dangers of domestic enemies: tyranny in government.
Washington himself took the farmers out for practice, and he utilized the knowledge and experiences of his generals and other valuable officers in the War for Independence by having them instruct and train the citizens (the whole people) in the techniques of soldiering, and the maintenance of an ‘energetic national militia’.
His “Plan No. 2 for the Organization of the Militia” was communicated to the Senate, on the 21st of January 1790. This lengthy Plan was permeated with the proposition that it is the direct duty and responsibility of the people themselves to guard against tyranny from within government.
Washington declared that the purpose of the militia was “to oppose the introduction of tyranny.” He had come a long way from the days when he accepted the Constitution without a Bill of Rights.
To view Washington’s statement in the context in which it was delivered, please look over the following excerpt taken from Pages 7-8 of an old document published by Gales and Seaton in 1832 entitled “American State Papers – Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States, from the First Session of the First to the Second Session of the Fifteenth Congress, inclusive: commencing March 3, 1789, and ending March 3, 1819”.
This excerpt is a part of Wash- ington’s lengthy Plan No. 2 of 1790. While he also made re- ference to the prevention of invasion and rebellion, Washing- ton said that “the well informed members of the community (the people) were meant to be the real defence of the country”; and “the virtues and knowledge of the people would effectually oppose the introduction of tyranny.”
He warned that “the government would be invaded or overturned, and trampled upon by the bold and ambitious” — meaning people in our own country who operated without adherence to vital principles. The absoluteness of the right of the people to keep and bear arms is a basic principle. Unless the right to arms is absolute, the people cannot remain the ultimate power. The Bill of Rights confirmed that we possess many other rights beside the absolute right to arms. All of the other rights for the preservation of their own existence, depend entirely upon the absoluteness, the force, and the reasoning that have shaped the Second Amend- ment. Washington agreed with Patrick Henry on the purpose of the militia: It was to “oppose the introduction of tyranny.” Make no mistake about it: The prime reason for the Second Amend- ment is prevention of tyranny in government.
EXCERPT FROM GEORGE WASHINGTON’S 1790 PLAN FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF THE MILITIA
“An energetic national militia is to be regarded as the capital security of a free republic, and not a standing army, forming a distinct class in the community.
It is the introduction and diffusion of vice, and corruption of manners, into the mass of the people, that renders a standing army necessary. It is when public spirit is despised, and avarice, indolence, and effeminacy of manners predominate, and prevent the establishment of institutions which would elevate the minds of the youth in the paths of virtue and honor, that a standing army is formed and riveted forever.
While the human character remains unchanged, and societies and governments of considerable extent are formed, a principle ever ready to execute the laws, and defend the state, must constantly exist. Without this vital principle, the government would be invaded or overturned, and trampled upon by the bold and ambitious. No community can be long held together, unless its arrangements are adequate to its probable exigencies.
If it should be decided to reject a standing army for the military branch of the government of the United States, as possessing too fierce an aspect, and being hostile to the principles of liberty, it will follow that a well constituted militia ought to be established.
A consideration of the subject will show the impracticability of disciplining at once the mass of the people. All discussions on the subject of a powerful militia will result in one or other of the following principles:
First, Either efficient institutions must be established for the military education of the youth, and that the knowledge acquired therein shall be diffused throughout the community, by the mean of rotation; or,
Secondly, That the militia must be formed of substitutes, after the manner of the militia of Great Britain.
If the United States possess the vigor of mind to establish the first institution, it may reasonably be expected to produce the most unequivocal advantages. A glorious national spirit will be introduced, with its extensive train of political consequences. The youth will imbibe a love of their country; reverence and obedience to its laws; courage and elevation of mind; openness and liberality of character; accompanied by a just spirit of honor: in addition to which their bodies will acquire a robustness, greatly conducive to their personal happiness, as well as the defence of their country; while habit, with its silent but efficacious operations, will durably cement the system.
Habit, that powerful and universal law, incessantly acting on the human race, well deserves the attention of legislators—formed at first in individuals, by separate and almost imperceptible impulses, until at length it acquires a force which controls with irresistible sway. The effects of salutary or pernicious habits, operating on a whole nation, are immense, and decide its rank and character in the world.
-2-Hence the science of legislation teaches to scrutinize every national institution, as it may introduce proper or improper habits; to adopt with religious zeal the former, and reject with horror the latter.
A republic, constructed on the principles herein stated, would be uninjured by events, sufficient to overturn a government supported solely by the uncertain power of a standing army.
The well informed members of the community, actuated by the highest motives of self-love, would form the real defence of the country. Rebellions would be prevented or suppressed with ease; invasions of such a government would be undertaken only by mad men; and the virtues and knowledge of the people would effectually oppose the introduction of tyranny.
But the second principle, a militia of substitutes, is pregnant, in a degree, with the mischiefs of a standing army; as it is highly probable the substitutes from time to time will be nearly the same men, and the most idle and worthless part of the community. Wealthy families, proud of distinctions which riches may confer, will prevent their sons from serving in the militia of substitutes; the plan will degenerate into habitual contempt; a standing army will be introduced, and the liberties of the people subjected to all the contingencies of events.
The expense attending an energetic establishment of militia may be strongly urged as an objection to the institution. But it is to be remembered, that this objection is leveled at both systems, whether by rotation or by substitutes: for, if the numbers are equal, the expense will also be equal. The estimate of the expense will show its unimportance, when compared with the magnitude and beneficial effects of the institution.
But the people of the United States will cheerfully consent to the expenses of a measure calculated to serve as a perpetual barrier to their liberties; especially as they well know that the disbursements will be made among the members of the same community, and therefore cannot be injurious.
Every intelligent mind would rejoice in the establishment of an institution, under whose auspices the youth and vigor of the constitution would be renewed with each successive generation, and which would appear to secure the great principles of freedom and happiness against the injuries of time and events.
The following plan is formed on these general principles:
First, That it is the indispensable duty of every nation to establish all necessary institutions for its own perfection and defence.
Secondly, That it is a capital security to a free state, for the great body of the people to possess a competent knowledge of the military art.
Thirdly, That this knowledge cannot be attained, in the present state of society, but by establishing adequate institutions for the military education of youth; and that the knowledge acquired therein should be diffused throughout the community by the principles of rotation.
Fourthly, That every man of the proper age, and ability of body, is firmly bound, by the social compact, to perform, personally, his proportion of military duty for the defence of the state.
-3-
Fifthly, That all men, of the legal military age, should be armed, enrolled, and held responsible for different degrees of military service.
And Sixthly, That agreeably to the constitution, the United States are to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such a part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States; reserving to the States, respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia, according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.”
End of excerpt from the 1790 Plan for Organization of the Militia
George Washington is listed as No. 1 in the Hall of Fame. In addition to his many other remarkable achievements, his Farewell Address also has gone down in history as one of the greatest writings of all time. In it he warned against engaging in foreign influence and entanglements, weakening the fabric of the constitutional government, loss of respect for national morality and religious principles, growth of party spirit, and against the devastation brought on by pretended patriotism.
It was a disgraceful effort which caused February 22nd, Washington’s birthday, to be renamed as President’s Day, thus reducing the respect due to a man who had contributed so much of himself. In his Farewell Address he left us this immortal advice:
“Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor and caprice?
George Washington And Father Augustine Washington
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world….”
Yet, we allow our public officials to “police the world”. Further still he said:
“One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown…..”
Yet, we allow our public officials to effect grievous alterations in the operation of the Constitutional system, swear by the oath of office under pretended allegiance, and destroy our inherent right as the ultimate power in the republic by denying us the use of firearms.
Today We Read From ‘The Hill’ That Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) Authored A Resolution which would mandate an immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces absent congressional authorization. His resolution failed (265-148). Now meet the real Kucinich and see what he DOES ACCOMPLISH!
Wonkette Muscle Beach Operative “Jim B.” sends us this hot sexy photo he took in Venice Beach over the weekend, where the communist Dennis Kucinich and his Elfin Queen, Liz, were vacationing during the “why does this even exist?” two-week Congressional recess. Look at this super-cool ruff rider, with the shades and popped collar. “I will steal your hottest ladies with my powers,” he is saying, maybe.
Dennis Living The Dream In Europe, While Committing Treason Against The United States Citizen!
The American military is engaged in multiple conflicts and humanitarian missions around the world, yet President Obama promised to veto legislation funding the troops for the remainder of 2011. This is a reprehensible political stunt, and it comes at the expense of our servicemen and women and the families they support.
Yesterday, as efforts to resolve the debate on 2011 government funding continued, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) introduced yet another temporary bill designed to keep the government operating for one more week during negotiations, and in this case, ensure the military portion of the budget is appropriated to eliminate the economic uncertainty facing our troops.
Before a vote was even taken, President Obama issued a Statement of Administration Policy that offered no policy, and merely called Speaker Boehner’s efforts a “distraction”, with the promise to veto the legislation. In fact, Speaker Boehner’s goal was to aid our armed forces by removing the distraction of a looming government shutdown for our troops. The House went on to pass the bill 247-181 with 15 Democrats joining nearly all Republicans.
The American public has clearly spoken that it is demanding budget cuts, but so far nothing has happened in the Senate—not one serious alternative to the budget with $61 billion in cuts the House passed nearly two months ago. That Harry Reid is even allowed at the negotiating table before completing the prerequisites is a mystery, and this latest episode of defense funding angst by he and Obama continues the drama.
United States military personnel are actively supporting the Libyan rebellion. Navy sailors and Marines are providing humanitarian relief to our ally Japan. American soldiers are still working to rebuild Iraq often in hostile conditions. They are engaged in active combat in Afghanistan. Some are being wounded daily; some maimed; some even killed. Others are doing their jobs around the globe keeping sea lanes open, on patrol, standing a post, and training for whatever conflicts lie ahead. Yet incredibly, their Commander-in-Chief vows to veto their paychecks.
The House-passed bill is essential to ensure military forces deployed around the world will get the equipment they need to succeed. Even it will fund defense at levels significantly below President Obama’s request, unfortunately, which is causing strain across the military right now.
The drawn-out budget fight to fund the government for 2011 is reaching a crescendo with a potential government shutdown now hours away. President Obama chose to finally engage the negotiations this week, yet still deflected leadership saying: “I shouldn’t have to oversee a process in which Congress deals with last year’s budget…”
This is true Mr. President. If last year’s Democrat-controlled Congress had fulfilled its basic responsibilities, we would not be in this situation. Yet, they did not, and you did not push them to do so. Now we are facing a partial government shutdown and while the House of Representatives offers fiscal solutions, measures to protect military pay and spending cuts, the White House and Senate merely say “no”. No is not good enough.
Democrat Party leaders are on record “rooting” for a shutdown in hopes it helps their electoral odds in 2012. By killing this measure to fully fund our troops and take them out of this Washington battle, their political maneuvering has taken a dangerous turn.
Supporting the military at the appropriate levels so as to protect and defend our nation is the first and foremost Constitutional responsibility of the federal government. It is one often abdicated in favor of stimulus bills and irresponsible entitlement management. The 2012 budget battle will once again address this as the president’s budget proposal fails to appropriately fund these duties. However, for 2011, right now, it is an easy choice, not a distraction.
Last night in the White House briefing room, the president tried once again to project leadership, but said: “I’m not yet prepared to express wild optimism…but I think we are further along today than we were yesterday.”
Absent a deal today, President Obama should actively press Congress to fund the troops, and withdraw his threat to veto their funding. Let our soldiers get back to work without threats to their safety and their families’ finances. It’s time for President Obama and Senator Reid to show that kind of leadership.
Quick Hits:
In Wisconsin, a computer error was discovered, giving incumbent Supreme Court Justice David Prosser 7,381 more votes and a likely victory, dealing a major blow to labor union efforts to unseat him.
Rangel, facing ethics charges in Congress, has proposed the Universal National Service Act that would require “all persons” from ages 18-42 “to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the nationaldefense and homeland security.”
REP. CHARLIE RANGEL (D., N.Y.): He is being “investigated by the House Ethics Committee in at least four areas, including his reported failure to properly report income taxes on a Caribbean villa in the Dominican Republic; use of four, rent-controlled apartments in Harlem; questions about an offshore firm asking Rangel for special tax exemptions; and whether Rangel improperly used House stationery to solicit donations for a school of public affairs named after him at City College of New York,” Fox News summarizes.
The plan also authorizes “the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.”
“May Obama be d—–,” he wrote. “It reinstitutes the draft, and is for both males and females … There is no ‘opt-out’ – if you are not ‘fit’ for actual military service, or are a ‘conscientious objector,’ then you are shunted into ‘civilian service’ which is pretty much anything the ‘president’ says it is.”
WND reported when a copy of Obama’s Colorado Springs speech posted online apparently was edited to exclude Obama’s specific references to the new force.
According to the copy of Rangel’s plan, which has been assigned to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel even though it lacks cosponsors, it specifies that “national service” means “military service or service in a civilian capacity that, as determined by the president, promotes nationaldefense, including national or community service and service related to homeland security.”
“It is the obligation of every citizen of the United States, and every other person residing in the United States, who is between the ages 18 and 42 to perform a period of national service as prescribed in this title,” it specifies.
It would require that the president provide “for the induction” of people to the service corps.
“Except as otherwise provided in this section, the period of national service performed by a person under this title shall be two years,” Rangel wrote.
The exceptions provide that the term of service may be extended if the “member” needs to “compensate for any time lost to training for any cause” or “for the purpose of furnishing hospitalization, medical, or surgical care for injury or illness incurred in the line of duty.”
It gives the president the far-reaching authority to “prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out this title,” including what types of “civilian service” are required, “standards of satisfactory performance,” “penalties for failure” and “such other matters as the president determines necessary to carry out this title.”
Conscientious objectors would be ordered “to perform national civiliain service … as the president may prescribe.”
The group Operation Sit In said it is coordinating information to link up those who “have the time to go to D.C. at the drop of a hat to keep the Senate from passing the Universal National Service Act … with those who would like to go to stop it, but cannot afford to lose their jobs by taking off with no notice.”
National Director Larry Richardson said, “Most of those who have the time and freedom of time to go are out of work because of the current economy, and therefore are short on funds to go. So we match those who still have jobs with those who do not, and with everyone doing a little, no one has to do it all.
“We also are arranging for people who live fairly close to D.C., (within 50 or so miles), to let us park our cars on their property, at home or business, so we do not have to worry about them being towed while we are in D.C.,” he said.
“We need every PATRIOT to step up and help in this,” he said.
A spokesman for Rangel’s office, Emile Milne, told WND that nobody knows what such a plan would cost, but presumably those in full-time service to their country as civilians would have to be paid, how many people would be conscripted or other details.
“It would have to move through committee,” he said. “These questions … certainly would be addressed by the relevant committee.”
He said the discussion in Rangel’s office is that those in the civilian corps would work in “education, health care, they could work in our ports, various aspects of security.”
He also said the idea has been a long-term goal for Rangel.
WND reported earlier when Obama signed into law the “GIVE Act,” H.R. 1388, which massively expands the National Service Corporation and allocates to it billions of dollars.
Officials said at that time the law would allow for the “managing” of up to 8 or 9 million people.
That bill includes a “National Service Reserve Corps” whose members have completed a “term of national service,” “training” and “not less than 10 hours of volunteering each year.”
Joseph Farah, founder and editor of WND, used his daily column when the issue originally arose to alert Americans of the plans. He then elevated the issue with a call to all reporters to start asking questions.
“If we’re going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn’t this rather a big deal?” Farah wrote. “I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?
“Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?” Farah wrote.
President George Washington Structured The Militia System To Prevent Treason And Tyranny By Public Officials!
George Washington takes the oath of office at Federal Hall in lower Manhattan, April 30, 1789.
On September 17, 1787 George Washington was the first to sign and accept the Constitution even though it had no Bill of Rights. It was Patrick Henry with his great speeches and lectures who in 1788 forced an agreement which promised that continued ratifica- tions of the document depended upon a Bill of Rights to be forthcoming. In 1789 Washing- ton took office and was faced with the arduous task of pioneering the first presidency including the structuring of the militia system. By January 1790 the influence Patrick Henry had over him became quite apparent. When Washington chaired the 1787 Constitutional Convention, provi- sions had been made for the defense of the country against invasion and for stifling rebel- lions, but there was an insuf- ficiency of safeguards to be applied against tyranny brought on by public officials.
By 1790 Washington began work on his “Plan No. 2 for the Organization of the Militia.” By now he was more able to see the weaknesses in the Constitution. He openly discussed the threat of tyranny emanating from within the government. By then, Patrick Henry’s wisdom was spread throughout the 13 original states, and it was inculcated as the basis for the policies and functions of the militia. Henry perpetuated the people’s liberty. He sustained the ultimate authority of the people. Washington well under- stood the need to safeguard the nation from its foreign enemies. In his “Plan No. 2 for the Organization of the Militia” he
Preface
undertook to warn about the dangers of domestic enemies: tyranny in government.
Washington himself took the farmers out for practice, and he utilized the knowledge and experiences of his generals and other valuable officers in the War for Independence by having them instruct and train the citizens (the whole people) in the techniques of soldiering, and the maintenance of an ‘energetic national militia’.
His “Plan No. 2 for the Organization of the Militia” was communicated to the Senate, on the 21st of January 1790. This lengthy Plan was permeated with the proposition that it is the direct duty and responsibility of the people themselves to guard against tyranny from within government.
Washington declared that the purpose of the militia was “to oppose the introduction of tyranny.” He had come a long way from the days when he accepted the Constitution without a Bill of Rights.
To view Washington’s statement in the context in which it was delivered, please look over the following excerpt taken from Pages 7-8 of an old document published by Gales and Seaton in 1832 entitled “American State Papers – Documents, Legislative and Executive, of the Congress of the United States, from the First Session of the First to the Second Session of the Fifteenth Congress, inclusive: commencing March 3, 1789, and ending March 3, 1819”.
This excerpt is a part of Wash- ington’s lengthy Plan No. 2 of 1790. While he also made re- ference to the prevention of invasion and rebellion, Washing- ton said that “the well informed members of the community (the people) were meant to be the real defence of the country”; and “the virtues and knowledge of the people would effectually oppose the introduction of tyranny.”
He warned that “the government would be invaded or overturned, and trampled upon by the bold and ambitious” — meaning people in our own country who operated without adherence to vital principles. The absoluteness of the right of the people to keep and bear arms is a basic principle. Unless the right to arms is absolute, the people cannot remain the ultimate power. The Bill of Rights confirmed that we possess many other rights beside the absolute right to arms. All of the other rights for the preservation of their own existence, depend entirely upon the absoluteness, the force, and the reasoning that have shaped the Second Amend- ment. Washington agreed with Patrick Henry on the purpose of the militia: It was to “oppose the introduction of tyranny.” Make no mistake about it: The prime reason for the Second Amend- ment is prevention of tyranny in government.
THESE WARSHIPS SHOULD BE HEADED FOR THE UNITED KINGDOM WITH THEIR BARRELS LEVELED AT LONDON’S BILDERBERGS, GOLDMAN SACHS, ROTHSCHILDS, & ALL SEDITIOUS NEW WORLDERS!
THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE FARCE, OUR SOLDIERS GIVING THEIR LIVES FOR ALREADY RICH & GREEDY BLACK HEARTS OF THE BRITISH MONARCHY! This has nothing to do with the good people of Britain, who are actually going through the same crap. In fact, U.K. is the next country to go into bankruptcy – its all has to do with de-population mechanisms and centralizing the wealth back into the International Banking Cartel based in London/Monarchy. The British Monarchy/Committee of 300/Illuminati/Bilderbergs etc are all encapsulated by The Committee of 300 and the other venues of their designs, are carried out in general by the (Illuminati-Physical Violence) (Bilderbergs-Economic Violence) etc etc.
The Speech That Brought The End To President Kennedy, By The Monarchial Sociopaths For Monarchial NWO Under The Useless Queen.
More than twelve U.S. and Israeli warships, including an aircraft carrier, passed through the Suez Canal on Friday and are headed for the Red Sea. “According to eyewitnesses, the U.S. battleships were the largest to have crossed the Canal in many years,” reported the London-based newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi on Saturday.
The Israeli newspaperHaaretz reported Egyptian opposition members criticized the government for cooperating with the U.S. and Israeli forces and allowing the passage of the ships through Egyptian territorial waters. The Red Sea is the most direct route to the Persian Gulf from the Mediterranean.
Retired Egyptian General Amin Radi, chairman of the national security affairs committee, told the paper that “the decision to declare war on Iran is not easy, and Israel, due to its wild nature, may start a war just to remain the sole nuclear power in the region,” according to Yedioth Internet, an Israeli news site.
The passage of a warship armada through the Suez Canal and headed for the Persian Gulf and Iran is apparently not deemed important enough to be reported by the corporate media in the United States.
Egypt recently rejected an Israeli request to prevent Gaza aid ships from passing through the Suez Canal. According to a report by al-Jazeera, Israel appealed to Egyptians asking them to prevent the passage of Iranian ships through the Suez Canal. The Egyptians responded that due to international agreements on movement through the Suez Canal, Egypt cannot prevent ships from passing through the canal unless a ship belongs to a state that is at war with Egypt. Iran and Egypt are not at war.
The United States and Israel, the sole nuclear-armed power in the Middle East, have not ruled out a military strike to destroy Iran’s nuclear program.
A number of Israeli politicians and scholars have admitted Israel has used its nuclear weapons for “compellent purposes,” in short forcing others to accept Israeli political demands.
CHILDREN OF THE APOCALYPSE
Israel’s threats to use nuclear weapons have increased significantly since it was discovered in 2002 that Iran was building uranium enrichment facilities. Israel’s former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon “called on the international community to target Iran as soon as the imminent conflict with Iraq is complete,” the Sunday Times reported on November 5, 2002. The United States invaded Iraq on March 20, 2003.
Earlier this month Israel leaked to the press that they had permission from Saudi Arabia to use their air space to attack Iran. “In the week that the UN Security Council imposed a new round of sanctions on Tehran, defence sources in the Gulf say that Riyadh has agreed to allow Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran,” the Sunday Times reported on June 12. On June 14, the ambassador of Saudi Arabia to UK Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf issued a categorical denial of the report
Obama fearing a revolution against him by the states, has moved swiftly by nationalizing nearly all National Guard Forces in multiple states; Georgia, Alabama, Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee, Virginia, Louisiana, South Carolina – to name a few. The Governors of the Great States of Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia still have under their Command-and-Control the State Defense Forces to go against U.S. Federal forces should the need arise. Also important to note: There are NO U.S. laws prohibiting National Guard troops from also joining their State’s Defense Forces. This dilemma occurred during the Civil War with many “citizen soldiers” choosing to serve their states instead of the Federal Government.
Obama is angered by the several State Governors who have reestablished “State Defense Forces.” These forces are described as: “State Defense Forces (also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves, State Militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are not regulated by the National Guard Bureau nor are they part of the Army National Guard of the United States. State Defense Forces are authorized by state and federal law and are under the command of the governor of each state. State Defense Forces are distinct from their state’s National Guard in that they cannot become federal entities.”
Mr. Obama is fearful of these State Defense Forces, in that he does not have control of said forces, and with the U.S. Military stretched to near breaking from multiple deployments and theatre actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, these State military forces would be under the direct command and authority of the Governors in which states have said forces. In essence, the Governors would have “de facto control” of the United States.
Notice All Of Ramadan Celebrating Islamic Terrorist Camps
The two Governors leading this move are: Tim Pawlenty, Governor of Minnesota; and Rick Perry, Governor of Texas. Both of these State Governors stated they have: “…deep fear the President is destroying their Nation.” Governor Pawlenty’s fear of Obama is that since Obama took office he has appeased America’s enemies and has shunned some of America’s strongest allies, especially Israel. Governor Perry has declared that Obama is punishing his State of Texas by dumping tens-of-thousands of illegal Mexican immigrants into the cities and small towns of Texas. Governor Perry further recently stated: “If Barack Obama’s Washington doesn’t stop being so oppressive, Texans might feel compelled to renounce their American citizenry and secede from the union.”
Dr. Lyle J. Rapacki
Lyle is an intelligence analyst and consultant who receives and disseminates critical intelligence and policy information from and to law enforcement, intelligence operatives, homeland security officials, government and community leaders. He is the author of dozens of white papers, bulletins and briefings, and he is frequently called on to share his expertise with public and private security directors and organizations.
Lyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D.
Protective Intelligence and Assessment Specialist
Consultant at Behavioral Analysis and Threat Assessment
Independent Intelligence and Information Warfare Analyst
FBI InfraGard-Arizona
ASIS-International
At the beginning of this year, President Obama decided to make good on campaign promises to homosexual activists and commissioned a year-long study to see how he could overturn the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in the U.S. military. Military leaders were to conduct the study, and report back with their findings.
This week, however, the Obama Administration and liberal Congressional leaders have made a so-called “compromise” in which Congress and the President will move forward with overturning the law regardless of the outcome of the military’s findings. Apparently President Obama and Speaker Pelosi think that our troops are incompetent to make their own policies.
The President and Congress need to hear the voice of Americans on this issue. Our military is for national defense, and is no place to advance a liberal political agenda. The time to act is now, as the House and Senate are voting this week. Please join me today in signing the petition to help keep our troops from being used to advance a liberal political agenda.
The White House on Tuesday signaled the end of months of deliberations on US strategy toward Afghanistan, announcing that President Barack Obama would reveal his decision within days.
“After completing a rigorous final meeting, President Obama has the information he wants and needs to make his decision and he will announce that decision within days,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.
And that troop increase is likely to be large. According to veteran intelligence reporter Jonathan Landay at McClatchy’s Newspapers, the White House plans to dispatch some 34,000 additional troops — slightly more than half the number requested by Afghan commander Stanley McChrystal.
“President Barack Obama met Monday evening with his national security team to finalize a plan to dispatch some 34,000 additional U.S. troops over the next year to what he’s called ‘a war of necessity’ in Afghanistan,” officials purportedly told the newswire.
“Obama is expected to announce his long-awaited decision on Dec. 1, followed by meetings on Capitol Hill aimed at winning congressional support amid opposition by some Democrats who are worried about the strain on the U.S. Treasury and whether Afghanistan has become a quagmire,” Landay adds. “The U.S. officials all spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly and because, one official said, the White House is incensed by leaks on its Afghanistan policy that didn’t originate in the White House.”
Late on Monday Obama held the ninth and last in a series of meetings with top commanders to examine the troubled war effort.
The results of those discussions are now widely expected to be made public next Tuesday, although a White House official said “nothing had been confirmed” about the timing of the announcement.
Obama has been weighing requests from the military top brass for tens of thousands of extra troops to be deployed.
“As it now stands,” McClatchy writes,”the plan calls for the deployment over a nine-month period beginning in March of three Army brigades from the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Ky., and the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, N.Y., and a Marine brigade from Camp Lejeune, N.C., for as many as 23,000 additional combat and support troops.
“In addition, a 7,000-strong division headquarters would be sent to take command of U.S.-led NATO forces in southern Afghanistan — to which the U.S. has long been committed — and 4,000 U.S. military trainers would be dispatched to help accelerate an expansion of the Afghan army and police,” he adds.