It Takes a Radical: The Very Political Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton

PROLOGUE:  I researched the following information and recorded it as a 4 part series about the 2016 presumptive Democratic Presidential Candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton. I am offering it today, as a 5,500 word essay, on the day before she makes the formal announcement that she is, in fact, a candidate for the Democratic Nomination for their Presidential Candidate.

After her recent actions, in which she attempted to blithely explain away the use of a private personal e-mail account to conduct Government Business as the Secretary of State, and then wiped her server,  I feel that it is imperative to share this information in a form where it will be easy for you , gentle readers, to share with your friends and family. 

Even though she is presently attempting to reinvent herself as a “Moderate” Democrat, in preparation for a political campaign in which she shall seek the Democrat Party’s Presidential Candidate Nomination, the story of her life reveals someone quite different.


Hillary Clinton 1On October 26, 1947, Hillary Diane Rodham entered this world in Chicago, Illinois.Hillary Rodham, the oldest daughter of Hugh Rodham, a prosperous fabric store owner, and Dorothy Emma Howell Rodham, was raised in Park Ridge, Illinois, a quaint little suburb located 15 miles northwest of downtown Chicago. Hillary has two younger brothers, Hugh Jr. (born 1950) and Anthony (born 1954).In her youth, the future Democrat was active in young Republican groups, even campaigning for the 1964 Republican Presidential Nominee, Barry Goldwater.According to Hil, she was inspired to work in some form of public service after hearing the Reverend Martin Luther King speak in Chicago. She became a Democrat in 1968.The young ingenue attended Wellesley College, where she was active in student politics, being elected Senior Class President before she graduated in 1969.After that, Hilary enrolled in Yale Law School, where she met Bill “Bubba” Clinton.  Afer graduating with honors in 1973, she then enrolled at Yale Child Study Center, where she took courses on children and medicine and completed one post-graduate year of study, which explains her whole “It takes a village” philosophy.

While a college student, Hillary worked several summer jobs. In 1971, she arrived in Washington, D.C. to work on U.S. Senator Walter Mondale’s sub-committee on migrant workers. The next summer found her out west, working for the campaign of Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern.

Then, in the spring of 1974, Rodham became a member of the presidential impeachment inquiry staff, advising the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives during the Watergate Scandal.

Her boss back then, Jerry Zeifman, now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, tells a very revealing story concerning her work there.

According to Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former Yale Law Professor, Burke Marshall, also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair.

When the Watergate Investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation. That made the Future First Lady and Secretary of State one of only three people who earned that badge of dishonor in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

According to Zeifman,

Because she was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.

Zeifman claims that she was one of several individuals including Marshall, Special Counsel John Doar, and Senior Associate Special Counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum, who plotted to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation.

Zeifman believes  that they were deathly afraid of putting the break-in’s mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by Counsel to the President.  The reason being, Hunt had the goods regarding some dirty dealings  in the Kennedy Administration that would have made Watergate look like a kid busting open his Piggy Bank…dealings which purportedly included Kennedy’s complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.

Hillary and her associates were acting directly against the decision of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, who all believed that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel.

The reason that Hillary and the rest came up with the scheme is because they believed that they could gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon.

In order to pull off this scheme, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception.

Hillary wanted to present in her brief that there was no right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding. Zeifman told Hillary about the case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeachment attempt in 1970….

As soon as the impeachment resolutions were introduced by (then-House Minority Leader Gerald) Ford, and they were referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the first thing Douglas did was hire himself a lawyer.

Douglas was allowed to keep counsel by the Judicial Committee in place at the time, which clearly established a precedent. Zeifman told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files.

That was  a mistake, per Zeifman…

Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public.

Hillary then wrote a legal brief which argued that there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding…ignoring the Douglas case completely.

The brief was so laughingly fraudulent, Zeifman believes Hillary would have been disbarred if she had ever actually submitted it to a judge.

Zeifman says that if Hillary and her associates had succeeded, members of the House Judiciary Committee would have also been denied the right to cross-examine witnesses, and denied the opportunity to even be a part of the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.

After President Richard M. Nixon resigned in August, rendering the matter of her deception moot, Hillary became a faculty member of the University of Arkansas Law School in Fayetteville, where her Yale Law School classmate and boyfriend Bill Clinton was also teaching.

Hillary Rodham married Bill Clinton on October 11, 1975, at their home in Fayetteville. Before he proposed, Bubba had secretly purchased a small house that Hillary had previously said that she liked. When she accepted his marriage proposal, he revealed that they owned the house.

Hillary Clinton #2After she married Bill in 1975, Hillary Rodham Clinton worked on Jimmy Carter’s successful campaign for presidenti in1976, while Bill got elected Attorney General of the state of Arkansas.

Hillary joined the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock after Bill became Attorney General, and made partner only after he was elected governor, according to Former Clinton Confidante Dick Morris.

That event occurred in 1978.

President Carter appointed Mrs. Clinton to the board of the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) in 1978. This was a federally funded nonprofit organization which was designed as a way to expand the social welfare state and grow social welfare spending. According to Dick Morris, the appointment was in exchange for Bill’s support for Carter in his 1980 primary against Ted Kennedy. Hillary went on to become board chairman in a coup in which she won a majority away from Carter’s choice to be chairman.

Hillary more than tripled LSC’s annual budget, from $90 million to $321 million, in taxpayer funds (OUR money). LSC used these funds in several different ways, most notable among them, the printing of political training manuals showing “how community organizations and public interest groups can win political power and resources,” and the financing of training programs that taught political activists how to harass their opposition.

While Hillary was running the LSC board, the Corporation also

1. Worked to defeat a California referendum that would have cut state income taxes in half

2. Called for the U.S. government to give two-thirds of the state of Maine to American Indians

3.  Paid Marxist orators and folk singers to wage a campaign against the Louisiana Wildlife Commission

4.  Joined a Michigan initiative to recognize “Black English” as an official language;

5.  Sought to force the New York City Transit Authority to hire former heroin addicts so as to avoid “discriminat[ing]” against “minorities” who were “handicapped.”

When it became clear that Ronald Reagan was on the verge of beating Democrat President Jimmy Carter in 1980, LSC redirected massive amounts of its public funding into an anti-Reagan letter-writing campaign by indigent clients. After Reagan was elected in November 1980, LSC immediately laundered its assets — some $260 million — into state-level agencies and private groups so as to keep the funds away from the board that Reagan would eventually appoint. Hillary Clinton left LSC in 1981.

While Bubba was  Governor of Arkansas from 1978 to 1980, and again from 1982 to 1992, Hillary was very active “behind the scenes”.

During these years, she continued her legal practice as a partner in the Rose Law Firm. In 1978 she also became a board member of the Children’s Defense Fund (CDF), and from 1986 to 1992 she served as chair of the CDF Board.

From 1982 to 1988, Hillary also chaired the New World Foundation (NWF), which had helped to launch CDF in 1973. While running the NWF, the Foundation made grants to such organizations as the National Lawyers Guild, the Institute for Policy Studies, the Christic Institute, Grassroots International, the Committees in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (which sought to foment a Communist revolution in Central America), and groups with ties to the most extreme elements of the African National Congress.

According to Dick Morris, when Clinton was considering not running for another term as Governor of Arkansas in 1990, Hillary said she would run if he didn’t. She and Bill even had Morris take two surveys to assess her chances of winning. The conclusion was that she couldn’t win because people would just see her as a seat warmer for when Bill came back licking his wounds after losing for president. So she didn’t run. Bill did and won. But there is no question she had her eye on public office, as opposed to service, long ago.

So, while Bill was the Front Man, Hil worked “the Back of the House”, in preparation for her “moment in the spotlight”.

During the Clintons’ time in Arkansas, they also both became involved in a little matter which later became known as “The Whitewater Scandal”.

In 1978, while Bubba was Attorney General of Arkansas, Hil and he partnered with James and Susan McDougal in a purchase 220 acres of land that would evolve into the Whitewater Development Corporation. The real estate venture tanked, costing the Clintons a reported $40,000 in losses. After that James McDougal went into the banking industry, forming Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan.

In 1986, federal regulators investigated another real estate investment backed by James McDougal. The investigation led to McDougal’s resignation from Madison Guaranty and the eventual collapse of the bank. Questions surrounding the Clintons’ involvement in the Whitewater deal grew during President Clinton’s first term in office and an investigation into the legality of the Whitewater transactions was launched.

All subsequent inquiries into the Whitewater land deal yielded insufficient evidence to charge the Clintons with criminal conduct. However, several of their associates were convicted as a result the investigations.

In July 1992, William Jefferson Clinton was nominated by the Democratic Party as their Candidate for the Presidency of the United States.

In August of that year, Daniel Wattenberg wrote the following prophetic statement in the opening of an article for “The American Spectator” titled, “The Lady Macbeth of Little Rock”…

Hillary Clinton has been likened to Eva Peron, but it’s a bad analogy. Evita was worshipped by the “shirtless ones,” the working class, while Hillary’s charms elude most outside of an elite cohort of left-liberal, baby-boom feminists-the type who thought Anita Hill should be canonized and Thelma and Louise was the best movie since Easy Rider. Hillary reckons herself the next Eleanor Roosevelt. But, standing well to the left of her husband and enjoying an independent power base within his coalition, Hillary is best thought of as the Winnie Mandela of American politics. She has likened the American family to slavery, thinks kids should be able to sue their parents to resolve family arguments, and during her tenure as a foundation officer gave away millions (much of it in no-strings-attached grants) to the left-including sizable sums to hard-left organizers. She is going to cause her husband no end of political embarrassment between now and November-and who knows how long afterward.

Mr. Wattenberg nailed that one, huh?

Hillary Clinton #3Bill Clinton was inaugurated as the 42nd President of the United States of America on January 20, 1993.  Standing right behind him…and pushing hard was Hillary Rodham Clinton, by now widely known as the more-driven, and politically ambitious one of the couple.

Billed as “the New Camelot” by the Main Stream Media, the Clintons strode arm-in-arm into their castle to preside over their new kingdom, where Progressivism in the name of “Moderation” would be the Law of the Land.

However, just as the reign of Arthur and Guinevere ended badly, into the Clintons’ storybook “Co-Presidency”, “a little rain” fell in the form of scandals and quite a few “Bimbo Eruptions” which brought about an inglorious end to all of their “peace and harmony”.

Rose Law Firm Billing – As I wrote previously, in 1978, while Bubba was Attorney General of Arkansas, Hil and he partnered with James and Susan McDougal in a purchase 220 acres of land that would evolve into the Whitewater Development Corporation. The real estate venture tanked, costing the Clintons a reported $40,000 in losses. After that James McDougal went into the banking industry, forming Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan.

In 1986, federal regulators investigated another real estate investment backed by James McDougal. The investigation led to McDougal’s resignation from Madison Guaranty and the eventual collapse of the bank. Questions surrounding the Clintons’ involvement in the Whitewater deal grew during President Clinton’s first term in office and an investigation into the legality of the Whitewater transactions was launched.

After nearly two years of searches and subpoenas, the White House announced on the evening of January 6, 1996, that it had unexpectedlydiscovered copies of missing documents from the Rose Law Firm that describe Hillary Rodham Clinton’s work for a failing savings and loan association in the 1980′s.

Federal and Congressional investigators had issued subpoenas for the documents since 1994, and the White House claimed not have them. The originals disappeared from the Rose Law Firm, shortly before Bill Clinton was inaugurated as President.

The newly discovered documents were copies of billing records from the Rose firm. The originals were found under the Clintons’ bed in the White House, shortly after the statute of limitations ran out.

All subsequent inquiries into the Whitewater land deal yielded insufficient evidence to charge the Clintons with criminal conduct. However, several of their associates were convicted as a result of the investigations.

Death of Vince Foster – On July 20, 1993, Vincent W. Foster Jr., the deputy counsel to the president of the United States, and former partner with Hillary, in The Rose Law Firm, was found lying neatly face-up on a steep embankment in Marcy Park with his feet pointing down, dressed in expensive trousers and a white dress shirt, less than eight miles from the White House, with a single gun-shot wound to the head. Dead. Some of the blood on Foster’s face was still wet, but starting to dry. A trail of blood flowed upwards from his nose to above his ear. The man who found his body said there was no gun, but after he left to notify police, a gun appeared in Foster’s hand. President William Jefferson Clinton’s Arkansas childhood friend, First Lady Hillary Clinton’s Rose Law Firm partner, and White House confidante’s death was to become the subject of controversy.

Due to Foster’s involvement in Whitewater, both at Rose and in the White House, the Senate Whitewater Committee investigation’s conclusion revealed that there was “a concerted effort by senior White House officials to block career law enforcement investigators from conducting a thorough investigation” into Foster’s death, and recommended “that steps be taken to insure that such misuse of the White House counsel’s office does not recur in this, or any future, administration.”

So, was Vince Foster murdered? And, why?

In 1999, a book titled, “Bill and Hillary: The Marriage”, caused a lot of consternation among the Clintons and their supporters.

The author, Christopher Andersen, claimed that in 1977 she began an intensely passionate affair with Vince Foster.

The affair supposedly took place when the two were lawyers at The Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas, while Bubba was governor.

Rumors of an affair first started buzzing around after Foster was found in Marcy Park. The book did not say when the relationship ended.

To this day, the circumstances surrounding the death of Vince Foster, remain a topic for conjecture.

 Travelgate – In early summer of 1993, 6 employees of the White House Travel Office were fired, after Hil and Bubba determined that the Travel Office workers, who served at the pleasure of the president, could be fired and that the Travel Office business, and the commissions that came along with it, Coulee be taken over by a cousin of President Clinton’s, Catherine Cornelius, who already owned her own travel agency.

However, they could not just go ahead and hand over a governmental office to a relative, without a backlash, so the Clintons made up a story, claiming that the Travel Office was rife with corruption and the workers there had to be fired. An audit of the Travel Office ensued, and while the record-keeping at the office was found to have been pretty inadequate, no corruption or embezzlement were found. That did not matter to the Clintons, so they went ahead and pressured the FBI to make arrests, and the local US Attorney was given instructions to prosecute the employees for corruption.

Of course, the Clintons denied being behind any sort of scheme in the matter. However, leaks by those involved, led to a firestorm of media criticism. Most of the Travel Office employees were eventually given other government jobs or retired and the trial for corruption of the head of the Travel Office, Billy Dale, ended in a verdict of “NOT GUILTY”.

Clinton’s cousin was subsequently removed as new head of the Travel Office.

Afterward, Independent Counsel Robert Ray wrote a report that concluded that, while she did not make any knowingly-false statements under oath, First Lady Hillary Clinton had made a number of inaccurate statements concerning the firings and her role in them.

Bimbo Eruptions – Back in the Bill Clinton era, White House advisor Betsey Wright coined the term “bimbo eruptions” to describe a long list of presidential gal pals.

BIll “Bubba” Clinton’s Bimbo List” included, but is not limited to (I’m sure) Jennifer Flowers, Former Miss America Elizabeth Ward, Paul Corbin Jones, and, of course, Monica Lewinsky.

The Lewinsky scandal was a sensation that enveloped the presidency of Bill Clinton in 1998–99, leading to his impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives and acquittal by the Senate.

Paula Corbin Jones, a former Arkansas state worker who claimed that Bill Clinton had accosted her sexually in 1991 when he was governor of Arkansas, had brought a sexual harassment lawsuit against the president. In order to show a pattern of behavior on Clinton’s part, Jones’s lawyers questioned several women believed to have been engaging in sex  with him. On Jan. 17, 1998, Bubba took the stand, becoming the first sitting president to testify as a civil defendant.

During this testimony, Clinton denied having had an affair with Monica S. Lewinsky, an unpaid intern and later a paid staffer at the White House who worked in the White House from 1995–96. Lewinsky had earlier, in a deposition in the same case, also denied having such a relationship. Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel in the Whitewater case, had already received tape recordings made by Linda R. Tripp (a former coworker of Lewinsky’s) of telephone conversations in which Lewinsky described her involvement with the president. Asserting that there was a “pattern of deception,” Starr obtained from Attorney General Janet Reno permission to investigate the matter.

The president publicly denied having had a relationship with Lewinsky and charges of covering it up. His adviser, Vernon Jordan, denied having counseled Lewinsky to lie in the Jones case, or having arranged a job for her outside Washington, to help cover up the affair. Hillary Clinton claimed that a “vast right-wing conspiracy” was trying to destroy her husband, while Republicans and conservatives portrayed him as immoral and a liar.

In March, Jordan and others testified before Starr’s grand jury, and lawyers for Paula Jones released papers revealing, among other things, that Clinton, in his January deposition, had admitted to a sexual relationship in the 1980s with Arkansas entertainer Gennifer Flowers, a charge he had long denied. In April, however, Arkansas federal judge Susan Webber Wright dismissed the Jones suit, ruling that Jones’s story, if true, showed that she had been exposed to “boorish” behavior but not sexual harassment; Jones appealed.

In July, Starr granted Lewinsky immunity from perjury charges, and Clinton agreed to testify before the grand jury. He did so on Aug. 17, then went on television to admit the affair with Lewinsky and ask for forgiveness. In September, Starr sent a 445-page report to the House of Representatives, recommending four possible grounds for impeachment: perjury, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and abuse of authority.

On Dec. 19, Clinton became the second president (after Andrew Johnson) to be impeached, on two charges: perjury—in his Aug., 1998, testimony—and obstruction of justice. The vote in the House was largely along party lines.

In Jan., 1999, the trial began in the Senate. On Feb. 12, after a trial in which testimony relating to the charges was limited, the Senate rejected both counts of impeachment. The perjury charge lost, 55–45, with 10 Republicans joining all 45 Democrats in voting against it; the obstruction charge drew a 50–50 vote. Subsequently, on Apr. 12, Judge Wright, who had dismissed the Jones case, found the president in contempt for lying in his Jan., 1998, testimony, when he denied the Lewinsky affair. In July, Judge Wright ordered the president to pay nearly $90,000 to Ms. Jones’s lawyers. On Jan. 19, 2001, the day before he left office, President Clinton agreed to admit to giving false testimony in the Jones case and to accept a five-year suspension of his law license and a $25,000 fine in return for an agreement by the independent counsel, Robert W. Ray (Starr’s successor), to end the investigation and not prosecute him.

In a later interview, Hillary claimed that Bill suffered childhood abuse which may have caused him to philanderer and experience “bimbo eruptions” later in life. She described her philandering husband as “a hard dog to keep on the porch”.

The Clinton Co-Presidency ended with the Inauguration of President George W. Bush on January 20, 2001.

However, Hillary Clinton’s “time in the Spotlight” was just beginning.

Hillary Clinton #4On November 6, 2000, Former First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton was elected Democratic Senator for the State of New York, serving unremarkably until leaving Office on January 21, 2009.

During her undistinguished career in the U.S. Senate, Hillary Clinton voted on a variety of key pieces of legislation as follows:

  • in favor of a 2003 bill to ban oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
  • in favor of an October 2002 joint resolution to authorize the use of the U.S. Armed Forces against Iraq
  • against major tax-cut proposals in 2001 and 2003
  • in favor of a 2007 proposal to end the use of a point-based immigration system, (i.e., a system that seeks to ensure that people with skills that society needs are given preference for entry into the United States)
  • against a 2007 amendment designating English as the language of “sole legal authority” for the business of the federal government, and declaring that no person has a right to require officials of the U.S. government to use a language other than English
  • against a 2008 bill urging an expansion of the zero-tolerance prosecution policy for illegal aliens; calling for the completion of 700 miles of pedestrian fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border; allowing for the deployment of up to 6,000 National Guard members to the U.S. southern border; and encouraging the identification and deportation of illegal immigrants currently in the American prison system
  • in favor of the Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2002 (McCain-Feingold Act), which put restrictions on paid advertising during the weeks just prior to political elections, and tightly regulated the amount of money which political parties and candidates could accept from donors
  • against separate proposals (in 2004 and 2005) to ban lawsuits against gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others
  • against a 2003 proposal to ban the late-term procedure commonly known as “partial-birth abortion”
  • against a 2004 proposal to make it an added criminal offense for someone to injure or kill a fetus while carrying out a crime against a pregnant woman
  • against a 2006 bill making it illegal to knowingly transport a pregnant minor across state lines in order to obtain an abortion, as a way to escape state laws requiring parental consent

One week after Barack Hussein Obama was elected President of the United States, on November 4, 2008, he called Hillary and offered her the job of Secretary of State, despite the fact that she had no Foreign Policy experience. It was a suspicious choice at best, considering that fact that when they were running against each other in the Democratic Primaries,Obama had specifically criticized Clinton’s Foreign Policy credentials and the initial idea of him appointing her had been so unexpected that she had told one of her own aides, “Not in a million years.”

The fact that she had campaigned unreservedly for Obama after he defeated her for the Democratic Nomination, led to speculation that the Secretary of State job was a “reward for her loyalty”.

Hillary accepted the position, and now, as speculation concerning a possible Presidential Campaign runs rampant, even the Main Stream Media is hard-pressed to come up with anything she accomplished as Obama’s First Secretary of State.

So, how did she do?

On January 26, 2013, after Hillary had stepped down as Secretary of State and was replaced by Senator John Kerry, the following conversation took place between Fox News Anchor Chris Wallace and Fox News Senior Political Analyst Brit Hume…

WALLACE: Yeah, I want to pick up on that, Brit, because during the hearing, what struck me was the Republicans were tough on Hillary, on Benghazi and the Democrats weren’t. But, both sides kept on saying what a great secretary of state she had been and to praise her service. And here’s some of the points that have been brought up, some of her accomplishments. She helped assemble the bombing campaign in Libya to topple Muammar Qaddafi. She helped assembly the coalition that imposed the toughest sanctions ever on Iran. And, she established diplomatic ties with Burma.

Question, Brit, how do you rate Hillary Clinton’s performance, record as our top diplomat?

HUME: I think those examples you cited would add up to a case for her competence. They do not add up to a case for greatness, after all, the groundwork on Burma had been done by the previous administration. And the administration properly followed through on it. You look across the world, now at the major issues. Are Arabs and Israelis closer to peace? How about Iran and North Korea and their nuclear programs? Have they been halted or seriously set back? Has the reset with Russia, which she so famously introduced with the photo-op in Moscow with the reset button, has they lead to a new and more cooperative relationship? Is there a Clinton doctrine that we can identify that she has articulated and formed as secretary of state? Are there major treaties that she has undertaken and negotiated through to a successful conclusion? I think the answer to all those questions is that she has not. And those are the kinds of things that might mark her as a great secretary of state.

She has certainly been industrious. She has visited 112 countries. Her conduct as secretary of state has been highly dignified. She does her homework. There have been no gaffes or blunders. So I think she has been a capable and hard-working secretary of state, but I think the case for her being a great secretary of state is exceedingly weak.

Brit was being gracious. Here are seven Foreign Policy Disasters, which happened under Hillary’s watch as the Architect of “Smart Power!”, in no particular order:

The decision to overthrow President Gaddafi in Libya – The short-sighted, ill-conceived action not only undermined an ally in the (now defunct) “global war on terror,” it also served to throw gasoline on the bonfire known as “Arab Spring.

The Afghanistan “surge”- A military campaign that fails to result in a desired political outcome is con only be considered a failure. What exactly was Obama and Hillary’s desired outcome when they called for this?
It is a fait d’accompli that the Karzai Government will be able to survive long once the U.S. completes its withdrawal of its combat forces from the country in 2014. This is can only be considered a failure, A failure which cost too many of our Brightest and Best.

Granting Afghanistan major non-NATO U.S. ally status – Why did Barry and Hill decide to grant Afghanistan the status of a major non-NATO ally? When we pull out, our enemied will pour in. And, with “friends” like these, you don’t need enemies.

Maintaining the status quo with Pakistan – Pakistan has a long history of sponsoring Sunni jihadists of various stripes. Following the 2001 attacks on the United States, they did an about-face, becoming a chief partner in the U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan as well as its “global war on terror.”
10 years later, following the successful May 2011 raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan that resulted in the death of Al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden, Pakistan promptly denounced the U.S. and closed its vital supply routes to NATO-bound shipments to Afghanistan.
Hil and Barry got “played”.

The East Asia “pivot” – Strictly an exercise in containment,attempts at containing China will only fuel Chinese fears of foreign encirclement, that will encourage Chinese assertiveness, that will further encourage containment.
This pivot is only a bluff on behalf of the feckless purveyors of “Smart Power to begin with.

As shown by the continued drawing of “Red Lines”, they will not stand up to our enemies.

Arab Spring – The Arab Spring was a series of protests and uprisings in the Middle East that began with unrest in Tunisia in late 2010. The Arab Spring has brought down regimes in some Arab countries, sparked mass violence in others, while some governments managed to delay the trouble with a mix of repression, promise of reform and state largesse.
Through this all Hillary and Obama have back the Muslim Brotherhood, the Godfather of Muslim Terrorist Organizations, in deposing Moderate Muslim Leaders.
Doesn’t make a while lot of sense, does it?

BenghaziGate – On September 11, 2012, Muslim Terrorists stormed the US Embassy Compound in Benghazi, Libya, slaughtered 4 brave Americans, including US Ambassador Chris Stephens, whose lifeless, sexually assaulted body they drug through the streets, while taking cell phone pictures of his corpse.
I have written several blogs about the Administration’s Cover-up of this atrocity, but the seminal moment, regarding Hillary Clinton came in January of 2013, during an exchange between her and Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin at a Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
Johnson asked her about the administration’s conflicting explanations for the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, which killed the ambassador and three other Americans. Hillary, as we say down here in Dixie, “got on her high keys” and said,

With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.

SUMMARY: When I finished writing this unauthorized biography of Hillary Clinton, I considered the possibility of Hillary Clinton running for President, and a great many thoughts entered my head…some of them even repeatable.

In fact, there are a lot of images that race through my mind, right now, as I sit here at my computer.

I remember the image of a lone terrorist, brandishing a machine gun, standing in front of the burning Benghazi Consulate.

I also remember the image of Benghazi Barbarians dragging a murdered Ambassador Chris Stevens through the streets, taking pictures every few yards, with their cell phones. 

My mind envisions the image of two brave Americans, up on a roof holding off 100 Muslim Terrorists, trying desperately to hold out for help which was denied to them, until finally the overwhelming numbers which comprise the horde of barbarians, murdered them as well. 

I imagine Ambassador Stevens’ elderly mother, making the trip from the West Coast to the East Coast to pick up the lifeless body of her abused and murdered son, whom she and her entire family were so proud of.

Finally, I remember the show of hypocrisy involving members of this anti-American Administration solemnly welcoming the bodies of those brave Americans home.

Former Secretary Clinton…the truth makes a big difference…to the families of those that were so savagely murdered that fateful night…and to the millions of Americans who still believe in this “Shining City on a Hill”.

Americans deserve the truth.

And, you should be ashamed to even consider running for President of the United States.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

***The information contained in this Blog may be found at biography.com, canadafreepress.com, biography.com,

discoverthenetworks.org, investopedia.com, The American Spectator, The New York Times, canadafreepress.com, bbc.co.uk, frontpagemag.com, theguardian.com, infoplease.com, discoverthenetworks.org, realclearpolitics.com, policy mic.com,mideast.about.com, and wsj.com.***

Obama and the Ayatollah: Another Charlie Brown and Lucy

 

Charlie BrownRemember how President Obama said that he and Secretary of State John Kerry had reached a “framework” of a deal with the Rogue Nation of Iran?

Apparently, he overestimated himself…again.

Foxnews.com reports that

Fiery criticism from Iran’s Supreme Leader, coupled with steep demands from the upper echelon of the regime, are throwing the nuclear “deal” reached last week into doubt — with Iran and the U.S. each claiming the agreement said different things, and neither side backing down.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has final say on all state matters, tore into the U.S. in remarks published on his official website and on his Twitter account.

Khamenei made clear he was neither endorsing nor rejecting the framework deal announced last week. But he challenged the way the U.S. was describing it — specifically, a fact sheet put out by the White House saying sanctions would be removed only after inspectors verify Iran’s compliance.

The Ayatollah, in one tweet, claimed the fact sheet was “contrary to what was agreed.”

In another, he said: “I trust our negotiators, but I’m really worried as the other side is into lying & breaching promises; an example was White House fact sheet.”

Ever since the preliminary deal was unveiled, Iranian officials have claimed — in their own remarks and fact sheets — that the agreement allows for sanctions to be lifted immediately once a final deal is reached.

On Thursday, both the Ayatollah and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani again insisted that all sanctions be removed as soon as a deal is reached, or implemented.

“We will not sign any agreement, unless all economic sanctions are totally lifted on the first day of the implementation of the deal,” Rouhani said during a ceremony marking Iran’s nuclear technology day, which celebrates the country’s nuclear achievements.

But the U.S. was not backing down.

State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke said Thursday that the White House fact sheet — which claimed sanctions relief was conditional — was accurate.

“Sanctions will be suspended in a phased manner upon verification that Iran has met specific commitments,” he said. “Those are among the agreed-upon parameters.”

He could not say whether it’s possible that Iran could actually meet those commitments on day one of any deal, but stressed that sanctions relief “will only begin” when the country takes “major nuclear steps” and increases its so-called “breakout time” — the time it would take to get enough fissile material for a weapon — to at least one year.

At the same time, Rathke said, “we’re not negotiating in public.” He acknowledged all sides have a “very tough series of negotiations” ahead. He also could not say if a final deal would include a signed document.

The U.S., Iran and five other world powers merely announced a framework last week and are trying to reach a final deal by a June 30 deadline.

In that time, both U.S. and Iran officials are trying to sell the framework to their own people.

As part of that, it had been expected that Iran’s leaders would position the agreement as a win for their country. Indeed, the remarks Thursday surely are part of that posturing.

But the split over the pace and nature of sanctions relief cuts to a fundamental issue, and several influential U.S. lawmakers have pointed to that split in questioning what was actually agreed to last week.

“As each new day reveals a new disagreement, it’s increasingly clear that Iran, in fact, failed to reach agreement with the United States and its partners on a political framework that addresses all parameters of a comprehensive agreement. At best, Iran agreed to disagree with the United States on key nuclear weapons-related issues and to continue talks,” Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., said in a statement on Thursday.

When Congress returns from a break next week, Republican senators — with some Democratic support — are planning to push a bill that would demand Congress have a say in any nuclear deal, a bill President Obama opposes.

The sanctions in question have had a crippling effect on Iran’s economy. Since 2012, the sanctions have reduced Iranian exports of oil by nearly 1.5 million barrels per day — around 60 percent of its production — to around 1 million barrels per day, Reuters reports.

Obama on Thursday — speaking in Jamaica, where he visited in advance of a summit in Panama — continued to defend the deal framework.

“But as I’ve said from the start, this is not done until it’s done,” Obama said. He said the next few months will be “critical.”

A senior Israeli defense official repeated his nation’s fears Thursday that Iran could still obtain a nuclear weapon if sanctions were lifted immediately, and would have additional funds to arm regional groups.

Those of us who are 50 years old and older, grew up with the comic strip Peanuts, the classic creation of Charles M Schulz, now only seen in barely-read Liberal newspapers, through reprints of the original strip.

One of the classic moments in that comic strip, which was repeated often in its run, was the scenario of Charlie Brown presenting Lucy with a football to hold so that he could kick it, only to have Lucy pull it away at the last moment, causing Charlie Brown to fall flat on his back in a spectacularly-humiliating fashion.

This scenario is exactly what we have going on with the “Iran Deal”, only the stakes are much higher and the man who is playing Charlie Brown is supposed to be the President of the United States of America.

Whether it be naivete or arrogance, Barack Hussein Obama seems blissfully unaware that he is being made the fool on the international stage by the Ayatollah Khamenei.

While the world watches to see if Obama will ever catch on to the game that the Ayatollah is playing with him, Americans are watching with our jaws hanging to the floor, in disbelief.

We knew that this guy was a lightweight, but, this is ridiculous.

In his quest to fulfill his fervent desire to leave a lasting legacy, Obama is giving away the safety of our nation, a nation which he is supposed to protect, not destroy.

What Obama has yet to figure out, is a painful lesson which Jimmy Carter learned the hard way: You cannot negotiate with barbarians from a position of weakness. Barbarians prey upon the weak.

How can you negotiate in a civilized manner, with people who don’t even use toilet paper?

However, come to think of it, that is about all that this “Agreement” will be good for.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s “Success” in Yemen Leading to WWIII?

 

Iran-Cheat-600-LA“But I want the American people to understand how this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil. This counter-terrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out ISIL wherever they exist using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground. This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.” – President Barack Hussein Obama,  Foreign Policy Address to the Nation, September 10, 2014.

Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. – Proverbs 16:18

Fox News reports that

Intervention by the U.S. and Iran in Yemen is raising the prospect of a proxy war even as the Obama administration tries to reach a nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic – with Iran sending two ships to waters near Yemen, as the U.S. speeds up military aid to the Saudi-led coalition striking Tehran-backed rebels there. 

Iran’s English-language state broadcaster Press TV quoted Rear Adm. Habibollah Sayyari as saying the ships, dispatched for the Gulf of Aden, would be part of an anti-piracy campaign “safeguarding naval routes for vessels in the region.” 

But the move comes amid the Saudi-led air campaign against Yemeni rebels, known as Houthis, which Iran is accused of backing. 

While the Pentagon has not yet weighed in on the ship movements, spokesman Col. Steve Warren said Wednesday: “We know that Iranians are providing support to the Houthis.” 

The developments underscore the growing international tensions surrounding the chaotic fighting in Yemen, with the U.S. shoring up Saudi-led forces on one side and Iran allegedly backing the Houthis on the other – though Iran and the rebels deny any direct military assistance. 

The fighting and international involvement threaten to hang over ongoing nuclear talks, which yielded a deal framework last week in Switzerland. The U.S., Iran and five other world powers are trying to strike a final deal by June – though critics have pointed to Iran’s involvement in Yemen and elsewhere as a serious cause for concern. 

But administration officials argue a nuclear deal is still worth pursuing, claiming it would cut off pathways to a nuclear bomb for the regime and make the world safer. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said Wednesday that “of course” the U.S. would like Iran to stop supporting the Yemen rebels and Hezbollah and other groups. 

“In a perfect world, of course we would have an agreement that does all of these things, but we are living in the real world,” she said, adding they want to get “this one issue dealt with.” 

Warren said Wednesday he could not say whether “Iranian money or equipment” has been delivered to the Houthis, but “we know the Iranians are partnered with the Houthis and they are working together.” 

Speaking a day earlier in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken blamed the violence in Yemen on the Houthis, and forces loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, saying that the U.S. is committed to defending Saudi Arabia. 

“We have expedited weapons deliveries, we have increased our intelligence sharing, and we have established a joint coordination and planning cell in the Saudi operations center,” he said in a statement to reporters after meeting with Saudi royals and Yemen’s President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, who fled his country amid rebel advances.

Warren said Wednesday that no additional munitions have been delivered yet. He would not specify the types of bombs involved. 

In 1974, at the very first Conservative Political Action Conference, the future President of the United States said the following:

Somehow America has bred a kindliness into our people unmatched anywhere, as has been pointed out in that best-selling record by a Canadian journalist. We are not a sick society. A sick society could not produce the men that set foot on the moon, or who are now circling the earth above us in the Skylab. A sick society bereft of morality and courage did not produce the men who went through those years of torture and captivity in Vietnam. Where did we find such men? They are typical of this land as the Founding Fathers were typical. We found them in our streets, in the offices, the shops and the working places of our country and on the farms.

We cannot escape our destiny, nor should we try to do so. The leadership of the free world was thrust upon us two centuries ago in that little hall of Philadelphia. In the days following World War II, when the economic strength and power of America was all that stood between the world and the return to the dark ages, Pope Pius XII said, “The American people have a great genius for splendid and unselfish actions. Into the hands of America God has placed the destinies of an afflicted mankind.

We are indeed, and we are today, the last best hope of man on earth.

And when Reagan became president, he did everything within his power to uphold these lofty words.

I suppose that is why I hold Barack Hussein Obama in such disdain. As a young man just starting my new life in the business world, I was able to watch the economy start to turn around under the greatest president in our lifetime. There was a confidence in our strength as an American people that I had never seen before.

You could see it in people’s faces as you walked past them on the street… or at the gas station, as we all watched the price of a gallon of gas finally go down after the pain at the pump that we experienced during the Carter Presidency.

People who had been out of work and suffering along with their families were beginning to be hired again. And, young Americans who had no confidence in the previous commander in chief, were once again going to military recruiters asking to sign up to serve our country.

Yes, indeed. Once again, it was “Morning in America”.

However, the popularity of our president was not just limited to the boundaries of our nation. Reagan was admired the world over. The things that he accomplished, along with his friends, Prime Minister of Britain Margaret Thatcher, Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev, and Pope John Paul II, have caused the decade of the 1980s to be recorded as a seminal moment in world history.

I remember watching President Reagan speak at the Berlin Wall. When he said, “Mr Gorbachev…tear down this wall!”, I was never prouder to be an American and of an American president, than at that moment.

The Liberal Democrats lost their collective minds.

For you see, Liberal Democrats, just as they do now, hate it when Marxism gives way to Freedom.

Nothing bothers them more than when a strong American President is at the forefront of a conquering moment, when a strong foreign policy based on the reality that negotiating from a position of strength is always more effective than negotiating from a position of weakness.

Fast forward to the present, where an ineffective President Barack Hussein Obama is looking like a fool to a world who used to look to America as a bastion of strength and freedom, not weakness and political expediencies.

President Barack Hussein Obama has placed us in untenable position with his weak and vacillating Smart Power Foreign Policy.

Those who used to cringe in their desert tents, while calling us the Great Satan, now laugh in our faces as they walk across our southern borders with the rest of the illegal immigrants.

That is, if Obama simply does not invite them to the White House and meet with them, as he has the Muslim Brotherhood.

It should not surprise anyone that he has no qualms in giving Iran a timeline for acquisition of a nuclear bomb.

…Nor that ISIS is still on the march.

After all…he considers Yemen a “success”.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

“His Holiness”, Obama, Concerned About “Less-Than-Loving” Christians

Obamahalologo'Back in April of 2008, Democrat Presidential Candidate Barack Hussein Obama, spoke the following words during a fundraiser in Pennsylvania:

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them.

And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

His attitude toward average Christian Americans hasn’t changed one bit.

The Washington Times  reports that

President Obama appeared to break from his script for a moment at Tuesday morning’s Easter Prayer Breakfast to opine on Christians who espouse “less-than-loving” views.

“On Easter, I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I am supposed to love,” Mr. Obama said toward the end of his speech. “And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less-than-loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned.”

“But that’s a topic for another day,” the president said, receiving laughter and applause.

“I was about to veer off; I’m pulling it back,” he said.

“Where there is injustice we defend the oppressed,” Mr. Obama said, returning to his prepared speech. “Where there is disagreement, we treat each other with compassion and respect. Where there are differences, we find strength in our common humanity, knowing that we are all children of God.”

Why are Christian Americans, such as myself, saying “less-than loving” things about Barack Hussein Obama and his cockamamie policies?

Perhaps, because he treats us like second class citizens.

For example, two months ago, Breitbart.com, reported the following story,

At the National Prayer Breakfast [February 4, 2015], President Obama reminded attendees that violence rooted in religion isn’t exclusive to Islam, but has been carried out by Christians as well.

Obama said that even though religion is a source for good around the world, there will always be people willing to “hijack religion for their own murderous ends.”

“Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” Obama said. “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”

Obama also denounced Islamic State terrorists for professing to stand up for Islam when they were actually “betraying it.”

“We see ISIL, a brutal vicious death cult that in the name of religion carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism,” he said criticizing them for “claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.”

Do you know why Christians went on the crusades, all those hundreds of years ago?

It was to stop the spread of militant, radical Islam across the European continent.

For President Barack Hussein Obama to continue to equate Christianity with the heinous barbaric acts of Radical Muslims, was not only a false equivalency, but downright CRAZY.

On the preceding Tuesday afternoon, Obama held a secret meeting with Muslim leaders in the White House. This meeting was closed to the press, so no one exactly knows which “Muslim leaders” were there.

It could have been Calypso Louie Farrakhan or it could have been the head of ISIS, along with his friends, the Muslim Brotherhood, who were sitting in the People’s House, we just don’t know.

However, for the President of United States to stand at the National Prayer Breakfast and attempt such an ignorant, foolish attempt at drawing an equivalency between Islam and Christianity, was disingenuous and an insult to the 75 percent of us Americans who proclaim Jesus Christ as our Personal Savior.

Regarding his equating Christianity with Racism, he was taking a page straight out of his Former Pastor of 20 years, Former American Muslim, Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s, playbook.

Amazing how he failed to mention that Christian Americans ran the Underground Railroad, huh?

Obama and the members of his political ideology, the Far Left, have proven that they cannot stand Christian Americans. It is evident from their condescension toward us and derision of our traditional values and ethics in their propaganda.

Our Constitution gives us Religious Freedom in its very First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Please note that this amendment does not say “in some circumstances”.

I have said time and time again, that I find it funny that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all.

However, this attack on our faith as Christian Americans, is not funny at all.

This Media Blitz, concerning the fact that Christian Americans refuse to support “Gay Marriage”, which was the impetus behind the President’s scolding Christian Americans about “not being loving enough” is not about discrimination, it is about control. Control of American Christians’ daily lives.

It is a rewriting and an attempted negating of God’s Word by those who cannot win a political or spiritual argument and are now trying to win a culture war by claiming that this law is something that it is not, and by rewriting Christianity by leaving out Individual Salvation through repentance of sin.

Joseph Goebbels, Adolf Hitler ‘ s Minister of Propaganda, once said that

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

The current lie that Obama and his sycophants are telling the American Public is that, somehow, the less than 24% of Americans who feel the same way as the Progressives in the Far Left do, somehow outnumber the 74% of Americans who proclaim Jesus Christ as our Personal Savior.

And, that overestimation just doesn’t add up.

Not even in Common Core.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The “Obama Doctrine”: Ignoring History

Non-Negotiable-600-LIThomas L Friedman, of the New York Times, was recently invited to the White House to interview President Barack Hussein Obama.

Here is an excerpt from his subsequent article:

…What struck me most was what I’d call an “Obama doctrine” embedded in the president’s remarks. It emerged when I asked if there was a common denominator to his decisions to break free from longstanding United States policies isolating Burma, Cuba and now Iran. Obama said his view was that “engagement,” combined with meeting core strategic needs, could serve American interests vis-à-vis these three countries far better than endless sanctions and isolation. He added that America, with its overwhelming power, needs to have the self-confidence to take some calculated risks to open important new possibilities — like trying to forge a diplomatic deal with Iran that, while permitting it to keep some of its nuclear infrastructure, forestalls its ability to build a nuclear bomb for at least a decade, if not longer.

“We are powerful enough to be able to test these propositions without putting ourselves at risk. And that’s the thing … people don’t seem to understand,” the president said. “You take a country like Cuba. For us to test the possibility that engagement leads to a better outcome for the Cuban people, there aren’t that many risks for us. It’s a tiny little country. It’s not one that threatens our core security interests, and so [there’s no reason not] to test the proposition. And if it turns out that it doesn’t lead to better outcomes, we can adjust our policies. The same is true with respect to Iran, a larger country, a dangerous country, one that has engaged in activities that resulted in the death of U.S. citizens, but the truth of the matter is: Iran’s defense budget is $30 billion. Our defense budget is closer to $600 billion. Iran understands that they cannot fight us. … You asked about an Obama doctrine. The doctrine is: We will engage, but we preserve all our capabilities.”

The notion that Iran is undeterrable — “it’s simply not the case,” he added. “And so for us to say, ‘Let’s try’ — understanding that we’re preserving all our options, that we’re not naïve — but if in fact we can resolve these issues diplomatically, we are more likely to be safe, more likely to be secure, in a better position to protect our allies, and who knows? Iran may change. If it doesn’t, our deterrence capabilities, our military superiority stays in place. … We’re not relinquishing our capacity to defend ourselves or our allies. In that situation, why wouldn’t we test it?”

Obviously, Israel is in a different situation, he added. “Now, what you might hear from Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu, which I respect, is the notion, ‘Look, Israel is more vulnerable. We don’t have the luxury of testing these propositions the way you do,’ and I completely understand that. And further, I completely understand Israel’s belief that given the tragic history of the Jewish people, they can’t be dependent solely on us for their own security. But what I would say to them is that not only am I absolutely committed to making sure that they maintain their qualitative military edge, and that they can deter any potential future attacks, but what I’m willing to do is to make the kinds of commitments that would give everybody in the neighborhood, including Iran, a clarity that if Israel were to be attacked by any state, that we would stand by them. And that, I think, should be … sufficient to take advantage of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see whether or not we can at least take the nuclear issue off the table.”

Alright, you students of history…does the message delivered by the president, during the above-referenced interview, seem familiar to any of you?

It should. 

The speech, “Peace in Our Time”, was delivered by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938, in defense of the Munich Agreement, which he made with those infamous barbarians, German Chancellor Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party, or as the world came to call them, the Nazis, and Hitler’s good buddy, the Italian Fascist, Benito Mussolini.

The following is an excerpt from that historic speech:

…I would like to say a few words in respect of the various other participants, besides ourselves, in the Munich Agreement. After everything that has been said about the German Chancellor today and in the past, I do feel that the House ought to recognise the difficulty for a man in that position to take back such emphatic declarations as he had already made amidst the enthusiastic cheers of his supporters, and to recognise that in consenting, even though it were only at the last moment, to discuss with the representatives of other Powers those things which he had declared he had already decided once for all, was a real and a substantial contribution on his part. With regard to Signor Mussolini, . . . I think that Europe and the world have reason to be grateful to the head of the Italian government for his work in contributing to a peaceful solution.

In my view the strongest force of all, one which grew and took fresh shapes and forms every day war, the force not of any one individual, but was that unmistakable sense of unanimity among the peoples of the world that war must somehow be averted. The peoples of the British Empire were at one with those of Germany, of France and of Italy, and their anxiety, their intense desire for peace, pervaded the whole atmosphere of the conference, and I believe that that, and not threats, made possible the concessions that were made. I know the House will want to hear what I am sure it does not doubt, that throughout these discussions the Dominions, the Governments of the Dominions, have been kept in the closest touch with the march of events by telegraph and by personal contact, and I would like to say how greatly I was encouraged on each of the journeys I made to Germany by the knowledge that I went with the good wishes of the Governments of the Dominions. They shared all our anxieties and all our hopes. They rejoiced with us that peace was preserved, and with us they look forward to further efforts to consolidate what has been done.

Ever since I assumed my present office my main purpose has been to work for the pacification of Europe, for the removal of those suspicions and those animosities which have so long poisoned the air. The path which leads to appeasement is long and bristles with obstacles. The question of Czechoslovakia is the latest and perhaps the most dangerous. Now that we have got past it, I feel that it may be possible to make further progress along the road to sanity.

We all know what happened next: World War II.

In more recent times, United States President Jimmy Carter thought that he could negotiate from a position of weakness, also.

Remember the Iranian Hostage Crisis under President Jimmy Carter?

That’s what happens when you negotiate with barbarians.

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Rolling Stone Lied About UV “Rape” Story

 

 

Media Bias MeterHonesty…is such a lonely word. – Billy Joel

The New York Times reports that

Rolling Stone magazine retracted its article about a brutal gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity after the release of a report on Sunday that concluded the widely discredited piece was the result of failures at every stage of the process.

The report, published by the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism and commissioned by Rolling Stone, said the magazine failed to engage in “basic, even routine journalistic practice” to verify details of the ordeal that the magazine’s source, identified only as Jackie, described to the article’s author, Sabrina Rubin Erdely.

On Sunday, Ms. Erdely, in her first extensive comments since the article was cast into doubt, apologized to Rolling Stone’s readers, her colleagues and “any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article.”

In an interview discussing Columbia’s findings, Jann S. Wenner, the publisher of Rolling Stone, acknowledged the piece’s flaws but said that it represented an isolated and unusual episode and that Ms. Erdely would continue to write for the magazine. The problems with the article started with its source, Mr. Wenner said. He described her as “a really expert fabulist storyteller” who managed to manipulate the magazine’s journalism process. When asked to clarify, he said that he was not trying to blame Jackie, “but obviously there is something here that is untruthful, and something sits at her doorstep.”

The Columbia report cataloged a series of errors at Rolling Stone, finding that the magazine could have avoided trouble with the article if certain basic “reporting pathways” had been followed. Written by Steve Coll, the Columbia journalism school’s dean; Sheila Coronel, the dean of academic affairs; and Derek Kravitz, a postgraduate research scholar at the university, the report, at nearly 13,000 words, is longer than the 9,000-word article, “A Rape on Campus.”

After its publication last November, the article stoked a national conversation about sexual assault on college campuses and roiled the university.

The police in Charlottesville, Va., said last month they had “exhausted all investigative leads” and found “no substantive basis” to support the article’s depiction of the assault. Jackie did not cooperate with the police and declined to be interviewed for the Columbia report. She also declined, through her lawyer, to be interviewed for this article. She is no longer in touch with some of the advocates who first brought her to the attention of Rolling Stone, said Emily Renda, a rape survivor working on sexual assault issues at the University of Virginia.

Mr. Wenner said Will Dana, the magazine’s managing editor, and the editor of the article, Sean Woods, would keep their jobs.

Since the 1960s, America’s newsrooms have been overwhelmingly staffed by Liberals.

However, nowadays, a Conservative watchdog organization keeps an intense watch on the antics of the Main Stream Media:

The Media Research Center, headquartered in Alexandria, VA, began modestly with a handful of employees, a black and white TV, and a rented computer. The first order of business was to organize a research operation second to none. For years, conservatives could only present the anecdotal evidence of liberal journalists’ bias — a question in this interview, a statement in that report. However, anecdotal examples of bias do not prove a liberal agenda. Only through thorough, comprehensive, and ongoing analysis based on quantitative and qualitative research can one document liberal bias in the media.

From a $339,000 initial annual budget, the MRC has grown to be the nation’s largest and most sophisticated television and monitoring operation, now employing 60 professional staff with a $10 million annual budget.

The result of the MRC’s work is a mountain of evidence to use in combating the undeniable bias. The key to the MRC’s effectiveness is the ability to prove bias by using scientific studies and word-for-word quotes from the media.

For example, the MRC reports that:

In May 2004, the Pew Research Center for The People and The Press (in association with the Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Committee of Concerned Journalists) surveyed 547 journalists and media executives, including 247 at national-level media outlets. The poll was similar to ones conducted by the same group (previously known as the Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press) in 1995 and 1999. The actual polling was done by the Princeton Survey Research Associates.

KEY FINDINGS:

Five times more national journalists identify themselves as “liberal” (34 percent) than “conservative” (just 7 percent). In contrast, a survey of the public taken in May 2004 found 20 percent saying they were liberal, and 33 percent saying they were conservative.

The percentage of national reporters saying they are liberal has increased, from 22 percent in 1995 to 34 percent in 2004. The percentage of self-identified conservatives remains low, rising from a meager 4 percent in 1995 to a still-paltry 7 percent in 2004.

Liberals also outnumber conservatives in local newsrooms. Pew found that 23 percent of the local journalists they questioned say they are liberals, while about half as many (12 percent) call themselves conservative.

Most national journalists (55 percent) say the media are “not critical enough” of President Bush, compared with only eight percent who believe the press has been “too critical.” In 1995, the poll found just two percent thought journalists had given “too much” coverage to then-President Clinton’s accomplishments, compared to 48 percent who complained of “too little” coverage of Clinton’s achievements.

Reporters struggled to name a liberal news organization. According to Pew, “The New York Times was most often mentioned as the national daily news organization that takes a decidedly liberal point of view, but only by 20% of the national sample.” Only two percent of reporters suggested CNN, ABC, CBS, or NPR were liberal; just one percent named NBC.

Journalists did see ideology at one outlet: “The single news outlet that strikes most journalists as taking a particular ideological stance — either liberal or conservative — is Fox News Channel,” Pew reported. More than two-thirds of national journalists (69 percent) tagged FNC as a conservative news organization, followed by The Washington Times (9 percent) and The Wall Street Journal (8 percent).

The way the Main Stream Media views themselves is quite different from the way Americans view them.

On July 25th of 2011, thehill.com published a poll focusing on voters’ perceptions of Media Bias:

A full 68 percent of voters consider the news media biased, the poll found. Most, 46 percent, believe the media generally favor Democrats, while 22 percent said they believe Republicans are favored, with 28 percent saying the media is reasonably balanced.

The share of voters who believe the media are too friendly with politicians is almost twice as large as those who find their coverage of politicians appropriate. Forty-four percent of voters assert the former; only 24 percent believe the latter.

The picture is not much brighter on the general question of ethics. Fifty-seven percent of voters think of the news media as either somewhat or very unethical, while only 39 percent see them as somewhat or very ethical.

With more and more news stories, such as this one, turning out to be outright lies, it has become very apparent that, the Main Stream Media’s “broadcast journalists” don’t feel that they have to feign objectivity anymore.

The majority of the “News Operations” in our country long ago sold out to the Democrat Party and their own Liberal Ideology. Sensationalism, propaganda, and toeing the Party Line, have replaced Journalistic Ethics and objectivity.

And, all too often, as in the case of the Duke Lacrosse Players and, almost, these young me from the University of Virginia, the Main Stream Media can irreparably damage people’s lives.

…And, shape the destiny of a country through lies, innuendo, and cover-up.

“And, that’s the way it is, April 6th, 2015.”

Until He Comes,

KJ

He is Risen!

Wow. It’s really been amazing around here since they crucified Jesus. Did you feel that earthquake? The veil of the temple was torn in half! And did you hear? A bunch of people that had died years ago, were seen walking around the city! But that’s not all. Don’t tell me you haven’t heard?

Listen to this: He has risen! He arose from the dead and was seen by several people. It’s true! I know it sounds unbelievable. I can scarcely take it in myself. Mary Magdalene and Mary, James and Salome’s mother, went to the tomb to perform the anointing of His body and it wasn’t there! On top of that, there was this young guy there, dressed in a white robe. They said he must have been 9 feet tall. He said, “You are seeking Jesus of Nazareth. Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here. See the place where you laid him.” So they went and told the disciples. But you know how Peter is. He just had to go run up there and see for himself.

Jesus even approached two of them on the road to Emmaus. They didn’t recognize him. He even broke bread with them that night. They realized who He was and He disappeared! They ran to tell the disciples and as they were telling them, Jesus appeared right in front of them! They were all starting to panic. Jesus said, “Peace to you.” But they couldn’t believe it was him, especially Thomas. So he had him touch him in the hole in his hand where they drove the nail and where the spear pierced his side.

Jesus ate with them and performed other signs and miracles in front of them and they understood scripture as never before. He also came to them at the Sea of Tiberius. Peter took the disciples fishing and they weren’t catching anything. Jesus told them from the bank to cast the net down on the right side. They did, and they could hardly bring it in the boat! When they got back to land, Jesus already had a fire going and some fish and bread ready to eat. He asked Peter three times if he loved Him, and each time He told him “Feed my sheep’. Hey, isn’t that the same number of times Peter Denied Him?

Anyway, He taught them many things before He left. They watched as He was taken straight up into heaven. Can you imagine?

The disciples are making plans now to go out and starting spreading the Good News about Jesus’ Resurrection. They are talking about going out in pairs. Man. Nothing is ever going to be the same again.

For God so loved the word, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. – John 3:16

As you read this post today:

The top 3 Christian National Populations in the world are

1. USA – 245+ million

2. Brazil -170+ million

3. Russia – 114+ million

There are approximately 38,000 Christian denominations in the world. This statistic takes into consideration cultural distinctions of denominations in different countries.

Today, in the United States of America, the overwhelming majority of adults identify ourselves as Christian. In comparison, the next largest religions in America are Islam and Judaism. Combined they represent only about one to two percent of the United States population.

There are more than 1,500 different Christian faith groups in America.

All this and more, because of the sacrifice of the Son of God.
Within the editorial, Jesus, the Perfect Man, published on Christmas Day 1912, C.P.J. Mooney, Editor of the Memphis Commercial Appeal, wrote the following excerpt:

After the experience of 2,000 years no man can find a flaw in the governmental system outlined by Jesus.

Czar and kaiser, president and Socialist, give to its complete merit their admiration.

No man today, no matter whether he follows the doctrine of Mill, Marx or George as to property, can find a false principle in Jesus’ theory of property.

In the duty of a man to his fellow no sociologist has ever approximated the perfection of the doctrine laid down by Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount.

Not all the investigations of chemists, not all the discoveries of explorers, not all the experiences of rulers, not all the historical facts that go to make up the sum of human knowledge on this day in 1912 are in contradiction to one word uttered or one principle laid down by Jesus.

The human experiences of 2,000 years show that Jesus never made a mistake. Jesus never uttered a doctrine that was true at that time and then became obsolete.

Jesus spoke the truth, and the truth is eternal.

History has no record of any other man leading a perfect life or doing everything in logical order. Jesus is the only person whose every action and whose every utterance strike a true note in the heart and mind of every man born of woman. He never said a foolish thing, never did a foolish act and never dissembled.

No poet, no dreamer, no philosopher loved humanity with all the love that Jesus bore toward all men.

WHO, THEN, was Jesus?

He could not have been merely a man, for there never was a man who had two consecutive thoughts absolute in truthful perfection.

Jesus must have been what Christendom proclaims Him to be — a divine being — or He could not have been what He was. No mind but an infinite mind could have left behind those things which Jesus gave the world as a heritage.

In this time in this nation, our faith as Christian Americans has been under attack as never before. Remember, that our fight is against “princes and principalities”.  And…

Turn your eyes upon Jesus,

Look full in His wonderful face,

And the things of earth will grow strangely dim,

In the light of His glory and grace.

He is risen indeed!

Until He Comes,

KJ

Atheist and Progressive Activists: The Tyranny of the Minority

American Christianity 2On this blessed Easter Weekend in my hometown, a bitter minority has purposefully scheduled a convention, to gain attention and to rail against “Someone” whom they claim NOT to believe in.

LocalMemphis.com has the story…

While the country debates the religious freedom bills, one of the biggest anti-religious groups is having their convention in the Bluff City.

American Atheists kicked off their convention with a panel discussion Wednesday evening. About a thousand atheists are expected to attend the event set in the heart of the Bible Belt.

“We come to Memphis, we come to the Bible Belt very deliberately because people assume that Memphis is a Christian city full of Christian people, and they feel oppressed by the Christian majority here”, said the President of the American Atheists, David Silverman.

It’s almost ironic that this convention of non-believers is happening just a short distance from the battle that’s brewing in Arkansas. As Americans go head to head over the debate of the Religious Freedom law that was just vetoed by the governor.

“Of course, religion divides this country. It is the most divisive force in this country, more than politics”, said Silverman.

Atheists certainly bring a unique perspective to the argument that certain services can be denied to people based solely upon someone’s religious beliefs.

“When the government comes in and says okay, if you’re religious you can skip out on these laws, but if you’re not religious you have to obey these laws. It is religious discrimination from the government”, said Silverman.

The American Atheists National Convention will be held at the Peabody Hotel through Sunday.

Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh spoke about a related story…

Such great news out of Indiana. Memories Pizza shut down by a mob of probably 10 to 15, maybe at the outside 20 people, who have found a way to make themselves look like they are thousands. Not just thousands of people, but angry, outraged, and they happen to represent the majority of Americans, don’t you know. That’s BS squared.Ten to 15 people toying around with algorithms available on Twitter that they actually created with the assistance of people that know Twitter well, and they’re able to create tweets, Facebook posts, e-mails to make it look like thousands of Americans are outraged at this harmless, barely even noticeable little pizza shop in a town of 2,000.

And, again, the story, ladies and gentlemen, is not that an infobabe from an obscure ABC affiliate in South Bend has to leave South Bend 20 miles away, go knocking on doors shopping for bigotry, and finally they open the door and a young woman who is a devout Christian is there. She thinks there’s a media person at the door who wants to really know what she thinks.

She’s like everybody else with their first encounter with the media. Why, there’s the media. There’s a camera, a microphone, some guy holding it up, and there’s the really pretty reporterette, and they must really want to know what I think. They must really be concerned with what I think. This young woman had no idea that what walked into her pizzeria was effectively the media mafia. She had no idea that the only reason they walked in that door was to find a way to destroy their business.

Nope. Instead, well, here comes this nice media woman, and she’s asking me questions, and I know they want to know the truth, and so I’m gonna answer their questions honestly. She told them that she had never been asked to serve a gay wedding or cater one, but that if she were to be asked she wouldn’t do it because she opposes gay marriage.

And so the honest, upstanding little reporterette from the obscure ABC affiliate, Channel 57, how obscure can you get, Channel 57. If it weren’t for cable nobody’d be able to pick up that signal, 57 UHF, you’d have to be in an airplane 10,000 feet above it to get the signal straight up. Channel 57?

Anyway, she’s in the store, and she’s got this naive but just brazenly honest young Christian pizzeria owner telling her the truth and the apparently harmless infobabe from the obscure Channel 57 ABC affiliate in South Bend salivates. A-ha! I’ve been knocking on doors for two days looking for a stupid idiot, and I finally found one. She thought she was looking squarely at devil bigot in the case of this young woman, Crystal O’Connor.

So she got Crystal O’Connor on tape, and then she walks out and gleefully applauds, can’t believe her good luck, all of her hard work knocking on doors looking for a bigot. And after 20 miles and who knows how many hours, she found one, and she’s thinking, this is my ticket out of the obscure Channel 57 in South Bend. If I can destroy this woman, maybe I’ll get noticed by the big network honchos in New York. She proceeded to report this little pizza shop, Memories Pizza, a home of open bigots, racists, homophobes, wouldn’t serve a gay wedding even though they’d never been asked.

…They’re a little pizza store, not bothering anybody, not threatening anybody, not doing anything but just living and breathing and trying to serve their community.  The next thing you know, they are the focus of evil in a bigoted, homophobic country?  Not so fast!  The people of this country are rising up.  By the way, this is not the first time for this.  

There was an African-American arts and crafts store owner who had her store totally destroyed in one of the riots in another fake news story, “hands up, don’t shoot,” in Ferguson, Missouri.  A GoFundMe account was set up, and that woman raised donations from people — white people — all over America, far more than she needed to rebuild and reopen her store.  So it’s still your same old righteous, God-fearing, God-loving country.  And that is what so angers this small malcontent minority on the left.  

They have found a trick way to make themselves appear to be much larger than they really are, and don’t doubt me on this.  We’ve investigated it because they’ve come after us — and they continue to come after us and our sponsors — for years now.  We’ve researched them. We know their names.  We know who the 10 people are in our case.  We know where they live.  We know the algorithm they’re using.  

We know exactly how they make this happen.  So don’t doubt me on this.  If they can do it in one area, they can do it in any other area. I think all this stuff that happens, all these Twitter explosions, are fake.  You have got to trust that.  You have not lost your country.  We have not lost our country.  Now it’s true we’re in a defensive posture. We sit around and mind our business, and when we’re attacked and assaulted we do on occasion stand up and defend ourselves.  

We are very absent political leadership in Washington.  That’s also true, and I’m not saying that this is not a problem.  It is.  I’m just telling you that if you’re running around thinking, “Oh, my gosh, we’ve lost the country,” we haven’t.  Don’t think that.  Breitbart has a story today — NewsBusters has carried it as well — that the pizza store was asking for it.  Breitbart: “Memories Pizza is an explicitly Christian business, which is probably what drew reporters in the first place. The store is festooned with religious sayings including this: 

“‘Every day before we open the store, we gather and pray together. If there is something you would like us to pray for, just write it down and drop it in the box and we will pray for you.'” Well, those hateful bastards! How dare they! Do you realize that’s a direct assault? That’s a direct assault from a majority bunch of Christians on people who aren’t!  That’s hateful (in the cockeyed, perverted world of the left).  Not only is that hateful, it’s threatening.  

Offering to pray for the godless?  

Who do they think they are!  

So this obscure reporterette from the obscure Channel 57 in South Bend, Indiana, probably didn’t have to hear anything from Crystal O’Connor. They just had to go and see that sign and say, “A-ha! I’ve got a Christian bigot here.  Why this hateful Christian bigot wants to pray for me?  Ha-ha.  What a bunch of idiots.” And then she thought that, “Well, I’m in this pizzeria and they want to pray for me?  I am surrounded by hate!” That is the perverted way they look at it.  

Daily Caller: “Salon: Pizzeria Closed After Death Threats ‘Getting Exactly What It Deserved.'” Salon.com says this pizzeria getting death threats deserves it — and now there are threats to burn it down!  There are tweets from people asking to be joined in a mission to go to Indiana, find this place, and burn it to the ground.  Salon is applauding this, saying the pizzeria is “getting exactly what it deserved.”  The tweet, by the way, is now deleted.  

“Salon’s Twitter account gloated over the closure of ‘anti-LGBT’ pizza shop: “‘That anti-LGBT pizza shop in Indiana is getting exactly what it deserves.'” I think, frankly, I agree with them now: Over a half million dollars in donations. Memories Pizza is getting exactly what they deserve, an uprising and outpouring of support and love from a majority of the American people who are outraged at these never-ending, incessant attacks on decent, good people who threaten nobody.  Some leftist dingbats have even threatened to steal the GoFundMe money.  

There are people on Twitter who are hatching plans to figure out how to rob them of this money.  I’m not kidding it.  NewsBusters has a roundup: “A tweeted wish to organize a group to burn the store down… A separate threat to the GoFundMe organizer who has a [sic] orchestrated a campaign which has raised over [$500,000] … and, to top it off, another threat, by someone who now laughably claims he was hacked, to steal from the O’Connors the money that has been raised.” 

People who have publicly encouraged donations to this GoFundMe account are also now being personally threatened.  We are to believe that this is justified? The Drive-By Media tells us that this family, the O’Connor family, is “getting exactly what it deserves”? Threats to burn down the pizza store, threats to rob them of the GoFundMe money? They deserve it? This is exactly what they deserve?  

There’s a political party, folks, that inspires and encourages this hate.  There’s a political party that rewards it.  There’s a political party that encourages it and claims that it will be rewarded, and that’s the Democrat Party.  These are not Republicans doing this; these are not conservatives doing this.  The people doing this are not the backbone of America.

The people engaged in this sick, perverted behavior, are not in any way, shape, manner, or form the people upon whose backs this country was built.  Admittedly so.  They’re trying to tear it down.  They’re outraged.  I just think it’s fantastic.  I love all of you who have donated.

I have never understood Atheists, especially the so-called activists among them.

Our Constitution provides for Freedom of Religion.

According to the Supreme Court, in their Ruling abolishing School Prayer, Atheism is a religion, which the Americans who embrace this nihilism are free to practice.

So, why are Atheist Activists continuously launching a full-blown attack on the Faith which our Founding Fathers wrote so eloquently about, and which has sustained this “shining city on a hill” through times of internal and external strife?

In other words, why are activist Atheists (and Progressives) so intent to either limit or completely eliminate Christianity’s influence on everyday American Life?

Why can’t they be content with their freedom to practice their own Religion?

Why don’t they attack the political/religious ideology of Islam with the same fervor?

The answer to this question is simple: Cowards will always tell you whom they are afraid of. They will avoid them, like one avoids a child with Chicken Pox.

Additionally, they expect Christians to allow them to take control by “turning the other cheek.” Evidently, they never read the scriptures which describe Jesus running the “money lenders” out of the temple, overturning tables, and expressing his righteous indignation in a way in which no one could mistake it for anything else.

A modern-day example is the resounding blowback to the hypocritical fascism being displayed by Progressives regarding their lie-driven mission to legalize “gay marriage”.

Perhaps, their quixotic quest to make life miserable for the 74% of Americans who claim Crist as their Personal Savior stems from the overwhelming overestimation of their own intelligence, which results from ignoring the influence of the God of Abraham in their own life.

So, what drives them in this “Unholy Crusade”?

Bitterness, emptiness, and an unfulfilled hungering in their soul which they cannot put a finger on, is the only explanation.

Otherwise, why would you fight so hard against the influence of and worship of Someone you claim not to believe in?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Celebrates “Pre-Deal”. Iran Refutes. American Pastor Still in Iranian Jail.

 

 

Suicide-USA-NRD-600I wonder what our Founding Fathers would think of a President who seeks to allow one of our mortal enemies the means by which to annihilate us, while this same enemy continues to hold captive an American, simply because he is a Christian Pastor?

They probably would not think very highly of him…at all.

The Radical Islamic Barbarians whom Obama and his Secretary of State are sucking up to, think that the dhimmi wuss stinks on ice.

The Washington Free Beacon reports that

Just hours after the announcement of what the United States characterized as a historic agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, the country’s leading negotiator lashed out at the Obama administration for lying about the details of a tentative framework.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif accused the Obama administration of misleading the American people and Congress in a fact sheet it released following the culmination of negotiations with the Islamic Republic.

Zarif bragged in an earlier press conference with reporters that the United States had tentatively agreed to let it continue the enrichment of uranium, the key component in a nuclear bomb, as well as key nuclear research.

Zarif additionally said Iran would have all nuclear-related sanctions lifted once a final deal is signed and that the country would not be forced to shut down any of its currently operating nuclear installations.

Following a subsequent press conference by Secretary of State John Kerry—and release of a administration fact sheet on Iranian concessions—Zarif lashed out on Twitter over what he dubbed lies.

“The solutions are good for all, as they stand,” hetweeted. “There is no need to spin using ‘fact sheets’ so early on.”

Zarif went on to push back against claims by Kerry that the sanctions relief would be implemented in a phased fashion—and only after Iran verifies that it is not conducting any work on the nuclear weapons front.

Zarif, echoing previous comments, said the United States has promised an immediate termination of sanctions.

“Iran/5+1 Statement: ‘US will cease the application of ALL nuclear-related secondary economic and financial sanctions.’ Is this gradual?” he wrote on Twitter.

He then suggested a correction: “Iran/P5+1 Statement: ‘The EU will TERMINATE the implementation of ALL nuclear-related economic and financial sanctions’. How about this?”

The pushback from Iran’s chief diplomat follows a pattern of similar accusations by senior Iranian political figures after the announcement of previous agreements.

Following the signing of an interim agreement with Iran aimed at scaling back its nuclear work, Iran accused the United States of lying about details of the agreement.

On Thursday evening, Zarif told reporters the latest agreement allows Iran to keep operating its nuclear program.

“None of those measures” that will move to scale back Iran’s program “include closing any of our facilities,” Zarif said. “We will continue enriching; we will continue research and development.”

“Our heavy water reactor will be modernized and we will continue the Fordow facility,” Zarif said. “We will have centrifuges installed in Fordow, but not enriching.”

The move to allow Iran to keep centrifuges at Fordow, a controversial onetime military site, has elicited concern that Tehran could ramp up its nuclear work with ease.

Zarif said that once a final agreement is made, “all U.S. nuclear related secondary sanctions will be terminated,” he said. “This, I think, would be a major step forward.”

Zarif also revealed that Iran will be allowed to sell “enriched uranium” in the international market place and will be “hopefully making some money” from it.

As I write this blog post, on Good Friday, April 3rd, the Year of Our Lord 2015, an American sits in an Iranian Jail, while the man who is supposed to be his president, protector, and advocate, praises and plays “footsie” with his Radical Islamic captors.

Christianpost.com reported last September that

Naghmeh Abedini, wife of imprisoned Iranian-American Pastor Saeed Abedini, gives remarks at a vigil for her husband held at Lafayette Square near the White House, Washington, Thursday, September 25, 2014.

U.S. Pastor Saeed Abedini, who has now been in an Iranian jail for his Christian faith for nearly two-and-a-half years, is “shaken” as six of his fellow prisoners were executed around him this week, his wife, Naghmeh, says.

“Saeed was quite shaken as he had to witness 6 fellow prisoners being beaten and taken to be executed (hanged) that day,” Naghmeh was quoted as saying in a report by American Center for Law and Justice on Saturday.

“It was a hard and dark day having witnessed that and seeing life being taken. The prison visit was also very hard as the families of those who were executed were crying and wailing,” she added.

Naghmeh learned about this after Pastor Saeed’s family members in Iran were able to have a short visit with him at the prison.

“It was also an emotional visitation as it is getting closer to Jacob’s 7th birthday. Last time Saeed saw Jacob he was 4 years old,” she said, urging Christians to continue to pray for her husband “to have the strength to endure in that harsh prison and that Jesus would continue to meet him there and give him hope.”

“Please pray that this will be the year that Saeed is released,” she said.

Pastor Saeed remains in an incredibly dangerous situation, ACLJ says, explaining that summary executions, inmate violence and beatings are commonplace.

Saeed has also sustained prolonged internal injuries due to beatings in the prison.

“The Obama Administration must do all within its power to bring this wrongfully imprisoned U.S. citizen home to his family in America,” ACLJ says.

Obama raised the issue of the pastor’s detention during his first phone conversation with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in September 2013, but authorities in Iran have not responded.

Saeed grew up in Iran before converting to Christianity at the age of 20. He later traveled with his family back and forth between Iran and the U.S. to meet other members of his family and for Christian work.

During one such trip in 2009, Saeed was detained by Iranian officials and interrogated for his conversion. While he was released with a warning against engaging in underground church activities, he was once again arrested in 2012 while working on a non-sectarian orphanage project.

Saeed was sentenced for endangering “national security,” but the ACLJ believes the punishment has more to do with Saeed’s Christian faith.

While the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) and his Secretary of State John (I served in Vietnam) Kerry continue to acquiesce…err…negotiate with the Rogue Radical Islamic Nation of Iran, seeking an “agreement” in defiance of Article 6 of the United Stated Constitution, there is a Forgotten American Man of Faith, being held in the squalor of an Iranian Jail.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama has proven himself to be more concerned about America’s Enemies than our Allies…and, more concerned about reaching out to Muslim Radicals than demanding the release of Christian American Pastor Saeed Abedina, who has been held captive by Iran since the summer of 2012.

Obama, Kerry, and the rest of his Liberal Dhimmi Cabal has shown where their loyalties unequivocally lie, with their braggadocio over this Chamberlain-esque “deal” that is now blowing up in his face, and placing our very nation in imminent danger..

And, they are not with our allies nor the safety of the citizens of the United States.

Iran has always been, since the ouster of the Shah, a rogue nation. They are a threat to every nation who stands in the way of their crazed Political Ideology, disguised as a “religion”.

Either due to naiveté or simple over-estimation of their own intelligence, on the part of Obama and his Administration, as regards their “superior intellect”, to quote Fred Thompson, as Admiral Josh Painter, in the great movie “The Hunt for Red October”…

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War Against Christianity: The Indiana Law: Bullies With Microphones

image

As I wrote about earlier this week, one of the major topics of discussion in our country is still Indiana’s Religious Freedom Law. This law was intended to protect Christians and other faiths in Indiana from Religious Persecution.

Yesterday, on the cusp of passing an identical piece of legislation, the Governor of Arkansas, Asa Hutchinson, told his state legislature to hold up, and that there needs to be some revisions made to the law. Governor Mike Pence of Indiana plans to do the same with his state’s law.

To quote the late, great Slim Pickens in Mel Brooks’ classic, “Blazing Saddles”,

What in the Wide, Wide World of Sports is a’goin’ on here?

This seemingly innocuous law, designed to protect Americans and their chosen faith, has started a Liberal-manufactured firestorm, fueled by the Main Stream Media, for the express purpose of intimidation, bullying, if you will.

Progressives, or Liberals, are still the minority political ideology in this country, surprisingly only 24% of the American Population, per gallup.com.  However, that does not stop them from attempting to force their beliefs on the entire nation.

They’re very adept at finding the nearest and loudest microphone and ranting and raving in it as loud as they can, for as long as they can, until someone listens to them.

Using this technique, their efforts are splashed all over both the Main Stream and New Medias, presenting propaganda reinforcing their erroneous claim that their cock-eyed view of American Christians, is actually the majority of thought of average Americans.

Heading into Easter weekend, I find this to be very ironic…and very sad.

Gallup.com tells us that Christianity is still the faith of choice of 74% of Americans.

Now, I am NOT a mathematician.

However I did win the 8th grade math contest, but that is neither here nor there. But, I digress…

It appears to me that there are actually more Christians in America among average citizens, then there are loud-mouthed Progressives.

Therefore, the wailing and gnashing of teeth of this minority population, signifies to me that they are desperate and trying to gin up momentum for their quixotic quest to legalize gay marriage in the United States and to change the meaning of a time-honored word, which until now, has always meant the joining of a man and a woman in Holy Matrimony.

Progressives’ use of a Liberal Judiciary to overturn states’ votes, which had disallowed gay marriage in the majority of American States, has not been greeted warmly by the American People as a whole.

And now, this concerted effort, which quite frankly appears to be fascist in nature,  to force Christian Businessmen and Businesswomen to forgo their faith, in order to service gay marriages, is meeting a backlash from average Americans living in the Heartland, which is being desperately covered up by the Main Stream Media and the shrieking Progressives.

Americans with common sense are asking…

Why can’t these gay couples simply go to other businesses, who will bake their wedding cakes for them, instead of trying to force Christian Americans to do something which is against their faith?

I find these couples’ politically-motivated actions to be intolerant, insensitive, demanding, and downright rude.

Our Constitution gives us Religious Freedom in its very First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Please note that this amendment does not say “in some circumstances”.

I have said time and time again, that I find it funny that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all.

However, this attack on our faith as Christian Americans, is not funny at all.

This Media Blitz is not about discrimination, it is about control. Control of American Christians’ daily lives.

It is a rewriting and an attempted negating of God’s Word by those who cannot win a political or spiritual argument and are now trying to win a culture war by claiming that this law is something that it is not.

Joseph Goebbels, Adolf Hitler ‘ s Minister of Propaganda, once said that

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

As proven by yesterday’s revelation that Harry Reid lied about Mitt Romney’s supposed tax evasion in 2012, in order to prevent him from winning the Presidency,and now the Liberals’ War against Christian American Small Business Owners, based on the lie that these business owners will not serve gay people, ever, it appears that Goebbels was actually right about the intolerant gullibility of some people.

Even, in a country founded by Christian Men.

Until He Comes,

KJ