New Documents Blow Lid Off Obama/Clinton Benghazi Scandal – Breitbart

New Documents Blow Lid Off Obama/Clinton Benghazi Scandal

I’ve always believed that the Benghazi cover-up was about two presidential campaigns:  Barack Obama’s reelection campaign and Hillary Clinton’s nascent presidential campaign.

Why else would Hillary Clinton personally send out lies about Benghazi within hours, and then keep on pushing these lies until the truth could no longer be ignored?  The truth about an attack by an al Qaeda group that killed our ambassador and three other brave Americans in the days before Obama’s reelection would not only have put Obama at risk of losing, but also would have potentially dashed the hopes of his successor-in-waiting, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The desperation by Obama, Clinton, and their political teams must have been potent.  It was so potent that they – rather than admitting that they caused an Islamist conflagration in Libya by ousting and killing Gadhafi – preferred to ignore pleas for increased security from Ambassador Stevens; to abandon him and his colleagues to rampaging terrorists; refused to follow up with force against those who attacked us; and to lie to the American people about the nature of the attack.  Rather than admit that it was a planned attack by a terrorist group in league with al Qaeda, the Obama/Clinton machine knowingly put out the lie that the killings were the result of a spontaneous demonstration in response to an obscure Internet video supposedly offensive to radical Islamists.  The message: don’t blame us – blame those who offend Islamists (conservatives, Republicans, etc.).  Indeed, rather than sending our military to eliminate the enemy in Libya, the Obama administration arrested the poor sap who made the offending video.

Strong stuff you might think.  But the most recent documents forced out of the State Department will make you think I’m being too kind to the Benghazi betrayers controlling the Executive Branch.

Judicial Watch recently struck smoking-gun gold in another cache of documents we forced out of the State Department.  The documents show that top aides for then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, including her then-chief of staff Cheryl Mills, knew from the outset that the Benghazi mission compound was under attack by armed assailants tied to a terrorist group.  The documents we’ve extracted from the Obama administration only through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the State Department (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01511)).

Unsurprisingly, the documents make no reference to a spontaneous demonstration or Internet video, except in an official statement issued by Hillary Clinton.

The JW lawsuit that uncovered this material focused on Mrs. Clinton’s involvement in the Benghazi scandal:

Any and all records concerning, regarding, or related to notes, updates, or reports created in response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S, Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. This request includes but is not limited to, notes, taken by then Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton or employees of the Office of the Secretary of State during the attack and its immediate aftermath.

Mrs. Clinton had said she took notes on Benghazi for her recent book but suggested no one could see them.  She isn’t above the law.  Congress is asleep, traditional media are cheerleaders, so hence, our lawsuit.

We haven’t yet gotten Hillary’s notes, but the chain of internal emails we did get is extraordinary and tracks the events surrounding the terrorist attack in real time.

On September 11, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Maria Sand (who was then a Special Assistant to Mrs. Clinton) forwarded an email from the State Department’s Operations Center entitled “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi is Under Attack (SBU) [Sensitive But Unclassified]” to Cheryl Mills (then-Chief of Staff), Jacob Sullivan (then-Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy), Joseph McManus (then-Hillary Clinton’s Executive Assistant), and a list of other Special Assistants in the Secretary’s office:

The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack. Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM [Chief of Mission] personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.

This email was sent about 30 minutes after the terrorist attack began.

On September 11, 2012, 4:38 PM, State Department Foreign Service Officer Lawrence Randolph forwarded Mills, Sullivan, and McManus an email from Scott Bultrowicz, who was the former director of the Diplomatic Security Service (ousted following review of the attack), with the subject line, “Attack on Benghazi 09112012”:

DSCC received a phone call from [REDACTED] in Benghazi, Libya initially stating that 15 armed individuals were attacking the compound and trying to gain entrance. The Ambassador is present in Benghazi and currently is barricaded within the compound. There are no injuries at this time and it is unknown what the intent of the attackers is. At approximately 1600 DSCC received word from Benghazi that individuals had entered the compound. At 1614 RSO advised the Libyans had set fire to various buildings in the area, possibly the building that houses the Ambassador [REDACTED] is responding and taking fire.

Nearly seven hours later, at 12:04 AM, on September 12, Randolph sends an email with the subject line “FW: Update 3: Benghazi Shelter Location Also Under Attack” to Mills, Sullivan, and McManus that has several updates about the Benghazi attack:

I just called Ops and they said the DS command center is reporting that the compound is under attack again.  I am about to reach out to the DS Command Center.

This email also contains a chain of other, earlier email updates:

September 11, 2012 11:57 PM email:  “(SBU) DS Command reports the current shelter location for COM personnel in Benghazi is under mortar fire.  There are reports of injuries to COM staff.”

September 11, 2012 6:06 PM (Subject: “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack (SBU):  “(SBU) Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and call for an attack on Embassy Tripoli”

September 11, 2012, 4:54 PM: “Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response team is on site to locate COM personnel.”

The DOS emails reveal the first official confirmation of the death of Ambassador Stevens.  On September 12, 2012, 3:22 AMSenior Watch Officer Andrew Veprek forwarded an email to numerous State Department officials, which was later forwarded to Cheryl Mills and Joseph McManus, with the subject line “Death of Ambassador Stevens in Benghazi”:

Embassy Tripoli confirms the death of Ambassador John C. (Chris) Stevens in Benghazi. His body has been recovered and is at the airport in Benghazi.

Two hours later, Joseph McManus forwards the news about Ambassador Stevens’ death to officials in the State Department Legislative Affairs office with instructions not to “forward to anyone at this point.”

Despite her three top staff members being informed that a terrorist group had claimed credit for the attack, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued an official statement, also produced to Judicial Watch, claiming the assault may have been in “a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.”

Cheryl Mills asks that the State Department stop answering press inquiries at 12:11 AM on September 12, despite the ongoing questions about “Chris’ whereabouts.”  In an email to State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, Jacob Kennedy, and Phillipe Reines (then-Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Strategic Communications and Senior Communications Advisor), Mills writes:

Can we stop answering emails for the night Toria b/c now the first one [Hillary Clinton’s “inflammatory material posted on the Internet” statement] is hanging out there.

Earlier in the chain of emails, Nuland told Mills, Sullivan, and Patrick Kennedy (Under Secretary of State for Management) that she “ignored” a question about Ambassador Steven’s status and whereabouts from a CBS News reporter.

Think about this:  Cheryl Mills, Hillary’s top aide, would rather go to bed and let hang out there the lie that Hillary Clinton put out about the attack than tell reporters the truth about the attack, which by that time had escalated to include mortar fire.

Another top State Department official is eager to promote a statement from Rabbi David Saperstein, then-Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, a liberal group.  The September 2012 statement condemns “the video that apparently spurred these incidents. It was clearly crafted to provoke, offend, and to evoke outrage.” Michael Posner, then-Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, forwarded the statement on September 12, 2012, to Wendy Sherman, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, and Jacob Sherman with the note:

This is an excellent statement – our goal should be to get the Conference of Presidents, the ADL etc. to follow suit and use similar language.

(President Obama nominated the left-wing Rabbi Saperstein to be Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom in July 2014.  The U.S. Senate confirmed him in December 2014.  Posner, by the way, is another far-left activist installed at State by Obama.)

Also included in the documents are foreign press reports establishing the cause of Ambassador Chris Steven’s death as being from asphyxiation. According to the reports, doctors attending Stevens said he could have been saved had he arrived at the hospital earlier.

The Obama administration has blacked out reactions from White House and top State Department officials to news stories published on September 14, 2012.  One of the stories quoted a visitor who criticized the lack of security at the Benghazi Special Mission Compound and another headlined, “America ‘was warned of attack and did nothing.’”  What was the reaction of key Obama officials to this truth-telling about the media?  They don’t want you to know.  If it were helpful to them, it would have been released to us.

Other emails list well over 20 invited participants in a “SVTC” (secure video teleconference).  The invited participants for the September 14, 2012, early morning call include senior White House, CIA, and State Department political appointees.  Details about that call, which likely documents the cover-up operation on Benghazi, haven’t been produced to Judicial Watch.

These emails leave no doubt that Hillary Clinton’s closest advisers knew the truth about the Benghazi attack from almost the moment it happened.  And it is inescapable that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knowingly lied when she planted the false story about “inflammatory material being posted on the Internet.”

The contempt for the public’s right to know is evidenced not only in these documents, but also in the fact that we had to file a lawsuit in federal court to obtain them.  The Obama gang’s cover-up continues to unravel, despite its unlawful secrecy and continued slow-rolling of information.

Congress, if it ever decides to do its job, cannot act soon enough to put Hillary Clinton, Cheryl Mills, and every other official in these emails under oath.

Islamic terrorists connected to al Qaeda attacked the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi on the evening of September 11, 2012.  U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith were both killed. Just a few hours later, a second terrorist strike targeted a different compound about one mile away. Two CIA contractors, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, were killed and 10 others were injured in the second attack.

The families of those four men deserve the truth and accountability.  And so do those who suffered injuries and others haunted by the attacks.

We expect more Benghazi documents over the next few months, so stayed tuned for more disclosures.


Posted in Benghazi, Hillary Clinton | Tagged , ,


Ann Coulter – February 18, 2015 – GOP DOUBLE-CROSSING TRAITORS


Now that a federal judge has held Obama’s illegal

executive amnesty unconstitutional, perhaps U.S. senators will remember

that they swore to uphold the Constitution, too.

Back when they needed our votes before the last election,

Republicans were hairy-chested warriors, vowing to block Obama’s

unconstitutional “executive amnesty” — if only voters gave them a

Senate majority. The resulting Republican landslide suggested some

opposition to amnesty.

Heading into the election, college professor Dave Brat took out

the sitting House majority leader and amnesty supporter Eric Cantor in a

primary, despite being outspent 40-1. It was the greatest upset in

history since the 1980 “Miracle on Ice” at the Lake Placid Olympics:

Never before has a House majority leader been defeated in a primary. And

Brat did it by an astonishing 55.5 percent to 45.5 percent.

Again, the voters seemed to be expressing disquiet with amnesty.

After that, even amnesty-supporting Sen. Lamar Alexander,

R-Tenn., was denouncing Obama’s executive amnesty. “If the president

were to do that,” he said, “and we have a Republican majority in the

United States Senate, why, we have a number of options that we don’t now

have to remind him to read Article I of the Constitution.”

Poll after poll showed Americans ranking illegal immigration as

the No. 1 most important problem facing the nation. We haven’t changed

our minds. Last week, an Associated Press-Gfk poll showed that Obama’s

single most unpopular policy is his position on illegal immigration.

In other words, Obamacare is more popular than amnesty. That’s like losing a popularity contest to Ted Bundy.

Since at least 2006, voters have insistently told pollsters they

don’t want amnesty. Seemingly bulletproof Republican congressmen have

lost their seats over amnesty. President Bush lost the entire House of

Representatives over amnesty. What else do we have to do to convince you

we don’t want amnesty, Republicans? Make it a host on “The View”?

Before the election, then-Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell

complained that Obama’s decision to delay his executive amnesty until

after the election was a ploy to prevent Americans from “hold(ing) his

party accountable in the November elections.”

But voters went ahead and held Obama accountable! Now McConnell

is Senate majority leader — and he claims his hands are tied.

McConnell’s spokesman at the National Republican Senatorial

Committee, Brad Dayspring, predicted that Obama’s amnesty threat would

drive voters to “elect a new Senate (that) will stand up to the


Check! Mission accomplished! Done and done! Officially off our

bucket list. OK, guys, your turn. When do you start standing up to the

president? Hello? Hell-oooo?

To gin up votes, “Republican insiders” told the Washington

Examiner last fall that “the results of the midterm elections” would

determine how “aggressive” the GOP would be in fighting Obama’s amnesty.

Voters gave you a blow-out victory, Republicans. You cleaned

their clocks. (Have you seen Harry Reid lately?) Where’s that promised

aggression on amnesty?

Republicans and George Will tell us they can’t stand up to Obama’s executive amnesty because the media are unfair.

Oh, well, in that case … never mind.

This is news to them? They didn’t know the media were unfair

when they were promising to block Obama’s illegal amnesty before the

elections? The media have blamed the GOP for every failure of

Republicans and Democrats to reach an agreement since the Hoover

administration. This isn’t a surprise development.

Why don’t Republicans attack the media? People hate the media!

Their power is eroding — and it would erode a lot faster if Congress

would challenge them. Instead of submitting to the media’s blackmail, my

suggestion is, take their gun away.

Tell voters what the media won’t: that Obama’s “amnesty” will

give illegal aliens Social Security cards and three years of

back-payments through the Earned Income Tax Credit, even though they

never paid taxes in the first place.

Could we get a poll on that: Should the government issue work

permits to illegal aliens and give them each $25,000 in U.S. taxpayer

money? I promise you, Obama would lose that vote by at least 80-20. Even

people vaguely supportive of not hounding illegal aliens out of the

country didn’t sign up to open the U.S. Treasury to them.

Tell voters that the media are refusing to report that, for the

past two weeks, Senate Democrats have been filibustering a bill that

would defund Obama’s illegal amnesty.

Whether or not the Democrats continue to filibuster the bill

containing the amnesty defund, the government won’t shut down —

contrary to hysterical claims by the media and George Will. The

government is funded. Only the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

will be “defunded.”

Which means, wait … I’m counting on my fingers … yes, that’s right: NOTHING.

Nearly all DHS employees are “essential” personnel required to

stay on the job even if the department is defunded — the Secret

Service, the Transportation Security Administration, the Federal

Emergency Management Agency, Customs and Border Protection and the Coast


Approximately 200,000 of DHS’s 230,000 employees will keep working.

By “government shutdown,” the media mean: “some secretaries will not go to work.”

Why don’t Republicans spend all their airtime attacking the

media for lying about what Obama’s amnesty does and what the Democrats

are doing? It’s hard to avoid concluding that Republicans aren’t trying

to make the right arguments. In fact, it kind of looks like they’re

intentionally throwing the fight on amnesty.

If a Republican majority in both houses of Congress can’t stop

Obama from issuing illegal immigrants Social Security cards and years of

back welfare payments, there is no reason to vote Republican ever






Posted in illegal immigration | Tagged , ,

Plan for massive Valentine’s Day shooting in Halifax foiled

Plan for massive Valentine’s Day shooting in Halifax foiled – NY Daily News.

Valentine’s Day shooting plot in Halifax foiled by police, with three suspects arrested and a fourth found dead (VIDEO)

Canadian police on Friday arrested three suspects, and found a fourth dead, for a plot to open fire in a public venue on Valentine’s Day. Many details about the plan and its suspects are still being withheld, but police said it was not intended as a terrorist attack.

Friday, February 13, 2015, 11:03 PM
Police said one of the suspects, a 19-year-old man, was found dead in this home in Timberlea, a suburb of Halifax. Global News Police said one of the suspects, a 19-year-old man, was found dead in this home in Timberlea, a suburb of Halifax.

A disturbing mass murder plot planned for Valentine’s Day in Halifax, Nova Scotia, was foiled by Canadian police, authorites said.

Three of the young suspects in the sick scheme, one of whom is American, were arrested Friday, and another was found dead. Police were tipped off to the plan earlier in the week.

Police said at least two of the suspects were planning to enter a mall “with a goal of opening fire to kill citizens, and then themselves,” CBC reported.

The plan was the brainchild of a 19-year old man from Timberlea, a Halifax suburb, and a woman, 23, from Geneva, Ill., both of whom had access to firearms, according to police.

The Timberlea man was found dead from a gunshot wound in his family house after police surrounded the home and tried talking to him.

Brian Brennan, commanding officer of the Nova Scotia Royal Canadian Mounted Police, said the foiled plan was not intended as a terrorist attack. Global News Brian Brennan, commanding officer of the Nova Scotia Royal Canadian Mounted Police, said the foiled plan was not intended as a terrorist attack.

The woman was arrested early Friday morning after getting off a flight from Chicago to Halifax. She had prewritten several statements she wanted to be tweeted after her suicide.

Two Halifax men, aged 17 and 20, were also arrested, but their roles in the plan have yet to be determined.

The names of the suspects and information about their connections to each other have not been released.

Brian Brennan, commanding officer of the Nova Scotia Royal Canadian Mounted Police, said “there’s nothing in the investigation to classify it as a terrorist attack.” He said it appeared to be a violent way for the suspects to express “some beliefs” they shared, but he did not elaborate. Police said the suspects seemed obsessed with death and collected photos of mass killings.

Brennan said police believe there are no other suspects in the thwarted Valentine’s Day massacre.

Posted in Uncategorized


Posted by Staff on November 15, 2014

Oslo, Norway: “The world’s largest gang of  thugs, murderers, and rapists is masquerading as a religion of peace,” says Adrian Stavig, a resident of Oslo.

Beginning this past January, the new Norwegian Prime Minister, Erna Solberg began a program which targets and deports Muslims who have ties to radical groups.

While many in America would say this is racist, it’s worked in dramatic fashion. Violent crimes are down more than 31% in Norway.

What a shocker.

Perhaps the rest of Europe and the United States could learn a lesson or two about radical Islam here. Deport the radicals, keep the moderates, and everybody wins.

From Oslo local news:

A record number of people were deported by Norwegian authorities in October, said government sources.

The National Police Immigration Service Norway (Politiets Utlendingsenhet – PU) deported 824 people in October, which is a new record.

The previous record was set in September, the month prior, when 763 people were deported, reported Dagsavisen.

PU believe some of the reasons for the rise in figures are more resources, more staff and a change of “portfolio priorities”. It has also become easier for Norwegian authorities to deport people back to Afghanistan and Nigeria.

Kristin Kvigne, head of PU, said to Dagsavisen: “This month helps us reach our goal for this year.”

Norway’s government has ruled that 7,100 people will be deported in 2014. At the end of October, PU had deported 5,876 people so far this year.

A percentage of those deported in 2014 were asylum seekers who had their application for continued asylum rejected. They were then deported along with their families. The majority of deportees, however, had committed crimes, or had returned illegally to Norway after being deported.

Kvigne said it was important to view the high number of deportations made by PU in the context of falling crime rates across the country.

Not everybody in Norway is happy with the increased deportations. One academic slammed the new policies:

“Norwegian women must take responsibility for the fact that Muslim men find their manner of dress provocative. And since these men believe women are responsible for rape, the women must adapt to the multicultural society around them.”  – Dr. Unni Wikan, Professor of Social Anthropology at the University of Oslo

So, Dr Wikan, using your logic, it is the victim’s fault they have been raped? Not in this universe. You sir may have book smarts, but you sure don’t have any common sense.

And there you have it! Kicking out radical Muslims makes a nation safer and peaceable. Women can walk around without fear of being raped, people just get along a lot better.

Posted in Uncategorized

Ex-Muslim’s Open Letter to America: “What else has to happen so you wake up?”

Mark ChristianMark Christian is the President and Executive Director of the Global Faith Institute. He is the son and nephew of high ranking leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood in his home country of Egypt. He is working in Nebraska against Muslim Brotherhood front groups’ malicious plans within the “Tri-Faith Initiative” in Omaha — details here.

“Ex-Muslim’s Open Letter To America: ‘WHAT ELSE HAS TO HAPPEN SO YOU WAKE UP?!,’ by Prissy Holly, Mad World News, January 11, 2015:

Meet Mark Christian, a brave man who has dedicated his life to exposing what Islam truly is all about.

After leaving Islam a decade ago to convert to Christianity, Mark pulls no punches when speaking out about his former religion, frequently calling out the Muslims who choose to murder in the name of their god.

“A god who is insecure enough to be offended by a cartoon, and incompetent to the level that he wants you to avenge for him, is not a god worthy of worship, but a devil who is leading you to your demise.

“When people challenged Jesus, he made them walk on water, raised them from the dead, and healed their sickness to prove ‘who He Is’ … But when people challenged Mohamed, he chopped their heads off to prove his power as a prophet … Well you chop my head off as much as you want. My heart will continue to call on the name of my savior Jesus Christ.

“Where is the American spirit and the American soul? Where are those who destroyed Hitler and brought down the Berlin Wall? When planes flew into your buildings, knifes ran through your fellow citizens’ throats, bombs went off in your Boston streets, Women and kids are screaming in every country around the world. All of this and you are still calling Islam the religion of peace … What else needs to happen for that Giant to wake up, and liberate humanity from the bondage and the fear of Islam???”

The following is an open letter from Mark, not just to Americans, but to those professing to be “peaceful” Muslims. In the light of the recent terror attacks in Paris, this message needs to be heeded and applied before it is too late!

The circumstances we face are dire and we have no coherent way of addressing it until we establish the stark, bright line between Muslims who are willing to respect the religious liberty of others (which must absolutely require the abandonment of vengeance over insults, perceived or real) and those who count us as so many cattle, ripe for slaughter and easily led.

Our society can no longer afford to self-censor when it comes to the “hair trigger” that is Islam.  Muslims of the former type I described above may be offended, and for this I am sympathetic; but Muslims of the latter type will become enraged and will reveal to all the depth of their incompatibility with civilized society. This is my aim: to force these Muslims to expose their unacceptable radicalism for all to see, but also to reach a self-realization of the depravity of that radicalism that exists within themselves.

Being offended is uncomfortable for sure, but it is nothing compared to being hunted and subjugated, which is the lot our Christian brothers and sisters in Muslim-dominated lands endure, and as we saw in Paris; and increasingly in our own western democracies. The source of this is a foolish adherence to the idea of “multiculturalism,” enforced by a misguided political correctness.  I believe you would heartily agree that there is no verbal insult, nor cartoon that would move you to murder.  However, hundreds of millions of Muslims worldwide disagree.

Part of the effort of the Global Faith Institute is to expose the reality of these twisted beliefs, not just among the jihadists (who we all know believe this) but more importantly, among the so-called “moderate” Muslims.

The concept of killing over an insult is abhorrent, but is held to be acceptable by a majority of Muslims.  Does this mean that a majority of Muslims would kill over a cartoon? Of course not.  However it does mean that a majority of Muslims would NOT stop a fellow Muslim from doing so, and might even feel compelled to assist or support them either financially, or through their silence. This concept is the bridge from religion to savagery. If a Muslim accepts insult as justification for violence, then it becomes possible  for them to move to the next stage – honor killings, murder of apostates and infidels, etc.

Think of responding to insult with violence as the “gateway drug” to all the evils that animate Islam today.  Break that link, and the rest will collapse for lack of support.

We are at the point where the lack of a stark, bright line is enabling death.  I must do all I can to draw that line, and force Muslims to choose which side of that line they prefer. This is an essential first step in exposing the radicalism that we both know festers beneath the surface of many Muslims; even some of whom we call friends.

Some of those “peaceful” Muslims are of the opinion that HAMAS is doing nothing wrong by targeting civilians. They say are merely “acting as anyone would toward an oppressor.” Their words, not mine.

We are in a war, declared by Islam against civilization itself.  As war is not pretty, sometimes tactics within a battle are difficult as well.  I have the greatest love for Muslims, as they are in fact the first victims of Islam, and it is that love that leads me to force them to address their own need for religious reform.  When one allows a wayward son to sit at the Thanksgiving table while drunk and on drugs, one is enabling that behavior.  Real love tells that son to be sober and clean before entering this house.  The son will resist, but only through that conflict can the problem be resolved.  So it is with Islam, and those who follow it.

Mark is the founder of Global Faith Institute, whose mission is “To inspire the lost with the hope of Christ; to equip America with knowledge of the truth, greater than the evils of the age; to embrace the role of “Watchmen,” that we might sound an alarm for all who will listen.”  Be sure and follow him on Facebook and on Twitter.

If you would like to read the exclusive interview Mark did recently with Mad World News, you can check that out here.

Posted in Uncategorized

Brock to Murdoch: Your Network Must Take A Stand

January 10, 2011 1:16 PM EST MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

Monday, January 10, 2011


Jess Levin (202) 772-8162

Media Matters CEO calls for Beck, Palin to be reined in after AZ shooting

Washington, DC — Today, in response to the tragic shooting in Arizona and the increasing focus on the tone of political discourse, Media Matters for America founder and CEO David Brock issued an open letter to News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch asking him to rein in Fox News personalities Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, both of whom frequently use violent and revolutionary rhetoric.

The letter reads:

Dear Mr. Murdoch,

Since the early days of 2009, I have warned your network and others in the media about the very real dangers of extreme anti-government rhetoric and the stoking of fear.

I cautioned against Glenn Beck’s proclamation that he was a “progressive hunter” and his statement that the government was full of vampires before he instructed his viewers to “drive a stake through the heart of the bloodsuckers.” And against Palin revealing her 2010 “targets” with a map showing gun sights over 20 congressional districts, including that of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, urging followers to not “Retreat, Instead — RELOAD.” I said on national television that inducing fear, anger, and the use of violent imagery creates a climate of fear, suspicion, and paranoia that could lead to another Oklahoma City.

I hoped my warnings would be heeded. Instead, they were cast aside.

Even after evidence emerged in October that California gunman Byron Williams was inspired by Beck to attempt to assassinate progressive leaders and I pleaded for Palin to set an example by condemning her Fox colleague’s violent and revolutionary rhetoric, Fox did nothing to address the situation.

On Beck’s radio show, he and Palin jovially mocked my concern. For seven minutes on air, the pair joked about my plea to tone down the rhetoric. Beck said it was “laughable,” “sad,” and compared me to the “smelly kid in third grade.” Palin giggled and said I was “silly” and that my argument was “pathetic” and “desperate” before ultimately concluding, “I stand with you, Glenn.”

Beck and Palin are two of Fox’s most recognizable figures. Before this heartbreaking tragedy in Arizona, you were either unwilling or unable to rein in their violent rhetoric. But now, in the wake of the killings, your network must take a stand.

You have the power to order them to stop using violent rhetoric, on and off of Fox’s air. If they fail to do so, it is incumbent upon you to fire them or be responsible for the climate they create and any consequences thereof.

My previous warnings were laughed off and ignored. For the country’s sake, I hope you take them more seriously now.


David Brock

Founder and CEO, Media Matters for America

Posted in 2nd Amendment | Tagged , , , , ,

Pelosi hires muslim staffer Zaid Jilani — Interesting

CAPS is all about promoting sharia and attempting to silence its critics.

NO this is no where even near being Mother Theresa.

via Career-Firster | Washington Free Beacon.

 House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) has hired the controversial editor of a blog recently engulfed in scandal over its use of language that Jewish groups have described as anti-Semitic and anti-Israel.

 Faiz Shakir, the editor in chief of the Center for American Progress’ ThinkProgress blog, is set to become a senior adviser to Pelosi and her office’s director of new media, according to reports.

 Shakir piloted ThinkProgress through a contentious period during which the liberal online outlet faced accusations of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic bias due to its reporters’ use of the term “Israel firster,” language historically associated with white supremacists.

 Zaid Jilani, who parted ways with ThinkProgress as a result of the controversy, employed the term on his Twitter feed, writing that “Obama is still beloved by Israel-firsters and getting lots of their $$.”

 Jewish and Israeli groups, as well as prominent Jewish thought leaders, decried the other incendiary rhetoric on the left-wing site, accusing the writers of fueling anti-Semitism and distrust of Israel. Those charges were echoed by the Obama administration, which described the organization’s hostility to Israel as “deeply troubling” in a report by the Washington Post.

 Shakir remained silent as the scandal unfolded, refusing to either apologize for ThinkProgress’ behavior or reprimand its writers for their use of terms popularized by the anti-Semitic fringe.

 He did, however, admit in a leaked internal email that he found the term “Israel firster” to be repulsive.

 “Yes, I agree ‘Israel Firster’ is terrible, anti-Semitic language, and that’s why that language no longer exists on Zaid’s personal twitter feed, because he also knows and understands the implications,” Shakir wrote, according to emails obtained by the Jerusalem Post.

 Publicly, CAP officials decried the accusations as flatly untrue.

 CAP and ThinkProgress were so damaged by the controversy that the organization hired a prominent Democratic PR group to do damage control in the Jewish community.

 Shakir’s is the latest in a string of departures from the ThinkProgress blog over the last six months, including Matthew Yglesias, Lee Fang, and Jilani.

 You can see Shakir on Al Jazeera which claims he is an expert on the fake premise of “Islamophobia” – along side Hamas-linked CAIR’s Nihad Awad (aka Nihad Hammad).

Muslim Pelosi staffer, Salon writter on French jihad: ‘muslim terrorists get the job done’

via DNC Touted Muslim “Youth Activist” Gloats Over Deadly Paris Terror Attack… | Weasel Zippers.


Via Frontpage Mag:

Zaid Jilani has many credentials as an activist of the left. He was a blogger at the Center for American Progress’ Think Progress site, the unofficially official spin project for Obama Inc, until he was fired for excessive anti-semitism, even by the standards of a site run by a man who had helped fundraise for Hamas before going to work for Nancy Pelosi.

Jilani went on to blog for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, also known as Bold Progressives, which is behind the Draft Elizabeth Warren campaign. He currently writes for Salon., the site of the Democratic Party, had also featured him as their youth activist.

Posted in Muslim | Tagged