go to vampirefreaks main page
Hello my comrade Vampire Freaks!
Welcome to my personal Infowars sharing blog

In here i will post the most critical things that are happening in the world that will define the future of our very lives...
Read with caution, and do the research if you feel like saying this is paranoid fantasy.

The New World Order is on the rise, it is just around the corner...
We must resist it with all of what is left of our power before it is too late and we will start to witness the start of the greatest genocide in history of the world...
and those of us who survive will be reduced to a scientifically devised permanent state of World Slavery,
left to the grills and whims a set of Sadistic Child-Raping Psychopathic Control Freak Elitists that will make the Nazi's of WW2 look like the Salvation Army!
Does that sound over the top? I dare you to view all my writing and their sources and prove me otherwise!

Paul_in_Wonderland's Journal

Profile Journal Friends' Journals Friends' Profiles
Paul_in_Wonderland's icon Persuit of the Killer Rabbit: The Empire Strikes Back
More Evidence U.S. Supports Nazis in Ukraine September 09, 2014, 04:56:pm
Ultranationalist Azov battalion wears the swastika and SS runes

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 9, 2014

German television ran a video Monday night showing Ukrainian government troops wearing Nazi symbols.

image
Azov Battalion paramilitaries wearing the swastika and the SS runic insignia of the Schutzstaffel

The video was shot by Norwegian broadcaster TV2 last week. “We were filming a report about Ukraine’s AZOV battalion in the eastern city of Urzuf, when we came across these soldiers,” Oysten Bogen, a correspondent for the television station, told NBC News.

Azov is openly fascist, although this is not mentioned by NBC News.

It was formed and armed by Ukraine’s interior ministry. It is linked to Yulia Tymoshenko’s Batkivshchyna (“The Fatherland”) party through Arsen Avakov, who became the new Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine after the U.S. State Department sponsored violent coup ousted the elected Yanukovich government.

Patrons of the paramilitary group include Oleh Lyashko, a member of Verkhovna Rada, or the Ukrainian parliament, and ultra-nationalist Dmytro Korchynsky. He is the former leader of Ukrainian National Assembly-Ukrainian National Self Defense, which merged with Right Sector, a violent ultra-nationalist group of street fighters that played in key role in the February coup.

The battalion’s commander is Andriy Biletsky, the head of the neo-nazi social-nationalist political groups Social National Assembly and Patriot of Ukraine.

The stated aim of the organization is “to prepare Ukraine for further expansion and to struggle for the liberation of the entire White Race from the domination of the internationalist speculative capital” and “to punish severely sexual perversions and any interracial contacts that lead to the extinction of the white man,” according to the BBC.

“Azov, which has an estimated personnel of 500 people, is one of about 50 volunteer battalions formed by Maidan activists and ultranationalists of the Right Sector group,” RT reported in August. “These newly formed units have been brought to eastern Ukraine to form the backbone of the forces fighting against the local self-defense militia advocating independence from Ukraine.”

It “actively participated in Kiev’s so-called ‘anti-terrorist operation’ and, like most of the volunteer and National Guards units, has been accused of committing war crimes against civilians,” the Russian news agency claims.

“Azov fighters do more than wave a Swastika-like flag,” writes Robert Parry, “they favor the Wolfsangel flag of Hitler’s SS divisions, much as some of Ukraine’s neo-Nazis still honor Hitler’s Ukrainian SS auxiliary, the Galician SS. A Ukrainian hero hailed during the Maidan protests was Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera whose paramilitary forces helped exterminate Jews and Poles.”

Ukrainian ultranationalists consider Russians and Poles their primary enemies. “The Jews in the USSR constitute the most faithful support of the ruling Bolshevik regime, and the vanguard of Muscovite imperialism in Ukraine,” Ukrainian nationalists declared in 1941 during the Nazi occupation.

Considering the fact the Kiev government has actively fielded a battalion of neo-Nazi racists determined to cleanse Ukraine of what it considers untermenschen, the resistance effort by Russian-speaking Ukrainians in Donetsk and Luhansk is understandable.


ANWO Banner Image
Mood: Shocked
Music: Singing in the Rain (???)
| (1)

>>
Nuclear World War 3 on our Doorstep August 30, 2014, 03:20:pm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ex-CIA Official Proposes Assassination of Putin

Former intelligence official wants sanctions against Russia to lead to the removal of Putin, "with a bullet hole in the back of his head" if necessary

image

Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
August 28, 2014

In a recent op-ed, a former CIA official suggested the removal of Russian President Vladimir Putin, by assassination if necessary, should be the primary objective of the Obama administration in its strategy for Ukraine.

Herbert E. Meyer, who served as a Special Assistant to the Director of Central Intelligence under the Reagan administration, said the goal of U.S. sanctions against Russia “should be to get the Russians who’ve been keeping Putin in power, or tolerating Putin in power, to throw that knockout punch .”

“If Putin is too stubborn to acknowledge that his career is over, and the only way to get him out of the Kremlin is feet-first, with a bullet hole in the back of his head — that would also be okay with us,” he stated.

To ensure Putin’s removal, Meyer suggested, the Obama administration should strike a wedge between the Russian business elite and the Kremlin that could serve as a catalyst for an attempt on Putin’s life.

“That’s why the sanctions will work if the president and his European counterparts will keep tightening the screws; if they keep making commerce more difficult for Russia’s serious business executives, for instance by blocking their access to capital, and if they keep making life more miserable for Russia’s playboy oligarchs, for instance by canceling their credit cards and denying landing rights to their private jets,” he added. “And if the president and European leaders keep telling these Russians – bluntly and publicly – that all this will end the moment Vladimir Putin leaves the Kremlin for good.”

The former CIA official is describing a centuries-old tool of statecraft in which a foreign power creates discontent between the nobles of another country and their ruler to ensure the eventual overthrow of that ruler.

But given today’s explosive increase in tensions between Russia and Ukraine, which could very well lead to another world war, Meyer’s suggestion is particularly disturbing considering is it likely that current Western intelligence officials also share similar views.

And the destabilization of the Russian government with the loss of Putin will only create chaos in the East, chaos which can be exploited by the global financial elite who hold no allegiance to any nationality.

“Every major international crisis for the past century or more has ended with an even greater consolidation of world power into the hands of the few, and this is no accident,” journalist Brandon Smith wrote.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Putin’s “Nuclear” Remark Checks U.S. Moves In Eastern Europe

U.S. has violated ABM and numerous other treaties

image

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 29, 2014

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s remarks on Russia’s nuclear arsenal appear to be partly in response to a U.S. claim Russia has violated a 1987 nuclear missile treaty.

“It’s best not to mess with us,” Putin said at a youth camp near Moscow.



On August 1, prior to the unverified claim Russia has invaded Ukraine, Obama mentioned the alleged treaty violation during a telephone call between to the two leaders.

The U.S. claims Russia tested a cruise missile prohibited under the treaty signed by President Reagan and General Secretary of the Soviet Union Gorbachev on December 8, 1987.

The treaty eliminated nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with intermediate ranges.

During coverage of the alleged treaty violation, the establishment media neglected to mention that the United States has violated and abrogated a number of international treaties, including the landmark 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty.

The U.S. considered the ABM treaty a “Cold War relic.”

In 2002 then president George W. Bush announced the treaty is “now behind us” and declared his commitment to deploy missile defenses “as soon as possible.”

In 2007, then Russian Prime Minister Putin said the so-called NATO missile “defense shield” would lead to a new arms race and enhance the probability of mutual destruction.

Poland, the Czech Republic, and Romania have indicated they would host anti-missile systems, but in 2009 Obama said a defense against short- and medium-range missiles using AEGIS warships would be deployed instead.

During the 2012 presidential campaign, contender Mitt Romney said Obama’s move represented a “gift to Russia,” a remark reflecting the attitude of Republicans and many in the establishment toward nuclear deescalation.

In addition to placing anti-missile systems in Eastern Europe, Russia is concerned about the United States using the situation in Ukraine as a pretext to introduce troops near its border.

Since the beginning of the year, the U.S. has deployed hundreds of troops in Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

U.S. Violates Treaties with Russia

According to the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research and the Lawyers’ Committee on Nuclear Policy, the United States routinely violates international treaties.

“The United States has violated, compromised or acted to undermine in some crucial way every treaty that we have studied in detail,” said Nicole Deller, principal editor and co-author of a report produced by the two organizations.

In addition to the ABM treaty, the U.S. has violated the 1970 Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.

The Bush administration undercut the NPT when it insisted reductions in strategic weapons previously agreed upon with Russia can be reversed.

The U.S. reached this conclusion after a Nuclear Posture Review expanded “options for using nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

NATO planning rapid-deployment force of 10,000 troops to counter Russia – report

NATO is reportedly working towards the creation of an expeditionary force composed of 10,000 troops

image

RT.com
August 30, 2014
NATO is reportedly working towards the creation of an expeditionary force composed of 10,000 troops from seven different member states as a result of escalating tensions with Russia over the conflict in Ukraine.

According to the Financial Times, the force’s creation will be spearheaded by Britain and involve contributions from Denmark, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Norway, and the Netherlands. Canada is also interested in joining the group, but it’s not known what its final decision will be.

Although no formal announcement has been made, British Prime Minister David Cameron is expected to declare its formation at the upcoming NATO summit in Wales on September 4th.

Many specifics have yet to be worked out or announced, but planners are reportedly implementing ways to increase the number of soldiers involved even more if necessary. Air and naval units will be integrated into the group, as well as ground troops led by British commanders.

As noted by the Times, the creation of the force comes as a response to Russia’s involvement in the ongoing Ukrainian crisis, with the ultimate goal being to “create a fully functioning, division-sized force for rapid deployment and regular, frequent exercises.” NATO has accused Russia of deploying more than 1,000 troops into Ukraine to bolster separatists in the eastern part of the country.

Russia, however, insists that it does not have troops operating inside of Ukraine and has dismissed NATO’s assertions.

Despite the fact that NATO has opted not to act militarily in Ukraine – unnamed sources told Foreign Policy on Friday that there are no plans to confront Russia with anything more than stronger sanctions – Jonathan Eyal of the London-based Royal United Services Institute said the group needs to demonstrate that its eastern European members are just as integral to the alliance as other states.

“We need to end the idea of different zones of security in Europe,” he told the Financial Times. “We need to be talking about prepositioning, regular rotation of troops and making it very clear that we do not accept that the eastern Europeans are in some different category of membership of NATO.”

The revelation also arrives just a few days after NATO’s Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen expressed interest in forming “a more visible presence” in Eastern Europe in the form of facilities capable of rapidly receiving “response forces” needed to counter Russia.

For his part, Russia’s envoy to NATO, Aleksandr Grushko, said any attempt to stretch further into the region would impact Moscow’s own security planning.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

ISIS to the Rescue

Amid NATO's failures in Ukraine, America's terrorist mercenaries threaten war with Russia

image

Tony Cartalucci
LandDestroyer.blogspot.co.uk
September 5, 2014

As the crisis in Ukraine continues to fare poorly for Kiev and its NATO-backers, an “unlikely” ally has emerged – ISIS. Threatening to “liberate” Chechnya and the CaucasusThreatening to “liberate” Chechnya and the Caucasus, ISIS would essentially be handing over regions of Russia to its Western and Persian Gulf sponsors. While one would imagine the West would attempt to at least appear to stand in solidarity with Russia in the face of this recent threat, it has instead used the threat to stir fear among Russians, and as leverage against Moscow.

The Fortune 500-funded Carnegie Europe think tank recently published an op-ed titled, “Forget NATO, Russia’s Got Bigger Problems.” In it contains astounding admissions – that NATO’s agenda is expanding itself all along Russia’s borders, that “the EU is now in direct competition with Russia over the future of the lands straddling the EU and Russia,” and that its plans in Ukraine are in utter disarray

The op-ed would also leave readers with an unmistakable threat:

“What could deter him [Russian President Vladimir Putin] is his own combustible southern flank and Islamic State, which Russia would be very unwise to ignore. It is these threats that are far, far more dangerous to Russia than NATO’s limited intentions in Poland and the Baltic states.”

“These threats are also more dangerous than the EU, whose openness has hugely profited Russian companies and ordinary Russian citizens.”

“If Putin thinks NATO and the EU are his big threats, competitors and enemies, he hasn’t seen anything yet.”


The threat is clear. The Islamic State (ISIS), a creation of US, European, Saudi, Qatari, and Israeli designs, is a global mercenary expeditionary force, precisely as Al Qaeda was since its inception in the 1980′s in Afghanistan. While it is currently being used by the West to divide and destroy the Middle East and smash the Iranian arc of influence stretching from Tehran, across Iraq and Damascus, and all the way to Lebanon, it can easily be redirected into the hotbeds of sectarian extremism in Russia’s southern Caucasus region.

In fact, all the Islamic State is, is little more than a re-branding of Al Qaeda – with many other Western-backed “legacy” Al Qaeda affiliates still fighting along side ISIS. While propaganda attempts to portray ISIS as mortal enemies of the West, every battle ISIS fights are battles the West has openly desired but has consistently failed to justify fighting. Western propaganda has also categorically failed to account for how a regional military force could appear, challenging both the national army of Iraq and the Syrian Arab Army, without significant state-sponsorship.

ISIS Inception

ISIS is in fact the intentional, engineered creation of the US. A comment made in the wake of Steven Sotloff’s alleged death by US Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen who claimed:

“This atrocious and brutal act shows that ISIL’s cruelty knows no bounds and that it has no respect for human life. ISIL is a global terror group that espouses an ideology that poses a grave threat to regional security as well as U.S. national security interests both at home and abroad.”

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.Before the inception of ISIS by the Western media, and as far back as 2007, Pulitzer Prize-winning veteran journalist Seymour Hersh would portend the creation of just such a terror group in his 9-page report in the New Yorker titled, “The Redirection Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” He stated that (emphasis added):

That “by-product” is ISIS. Through America’s own premeditated conspiracy to plunge not only Syria, but the entire region and now potentially Russia, into genocidal sectarian bloodshed – resulted directly in the alleged murders of both James Foley and Steven Sotloff, not to mention tens of thousands of Iraqis, Syrians, Lebanese, and many others. The creation of ISIS and its use as a proxy mercenary force for Western designs is once again revealed in ISIS’ otherwise irrational declaration of war on Russia.

Impetus to Intervene

America’s doctrine of global intervention amid chaos of its own creation is a two-way road. While it is attempting to justify military intervention in Syria to fight its own ISIS mercenaries, with ISIS’ recent threat against Russia, it has given Syria’s allies a golden opportunity to openly declare their backing of Damascus including arms, equipment, intelligence, and other forms of direct assistance in crushing ISIS and its Al Qaeda affiliates still fighting within Syria’ borders.

Such a counterstroke would boost the legitimacy of the Syrian government using the West’s own propaganda regarding ISIS against it. It would also allow Syrian, Iranian, and Lebanese forces to fill the geostrategic space the West intends to seize as part of its “war on ISIS,” thus permanently taking Western intervention off the table.

By crushing ISIS where it is, may mean fighting an enemy with shorter logistical lines and more concentrated forces – a scenario that would be vastly different if ISIS attempted to fight Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Russia. A balance between boosting Syria and its allies’ ability to cope with ISIS, and allowing ISIS to overextend itself would be optimal – and interventionism used in a manner to stop a true threat to global stability. Identifying, exposing, and punishing ISIS’ sponsors is also a necessary component of confounding and eliminating ISIS – a component curiously absent from Western plans to “intervene.”

Global Domination by Any Means

While it seems unfathomable that such a gambit – spanning the entire Middle East and edging into Russia – can be conceived let alone executed, it should be remembered that the Arab Spring and the subsequent violent subversion of Syria was planned as far back as 2007-2008, with the indirect consequence of undermining Iran as the ultimate objective. That this itself is part of a grander strategy originating from machinations hatched as far back as 1991, orchestrated by US policy makers who compare geopolitics and the world map to a “Grand Chessboard,” is fairly easy to comprehend.

There is no better way to control the vast resources, geography, and populations of Eurasia and beyond than granting everything from North Africa, the Middle East, and Eurasia to ignorant, indoctrinated, medieval zealots led by duplicitous co-conspirators who will wheel-and-deal with the corporate-financiers of the West while keeping their own populations in fear and darkness – simultaneously, perpetuating Al Qaeda throughout the developing world allows the West to impose draconian repressive measures at home, stifling true political and economic independence and self-determination across their own populations.

The result is global hegemony uncontested both at home and abroad, with a world population subjected to the machinations and whims of a scientific dictatorship rooted in Hilterian eugenics and Malthusian ideology.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

China Warns of Third World War

Nations prepare for global chaos

Infowars.com
September 17, 2014

Paul Joseph Watson breaks down the latest warning by a global superpower, hinting that it’s not just an airborne Ebola virus we should be worried about.




ANWO Banner Image
Mood: Stunned
Music: Breaking Bad, Confessions
(1) |

>>
Don't Fear Ebola, Fear the State August 01, 2014, 12:47:pm
And mistrust fascist big pharma public-private partnerships

image

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 1, 2014

It is difficult to contract the deadly viral disease Ebola.

In order to get it, you have to be in direct contact with blood and other body fluids from an infected person or animal. Aerosol transmission is not possible. The possibility of widespread transmission is extremely low due to a high fatality rate and the remote areas where infections usually occur.

According to some members of the medical establishment and the corporate media, the spread of the disease is out of control in the African nations of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone. A chart posted on Daily Mail claims 1,201 people in those countries tested positive for the disease and 672 have died this year. The Daily Mail says Ebola is “as infectious as flu,” a claim that is patently untrue.

As Jon Rappoport told Alex Jones on Thursday, the death rate from Ebola is nearly infinitesimal when compared to seasonal flu, which kills between three and five million people every year. Like previous “pandemic” diseases like Swine Flu and West Nile, Ebola is being exploited and exaggerated as part of a psychological operation by government.



Disease, natural disaster, and man-made crises are routinely exploited by government as pretexts to enlarge and extend its power and reach. The state and its propaganda media thrive on one manufactured crisis after another as part of a systematic effort to ramp up the police state. The goal is not protection of the people. It is an all-encompassing surveillance state with a militarized component designed not to save us from evil terrorists or scary diseases, but control the population and maintain through fear and violence its political monopoly.

A fear-mongered Ebola – far less threatening to the average American than a stay at the hospital or driving a car – will be used to impose new restrictions on the movement of citizens. The CDC website reveals what the government plans to do in the event the difficult to spread disease arrives in America – enforce isolation, quarantine, and government decree enforced at gunpoint. “In addition to serving as medical functions, isolation and quarantine also are ‘police power’ functions, derived from the right of the state to take action affecting individuals for the benefit of society,” the CDC states.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon is on its game. “The military has response plans in place for national emergency events that could include anything from a pandemic outbreak to economic collapse, both of which could lead to civil unrest,” writes Mac Slavo. “The Department of Defense informed Congress that it has deployed biological diagnostic systems to National Guard support teams in all 50 states” despite a complete lack of Ebola cases and the improbability of a pandemic.

In addition to providing an excuse for an enlargement of government and military power, hyped up pandemic threats are used by transnational corporations to increase profits.

In 2010 the outgoing Chair of the Council of Europe’s Sub-committee on Health, Wolfgang Wodarg, told the Alex Jones Show that the 2009 swine flu pandemic was a hoax manufactured by pharmaceutical companies in league with the WHO to make large profits while endangering public health. “It is their trick that they always try to monopolize this and we pay much more like this,” said Wodarg.

Fast tracked vaccines that may become mandatory

The National Institutes of Health, a biomedical research facility under the Department of Health & Human Services, has announced it is working with another government behemoth, the Food and Drug Administration, to fast track an Ebola vaccine.

“We are starting to discuss some deals with pharmaceutical companies to help scale it up, so on an emergency basis, it might be available in 2015 for health workers who are putting themselves at extreme risk,” Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Fast tracked vaccines and accompanying pandemic psychological warfare has resulted in the state and its supported institutions – including hospitals, schools and even private daycare centers – making flu vaccines mandatory for workers.

The New York Times and the establishment media are now demanding mandatory vaccinations for children and the elimination of all exemptions. As if that is not bad enough, some are calling for mandatory participation in vaccine clinical trials as well.

“Many societies already mandate that citizens undertake activities for the good of society,” writes Susanne Sheehy for the American Medical Association, a government-sanctioned cartel that specializes in making healthcare unaffordable.

Beware when government and its preferred corporate partners argue in favor of mandatory activities supposedly for the good of society.

This invariably results in authoritarian behavior, conscription, and wealth confiscation at gunpoint.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama Signs Executive Order to Detain Americans With ‘Respiratory Illnesses’

Amendment comes in wake of Ebola scare

image

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
August 1, 2014

As the Ebola outbreak continues to cause concern, President Barack Obama has signed an amendment to an executive order that would allow him to mandate the apprehension and detention of Americans who merely show signs of “respiratory illness.”

The executive order, titled Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases, amends executive order 13295, passed by George W. Bush in April 2003, which allows for the, “apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of suspected communicable diseases.”

The amendment signed by Obama replaces subsection (b) of the original Bush executive order which referred only to SARS. Obama’s amendment allows for the detention of Americans who display, “Severe acute respiratory syndromes, which are diseases that are associated with fever and signs and symptoms of pneumonia or other respiratory illness, are capable of being transmitted from person to person, and that either are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic, or, upon infection, are highly likely to cause mortality or serious morbidity if not properly controlled.”

Although Ebola was listed on the original executive order signed by Bush, Obama’s amendment ensures that Americans who merely show signs of respiratory illness, with the exception of influenza, can be forcibly detained by medical authorities.

Although the quarantining of people suspected of being infected with the Ebola virus seems like a perfectly logical move, the actual preconditions for this to happen aren’t restricted to just those suffering from the disease.

As we highlighted earlier this week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has measures in place for dealing with an outbreak of a communicable disease which allow for the quarantine of “well persons” who “do not show symptoms” of the disease.

In addition, under the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act, public health authorities and governors would be given expanded police powers to seize control of communications devices, public and private property, as well as a host of other draconian measures in the event of a public health emergency.

When the legislation was introduced, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons warned that it “could turn governors into dictators.”

Yesterday it was reported that Emory University Hospital in Atlanta was set to receive a patient infected with Ebola. A hospital in Germany also accepted an infected patient earlier this week. Some critics have raised concerns about the risk of deliberately importing infected individuals into the west.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama Brings Ebola Into America After Signing Executive Order to Detain Sick Americans

Officials are importing Ebola into the U.S. which doctors have failed to contain in Africa

image

Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
August 2, 2014

Despite the fact that doctors in Africa cannot keep Ebola from spreading, United States officials brought an affected patient into the country only days after President Obama signed an executive order mandating the detention of Americans who show signs of “respiratory illness.”

The first known Ebola patient on U.S. soil, Dr. Kent Brantly, was flown into Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, today after contracting the disease in Liberia during the latest outbreak in West Africa which has claimed the lives of over 700.

“Video from Emory showed someone wearing a white, full-body protective suit helping a similarly clad person emerge from the ambulance and walk into the hospital early Saturday afternoon,” CNN reported.

This has stoked concerns among the American public that Ebola could now spread inside the U.S., especially since the virus has been difficult to contain in Africa.

“It sounds like the perfect script for a horror movie: A virus with no vaccine and no cure kills hundreds of people; despite containment efforts, it keeps spreading, but it’s actually all too real in West Africa, where doctors have said Ebola is now ‘out of control,’” wrote Sheila M. Eldred for Discovery News.

Hospitals in America may not fare any better considering that antibiotic-resistant “nightmare bacteria” spread from one medical facility in 2001 to 46 states by 2013.

“Allegedly the Ebola carriers will be quarantined in special rooms, but we already know that American hospitals cannot even contain staph infections,” columnist Paul Craig Roberts wrote. “What happens to the utensils, plates, cups, and glasses with which the ebola infected persons eat and drink and who gets to clean the bed pans?”

“One slip-up by one person, one tear in a rubber glove, and the virus is loose.”


This really highlights the reckless nature of the global elite and government officials for importing a virus into the country which has no specific treatment and a mortality rate of up to 90%.

Similarly, state-funded universities and other facilities across the U.S. are maintaining weaponized viruses for so-called “bio-defense” under the Project Bioshield Act passed by Congress in 2004, but because these facilities are only moderately secure for the most part, there is a real risk that a deadly virus could escape into the public and affect millions of Americans in an outbreak on the same level as the pandemics which killed 80% of Native American populations by the 19th century.

The National Research Council found that one of these laboratories in Kansas, for example, has a 70% chance that a virus will spread from its lab in the next 50 years, even though the facility is designated as “maximum security.”

And it should also be pointed out that this is just one lab out of many in the nation, a good percentage of which have even less security.

There is no doubt that an accidental or an orchestrated release of a virus from one of these labs could result in the deaths of millions as well as a draconian government response to the outbreak, including martial law, through both the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act drafted in 2001 and President Obama’s latest executive order which mandates the apprehension and detention of Americans who merely show signs of “respiratory illness.”

Simply put, instead of preventing Ebola and other viruses from spreading within the U.S., Obama is readying his administration for a power grab if a major pandemic breaks out throughout the country.




ANWO Banner Image
Mood: Relaxed
Music: The Alex Jones Show
(1) |

>>
Saudi Arabia, Sunni Caliphate, NATO Run Secret Terror Army June 14, 2014, 05:57:am
in Iraq and Syria

The ultimate objective is taking down all contenders and reconfiguring the world order

image

Kurt Nimmo and Alex Jones
Infowars.com
June 13, 2014

The Salafist horde currently making its way to Baghdad from northern Iraq is a secret and specialized army of terrorists funded, armed and supported by Saudi Arabia, the Sunni caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, and NATO.

Otherwise known as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), the caliphate and its partners in Riyadh and Doha have transplanted tens of thousands of murderous paramilitary jihadists from the battlefields of Syria to the killing fields of Iraq. For the fossilized monarchies of Saudi Arabia and Qatar the objective is to spread a pernicious version of Sunni Islam and thus defeat their longtime Shia Islam rivals, while in the West the financial and global elite are playing a long-running game of conquer and divide, a technique long used by the British Empire.

British Empire Conquers the Middle East

F. William Engdahl and other historians have shown how the British Empire ruthlessly conquered the Arab Middle East, an effort spurred on when it realized oil would eclipse coal as the dominant energy source in the 20th century. As World War I raged in Europe, the British worked with France, Italy and Russia to wrestle the region away from the Ottoman Turks, who had enjoyed uncontested control for centuries.

The borders imposed after the war created the artificial states of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Kuwait. The British had fomented and directed a revolt against the Ottomans during the war. One of the leaders selected by the British was Ibn Saud, the leader of a tribal Wahhabi sect in central Arabia who bought the support of the Bedouins with British money. In 1925, with British blessing and money, Saud overthrew the ruling monarch Prince Hijaz and by 1932 the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was established. Following the Second World War and a massive influx of money from Western oil corporations, the House of Saud began to proselytize and export Wahhabism, an austere and puritanical version of Sunni Islam founded by Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. By 2013 governments around the world, including the European Parliament, considered Wahhabism the primary source of Islamic terrorism.

The British and the global elite understood Islam could be effectively exploited to control Muslims. “All political leadership of the time depended on Islam for legitimacy and all political leaders were pro-British. Islam was a tool to legitimize the rule, tyranny and corruption of Arab leaders. To the West, Islam was acceptable; it could be and was used,” writes Said K. Aburish, the author of A Brutal Friendship: The West and the Arab Elite.

Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda

By the late 1970s, following an effort to crush Arab nationalism in response to European colonization, the United States and the Pakistani military and intelligence used – with the bankster front, the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, working in the shadows – Sunni radicals to eject the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. “Today it is generally understood that radical Islam received its biggest boost as a result of the mujahedin’s successful jihad against Soviet forces, and when the Soviets retreated from Afghan territory in early 1989 the country was left with tens of thousands of unemployed Islamic mercenaries who then turned their attention to the West,” writes Peter D. Goodgame in his book, The Globalists and the Islamists: Fomenting the “Clash of Civilizations” for a New World Order.

The CIA, in collaboration with Pakistan’s ISI, organized the Afghan Mujahideen, a loose coalition of tribal fighters, to go up against the Soviets. The “Afghan Arabs” and Osama bin Laden were instrumental in this effort. Following the ejection of the Soviets from Afghanistan, Bin Laden and “al-Qaeda,” the terror group named after a database of Mujahideen mercenaries, would establish a foothold in Afghanistan and declare jihad against the Great Satan, the United States. Along with al-Qaeda, the CIA-ISI collaboration produced the Taliban, a group consisting of Afghan civil war veterans who embraced a regional version of Wahhabism imported by Pakistani intelligence and Saudi Arabia.



As Infowars.com has documented for more than a decade, the United States and its European NATO partner have used al-Qaeda terror for a number of political objectives, most notably undermining disfavored governments and destabilizing Islamic states along the former Soviet periphery, the most notable being Chechnya. During the U.S. occupation of Iraq various al-Qaeda aligned and inspired groups contributed the required pretext for U.S. involvement and the establishment of military bases and facilities. U.S. and British collaboration in the “insurgency” led by al-Qaeda and other Sunni groups became obvious when British soldiers were caught posing as Arabs shooting Iraqis in the occupied city of Basra in southern Iraq in 2005.

Award-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh wrote in 2007 that the Bush administration had aligned itself with radical Sunni elements in Iraq. In order to institute what then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice described as a new policy, “clandestine operations [were] kept secret, in some cases, by leaving the execution or the funding to the Saudis, or by finding other ways to work around the normal congressional appropriations process,” Hersh explained, citing government sources.

Libya and al-Qaeda Magnified

During the effort to overthrow Libya and its leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 it became obvious the United States and NATO were supporting, funding and arming paramilitaries swearing allegiance to al-Qaeda and the radical Wahhabist agenda of sharia law.

“The United States switched sides in the war on terror with what we did in Libya, knowingly facilitating the provision of weapons to known al-Qaeda militias and figures,” Clare Lopez, a CIA officer, told the British newspaper The Daily Mail in April, three years after the fall of Libya and the death of more than 30,000 Libyans. The country is now a classic failed state, as planned, with rival factions engaged in open street battles and jihadist groups attacking the Parliament in Tripoli.

Syria: U.S. Directly Collaborates with al-Qaeda

The best kept secret of the Benghazi scandal, at least as far as Congress is concerned, is the CIA gun-running operation out of Benghazi, Libya, to the CIA’s latest al-Qaeda affiliates fighting to overthrow Bashar al-Assad in Syria. The U.S. support of various al-Qaeda affiliated and inspired groups, including al-Nusra and ISIL, either directly or through proxies, is well-known.

“The New York Times reports that a 50 man cell of ‘rebels’ trained and armed by the CIA and US special forces is to sneak over the border from Jordan into Syria this week to begin fighting government forces there, a move that should prompt concern given that moderate rebel forces are now fully infiltrated by extremist al Qaeda linked terrorists,” Steve Watson wrote in September, 2013.

The same month, the U.S. brazenly announced it was arming al-Qaeda. “The United States has officially announced it is now delivering ‘lethal aid’ to the ‘rebels’ engaged in attacks against the Syrian government. In addition to sophisticated communications equipment and advanced combat medical kits sent by the CIA, the State Department is sending vehicles and other munitions, according to the Washington Post,” we reported.



“We’ve come full circle from going after al-Qaeda to indirectly backing al-Qaeda,” Bill Gertz quoted a U.S. official as stating following a promise in June by the Obama administration to increase arm shipments.

Globalist Game Plan: Conquer and Divide through Failed States

Tony Cartalucci documents how the al-Qaeda inspired, although supposedly no longer aligned, ISIL is the product of a NATO and

Saudi conspiracy stretching back as far as 2007 [when] US-Saudi policymakers sought to ignite a region-wide sectarian war to purge the Middle East of Iran’s arch of influence stretching from its borders, across Syria and Iraq, and as far west as Lebanon and the coast of the Mediterranean. ISIS has been harbored, trained, armed, and extensively funded by a coalition of NATO and Persian Gulf states within Turkey’s (NATO territory) borders and has launched invasions into northern Syria with, at times, both Turkish artillery and air cover. The most recent example of this was the cross-border invasion by Al Qaeda into Kasab village, Latikia province in northwest Syria.

Cartalucci cites Hersh who wrote in the above mentioned article:

“To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.”

According to Cartalucci, the Sunni rampage in Iraq is about providing a pretext to introduce NATO into Syria and finalize the current stalemate there. “Through Iraq, NATO has used its terrorist proxies to create a pretext to put this ‘buffer zone’ strategy back into motion,” he writes. “The prospect of the US, NATO, or the Persian Gulf states delivering Iraq from ISIS is an ironic tragedy – as definitive evidence reveals ISIS’ brutal incursion was of this collective coalition’s own doing to begin with, and for its own insidious ends. Instead, a joint Iranian-Iraqi-Syrian anti-terror campaign should be conducted to corner and crush NATO’s terrorist mercenary expeditionary force once and for all.”

Iran, Iraq and Syria may indeed unite to rid Iraq of the current Wahhabist scourge threatening to take over the country and destabilize the region. However, as we have learned since the CIA, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia built and unleashed the terror group and its surrogates, al-Qaeda is tenacious and in the past has experienced miraculous resurgence.

The globalists are primarily interested in fomenting chaos and disorder. Iraq was invaded in 2003 because it was a relatively strong contender in the neighborhood – and this is, as well, why it was coaxed into attacking Iran and, fatefully, Kuwait. Bush’s” Mission Accomplished” was not a tribute to the defeat of Saddam Hussein. It was an acknowledgement that Iraq had been reduced to a failed state on par with Yemen and countries in sub-Sahara Africa.

ISIL and other Saudi-financed and supported terrorist groups may desire a caliphate in the Middle East. However, for the global elite, such a prospect comes in a distant second to its primary objective – taking down all contenders and reconfiguring the world order for its ultimate end: the establishment of a one world totalitarian government.





----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Haven’t We Already Done Enough Damage in Iraq?

Same foreign policy “experts” who lied us into the Iraq war are now telling us we must re-invade Iraq

image

Ron Paul
RonPaulInstitute.org
June 16, 2014

In 2006, I invited the late General Bill Odom to address my Thursday Congressional luncheon group. Gen. Odom, a former NSA director, called the Iraq war “the greatest strategic disaster in American history,” and told the surprised audience that he could not understand why Congress had not impeached the president for pushing this disaster on the United States. History continues to prove the General’s assessment absolutely correct.

In September, 2002, arguing against a US attack on Iraq, I said the following on the House Floor:

“No credible evidence has been produced that Iraq has or is close to having nuclear weapons. No evidence exists to show that Iraq harbors al Qaeda terrorists. Quite to the contrary, experts on this region recognize Hussein as an enemy of the al Qaeda and a foe to Islamic fundamentalism.”

Unfortunately, Congress did not listen.

As we know, last week the second largest city in Iraq, Mosul, fell to the al-Qaeda allied Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Last week an al-Qaeda that had not been in Iraq before our 2003 invasion threatened to move on the capitol, Baghdad, after it easily over-ran tens of thousands of Iraqi military troops.

The same foreign policy “experts” who lied us into the Iraq war are now telling us we must re-invade Iraq to deal with the disaster caused by their invasion! They cannot admit they were wrong about the invasion being a “cakewalk” that would pay for itself, so they want to blame last week’s events on the 2011 US withdrawal from Iraq. But the trouble started with the 2003 invasion itself, not the 2011 troop withdrawal. Anyone who understands cause and effect should understand this.

The Obama administration has said no option except for ground troops is off the table to help the Iraqi government in this crisis. We should not forget, however, that the administration does not consider Special Forces or the CIA to be “boots on the ground.” So we may well see Americans fighting in Iraq again.

It is also likely that the administration will begin shipping more weapons and other military equipment to the Iraqi army, in the hopes that they might be able to address the ISIS invasion themselves. After years of US training, costing as much as $20 billion, it is unlikely the Iraqi army is up to the task. Judging from the performance of the Iraqi military as the ISIS attacked, much of that money was wasted or stolen.

A big US government weapons transfer to Iraq will no doubt be favored by the US military-industrial complex, which stands to profit further from the Iraq meltdown. This move will also be favored by those in Washington who realize how politically unpopular a third US invasion of Iraq would be at home, but who want to “do something” in the face of the crisis. Shipping weapons may be an action short of war, but it usually leads to war. And as we have already seen in Iraq and Syria, very often these weapons fall into the hands of the al-Qaeda we are supposed to be fighting!

Because of the government’s foolish policy of foreign interventionism, the US is faced with two equally stupid choices: either pour in resources to prop up an Iraqi government that is a close ally with Iran, or throw our support in with al-Qaida in Iraq (as we have done in Syria). I say we must follow a third choice: ally with the American people and spend not one more dollar or one more life attempting to re-make the Middle East. Haven’t we have already done enough damage?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S. Ignored ISIS Threat to Hype Endless War On Terror

Globalists pretend they were taken by surprise

image

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
June 17, 2014

The corporate media, taking its cues in part from Foreign Policy, a magazine formerly owned by the misnamed Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, insists the gains of ISIS in Iraq took the establishment by surprise.

“We got caught flat-footed. Period,” Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, described as a terrorism analyst and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who supposedly studies ISIS and other al Qaeda-linked groups, told the magazine last week. Gartenstein-Ross claims: “U.S. intelligence had no idea ISIS was about to mount a major offensive to take over two more cities simultaneously.”

“The intelligence agencies’ inability to predict the latest crisis in Iraq is likely to fuel critics of the Obama administration’s management of other global crises, including in Syria and Ukraine,” Shane Harris writes for FP.

Even former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton insists she had no idea of the ISIS threat. Appearing at a Council on Foreign Relations shindig, Clinton said she was unaware of “the extent to which ISIS could be effective in seizing cities in Iraq and trying to erase boundaries to create an Islamic state.”

This ignorance plays right into the neocon plan to keep the war on terror going indefinitely. The
Foundation for Defense of Democracies is a prominent neocon think tank right up there with the American Enterprise Institute and the Hudson Institute, organizations that enthusiastically promoted “intelligence failures” (lies and fabrications) ahead of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq by the Bush regime and subsequently maintained by Obama.

image

Anything Gartenstein-Ross tells us should be taken with a large chunk of salt. He is the author of two books hyping the war on manufactured terror – Bin Laden’s Legacy: Why We’re Still Losing the War on Terror and Homegrown Terrorists in the U.S. and U.K.

Peter Bergen, who penned The Longest War: The Enduring Conflict between America and Al Qaeda, insists “Daveed Gartenstein-Ross has written an analytically sharp, fluidly written account of al Qaeda and its affiliates in the post-bin Laden era. It makes for sobering and essential reading,” especially for neocons interested in keeping the war on terror and its myths chugging along.

Ignored amidst all this feigned ignorance is the fact ISIS keeps books like an anal-retentive accountant. In March, the organization published al-Naba, its annual report. “The Arabic language report, over 400 pages long, was first published by the I’tisaam Media Foundation, ISIS’s main media arm, and then re-posted online by secondary sources,” Alex Bilger writes for the Institute for the Study of War. “This report is the second known ISIS report publicizing the results of their military campaign in Iraq.”

The repeated publication of consecutive annual reports indicates that the ISIS military command in Iraq has exercised command and control over a national theater since at least early 2012. ISIS in Iraq is willing and able to organize centralized reporting procedures and to publish the results of its performance to achieve organizational effects. Such organizational effects might include attracting the attention of potential donors to ISIS’s cause and also showing off an increasingly structured organization capable of more than just attacking haphazardly.

Despite the supposed befuddlement of Hillary Clinton and U.S. intelligence agencies chewing through billions of dollars per year in the supposed effort to protect the American people from al-Qaeda bad guys, the report “describes its campaign for Ninewa as a main effort.”

Ninewa, or the Nineveh Province, is where ISIS began its effort to carve out a caliphate earlier this month.

As an elder statesperson and potential future president, a translation of the ISIS report should have been bedside reading for Clinton. It should have also landed on a CIA station desk within days of publication.

But it didn’t – and for good reason. Had the United States anticipated the military advances of ISIS, it could have beefed up a woefully unprepared Iraqi military. Instead, it decided to be “flat-footed” and caught by surprise.

This posture allows the government to mount a public relations campaign characterizing ISIS as a threat requiring renewed war on terror emphasis (and expenditure of trillions of additional dollars). It provides countless hours of media coverage complete with lurid photos of mass murder and hundreds of thousands of frightened refugees.

Sen Lindsey Graham, Sen. John McCain, Rep. Peter King and others are now warning in shrill and belligerent tones that if the American people do not wake from their slumber and get behind the war on terror, ISIS terrorists will engage in a murderous jihad in the homeland.




ANWO Banner Image
Mood: Saddened
Music: ThatGuyWithTheGlasses.com
| (1)

>>
Obama Endorses Australian-Style Gun Confiscation June 11, 2014, 01:08:pm
President ignores drop in gun crime, applauds Australian gun confiscation

image

Mikael Thalen
Infowars.com
June 11, 2014

Answering questions with Tumblr founder David Karp, Obama pointed to several recent high profile shootings as proof of epidemic gun crime.

“Levels of gun violence are off the charts,” Obama said. “There is no advanced developed country on Earth that would put up with this.”

Obama argued that Americans should be “ashamed,” using the opportunity to bemoan his inability to pass gun control legislation.

“We’re the only country in the world where this happens and it happens once a week,” Obama said.

Obama went on to refute any link between mass shootings and mental health as well, instead blaming the ability of Americans to collect ammunition.

“It’s not the only country that has psychosis, and yet we kill each other in these mass shootings at rates that are exponentially higher than anyplace else,” Obama said. “What’s the difference? The difference is these guys can stack up a bunch of ammunition in their houses.”

Invoking his role as parent, Obama also pushed the notion that American gun owners are collectively responsible for mass shootings.

“This country has to do a lot of soul searching,” Obama said. “This is becoming the norm. And we take it for granted in ways that, as a parent, are terrifying to me.”

The President even went as far as praising Australia’s gun confiscation program, claiming that “very severe” gun laws have helped the country.

“Couple of decades ago, Australia had a mass shooting, similar to Columbine or Newtown,” Obama said. “And Australia just said, well, that’s it, we’re not doing, we’re not seeing that again, and basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws, and they haven’t had a mass shooting since.”


During a live discussion on student loan debt Tuesday President Barack Obama claimed that American gun violence was “off the charts.”

Earlier that day, White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters that the President is “always” looking for ways to “unilaterally” act on gun control.

“The president’s goal is to look for opportunities to act administratively, unilaterally using his executive authority to try to make our communities safer,” Earnest said.

In reality, the President’s comments and actions once again conflict with actual statistics regarding gun crimes.

Obama’s claim of “off the chart” gun violence is in complete opposition to countless studies that have found a 49 percent drop in gun homocide since 1993.

A similar study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that non-fatal gun crimes have dropped nearly 70 percent over the same time period.

Ironically, a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study on gun violence ordered by the President last year reached similar conclusions.

“Firearm-related death rates for youth ages 15 to 19 declined from 1994 to 2009,” the report states. “The number of public mass shootings of the type that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School accounted for a very small fraction of all firearm-related deaths.”

The study even pointed to the benefits of concealed firearm carry for protection against criminals, yet another point that interferes with the Obama Administration’s gun control agenda.

“Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year” the report reads.

“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

Reports from the Bureau of Justice Statistics also reveal that school shootings are not becoming the “norm” as the President suggested.

Despite the massive plunge in gun crime, a recent survey found that 56 percent of American’s believe it has actually increased, a point unsurprising given the media’s reporting on the issue.

The President also alluded to a recent report from “Everytown for Gun safety,” a gun control group founded by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, which claims an average of 1.37 school shootings have occurred every week since the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting.

Shortly after its release Tuesday, a journalist began listing all of the report’s inaccuracies on Twitter, documenting how it even included drug related shootings off of school property.

Obama’s refusal to acknowledge the role of mind-altering pharmaceutical drugs in mass shootings is reprehensible given the fact that nearly every mass shooter in the last 20-years has been on psychotropic drugs, a point almost always ignored by media. Prescriptions for antidepressants have risen by 400 percent since 1988 according to the CDC, making American the largest consumer of psychotropic drugs in the world.

The President’s public comments regarding children, who are just as likely to be struck by lightning as they are to be in a mass shooting, are a far cry from his private conversations.

Just last year, reports indicated that Obama was overheard bragging to administration aides about how well he killed people with drone strikes. According to several US officials, more than 4,700 people, many of whom were woman and children, have died from such strikes. Researchers estimate that the President’s drone attacks kill anywhere from 36 to 50 innocent people per 1 suspected terrorist. Obama’s decision to assassinate 16-year-old American citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki also discredits his alleged concern.

The President’s credibility also comes into question given his involvement in the Fast and Furious gun running scandal. Documents obtained by CBS News in 2011 revealed that American guns shipped into Mexico would be covertly used to blame the Second Amendment, allowing the administration to push tougher gun laws.

The Obama Administration’s agenda becomes most clear when one examines not the shootings it mentions, but the shootings it ignores.

While the media gives endless attention to shootings that can be used for political gain, gun control capitols such as Chicago, which recently saw four dead and more than 30 injured in one weekend, are completely ignored.

As gun crime continues to plummet, focusing on the root issues of gun violence will assure that number continues its decline.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hillary: We Can’t Let Gun Control Opponents Hold an Opinion That “Terrorizes” America

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
June 18, 2014

Hillary Clinton all but called for the introduction of thought crime during a CNN town hall event last night when she asserted that gun control opponents should not be allowed to hold an opinion that “terrorizes” America.



After a school teacher in the audience asked Clinton about high capacity magazines and assault weapons, the presumptive 2016 presidential candidate took the opportunity to go on an extraordinary anti-gun rant.

“I’m well aware that this is a hot political subject. And again, I will speak out no matter what role I find myself in But I believe that we need a more thoughtful conversation. We cannot let a minority of people – and it’s, that’s what it is, it is a minority of people – hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people,” said Clinton.

Clinton’s claim that only a “minority” of Americans oppose gun control is contradicted by a recent Rasmussen poll which found that 53% of Americans oppose stricter gun control laws and only 40% of likely voters back tighter firearms restrictions.

“Expect this quote to be featured prominently in campaign ads in the event of Hillary’s eventual run for the highest office in the nation. A nation where, despite such grotesque characterizations, the Second Amendment is still the law of the land,” writes Caleb Howe.

Clinton’s rhetoric is even more audacious than similar sentiments expressed by her ideological adversaries on the subject of the second amendment.

Last year video emerged of Eric Holder announcing a 1995 public relations campaign based around the attempt to “really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”



In the same year, Democrat Dianne Feinstein admitted she pushed to ban all firearms, exclaiming, “Mr and Mrs America, turn ‘em all in!”




ANWO Banner Image
Mood: Annoyed
Music: The Alex Jones Show
(1) |

>>

1 2 3 NEXT>


[ VF Points: 0 ]   [ Points Today: ]
[ Terms of Service ] [ About ] [ Getting Started ] [ FAQ ] [ Privacy Policy ]
© VampireFreaks.com / Synth-tec Inc. 2014   All Rights Reserved