Category Archives: Military

President and Commander In Chief Barack Obama missed 6 of 10 daily intelligence briefings

Dr. Eowyn:

He doesn’t listen to the counsel of military leaders. His policies (or non-policies) have alienated allies across the globe and fostered the rise of radical Muslims in Egypt, Libya, and Iraq. He turns to Twitter for foreign policy ideas. Now comes a meticulous report that he doesn’t even attend his daily presidential intelligence briefings.

Is it any wonder, then, why our military distrusts Obama, and why America’s foreign policy is in such disarray?

I just pray that America and the world survive this POS.

See also “Obama blames Americans for being lazy.”

Originally posted on Consortium of Defense Analysts:

The President of the United States, the most powerful person in the world, receives live, in-person Presidential Daily Briefs (PDB) that allow the Commander-in-Chief the chance for critical followup, feedback, questions, and the challenging of flawed intelligence assumptions.

An alarming report by the Governmental Accountability Institute (GAI) says that, in the 2,079 days (1/20/2009 thru’ 9/29/2014) since he became President and Commander-In-Chief, Barack Obama has attended a total of only 875 PDBs for an overall 42.09% attendance rate.

That means he missed 57.91% or 6 out of every 10 of his daily intelligence briefings.

Even worse, his attendance rate has worsened in his second term (41.26% attendance rate) as president than in his first term (42.43% attendance rate).

Obama & James ClapperObama (l); James Clapper (r)

Wynton Hall reports for Breitbart, Sept. 29, 2014, that the GAI’s alarming findings come on the heels of Obama’s comments on CBS’s 60 Minutes on Sunday…

View original 493 more words

Washington Times ad: Jihadi is in the White House

This ad was published in the print edition of The Washington Times, Sept. 29, 2014:

Click image to enlarge

WashingtonTimes-ErikRush-FullAdvert-9-29-2014

Here’s the ad’s full text:

America… It’s Time to Wake Up and Smell the Jihadi

America has switched sides in the War on Terror under President Obama…”

- Former CIA operations officer Clare Lopez

If a friend asked you to jump in their car to go pick up some Dairy Queen, you might eagerly take them up on it.

If the same friend asked you to jump in their car to go knock over a liquor store, you wouldn’t be as eager to go along for the ride.

Right now, every American is being taken for a ride—and if we don’t wake up to that fact, we’ll be just as responsible as the passenger going on the liquor store heist.

As hard as it may be to believe, America has been deceived on a massive scale by our president, Barack Hussein Obama.

His loyalties and political objectives are not what we were sold in 2008 and 2012.

Rather than combating terrorism at home and abroad, President Obama has intentionally built up terrorist groups. In violation of international law, he was instrumental in the fall of governments in Egypt and Libya, which has resulted in the deaths of thousands. In doing so, he also destabilized the entire Middle East. He has compromised America’s entire antiterrorist infrastructure, and placed anti-American Islamist operatives in sensitive government positions.

Suspicions Run Deep in Iraq That C.I.A. and the Islamic State Are United…”

- the New York Times

According to the Jordanian government, Middle Eastern and European press organizations, the Obama administration actually funded and trained members of the terrorist group ISIS, which now threatens several nations in the Middle East, as well as the American homeland.

Can a leopard ever really change its spots? You can take the boy out of the farm, but you can’t take the farm out of the boy.

Likewise, you can take the boy out of Indonesia, but you can’t take the Sunni-colored glasses off the Muslim-raised boy.

Obama has proven that his loyalties are to radical Islamists, and his objective is to bring down this nation. How did Obama evade the constitutionally-required vetting process that confirmed he was qualified to run for President of the United States?

America, it is time to wake up and smell the real jihadi. We do not have a President – we have a Terrorist-in-Chief – and we must remove him before it is too late!
_______________________________________________________

Erik Rush is a New York-born columnist, author and speaker who writes sociopolitical commentary, and host of the FULL-CONTACT With Erik Rush LIVE! streaming radio show. He is also the Founder and Chief Editor of the Instigator News Network. In February of 2007, Erik was the first to break the story of Barack Obama’s ties to militant Chicago preacher Rev. Jeremiah Wright on a national level. His book, “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal ~ America’s Racial Obsession,” has been called “the definitive book on race politics in America.”

H/t Birther Report

See also:

~Eowyn

Not content with bullets, U.S. Dept of Agriculture now buys submachine guns

The United States of America has a formidable military — still the most powerful in the world — to protect us against foreign enemies and invasions.

Every town or city in the United States of America has a police force that’s increasingly armed to the teeth with military-grade weapons, to protect citizens from criminals. (See “Obama regime supplies military-grade arms to police”)

So why are civilian bureaucracies in the executive branch of the federal government arming themselves to the teeth with millions of rounds of bullets, battle rifles, assault weapons, and armored trucks? (Scroll to the end of this post for examples.)

This disturbing trend began more than 4 years ago when news came that the Dept of Education had bought shotguns.

Two years ago, the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) purchased 300,000 rounds of ammo. Now comes news that the USDA is graduating to submachine guns! 

On May 7, 2014, the USDA’s Office of Inspector General filed a purchase request with the General Services Administration for submachine guns. Here’s the solicitation number and request:

Solicitation Number: USDAOIGWEA-5-7-14
Notice Type: Sources Sought
Synopsis:
Added: May 07, 2014 2:03 pm

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General, located in Washington, DC, pursuant to the authority of FAR Part 13, has a requirement for the commerical acquisition of submachine guns, .40 Cal. S&W, ambidextrous safety, semi-automatic or 2 shot burts trigger group, Tritium night sights for front and rear, rails for attachment of flashlight (front under fore grip) and scope (top rear), stock-collapsilbe or folding, magazine – 30 rd. capacity, sling, light weight, and oversized trigger guard for gloved operation. NO SOLICITATION DOCUMENT EXISTS. All responsible and/or interested sources may submit their company name, point of contact, and telephone. If received timely, shall be considered by the agency for contact to determine weapon suitability.

submachine gunA man holding a 30-round .40-cal submachine gun that’s being purchased by the USDA

Charles McFarlane reports for Modern Farmer, Sept. 19, 2014, that according to a USDA press rep, the guns are necessary for self-protection:

“OIG Special Agents regularly conduct undercover operations and surveillance. The types of investigations conducted by OIG Special Agents include criminal activities such as fraud in farm programs; significant thefts of Government property or funds; bribery and extortion; smuggling; and assaults and threats of violence against USDA employees engaged in their official duties.”

Not everyone believes the USDA being armed to the teeth is justifiable. On Aug. 2, the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund launched a petition to support a bill that would curb the ability of agencies like the USDA to arm themselves. They see it as overkill and scare tactics, especially for smaller farm producers.

Liz Reitzig, co-founder of the Farm Food Freedom Coalition, says, ““What we have seen happen, with the FDA especially, is they have come onto small farms, raw milk producers, and raided the heck out of them with armed agents present. Do we really want to have our federal regulatory agencies bring submachine guns onto these family farms with children?”

The Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund petition focuses on two now infamous blows to the raw milk community – the 2010 and 2011 raids on Rawsome Food Club in Venice, California, which were carried out by armed federal agents from the FDA and other agencies.

The USDA’s Office of Inspector General’s Investigation Development bulletins show there have been three incidents in the last year that involved firearms and two in which USDA agents were verbally threatened. Still, most of their enforcement operations surround white-collar fraud of government programs, often involving SNAP (or food stamps) programs. “If there is fraud in the SNAP program, look at how it is implemented and make changes in the entire program,” says Reitzig. “Don’t bring machine guns onto farms.”

Rep. Chris Stewart

Rep. Chris Stewart

The Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund are not the only ones interested in taking guns out of the hands of USDA agents. Congressman Chris Stewart (R-Utah) is the sponsor of the bill on the FTCLDF petition. “At its heart it comes down to this: To myself, and for a lot of Americans, there is great concern over regulator agencies with heavy handed capabilities,” Rep. Stewart told Modern Farmer.

His bill, H.R. 4934, hopes “to prohibit certain federal agencies from using or purchasing certain firearms, and for other purposes.” When asked about the USDA’s plan for submachine guns, he said, “I can’t envision a scenario where what they are doing would require that.”

Another concern is simply accountability. The request for submachine guns from the USDA doesn’t say how many guns.

Congressman Stewart said, ““We have never argued that federal regulators don’t need to protect themselves.” But the USDA “have been very unhelpful in trying to find out any information about this. “e couldn’t get answers — it doesn’t seem right to me. They should do what the rest of us do, call the local sheriff.”

H/t ZeroHedge

See also:

~Eowyn

Obama’s speech to the UN General Assembly, Sept. 24, 2014

Dr. Eowyn:

Here’s the full text of Obama’s speech to the UN on Wednesday, or does anyone care? LOL

I’m reblogging this only because Roger Cohen (who he?) of the New York Times quoted from the speech and lauded Obama on his “new resolve.” Gag….

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/26/opinion/roger-cohen-obama-leads-on-isis-he-is-right-to-take-the-risk.html?_r=0

Originally posted on Consortium of Defense Analysts:

O's UN chairObama at the UN General Assembly, Sept. 24, 2014

Remarks As Prepared for Delivery by President Barack Obama
Address to the United Nations General Assembly
September 24, 2014
New York City, NY

Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, fellow delegates, ladies and gentlemen: we come together at a crossroads between war and peace; between disorder and integration; between fear and hope.

Around the globe, there are signposts of progress. The shadow of World War that existed at the founding of this institution has been lifted; the prospect of war between major powers reduced. The ranks of member states has more than tripled, and more people live under governments they elected. Hundreds of millions of human beings have been freed from the prison of poverty, with the proportion of those living in extreme poverty cut in half. And the world economy continues to strengthen after the worst financial crisis of our lives.

View original 4,209 more words

Paging Code Pink: Army sending division HQ element to Iraq

obama

Stars and Stripes: The 1st Infantry Division headquarters will deploy to Iraq soon as the U.S. military steps up its campaign against Islamic State militants, the Pentagon said Thursday. It will be the first division headquarters assigned to Iraq since U.S. forces withdrew from the country at the end of 2011.

About 500 soldiers from the Fort Riley, Kan.-based division will be heading for the Middle East next month with about 200 of them going to Iraq, Pentagon press secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby said.

“They’re going to provide command and control of the ongoing advise-and-assist effort in support of Iraqi and peshmerga forces. And they’re going to continue to help us all degrade and destroy ISIL,” Kirby told reporters, referring to the Islamic State by one of its acronyms.

The new headquarters personnel will be working out of the joint operations centers in Baghdad and the Kurdish capital of Irbil, as well as the Iraqi defense ministry. An advance element of about 10 soldiers is already in Iraq preparing for the influx of the additional troops, Kirby said.

These soldiers will not embed with Iraqi units in the field, Kirby said. “The troops will advise and assist the Iraqi Security Forces to help them go on the offense against ISIL and conduct intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance flights,” the division said in a statement on its website. “This will also increase the United States’ capacity to target ISIL and coordinate the activities of the U.S. military across Iraq.”

Rick Brennan, Jr., an analyst at the Rand Corporation and former Army officer, said sending elements of a division headquarters and the general officer who will come with it will make it easier to coordinate both with international allies as well as Iraqi and Kurdish forces in the campaign against the Islamic State, which overran about a third of Iraq in an offensive last summer.

Brennan said the decision also signals that there will be a significant U.S. military presence in Iraq for the foreseeable future. “I think there’s been recognition that what the United States is doing in Iraq is going to be long term,” he said.

Kirby acknowledged that the timeline for the headquarters element’s mission is uncertain. “I just don’t know for how long they’re going to be there or how and when they might be replaced,” he said. The 1st Division said the soldiers were preparing for a one-year assignment.

The 200 headquarters servicemembers who will be in Iraq are part of the increase of 475 troops that President Barack Obama authorized two weeks ago.  The U.S. has been sending teams of military advisers to assist the Iraqi security forces, many of which have performed poorly against the Islamic State.

The other 300 troops from the 1st Infantry will be supporting the command and control mission from outside of Iraq. Kirby did not identify the country where they will be stationed.

The deployment of the new headquarters element is just the latest step in an expanding U.S. role in Iraq. The process began three months ago after the Islamic State militant group overran much of the country.

On June 16, the Pentagon announced that 275 personnel were being sent to secure U.S. diplomatic facilities as Islamic State fighters marched towards Baghdad. Later that month, President Barack Obama announced that 300 troops would go the country to assess the capabilities of the troubled Iraqi security forces and set up joint operations centers near Baghdad and Irbil. About 200 additional security personnel were sent around that time.

On Aug. 8, the U.S. military commenced airstrikes and humanitarian air drops as terrorists threatened to massacre religious minorities near Mount Sinjar. The bombing campaign later expanded to support Iraqi ground forces and prevent the militants from damaging the Mosul and Haditha dams.

Two weeks ago, after a new Iraqi government was formed, Obama announced that another 475 troops would deploy to advise and assist Iraqi forces. As of Thursday, 1,268 of the 1,600 American troops authorized to be in Iraq were in country. The Pentagon has also carried out approximately 200 airstrikes there.

In early June, there were only about 200 American troops in Iraq manning the Office of Security Cooperation.

(Note they use the word American “troops” – this does not include any amount of American “contractors” that may be working in the country as well.)

See also “Selective opposition: Where are the peace protests over Syria bombing?

DCG

President Lucifer’s Undocumented Soldiers

No kidding! What could possibly go wrong?!!!!!!


Military to allow undocumented immigrants to serve

Selective opposition: Where are the peace protests over Syria bombing?

dissent

SFGate: Maybe it’s war fatigue. Maybe climate change is consuming all the protest energy right now. Maybe momentum just needs to build.

But most likely, all of the above are the reasons antiwar protests didn’t erupt throughout the Bay Area, veteran activists say, after U.S. warplanes roared over the Syrian border Tuesday to bomb more than a dozen enclaves of Islamic radical jihadists into rubble.

Some activists even conceded that many people weren’t going into the streets because the militants being targeted deserved to be dealt with, if not killed.

By Tuesday afternoon, there were still no loud demonstrations to be found. Major military incursions in years past launched seas of banners down San Francisco’s Market Street, but this time? Nothing — at least right off the bat.

“People are war-weary and have already been very disappointed in President Obama for some time,” said David Hartsough, executive director of the Peaceworkers antiwar group in San Francisco. He said he and other longtime activists are outraged at the bombing and believe nonviolent solutions to jihadist terror would be more effective — but the groundswell to hit the streets just isn’t there.

I think a lot of people are focused on the climate right now, especially young people,” Hartsough said, noting that weekend protest marches on that issue in cities including New York and Oakland collectively drew hundreds of thousands of people. “That seems to be closer to heart, and I think on war we as a nation have been numbed.”

“Just think: When, in a young person’s lifetime, have we not been at war or dropping bombs on someone?” Hartsough said. “People hear that over and over and they get numbed.”

Plans weren’t made

U.S. officials said last week that they planned to strike targets in Syria, so there was plenty of time to plan for big protests before warplanes targeted the Nusra Front, the Khorasan Group and Islamic State, the group that aired videos of the beheadings of two U.S. journalists.

Sunday was even celebrated by activists all over the globe as International Day of Peace — but that’s when the main events sucking up headlines centered on climate change. The actions that did come by Tuesday evening were limited.

The Credo progressive group in San Francisco started a national online petition drive Sunday to demand that Congress vote to end the air war, and two dozen antiwar activists — including several with Bay Area roots, such as Code Pink leader Medea Benjamin — protested outside the White House. And in Walnut Creek, the Mount Diablo Peace Center staged a demonstration against the bombings.

“We felt like we needed to do something quickly and let the world know that even in places like Walnut Creek, people are angry about this,” said Margli Auclair of the Mount Diablo Peace Center.

“It’s early still, and for the moment this is an air war and not a ground war,” said Credo President Michael Kieschnick, whose petition drive had collected 40,000 signatures by Tuesday evening. “I think Americans get most concerneed when there are soldiers on the ground at risk.” (As if a pilot isn’t at risk when flying over enemy territory?)

‘Bombing won’t work’

“And look, Americans are horrified by ISIS,” Kieschnick said, using one of the alternative names for Islamic State. “There’s a natural instinct to at least pause before critiquing. These are murderous thugs, and they should be called out and dealt with.”

“But bombing won’t work. It never works,” Kieschnick said. “And a different form of protest will emerge when bombs go awry and hit a wedding party, or when someone calls in a strike labeling someone as ISIS when they’re not. Then, things will look different.”

Even the Bay Area’s famously liberal congressional delegation was largely silent, and Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer issued a statement saying, “We cannot stand idly by while barbaric groups threaten America and the entire world.”

Stephen Zunis, a political science professor at the University of San Francisco, said the unusually murky nature of alliances and enemies in this latest of many U.S. fights in the Middle East make it tough to muster focused outrage.

“I think a lot of people are torn,” he said. “At the start of all classes last year, I explained to my students that the U.S. government might be on the verge of war against the Syrian government, and now I have to explain why we’re going to war now against Syrian rebels. It’s a very muddled situation over there.

I see now – it’s “climate disruption”, a “muddled situation” and a “murky nature” to bomb Syria. Spare me the faux excuses. We all know why they aren’t protesting.

Messiah Obama

DCG